skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One has to think the ROI for any financial investment in someone <25 YO towards things like education pays off more than similarly-sized investments later in life.

Regardless of whether the parent can support that tuition cost or the kid has to take on loans themselves, it should be up to the individual whether they take on that risk irrespective of the parent's financial situation, which is I think where this heavily-downvoted reply was going.

As somebody who's education was way less supported than the rest of my family, who came out with a better job than all of those others in spite of that, there's a decent chance your kid will resent being "held back" by such a choice for a very long time if you give them trade school as their only option in life.

Lots of people find ways to be successful in the arts by eventually finding something cross-disciplinary, and with the direction most non-white-collar jobs in the US are heading I wouldn't bet my kid's life on trade school. What made sense as a sentiment on Mike Rowe's "Dirty Jobs" 10+ years ago doesn't quite hold up as well today, and those projects were funded by the Koch brothers and the whole "trade school is just as good" thing should be taken with a mountain of salt. I'd love to see more data proving trade school proves better today, especially for young adults with educational backgrounds and access to learning and job opportunities whose parents are in the economic class to be browsing HN
Graphics Programming Weekly:

https://www.jendrikillner.com/post/graphics-programming-week...
Everyone seems to ignore that Threads may be interested in the rest of Fediverse: Wordpress and (if it ever integrates) Tumblr. It also secures them easy access to any other potential developments, such as Lemmy.

While Fediverse integration adds moderation complexity, I see few downsides for them to integrate and stay integrated. The portion of Mastodon that hates Facebook seems determined to segregate itself.
My brother in Strunk&White, that ship sailed 100years ago, and can't be unsailed.
in my area to few spots to re-charge
> Following passion is for rich people (or people who get unlimited student loans).

I think this is a truism that people want to be false.

But in any developed country, most poor people are pretty rich when compared to the world, and it offers them lots of freedom to choose what field they want to work in, where they want to work (both city and company), etc. There isn't the expectations that sons take their fathers' jobs and that daughters take their mothers' (often being a homemaker).

It still sucks to be relatively poor in a developed country, but most are rich enough that they can follow their passions in ways their grandparents never could and half the world can't today.
I'd wager econlib is cherry picking https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-library-of-economics-and-...

Mainstream economists have thought very different things at different times. The current mainstream orthodoxy is largely free market fundamentalists that took over in the 80's. There are heterodox economists that disagree with this view. Practically, there are also many examples of price and rent controls and de-commodification "working" throughout modern history and currently on other countries.
There is absolutely no evidence that the Planck length is anything like the smallest possible length or wavelength. Its "just" a length scale that pops out when you combine several physical constants. That combination of constants means that at the Planck scale quantum effects and gravitational effects are likely to both be relevant, which is cool, but other than that it doesn't really have any fundamental meaning.
What does that have to do with ML/DL? You don't need Lie Algebra to understand how to do a matrix dot product...
One valid reason is that it is not a Tesla. Not everyone wants the same thing.
Kids, never learn keyboard shortcuts from strangers in the internet
It was a political stunt by an aide to one of SF's supervisors. It did not arise organically from people upset about self driving cars. I don't think there was anything elegant about it. Just politics as usual in SF where the progressives battle the über-progressives over meaningless issues like re-naming schools while homeless people die on the street, the Tenderloin is an open sewer, and downtown withers away. It really hurts to see what has happened to my hometown over the past decade. I blame district elections and a weak mayor, both of which have contributed to a government that is incapable of doing much of anything. I suppose ultimately the voters are to blame.
I think one of us is confused!

My original ask of OP was this:

> 2) look at the single core performance, battery life, and screen quality of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance at the same price point from that time.

My point is not that there are NO faster or cheaper laptops than MacBook Air, but that at this price point, it's very difficult (impossible?) to find comparable processor performance, battery life, and screen quality.

You offered a laptop which doesn't seem to be commensurate on any of those aspects. I think it's possibly because you didn't read the full comment?

> Or ignore that and continue to insist faster and cheaper laptops don't exist.

Hopefully the above clears up what I'm driving at. Faster laptops definitely exist. Cheaper laptops definitely exist.

> It's a $400 laptop and your only critera was that it had to be faster and cheaper.

No, that is not what I said. I referred to the MacBook Air "test" twice:

> > 2) look at the single core performance, battery life, and screen quality of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance at the same price point from that time.

This might be unclear to you. I am saying: look at [processor performance, battery performance, screen performance] of the original 13" M1 MacBook Air. Now find me a laptop with commensurate performance [to those aspects][ at the same price point.

I went on to refer back to this later on:

> 4. Can you find me that mythical laptop computer to compete with MacBook Air?

I did not set the condition that it be cheaper. I did not constrain performance to JUST the processor speed.

> If you actually wanted to talk about displays then yes, your original comment was missing some key details.

Is there something beyond me specifically referring to the "screen quality" that would have been helpful to your understanding?

> I wouldn't be surprised if your next reach was to claim MacOS is an "infinite value add" and end our comparison on that basis alone.

You're engaging in a lot of quite pointed speculation about my integrity in this discussion. Did you read what I said to OP? If so, can you help everyone understand why you think I don't care about the list of parameters I enumerated and am somehow moving the goalposts by assessing your example by the criteria I feel like I originally expressed?
Show HN: Personal AI Developer Connected to GitHub
Thank you for responding. This is very crisp and well written -- it makes it very clear to see where we disagree. Which is of course totally fine and an age-old debate. But it gives me a chance to state my view in a crisp way as well as a reaction:

// There is nothing in the natural world that has a creator in the sense that you mean...

I believe you're expressing a faith here. As you and I both agreed "reality has no need to conform to our intuition or ability to understand" - the implications of this is that on questions like "where did the laws of physics come from" we have no hope of observation / understanding that can lead to an answer.

Perhaps the only honest answer would be "as a human being, I am too limited to engage with this topic at all."

But both religious people and atheists make a stronger assertion than that. An atheist says "I can never understand this, but I believe it came about randomly." A religious person says "I can never understand this, but I believe it came about purposefully."

They are both equally (un)justified in their belief, but one or the other resonates with them deeply enough to operate as a matter of faith.
Can't be udon pasta 30day window.
Those are notes in my big digital notebook (currently managed by Obsidian)
That's being too kind to them. Luddites didn't actively try to maintain a state of affairs that resulted in 30,000 deaths per year in their country alone. These idiots are doing just that.
I want electric, but I still have reservations. Range is a big one, and many times I mention it, people will say 'oh just wait for x, then batteries will last y.' Meaning it's probably evolving quickly.

That in turn makes me want to wait, why would I spend more money than ICE on something that will be outdated soon?

Which brings me to the second point: costs are still pretty heavy on most of these.
this is SF. It would not surprise me.
> These will be more convenient, but also dramatically more expensive, and _that_ certainly reduces the ownership of things.

Yes making them dramatically more expensive would reduce ownership. I suspect they will be expensive at first, but can't think of any reasons they won't get cheaper with time.

>> the mean number of cars on the road at any given time would seem like it would only go up

> That's orthogonal to the question of level of ownership -- these can both be true simultaneously.

It's not orthogonal, but they aren't completely tied together. Per-car utilization would have to go up for them both to be true.

> And it may even be the case that the number of cars on the road goes down. The idea would be that if these services are convenient enough for more people to forego owning their own vehicle in favor of using a fleet, the economics on a per-trip basis would change: ...

Again this seems to presuppose that self-driving cars will require a significantly higher capital outlay (or perhaps that cities not named "New York" will make parking significantly more burdensome, though that could happen without self-driving cars). If a new self-driving car costs a few thousand more than a non-self driving car, and enough people buy new ones that a thriving used market occurs, the outcome would instead be to move people from "Of course I take transit to work; it's only a bit longer and I can read" towards using cars.
Email Is Dead
Highly recommend Benedict Evans.

https://www.ben-evans.com

I actually unsubscribed from Stratechery, and replaced it with Benefict Evans since I find it more insightful (and less wordy / more to the point).
But once you've become sensitized to the impact of paying for daycare on your budget, it's easy to logically just continue the same budget and funnel the same money to a different school.
Derivative works like translations, sequels, TV/movie adaptations, etc.
Hopefully for you the court's prioritizing will actually allow enough $$$ for your rent and food and medical expenses and transportation and clothing and etc. And adjust that when inflation hits the costs of those things.
> Meta

Their very name (to me it's still Facebook) is a grift about decentralization. So of course they're keen to make multiple statements about it.

I don't fully agree with the article because I think they might cynically launch a useless ActivityPub integration. Or they'll do it only for business profiles or something...

Another thing is they could attempt to do it in a self-serving way with crypto like they did with Diem. That is they could be legitimately interested in NFT grifts but talking about ActivityPub because it's trendy right now. They have no timeline, so their first foray into ActivityPub could involve blockchain tech.
There seems to be very little incentive to buy a compact car in the US, especially when the calculus involves _every other driver_ is in 6000 lb death machine, with 400 more horsepower than they need and vision-blocking A-pillars the size of small cars themselves. Oversized vehicles and non-commercial trucks need to be taxed to death.
The questions is: what are you looking for?

- General tech news?

- Career tips/tricks for devs?

- Deep dives on functional topics?
Show HN: Cosmos - Search and edit video files with AI
Hey HN - excited to share the the beta launch of Cosmos, an AI-powered platform for businesses to convert existing video content into visually engaging marketing and sales communications.

Video assets are cumbersome to repurpose. That’s why we’re building Cosmos – a creative tool that uses multimodal search to identify actions, objects, on-screen text, speech, and people in videos for a powerful video editing experience.

Contact us or sign up join our beta and learn how we can help you build video processing workflows.
So spot on. You see tons of articles and "thought leadership" on Managers vs Leaders as if managers are holding a company back through incompetence or malice. Oh man. Reality is leadership sets processes because they believe the "last ounce of juice" hasnt been squeezed. I can point you to a whole bunch of leadership rubriks (at faang/maangs) that is all about showing "impact" vs getting actual work down - and they all get vocalized a lot more during perf/calibration seasons. I am pretty sure someone who is a "Leader" will just say true work always equates to quantifiable impact (north star metrics etc) all the while ignoring the fact that collaboration needs a lot of political skills - ie convincing why we should do what leadership wanted to begin with - but without their ack. "I trust you will sort this all out instead of depending on us leaders".

I know i know. I really apologize for sounding angry there. I have seen so many smart and well meaning people getting demotivated (and giving up) because the modern corp is built around "preventing" work getting done than channeling all this passion and then execs are surprised at why people are "saying they are burnt out" or not being productive.
Zelensky, Duda Commemorate Victims of Volyn Massacre in Lutsk
Sheep aren't farmed in Japan?
I can't imagine this counting as vandalism in any reasonable world. Vandalism involves actually damaging things. Coning damages nothing.

As you suggest, putting tape over cameras is closer to actual vandalism because it could leave tape residue on the lens.
I’d be curious to learn more if you could share please
Perhaps, unlike disaffected urban youth (read: trust-fund anarchists), the AV companies are smart enough to address one problem at a time.
Also in the "Julia that can compile" family: https://lbstanza.org/
Use of this type of thing has been absolutely essential to my work as a research scientist, as the modern equivalent of a 'commonplace book' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonplace_book). Search is the primary advantage over paper notebooks and so search is arguably the most important feature of any of these 'knowledge bases'. Tagging or other forms of organizing being subsets of search, and in my opinion essential features.

So, how do I employ it? One is to search on a subject I'm interested in or working on, ie to find notes, previous readings and writings, then add to these or go from there. Another is to keep various kinds of lists, (eg lists of ideas, things to read, etc). Otherwise the way your able to link things together with tags and other forms of linking is also pretty great - these are all features I will insist on when I move to something new, since I use tiddlywiki, which is a mostly dead project.

Anything with these features works like an external brain, allowing for recall, with just enough inefficient that you have to engage with the material, and possible mix some notes and facts together to hopefully inspire some new ideas.
Complete layman here -- does that theory say that every time a quantum effect does or does not occur, in fact both possibilities happen but in different worlds?

The entire universe instantly splits up in two for every quantum event anywhere in it?

Edit: I read more comments and no, it's not literally that.
Yet there are likely many people in your area with garages where they can charge. Unless you live in a very remote area, there are likley more fast charging stations that you may have noticed and the plan is to double those by 2025.
I like Hillel Wayne newsletter: https://buttondown.email/hillelwayne/
Loan companies might not want to do that, but it's absolutely part of the due diligence they have to do. If I borrow a few hundred thousand for a home, the loan company does a deep dive to ensure that my home is a sensible buy (e.g. appraisal) and that I'm in a position to pay back the loan (e.g. credit check, historical performance). It's absolutely wild that we'd absolve loan companies from this due diligence for young adults with less credit history and no ability to default on the loans.

Also, you may be right that schools start to prioritize programs that allow borrowers to earn enough to repay their debt. Why is this a bad thing? I would absolutely argue that a poor student would be better off being unable to obtain loans for a degree with poor returns then they would be taking on mountains of debt that they can never discharge.

For the rich, those talented enough to earn scholarships, and those willing to accommodate loan companies' stringent conditions on risky borrowing, degrees with poor monetary returns will absolutely stick around as they always have.
OK thanks haha, yeah I don't have that big of a neck
- https://www.pgmustard.com/newsletter (For Postgres news)
I have an older relative who shouldn’t be driving, but lives in another state in a place where there’s effectively zero public transit. For them, a car is what allows them to participate in society.

The moment a self-driving car comes on the market, I’m helping them buy one. They don’t have to be perfect. One that gets my relative off the streets will be a get gain for all of us.
Again, I feel like there are so many what-ifs that it's hard to say for certain. If it were to turn out that AVs were dramatically less likely to kill people than human-driven cars (seems not to be the case with current technology, but humans suck at driving, so it's not inconceivable), maybe there would be regulatory/legislative disincentives that would make human car ownership harder or more expensive.
This is not wrong (despite being common and the de facto explanation) but it isn't complete either. The reason I say this is because people that often say this (or read this) also conclude that the way to fix this is to just get rid of government backed loans. The issue is that this model doesn't question why the government backed loans in the first place. How they were seen as an investment in the people, as higher education was already prohibitively expensive. The solution failed because it did not account for a feedback loop, relying on competition to keep prices low rather than implicit coordination (sometimes explicit collusion). Mostly being due to momentum and prestige having an ineffable market value.

So we need to resolve that issue as well if we're to stop federally backed loans. There's more things at play as well and the convoluted mess is the real reason we haven't solved the problem. Realistically, this is probably true about most of the larger issues we face. I'm concerned that over simplifying the problem statement results in an over simplification of the solution and it just causes us to argue (which can be supported by evidence) or take ineffective/theatrical action rather than actually resolving the problem (meeting the intended goals (plural)).

We can keep having this conversation over and over, but it has happened for well over a decade now and no real progress has been made. We gotta start looking at the actual complexity of the situation as first order modeling isn't good enough.
Yeah, it is surprising not to see more attempts out there! GitHub's TreeSitter sits at the core of our attempt. Definitely feels like the right tool with the right potential. We plan to open source it sometime soon.
The highest I've found in the bay area are a small handful of residential private schools (e.g. Athenian is $82k for boarding students). Most of the top private day schools are still <$50k/yr, but I strongly suspect they top that once fees & "discretionary" expenses are added.
In this case, the person doing it was an employee of Dean Preston, a city supervisor.

Regardless, the traffic cone clowning and the falsifying data clowning both are born of the same shortsighted desire to get "progressive" points by attacking evil corporations.
It’s 2023, Retina and otherwise high res displays are very common and the way to serve images to them is known.
Yeah, I'd love to see the day when I could build iOS apps on Windows and on Linux, just like I can for Android.
I see what you mean now. If creators don't publish their creations, they won't be experienced by anyone. They don't matter to anyone, we don't even know they exist. I suppose it's sad in an existential way that their works could be lost without anyone experiencing them or any preservation efforts being made but what can you do?
Ignorance of the law is no defense against prosecution, and any claim that "it's null in practice" is about as bad legal advise as you can give.

Even if the company went bust, and the former owners died, and they have no legal heirs, that copyright is STILL active and now lies with the state, whether the state knows that or not.

It might be called an orphan work, and it might take a whole lot of digging to discover it's now owned by the state, but it is owned, and they do have the right to prosecute over infringement if someone at any point goes "hang on, we own this, and we can make close to 50% of our annual budget by prosecuting".
Dubious. A human driver is also not going to take off with a cone on their hood. So fine, you need a human to take it off, what do you expect? The next problem after that is that the technician needs to reset the car's system... because it tries really hard to fail safe when something unexpected happens? And this is meant to be proof that they're dangerous?
NEVER cross the streams
Because it solves the chicken and egg allowing none Apple software at launch.
> These will be more convenient, but also dramatically more expensive, and _that_ certainly reduces the ownership of things.

Only if you force everyone to use self-driving cars exclusively. No one sane is proposing that.
> Hmm, so doesn't the fact that this particular value makes the math simplified not also imply some kind of meaning?

No. There are plenty of other sets of constants you can choose to set to 1, inducing other length scales. Only dimensionless constants have physical meaning in isolation; dimensioned quantities are meaningful only with respect to each other.
Title; Drilling for Oil in Alaska, as World Scrambles for Arctic Riches

https://archive.is/X2FsA
Not quite. This article talked about increase in HR, if yours is stable then this article's finding do not apply.

RHR has a genetic component - mine has already been low. When I was fit and getting enough sleep and stress free for an extended period of time, it was even lower.

I think of it as baseline RHR and relative changes to that baseline. Relative changes can be negative (as in RHR goes up) or positive (as in RHR goes down due to managing or removing stress, cardio and sleep).

If yours is 85 and you have room for improvement, then by all means you should try to bring in some positive RHR changes?
People like you are hilarious. You're sitting high in your ivory tower thinking that no one without a PhD in CS from Stanford/Berkeley/MIT can do what you do. Meanwhile people will take the Fast.ai course and be training full llm's from scratch in 6 months all the while you moan that "they don't even understand the REAL math". Yawn.