skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you have been a regular HN reader, you should be already be familiar with the guidelines on submissions at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."

So it shouldn't be surprising that these stories are being flagged for being off topic.
I don't see that as disallowing "for those who disagree with me: what do you disagree with, exactly?" Isn't that a reasonable question?

Besides, isn't downvoting someone for nonsensical, petty reasons (and leaving no response as to why, of course) at least as harmful to the overall discussion as referring to those downvotes?
A simple prompt to “rewrite, but more engaging” will work wonders.
What M&A are you familiar with that they can typically happen in a 6 day timeframe?

I know this is already a stressed straw man in the first place but M&A are aren't a short simple process anyway. Adding some oversight isn't going to change that.

Yes there are tradeoffs to more regulation vs total anarchy/free market. That doesn't mean they're not worth it. "Good" is not the enemy of "perfect" and all.
To be honest if it's publicly available, I'm sure the odds that a human looking at your content and copying it vastly exceeds the odds of an AI utilizing it in its entirety. These are billion parameter models.
For several days I'm having trouble finding good resources on _implementation_ for query execution/planning (predicates, existing indices <<especially composite ones - how to locate them during planning etc>>, joins etc).

Google is spammed with _usage_.

Anybody has some recommendations at hand?

ps. the only one I found was CMU's Database Group resources, which are great
Native code wants to think it’s a ref counted buffer that could be accessed from any thread including ones that don’t participate in GC. So it’s gotta be allocated in the malloc heap and it’s gotta have a ref count.

JS code wants the buffer to be garbage collected. If native code doesn’t ref it (count is zero) and it’s not reachable via JS heap then it’s gotta die. So, it needs a GC cell and associated machinery (JSC object headers, mark bits, possibly other stuff).

So, the reason why the aliased case is not as awesome as the owned case is that you need double the things. You need some malloc memory and you need a GC cell. You need a ref count and you need a GC header and some mark bits.

Having both malloc/RC and cell/GC overhead isn’t like the end of the world or anything, but it means that allocations are slower and waste more memory than if it was either just a buffer owned by native code or just an object in the GC heap.
This comment strikes me like a breath of fresh air amongst a lot of bad breath.

RHEL has taken a step that looks like Solaris etc. of the past, but aren’t the ecosystems completely different nowadays? It seems like it’s comparing apples to oranges.
It's tough life out here for developers who're so plugged into the matrix of the actual Web that you can't overlook how condensed and bland it has become. But stating the obvious doesn't really help or do anything. I think if people genuinely feel this way then what is needed are solutions.

There's actually quite a lot of psychology involved in this whole debate/situation, but my gut tells me that people don't even want to listen to that. It's just a weird phase for everyone - there is an overflow of garbage on the web that is designed to manipulate you and talk to you as if we are two different species.

Look what StackOverflow is doing now also - it's literally ruining a great Internet community (intense as it is) because their hand has been forced by people who pay the bills. And because nobody could foresee the future, perhaps things didn't seem like they would end up this bad. But they have.
Hong Kong going to do crypto, Xi Jinping going to basically redo the Special Economic Zone experiment, this time with HK has the zone, attracting the speculators whilst insulating the rest of China from it. US fumbling this, Florida had this game won before the SEC decided that incoherency was the best idea
I'm reminded of how one writes programs. I cannot maintain the state of the machine in my head, but I can convince myself of its workings, its intelligence, by reading the code, following along on its line of reasoning as it were. I think the Intelligence Completeness may boil down to the very same Church-Turing thesis.
Correct - archive.is doesn't like not getting EDNS from Cloudflare (https://jarv.is/notes/cloudflare-dns-archive-is-blocked/), so Cloudflare sends you to 1.1.1.7 to indicate a problem.
> On the contrary, many of these people have PhDs, have been leading research agendas in this field for decades, have been in senior leadership roles for a long time, have launched successful products, etc. etc.

Society should definitely hear from those whose careers depend on continued AI research (and I fall into this group myself), but we are a hopelessly biased group.

Advancements in AI are going to change everyone's lives, so everyone deserves a say in this.

For the last 20-30 years tech has raced ahead of our government and civic processes and we're starting to feel the consequences of that. New technologies are being experienced by people as changes that are inflicted upon them instead of new options open to them.

They might have very little understanding of the technology, but everyone is the expert on what impact it is having on their lives. That's something that we shouldn't ignore.
I don't follow. Why would being asked/answering this question result in that?
> found a cult around self-referential ideologies

That's something.

> Rationalism is rational because it is rational...

In his ideology, "rational" means "the way of thinking that best lets you achieve your goals". This not self-referential. A more appropriate criticism might be "meaningless by itself". I guess the self-referential aspect is that you're supposed to think about whether or not you're thinking well. At a basic level, that sounds useful despite being self-referential, in the same way that bootstrapping is useful. The question is if course what Yudkowski makes of this basic premise, which is hard to evaluate.

The controversy about "longtermism" has two parts. The first is a disagreement about how much to discount the future. Some people think "making absolutely sure humanity survives the next 1000 years" is very important, some people think it's not that important. There's really no way to settle this question, it's a matter of preference.

The second part is about the actual estimate of how big some dangers are. The boring part of this is that people disagree about facts and models, where more discussion is the way to go if you care about the results (which you might not). However, there is a more interesting difference between people who are/aren't sympathetic to longtermism, which lies in how they think about uncertainty.

For example, suppose you make your best possible effort (maybe someone paid you to make this worthwhile for you) to predict how likely some danger is. This prediction is now your honest opinion about this likelihood because if you'd thought it was over/under-estimated, you'd adjusted your model. Suppose also that your model seems very likely to be bad. You just don't know in which direction. In this situation, people sympathetic towards longtermism tend to say "that's my best prediction, it says there is a significant risk, we have to care about it. Let's take some precautions already and keep working on the model.". People who don't like it, in the same situation, tend to say "this model is probably wrong and hence tells us nothing useful. We shouldn't take precautions and stop modeling because it doesn't seem feasible to build a good model.".

I think both sides have a point. One side would think and act as best they can, and take precautions against a big risk that's hard to evaluate. The other would prioritize actions that are likely useful and avoid spending resources on modeling if that's unlikely to lead to good predictions. I find it a very interesting question which of these ways of dealing with uncertainty is more appropriate in everyday life, or in some given circumstances .

As you rightfully point out, the "rationalist/longtermmist" side of the discussion has an inherent tendency to detach from reality and lose itself discussing the details of lots of very unrealistic scenarios, which they must work hard to counteract. The ideas naturally attract people who enjoy armchair philosophizing and aren't likely to act based on concrete consequences of their abstract framework.
It's not flamebait. This perspective is widespread and discussed with nuance in the fitness community, and also in the medical community, eg https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37285414/

It's in no way a controversial or baity observation.
This is my favorite macro:
"#define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN"

Why is it that even though Github or what ever has cutsie unicorns (or whatever it is) as error messages it feels fake and contrived while this define just feels like some random dude at MS naming it before going off to write Solitaire?
https://youtu.be/Df_2BBTvJ2o

Video of a journalist using it.
The worst part is we have learned zero lessons from the metamorphosis of "fraud" into "identity theft." In the former case, the banks were responsible for preventing "fraud" and when that became too easy they simply abdicated all responsibility for this new form of computerized fraud and created the notion of "identity theft" which is fraud but with a computer.
Government institutions have already been instructed to start using quantum computer safe encryption algorithms. Internationally, governments have been storing tons of encrypted data that they can’t currently decrypt because they expect to be able to decrypt it soon using quantum computers.

There are already quantum computer safe encryption algorithms that have been released to the public. I don’t know exactly how they work, but one of them was about reverse engineering a path through multi-dimensional space.

Expect SHA256 to disappear soon and be replaced.
sad to hear this, but not suprised as much. according to wikipedia, turkey is one of the few countries/regions where israel requires a visa from; along with india, pakistan and arab countries.
Or “the five photos were all taken in the same town/city”. Now I know the scale I’m looking for.
Are they using the contents of GMail email messages ?
Not "when", "if". Maybe I'm not fit to be in the HN crowd, having lived too many decades on this earth, but I still remember each and every time the government has stepped up spying efforts, and someone says it'll be recalled as soon as it affects a politician.

And it never really does.
Because there were five guesses, I thought they would be five different photos from five different geographic locations
Do you mean; Use a quantum random number generator and emit random words. Changes are that in some world the comment is insightful?
You missed the point.

Any fork is deterred by the massive size and complexity of those. c++ is adding several orders of magnitude on complexity (there are no reasonable comparison to make between C syntax complexity and c++ syntax complexity). All that is part of the developer/vendor lock-in. This is how Big Tech has vendor locked some open source software.

That's why generic "open source" is hardly less worse than corpo binaries, because it includes grotesquely and absurdely massive and complex software.

We need lean, functional enough, open source, SDK included.
In this case, it's only foisted on people that visit the site in question. That's the main variable I control.
You think that's bad. I guessed in three, after realizing the first two photos had the name of the town in them!
JobLens is cool! This past month we had the same idea -- it's been a fun project:
https://hnjobs.u-turn.dev

ChatGPT does an incredible job parsing, but then lots of effort goes into normalizing and deduping each field. Long story short, your results look quite good to me!
Reddit is a glorified bulletin board that does not need ~2000 employees to operate and iterate. The community is their product. They are were never going to be a unicorn and they will die trying. Software eats the world but Silicon Valley manages to find a way to kill off its own creation.
The most expensive things for many, many, many individuals and families is not consumption or fashion but shelter and healthcare.

But if we're talking upper-middle-class-and-higher where we can assume they have decent options for that into retirement... I don't think there's nearly as much that really moves the needle enough to let them work a lot less short of "move to places in much lower demand"? Like "retire 10 years earlier and then go somewhere dirt cheap" seems about the only option, unless it's a larger societal change so the jobs move with the people to the dirt-cheap places, like what happened with the move to the Sun Belt in the US in the latter half of the 20th century but which isn't happening now in the US.

Maybe remote work will stick for enough people that that can happen again, but I don't see great signs of decentralization yet...
I remember the first time I really understood Google was using my "private" comms to sling ads at me. The writing on the wall seemed clear then. I just didn't know what the future endpoints were.
My confusion is to why the "/144" is needed there, rather than just the lone numbers, 114 and 132, especially since the missing pieces are, more than likely, defective. How can knowing this number help anyone? Perhaps it's transparency, "132 is the best we have now. Best possible is 144, so don't save your money, buy this one!"
unless it's something like Zelle, where they want to force you to use a mobile app so they can... <insert nefarious conspiracy here>
Ive seen lesser qualified people get hired because of this. Ie multiple people get inverviewed, but even the the "least represented" is far less qualified they got hired entirely because of DEI. This was clearly stated as the reason why too. Happens more often than you'd think.
> given we needed to handle memory allocation failure

Isn't it that the OOM killer is likely to be a much bigger problem? With the overcommit enabled and OOM enabled I don't think I can envision the case where you would run into a failed allocation - allocations on Unices practically never fail. It is the OOM-killer that will likely kill your process once it detects that the pressure on your ram+swap is high so you won't even have a chance to run into the OOM.

OTOH if you disable the OOM-killer there's another and much bigger problem to solve - a kernel panic. I guess that's not the condition you want your system to run into.

So, I think that the only combination where you can deterministically detect and run into allocation failures is when both OOM-killer and overcommit are disabled. That's what I think Windows is doing by default.
what happened to them?
That's called Kagi. It exists.
Although I haven’t used these monitors, my experience with high dpi on windows and Linux has been a nightmare compared to OSX. It’s surprising me the non Mac world hasn’t made this a bigger priority.
Is remote US-only?
It takes more muscles to frown than to smile, but it takes more parts to make a thumbs up than to flip someone off.
After having experienced several migrations, I would avoid like the plague any platform that includes a CEO, even if it claims to supports open standards. Mastodon is a better choice long-term.
As it might be quite common among the HN crowd, Douglas is my hero - I have read three of his books.

First of all, hats off to him for his extraordinary display of humility in this interview. People rarely change their minds publicly, let alone hint that they no longer believe in their own past work.

However, I'm genuinely surprised that he, of all people, does sees intelligence in GPT-4 output.

I think humans are just very eager to ascribe intelligence, or personality, to a bunch of text. A text may say "I feel <blah>" and that text can easily manage to permeate through our subconsciousness. And we end up believing that that "I" is, in fact, an "I"!

We have to actively guard against this ascription. It takes a constant self-micromanaging, which isn't a natural thing to do.

Ideally, we would have some objetive measurements (benchmarks) of intelligence. Our own impressions can be too easily fooled.

I know defining (let alone measuring) intelligence is no easy task, but in absence of a convincing benchmark, I will not give credit to new claims around AI. Else it's all hype and speculation.
Are Clang’s builtin types interoperable with __m128 intrinsics?
Set a price list for this type of usage, then pick a jurisdiction friendly to your cause of action.
For those who disagree, please give an example of a domain that is devoid of important "concern-based" operations.
I absolutely love this! Got to 107 miles on the first try :)
Very nice explanation!

> The correct way to do this is to normalize the table

This is true for transactional dbs, but in data warehouses it's widely accepted that some degree of denormalization is the way to go
> "anyone around for a round of bikeshedding? I need to name a thing"

I have to come up with many names for things in code every day. I can't imagine the slowdown having to workshop every name would incur...
Relatedly, it'd be helpful if you could point to folks with good ML research credentials making a detailed case against x-risk. The prominent example of whom I'm aware is Yann LeCun, and what I've seen of his arguments take place more in the evopsych field (the stuff about an alleged innate human drive for dominance which AIs will lack) than the field in which he's actually qualified.
I meant a vanilla lean build of wine 8.11 (core win64), with only vkd3d. Namely, only a small C compiler is required (not those horrible gcc and clang, or even worse, a c++ compiler).

Was that tested on cyberpunk 2077 and forbidden zero dawn?
Sure thing. I will log out to increase the threshold of making bad comments.
Yeah this is why competition is good. It's possible that AMD might just decide "fuck segmentation let's undercut Nvidia and steal marketshare" like they did with the first and second gen Threadripper / Threadripper PRO (later generations priced the Threadripper PRO's at "fuck you, just buy Epyc" prices while gatekeeping some key features from the non PROs).
Slightly off topic but I can’t wait until there’s a 120 Hz 8K monitor. It’s the only thing holding me back from upgrading from 4K. I wonder if the current limitation is on the panels, cable bandwidth or absurd price tag…
This talk is just clickbaity, the complains are valid, but to then go and use it to claim that you can never have zero cost abstractions is just ....

For example, the ABI used by Linux already passes many structs in registers. Fixing it to also include unique_ptr will indeed "break every aspect of the C++ ABI", but that is not really an unsurmountable problem: Windows breaks C++ ABI on almost every other release (and so does almost any language other than C), Linux user-space has done so in the past, and Linux the kernel just doesn't care.

There is no overhead with exceptions when there are no exceptions (e.g., in the kernel). Also think about what it means for the compiler to need to generate exception code: if you were not using unique_ptr, wouldn't you have to make a conditional and free the pointer by hand in such scenario? If the answer is 'yes', then it is not really 'overhead'.

> It's only really zero overhead when you can't transfer ownership (`unique_ptr<T> const &`)

I think you have this backwards. Pass-by-value can be zero overhead (as in, you can probably think of an ABI which makes it zero overhead and is compliant). It is precisely pass-by-const-reference that cannot be zero overhead, because according to the language rules you are passing a reference to a unique_ptr (i.e. a pointer to a pointer). I'd hardly call that a hidden landmine, as that's what the & means, and I think the average C++ developer is familiar with the concept.

Then again, why would you try to pass a unique_ptr by reference is over me. There is really no ownership transfer whatsoever, you are just contaminating your API with unique_ptr unnecessarily.

In fact, most of the overheads mentioned just go away if you don't use unique_ptr in function signatures, which is hardly unmanageable mental complexity. In fact, in the proposal here by the Linux kernel, you also cannot pass unique_ptrs through functions; they are type erased.
> But terrible, banal things will be done at the behest of these systems and nobody is talking about it.

Well said. Fewer Terminator and War Games fantasies, more boring risk analyses. Amen.
The China secondhand market is teeming with them.
Yea, I feel like this is also likely an issue. You can't let yourself run too low because you can't for-sure get a charger quickly if you don't have one at home. I regularly run down to a sub 10-mile range and less than a half-gallon of gas in my ICE car now because I live by a couple gas stations, so I'm never more than a couple minutes away from being able to fill my car.

If I had to drive around for a while to find an open charging spot, I'd have to be more opportunistic about where/when I charge to stay ahead on it.
What's stack overflow doing?
This. A vast number are in rural Ohio
What's the benefit of in-process crash reporting compared to just using something like crashpad/breakpad?

To the extent that in-process crash reporting is even possible... seems the most common class of crashes would be entirely unrecoverable.
> So this is three paragraphs of hate with no solution?

Welcome to the Internet.

Maybe I have a decade-long stroke of bad luck, but "use a fork" is almost a default - except the intersection of restaurants serving condiment packets and restaurants serving metal utensils is... empty set, in my experience.

> Is your solution no condiments because you personally struggle

Ideally, they'd just make the perforations better and align them better, or just do whatever it is the makers of VIFON instant noodle soups do with the "flavor concentrate" packets - they're still not the easiest one to open, but there is always an area on one or two edges where you can tear it perpendicularly to the edge, and it'll tear off the entire adjacent edge in one swift go.

> or even more waste by requiring more plastic containers with a lid like what salsa comes in or the much larger containers like what the nugget sauces come in?

I'd have to check, but I think the little plastic containers my local pizza companies use for sauces in delivery orders would come out way ahead, because a) they have better ratio of surface to volume (flat condiment pack is literally about the least efficient you can get), b) nobody in their right mind would size them down to equivalent of single condiment package, and c) they're made from thin, single-type plastic - while condiment packages are some weird plastic/metal/foil combination that also doubles as advertising space.
We use Matomo
Well, in fairness, I could say the same about solar, improved batteries, etc.
Location: Istanbul, TR

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Go, Python, Rust, Kubernetes, Terraform, Pulumi, Docker, gRPC, Protobuf, Clickhouse, Knative, Dapr, AWS (Kinesis, Firehose, Glue, DynamoDB, EKS, ECS, EMR, S3, Spark), Redis.

Résumé/CV: available upon request

Email: yagizdeg@gmail.com

GitHub: github.com/ycd

----

Hey,

I worked for fast-paced, high-growth startups in the past 3 years. Most of my work experience in the AdTech space and I'm currently exploring the FinTech space.

I started some popular open-source projects, and made major contributions to communities and projects, you can find my work on GitHub.
What do you use at home?

I've used all three of those distros at home, but now I don't.