skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Instead of robodebting the poor, they should use their resources to fix this MyGov crapshoot. You approve various departments to share your data, then whenever you apply for something (e.g. senior citizens card which I recently had to help someone do) they ask you to enter hours’ worth of input instead of actually getting the data from the approved department (e.g. ATO).

There would be hundreds of equivalent use cases…
I had that mindset for a while, just to fall into enough issues that I had to balance it again.

Integration tests are important for features, unit tests stay important for code blocks. My realization was that a ton of what we wrote aren't features, but blocks.

For instance, let's imagine an API that build an invoice. Where do you put the VAT calculation test ? Do you jam your 100+ VAT test cases in the integrations tests, or do you unit test the VAT calculation in isolation and only cover the main cases in the integration ones ?

Same for name display, invoice number generation, Invoice items fetching etc. If you want a decent coverage and also document/properly test the edge cases, unit test will easily be half or more of your whole test volume. And of course you'll want to reuse there blocks, so make sure they're rock solid, so pay even more attention to tests.
Ukraine is holding territory. They are not fighting like an insurgency.

Stringers are absolutely useful in LSCO. Soviet doctrine made heavy use of MANPADS (man portable air defense systems, of which Stinger counts) when they were planning for LSCO. Basically every army besides the US army (and its allies) makes heavy use of them, and the US army is different because they plan for the US Air Force to be able to clear the skies for them. Soviet doctrine embedded air defence at all levels of their army, from MANPADS to Pantsirs, Buks, and S-300s etc. This goes from man carrier to short/middle/long range.
Not trying to deny anything but with the length of records and a random distribution you’d still expect “hottest year” to happen pretty often. (Somebody please do the statistics)

With a very slightly warming planet it would indeed happen quite often.

In other words… setting records means something, but less than one would expect by default.

The more valid statistic is something like n of the last 30 years have been the warmest on record, or something along those lines.
> My understanding is that they use NFTs on the Ethereum chain for authentication

Your understanding is imperfect. You use your private key on Ethereum to authenticate, not an NFT. It does seem like certain NFTs gate access to different parts of the site.

> NFTs are still wildly damaging to the ecosystem, with how much electricity they demand

Not really anymore. As others have pointed out, the switch to PoS massively reduced Ethereum's energy demands, by ~99.5%. https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/04/26/ethereums-lifetime-...

> Their sole purpose is to be traded as chits in a series of wealth extractions, until some unfortunate sucker is left holding the bag on a worthless blob of data that (rightfully) nobody wants.

Ya, unfortunately the space is rife with grifters and hype in weird places, but that doesn't seem relevant to this specific project though.

> So I believe it is a reasonable assumption that it is in this form so the creators can get in on the scam-o-sphere that is Ethereum/NFT.

Or they're trying to make something legit within this space. The Internet's early use cases were largely a bunch of scams and over-hyped projects that failed miserably. That didn't exactly hold for long though.
it's more like 4 orders of magnitude. Resource usage isn't really a good criticism of ethereum specifically anymore (it can still be squarely aimed at bitcoin, which has always been the biggest problem)
It's fiddly and there's a small chance you'll break some expensive components. (I once dropped a CPU from a height of a few inches, and had to straighten out the pins with a credit card). Cable routing is a pain. I'd still do it if I had to, but prefer to order from a place that'll do a build. https://www.centralcomputer.com/custom-systems.html is local to me, there's probably something in your area.

If you're picking an entirely novel combination of components, there's a higher chance of a compatibility problem. My 2018 machine browned out a lot until I tweaked some PCI-E power management thing in the motherboard's BIOS. There's some benefit in buying a bunch of parts that 100s of people are already using together.

If Youtube videos of building machines seem interesting and fun to you, go for it.
Just because it was build during the Soviet era doesn't mean Russians build it.
Thats fair. I'm not GP but I do tend to agree that the AST used in that paper is overly complicated.

Here is an STLC with bidir example which I believe to be easier to understand:
https://github.com/solomon-b/lambda-calculus-hs/blob/main/ma...
That's not an application. It's a technological result. It may or may not be applied for productive work (I'd say on the whole the negative results have outweighed the positive so far, especially looking at the ecosystem as a whole)
I've heard than some mental illness (maybe schizophrenia) is theorized to be in part due to an inability to forget things. Certainly normal human existence involves preferential remembering and forgetting. For example not dwelling on pain or failure etc.

Gradient descent obviously has none of that, it has not feelings or goals, and so there would be no preferential remembering or forgetting other than to do better next word prediction or rlhf or whatever. So it would be interesting to think about what a model should remember or forget in order to align it with our goals (because it doesn't have any of it's own).

Also, don't volunteer for Google. They have lots of money, they can pay for this stuff and if you know how to do it you have lots of options.
Google (and other companies) can shut down their auth services. Ethereum cannot be shut down
I don't know what you're talking about, but msync() flushes only the pages in that range. The pages are in the page cache (on Linux, it's a per-file xarray [1] of pages). Once all the dirty pages in the range are located, they go through the filesystem to be mapped to block numbers and then submitted to the block layer to be written to the storage device. Only the disk blocks mapped to the pages in that range will be written.

Source: I'm a Linux kernel developer.

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/core-api/xarray.html
if you don’t deploy them, their cost goes to zero!

assuming the spent engineering hours would have been wasted elsewhere anyway.

ymmv.
The ads Rolls Royce have created are pretty tacky, their image probably would have been better served by staying quiet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ82dP5s1cU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOn-oqfj8JY
Only junior software engineers hate other peoples code. The progression of a skilled software engineer starts with writing code, then reading code, then writing code in the context of others code. The more you work the more crucial it is to be able to operate in a zone of non ownership in the code base, your value really unlocks when you can sniff code and improve it without rewriting it. At this stage 30y into my career I can step into a completely foreign code base and make material improvements quickly in situ, and sometimes have to do it several times a day. I don’t mind other peoples code - in fact I learn an awful lot of cool things spelunking!

I tend to avoid the “let’s rewrite it” engineers - they’re usually going that route due to lack of practice and skill in developing software. There are times for sure a rewrite is necessary, but IMO it’s sort of like blaming the compiler for build errors. Usually it’s not the compiler, it’s you. But rarely there’s a compiler bug and you’re justified in asserting it as such. Likewise, rarely does code need to be rewritten, you are just unskilled at code surgery - so practice. When you have practiced enough you’ll see that the initial revulsion you felt at their code was mostly your brain reacting to the unknown. The people who wrote that code are often as good or better than you, and understood the domain a lot better if you’re new to the code base. Show a bit of respect for those who came before and learn to learn.
“Do you always fly at the ~~ladies~~ guys at Warp 10, Ensign?”
I never said I want it outlawed. That would deprive me of the clowns to laugh at.
https://archive.org/details/youtube-0nbkaYsR94c
Old grouch is far better than the disingenuous people running around saying “stop using this technology!! It has no value, I have never seen it and it cant have any value!!”

Basically the difference is that the username and password can be used to authenticate with that specific site and that’s it, while a “wallet” browser extension or app can let the user sign transactions and manage value outside your site, so they don’t have to trust your site (they approve all major transactions) and your site can’t impersonate them. You may think you won’t but one of your devs could go in for example and salami-slice the balances of your members, or change all the votes in a stackoverflow election etc.
Rather than AC, which just deepens the problem by increasing our energy burn rate, we need more passive solar design. Plus more mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods.

Also: Reduce upholstered furniture, books and similar, take trash out more regularly, remove all cardboard from groceries as soon as you get them home.
That's certainly better than reviewing your own code, but tossing your code into a merge request to run tests and then taking another look over it tomorrow if it's all green is still better than just pushing straight to prod because there's not another pair of eyes.
Or maybe not? [1]

[1] https://temperature.global/
If you are reviewing implementation semantics after someone has already coded a feature, I'd say it's too late. You might catch issues, but the loss of goodwill and wasted productivity will make everyone hate code review.

I think this pyramid is accurate but better framed as a "review pyramid". Catch semantic issues in an earlier phase (informal discussion or rfc-style proposal document).
Eh, I disagree. I find the traditional test pyramid a suitable model still.

Sure, unit tests require much more maintenance than higher level tests, but they give you confidence that the smallest parts of the codebase work as intended. They're the ones that test all sorts of failure scenarios and edge cases, which is typically not the purpose of integration tests. They also should be inexpensive to run, simple to write, and require minimal setup.

Unit tests should also give you immediate feedback that something went wrong, by pinpointing the exact component that failed. In contrast, integration tests might happily pass, as they're not granular enough to cover all code paths. Integration tests focus on, well, that the integration between components is working as expected.

So I still insist on having mostly unit tests, many integration tests, and some E2E tests. Doing it otherwise because it saves you maintenance efforts will haunt you in the long run.
Lands with soil that support it are greening. Desertification is a continuing issue and typically do not green without human assistance.
qdrant is better in my opinion
I guess all the wars theatlantic supports doesn't cause any environmental damage.

Their logic is similiar to admonishing a smoker for causing environmental damage while supporting the coal industry.
When the semantic web was the new thing, it was similar to the hype cycles around new technologies or very early applications of it (nft, etc).

A contextual, connected knowledge base and digital consciousness never really came according to the semantic web specs in terms of implementation and adoption and use by the masses.

Still, maybe that middleman work is something LLMs could help with.
This offers a way for scammers to communicate with their marks without having any annoying outsiders posting. Other than that, is there a use case?
Thank you! I will look them up
Oh please. Data has value dependng on how large and powerful a community is.

Votes in an election are data, it’s meaningless unless the outcome of the election results in real world consequences.

Balances are just data, unless people are willing to give goods and services for those balances.

A police officer flashing a badge is data, but be may be in a position to arrest you.

Verifiable Credentials is an entire Web2 standard about data. You dont complain about it … well, Web3 assets are like transferable and mutable Verifiable Credentials. All that certificate validation expiry etc. can be done by the current owner, for instance, instead of third parties. It can achieve self-sovereignty, it can reduce a site of massive liability for which we now reuire surety bonds, and more. Even FINCEN sees the value: https://www.fincen.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/FinCEN%20...
This is incredibly sad.
What does Dr. Boaler have to gain from crippling math education?
It was a fairly common thing to do very similar operations on Apple ][ computers.

6502 had a BCD (binary coded decimal) mode; basically when in BCD mode arithmetic operators carried at 0x9 rather than 0xF, and operations worked nibble-wise rather than byte-wise. So it was common to represent 2 digits in one bye regardless of hex vs decimal.

I actually have been thinking about this lately because of the other half of the problem, ie ASCII <—> native types. On the Apple 2 one really cool speed trick was to store strings directly on the screen. The Apple 2 text screen was memory mapped (0x400 - 0x7FF IIRC). To write strings to the screen in assembly, you wrote the ASCII character codes to the right memory locations. But if you were trying to eke out every single cycle you could, and your strings were fixed length, you didn’t need to store them somewhere and copy them to the screen; you could use the screen as the store for your strings.

I once made a stupid program that counted to one million this way; it ran fast enough to watch it finish.
> there has been a global (edit: anglosphere) shift in liberals abandoning the working class for ideology and the role of what used to be pro worker pro union

The UK Liberals faded away after the mid 1920s, like the Australian Liberals (rich conservatives) they were never particularly pro union and were only ever pro worker | pro welfare in a patronizing condescending manner ala "Daddy knows best".

Both the UK and Australian populations had strong political Labor Parties as principal opposition to conservative ideals for the past century, these were the parties that were strongly pro worker and pro union.

These UK and Australian Labor parties have been less so since the 1980s and the Thatcher years as unions have dwindled in power (compared to times past).
It's not about taste, really. We all learn mathematical notation in primary school. It is an universal language. Programming languages support many concepts that are either the same in math or very similar.

Using the symbols for the same concepts in both worlds is the obvious and sensible choice.

The reason why C did choose a different convention was that it preferred similarity with FORTRAN which is so old that it was punched on cards that did simply not have a : character.

Now it is 2023 and I argue that we should use the same symbols in programming that children are taught in primary school instead of ones that were chosen merely because more than 70 years ago the proper characters were not yet available.
Perl first commit: a “replacement” for Awk and sed
NATO does not have air superiority in Ukraine. The skies are contested in many areas. Recently Ukraine lost a number of Bradley’s and when a Ka-52 ambushed them in Zaporizhzhia.

If you’re making the point that America and NATO could join the fight sure, but that’s a hypothetical and the reality now is that the skies in Ukraine are contested.
The AI crowd has been working for multile decades and only now has made progress that people care about. Also I’m pretty sure the “eye-watering amounts of money” Sam Altman referred to exceed what developers of even the crypto projects had, when they built eg Bitcoin or Ethereum. That’s what it took to make AI turn heads. Until AlphaGo you could also yell that AI has no real applications.

The personal computer crowd had hobbyists like Wozniak coming to meetups for decades and computers were the province of nerds, now everyone is addicted to them. Decades took place

You are like a person yelling at the video game industry: “pong and space invaders are a stupid waste of time with ugly graphics!! Don’t play or make video games!!” Until a few decades later we have Halo, Call of Duty etc.
This appears to be from 2017.
This is my question as well. Is there a more nuanced way to tell how personal data is used other than confirming that an OpenAI key is or is not needed?
The growing and processing of it uses large quantities of carbon inputs. Diesel and fertilizer.
ooof
The weight of having to support what you write is an important one for a developer IMHO.

It is easy to slap together crap and toss it over the wall as good enough, and then, the "hone team" is stuck with supporting it.

For example: Imagine building the feature on a O(n^2) data structure, it'll work fine to start, but long term, we'll need a O(log(n)) structure. I wonder who has to do the work on the "slow performance" bug, and data migration.

These concerns aren't abstract. They are very concrete. There will be landmines left behind. Even when we try not to leave them behind we do as developers. Without responsibility... it would be even worse.

This is also why I don't like having one team do all the Greenfield work, and one do all the fixing.
Let other people pay you to run their stuff on your hardware with Vast.ai.
How does this relate to Brooks' Law?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks%27s_law

Also, out of curiosity, does AMZN have red shirts on the away teams?
I've made that transfer. It sucks but it's still a relevant option, especially for people who live next to a CalTrain station. A CalTrain that goes downtown would likely get them to make it easier for airport passengers to get to Millbrae. Because of that a CalTrain that goes downtown would be worth a lot, but still a tiny fraction of the proposed budget. I hope it doesn't happen if it's going to cost that much.

The conference attendees when at the airport have their luggage. The airport hotel is a more realistic scenario. Or a CalTrain accessible hotel. And some of the airport hotels have good access both to CalTrain and the airport. I think more would if this extension were made.
An interesting idea. My first thought was to say “just use a differentially private learning algorithm,” but DP requires a notion of closeness, and that’s not trivial for, e.g., image data. Images close in an abstract sense, like Euclidean distance, may not be close in a task-relevant sense. You may not know what a good, task-relevant metric for employing DP without performing some kind of learning in the first place.
Ah, cool. So you relied on repeated blood tests until you found the right dose. Thanks
> Traveling to Antarctica is a carbon-intensive activity.

> By one estimate, the carbon footprint for a person’s Antarctic cruise can be roughly equivalent to the average European’s output for a year, because cruise ships are heavy polluters and tourists have to fly so far.

> Almost all travel presents this problem on some level. But “this kind of tourism involves a larger carbon footprint than other kinds of tourism,”

Other kinds of tourism, like NA and EU tourists going to Asia? Like ultra long haul flights from Australia & New Zealand to the US? Singapore to New York?

I think reading this article is a waste of time because it's acting like going to Antartica is something special. Yes, there are plenty of tourists who only drive or take the train to get to their destination, but there are millions of tourists who fly 12-20 hours each way to go to the other side of the world which is significantly more than the 100,000 visitors Antarctica gets.

I'm saddened to see that The Atlantic, which once published the amazing piece "My Family's Slave", is also publishing this garbage with gems like

> As a species, we’re not very good at self-restraint (see: AI)
I am party #1. I go to a website to make an account. They are party #2. I do not see a third party.

Meanwhile, Mr. John "bro trust me bro your wallets secure bro nobody's going to just drop a viral token into your wallet to fuck with you bro" Ethereum is a 3rd party to the transaction between me and a website. I trust Ashley Madison with my password more than I trust the Web3 ecosystem and cryptobros to not fuck me over using the rules of their own rigged game.
I think the title was just bad. It's a good description of what's wrong with the modern internet, but it's framed as just what's wrong with Threads, which I agree could be answered much more succinctly.
I might hold an unpopular view here but I do not like reviewing small focused changes.

When a feature is implemented I preferably want the entire thing before me when reviewing. Otherwise I find it hard to keep track of everything that has happened.

Not to mention that the small focused changes might be reviewed by different people leaving only the implementer in full knowledge of everything that was done.

Peer/Assembly programming help but if you do peer/assembly programming reviews are mostly a waste of time (especially for assembly programming).
So you made a prediction and presented it as objective fact?
If you look at the graph of the last 140 years of global average temperatures it definitely does not look random at all.... it just keeps going up https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ContentWOC/images/globalte...
Correlation doesn't equal causation.

Despite the common narrative to the contrary, there is no actual hard evidence of what degree humans have contributed to climate change and what will fix it. There are many theories and computer models, but no evidence.

The issue is that history has shown many of these models to be extremely inaccurate.

See below where it was predicted on ABC news in 2008 that the world would be doomed by 2015 (you know, 8 years ago)...none of that happened.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2015/06/12/...

So with the constant Chicken Little coming from the climate change alarmists, I think you can understand some people's skepticism on the matter.

https://www.unionleader.com/opinion/oped-global-warming-dish...
Ah, this comment puts a lot into context for me. Y'all didn't _intend_ this to be your big PR push here yet, and now you're caught "mid-flight" explaining why your marketing is still aspirational instead of true-to-current-state.

Feeling for y'all.
Java might have been bit of a trendsetter here with both a logo (blue/red coffee cup) and a mascot (duke). Ruby and Python started having more distinct logos in 2006 both, I suspect they ended up being fairly influential here. Of note, Lua logo has 1998 copyright, so that is an early example too.

edit: php logo from 2000 is another notable early example
The Pocket thing was when I started to feel Mozilla lost their way. For a while I tried to maintain a patch that completely removed it. But, that's not fun.

The Idea of Pocket is great - seems everyone needs a personal-knowledge-base. And the archival feature was/is cool (I added the same to my own PKB).

And Pocket for organizing, messy like the article says. I do tagging and SQLite FTS - works a treat.
Running models on your own hardware isn't just about cost, there are privacy concerns too.
After talking about it for thirty, forty years and not doing much more than feeling good about sorting our recycling, we're here at the tipping point.

We need to not be talking about "climate change" anymore.

We are here at "climate collapse".
Were you also a critic of the first computing devices themselves, by chance?
Love to see an ad for "Learn the Future of Marketing and Unleash the Power of AI" as I read a piece on how Meta has supposedly forsaken the true gritty down to earth spirit of the internet.