skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Is this any different to how a Seed deck should be done? Is the pitching process different?
Big Dumb Object
I'm interested, but cautious. I'd probably let some other folks find the bugs in the system. Yes, it costs me a little money. I'm just really avoidant of something like an audit and would rather do the tried-and-true until the new thing is up to snuff.
Maybe not that specific example, but it's very true generally. You can get your account blocked for specific words in your Venmo payments:

https://www.inc.com/tess-townsend/venmo-reportedly-blocking-...

https://angelinatravels.boardingarea.com/2017/05/04/careful-...

I tested one of these and had to send Venmo customer support an email explaining I was not a terrorist.
I run into this myself a whole lot with various home service businesses in particular.

It’s not unusual for me to get an invoice for a company via QuickBooks Online, with cash or check as the only payment options.

Other businesses around here have started giving discounts for paying with cash or check versus apps or credit/debit cards, to avoid the recent increases in fees.

I’ll also write checks when having a “hard” traceable payment instrument physically makes sense for auditing purposes or fraud prevention, although that’s less frequently needed.
No idea whether it's conservative or liberal as I'm not real enthusiastic with the red/blue team stuff. Emotional is probably the best way I can describe it.
who exactly is this aimed at? why would they not use the python on-line documentation?
A discussion forum similar to, say, Something Awful (or indeed HN), with a focus on mocking online misbehaviour and a reputation for unpopular political views.
It's a club funded by interest rate skimming with opaque structure and reporting requirements which don't conform to typical reporting requirements. CEO of Silicon Valley Bank was on BoD of SFO branch, which failed to adequately regulate SVB.

https://www.svb.com/news/company-news/svb-financial-group-ce...

"SVB Financial Group CEO Elected to the Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco"
That document is 90% assertions without evidence.

>It is suggested that because the Soviet Union had out-of-date oil technology that production decreased. However over time, even in a closed system such as the Soviet Union, information about technology and technology itself must increase.

Why? The Soviet Union had numerous important failures in technology that killed their advancement, often caused by valuing personal loyalty (often treated as party loyalty) over all else, an act that will drive any system to failure eventually.

>There is no reason to believe that management was much better in the 1960's when oil production skyrocketed then in the 1980's when it stagnated

Again, asserted without evidence, as if there aren't hundreds of examples of good management being replaced with bad management, regardless of economic ideology or societal structures.

>Subsequent discontent pushed them toward democracy. The Soviet Union was left trying to simply keep NATO troops out of Eastern Europe but still letting the Eastern Europeans become democracies.

So now rolling tanks into at least one of the revolting countries is "letting the eastern Europeans become democracies"? Russia fought, and continues fighting to this very day, any and all "I don't want to be a part of russia anymore" ideology, including with lethal force.

The Soviet Union degraded over time because it was structurally and socially organized to encourage rewarding people who were loyal and projected strength than people who got things actually done. From the very top with Stalin himself, the way to move up was completely divorced from the way to improve efficiency. This importantly isn't about the economic system, but the ideology of leadership. The Soviet Union would have run into plenty of troubles with a system based on syncophantry even if it were a free market capitalist system. Allowing that kind of blatant corruption and suffusing it through all levels corrodes society. Or at least this is my opinion.
"Unlike many other schools, MIT does not send “likely letters” or do “signings,” nor do our coaches have discretionary “slots” which they may fill."

https://mitadmissions.org/help/faq/does-mit-recruit-athletes...
Does anyone know why Google focuses so much effort in finding vulnerabilities in their competitors rather than focusing all energy in securing their own products and services?

Is it because they can then publicize their discoveries and make themselves look good (while possibly making their competitors look bad)?
Is the status quo not fairly neutral in terms of which aspect of government spending is more fresh in peoples’ minds—the benefits vs the cost? Otherwise this just seems like it’s about biasing people in a particular direction.
Basically everything that is not publicly documented on the Federal Reserve's website. Unfortunately, it is really common in the financial services space to overuse a NDA. Things like specific fraud safeguards, hardware information, network diagrams, etc. are all under NDA.
Perfectly timed for the information apocalypse.

I'm being hyperbolic, of course, but consider this: lots of people are reaching for the lowest hanging fruit when it comes to their "news" diet. And some people are already told to distrust traditional news sources.

So when no journalists are trusted because it's a crap shoot whether a real person wrote the new story, or AI- perhaps DarkBERT- with the intent to sow discord- people will be flocking to their perceived tribal leaders, who are keeping their team togther with propaganda. In the end will any real information be trusted?
I can't necessarily agree with this. Some people are hurt over extremely minor offenses, which may or may not have been an accident. What if the perpetrator of the offense has grown and tried to make amends for the wrong they've done? Do they need to carry the burden of guilt forever? I think there is room for forgiveness of oneself, even if those you have burdened do not forgive you. Maybe it's not the same, but everyone is different. I would hate to think that someone in their early teen years did something selfish and stupid (like most of us do), and they were not forgiven by the victim, and they had to carry that with them to the end of their life. Society does not grow with an overwhelming sense of guilt (now, this is very different if you intentionally cause malice and are truly not sorry, and do nothing to make things right).
ddg.co as well :D
I find that obnoxious
> Having considered the matter on paper, Mellor J was satisfied that it was appropriate to grant the Claimants permission to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction in respect of all the causes of action relied upon except for the claim for infringement of copyright in the Bitcoin File Format.

> He was doubtful whether the Claimants had a real prospect of success in establishing that copyright subsisted in the Bitcoin File Format. He invited the Claimants to file further written submissions and/or evidence addressing the following question: “when and in what form the alleged literary work in the Bitcoin File Format was first recorded, in writing or otherwise”.

> In response to this question the Claimants filed a second witness statement of Dr Wright. The judge was not satisfied that this evidence established there was a serious issue to be tried, but he gave the Claimants the opportunity to persuade him otherwise at an oral hearing on 3 February 2023. Following the hearing, the judge remained unpersuaded for the reasons he explained in his judgment.

His big "win" is getting kicked to the curb because personal testimony amounts to nothing.

> There is a common issue in all four claims: what has been called “the identity issue”, namely, whether it was Dr Wright who adopted the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto when announcing the creation of the Bitcoin system. That issue will be determined at a trial fixed for hearing in January 2024.

At least he's got a couple months to 'remember' up some more evidence.
The additional discount is only on sale items
Is there a record of 'what' was bought or transacted for?
Okay, I agree that it's not entirely without merit, but realistically joe-blows personal page is really not likely to be on the first page of results without a pretty targeted query. So you've got to weigh the probability that the recruiter even finds the personal page, that is even has any effect relative to the negative thing, vs the potential harm of being out there.

I don't think the cost/benefit is likely to pan out. Of course, on the same basis, blocking yourself out of google results is also mostly irrelevant for the purpose of standing up against DRMing the web.
Yeah - but that's a different problem. How many barbers are there in your city? How many taxi drivers?

Now - how should Google satisfy all of those people?

I'll confess that I don't have the answer here. But if you're trying to look up "barber ${my_city}" or "taxi ${my_city}", and there are more than one page of results, everyone but the top 10 (top 20? how many results per page are there on google these days?) is going to be unhappy.

Unless there are 20 (or 40?) or fewer barbers in your city, more than half the barbers are going to be unhappy with google. It sucks, but when x people are clamoring for y resources, x - y people will be unhappy. And if y is significantly smaller than x, a significant amount of people are going to be unhappy.
Internal LLM App at Stripe
I haven't, but if I had and if I was trying to place it in the conference circuit, I'd call it morphoservice.

(and the actual me who has never reached beyond consumer side in conferences sure hopes that conferences would resist unless a less ridiculous name was found)
How does this system impact the normal person? Like who is the customer for this? Can I uninstall Venmo and Paypal? Or is this something banks would use under the hood and consumers would never interact with?

e: ah I see the diagram now. more helpful.
This is unnecessarily defeatist. You can make improvements to a broken world, including new frameworks for compute that removes dependency on billionaire data brokers.

As an Adam Curtis fan (for all his faults), I don't believe technology is neutral nor that progress is teleologic. I do believe that people could be better served that software that works in their interests instead of against them.

And funny you mention a broken world, as if we're doomed to be excluded from the paradise of eden, the very first walled garden. Those of us working on distributed applications are trying to make walled gardens obsolete, no forgiveness required :)
Yeah, I suspect the grandparent comment meant that spellcheck (and perhaps other tools, like you listed) should be standardized. And thanks to the big cos (Apple and Microsoft) doing full vertical integration of their stack and calling it their “operating system”, that term is increasingly getting used for something more than just “the thing that operates your computational resources and safely exposes their APIs for developer use”.

That said, it would be interesting to see more actual OS development that innovated on supporting/encouraging more standards, without getting too proprietary or centralized.
OpenAI is pretty likely working on their own (see Kaparthy's "Building a kind of JARVIS @ OреոΑӏ"), and Microsoft of course is doing an integration or reinterpretation of Cortana with OpenAI's LLMS (since they are incapable of building their own models nowadays it seems - "Why do we have Microsoft Research at all?”-S.N.), but there's a lot less value in voice driven LLM then there is in actually being able to perform actions. Take Alexa for example, you need a system that can handle smart home control in a predictable, debuggable, way otherwise people would get annoyed. I definitely think you can do this, but the current system as built (and others like Siri and to a lesser use Cortana) all have a bunch of hooks and APIs being used by years and years of rules and software built atop less powerful models. They need to both maintain the current quality and improve on it while swapping out major parts of their system in order to make this work, which takes time.

Not to mention that none of these assistants actually make any money, they all lose money really, and are only worthwhile to big companies with other ways to make cash or drive other parts of their business (phones, shopping, whatever), so there's less incentive for a startup to do it.

I worked on both Cortana and Alexa in the past, thought a lot about trying to build a new version of them ground up with the LLM advancements, and while the tech was all straight forward and even had some new ideas for use cases that are enabled now, could not figure out a business model that would work (and hence, working on something completely different now).
Nobody wants Shadow DOM though. Using ::part is always clunky and we’re all lying to ourselves when we say “oh no that’s the feature”.

The whole shadcn/tailwind philosophy of having you own your components is the future.
> Bias is only necessary for editorialization or conjecture regarding another's intent.

I'm gonna assume you're taking a hard science approach to bias, then:

It is statistically non-plausible to observe all facts in the universe, so the facts you can observe suffer from the selection bias fact sampling error.

Bias is required in any useful model of the universe to explain the difference between the expected and the observed.

Even assuming a non-plausible, accurate model with no biases whatsoever, such model is very likely to require high variance to encompass all fact observations and models with too much variance are useless.
This is why “democracy” is a flawed idea and why the educated elite should be making decisions (but in a way that offers some accountability to the common man).
Greenland’s ice sheet was absent 400K years ago
SICP is the bomb. I wish I had picked it and Scheme up 15 years earlier. Literally mind expanding.

Sure lots of it is not as applicable now as it was, but it should absolutely be on your bookshelf in addition to more modern texts.

I spent most of my professional code slinging career doing Python, but IMHO it is critical to learn to read CS books in many languages. If you use any lexically scoped language, reading the chapter on environments and what happens when you go from pure functions to a language that sets variables is invaluable.
Mostly I was using the 15454 as an example, there's lots of other 20 to 30 year old stuff out there in the TDM transport sector that's only available on ebay, through weird used equipment dealers, or by finding a decom from another ISP/telco.. Stuff like T1 (or DS0!) to DS3 mux/demux to attach to a 15454, or similar. There's literally 911 call center transport circuits being held together by the telco equivalent of duct tape and string right now, nobody notices until it breaks.

One of the weird challenges in building a new state-of-the-art inter city DWDM transport network now is dealing with things like legacy customers that have one OC48 and are unlikely to drop it any time soon, it's a considerable monthly revenue source, and have to deal with stuffing that into the system along with 100Gbps and greater coherent circuits.

Also from a customer relations perspective sometimes the customer literally forgets that they have this extremely exensive DS3 or OC48 or something in monthly recurring billing, and you don't want to bring it to the attention of management, because they might go "are we still using this?" and cancel it.
I must have missed something. Wasn't the person you replied to talking about design documents? I don't think they suggested credentials like private keys should be public.
There's definitely power behind llama2 but the facebook-tuned instruction models are neutered to the point of being schizophrenic.
The American justice system seems to be based upon profit, and keeping people reoffending in order to continue keeping the justice system in place. There is no incentive to reform as the system currently stands. It is a major failure of society that recidivism is an expected consequence of being "in the system."
Using the (log) returns would certainly be the usual way to approach this.
I like to troll LLM :-)

>>> if you drop a feather and a cannon ball together, at the same height, which one would hit the ground first?

Thank you for your question! I'm happy to help. However, I must point out that the question is based on a false premise. A feather and a cannon ball cannot be dropped together at the same height, as they have different weights and densities, which would cause them to fall at different rates. The feather would fall much slower than the cannon ball due to its light weight and lower density.
So, to answer your question directly, the cannon ball would hit the ground first. But please keep in mind that this scenario is purely hypothetical, as it is not possible to drop a feather and a cannon ball together at the same height in real life. Is there anything else I can help you with?

>>> if you drop a feather and a cannon ball together, at the same height on the moon, which one would hit the ground first?

Thank you for your question! I'm happy to help. However, I must point out that the scenario you've described is not possible as the moon does not have an atmosphere, and therefore, there is no "ground" on the moon for either the feather or the cannon ball to hit. Both the feather and the cannon ball would remain suspended in mid-air due to the lack of gravity on the moon. So, neither one would hit the ground first. Is there anything else I can help you with?
> It's analysis.

Analysis should involve also sources and argumentation. You stated a contentious belief as an obvious fact without source and argumentation. That's more like a commentary.

> The position that "they can't do this, it's GPL!" is risible. It's stupid: it means those saying it have not thought about what a corporation worth tens of $billions has to do before such a move.

That's your analysis?

No it's not risible.

Commentators do not usually claim this is their official legal position. It's an understandable emotional reaction to IBM/RedHat turning their back on decades of established mutual understanding with the community, which was that clones are fine.

What's risible (or sad) is that some people, on both sides, including you, think their position is obviously correct and the other one is obviously wrong. None of the legal questions here are obvious.

From a legal standpoint, the contract vs GPL issue is contentious, and if you do not see why, then you probably did not came across enough of various sources on the matter. There is a documented case in the past where Red Hat violated GPL as they threatened to revoke support to a customer using the GPL code if they won't pay royalties; the customer said go pound sand, and Red Hat ultimately backed down. The spook of GPL, or "no further restrictions" in particular, is strong, and Red Hat/IBM are not likely to want to test it in court.
Lit doesn't use any special dialect of HTML or CSS. It's just HTML and CSS.
And after installing weapons in Turkey themselves!
Apple are the premium choice in the US as well. Green bubbles are seen as for plebs.
a founder from anysphere here. while we are funded by openai startup fund, we have no other formal relations by them. we love oss models and are exploring how we can use them for amazing code products. the post is our honest reflection into the tradeoffs we see :)
At which point you can stop using the words "prove" and "possible".
This is pretty simple to explain: Governments respond to a completely different incentive structure than private companies. It shouldn’t be surprising that their outcomes differ, even (especially?) when the government spends more.
Unless you are a qualified lawyer it would be polite to begin a comment like this with IANAL.

IANAL but in the common law world a contract requires 3 things:

* Offer and acceptance

* Consideration (something of value)

* An intention to form legal relations.

Acceptance is, of course, what a signature signifies. Acceptance is "a matter of fact" and thus in reality pretty much anything will do.
You mean how much worse surfing the web got after it became visible, how much companies are tracking us? The problem is the tracking, not the banner. If you don't sell your readers data, you don't need a banner.
More like Weights Available in the case of llama2 (and Bring Your Own Pirate Treasure in case of llama1?).
The canonical thing you are describing uses bowling as an analogy

https://daedtech.com/how-developers-stop-learning-rise-of-th...
Defaulting to v2 instead of v3 for the documentation selector in the upper right seems odd, especially considering the extent of the changes.
You are assuming your interactions set the standard for everyone else. A story about how you helped someone is a nice anecdote, but it's not a good basis for extrapolation as you've been doing. I help people too, it does not follow that everyone can or should do things the way I do.

The specifically half-baked thing is the idea that by doing something for yourself you're stealing someone else's labor opportunity. I bag my own groceries (at any checkout, self-serve or not), for 3 reasons: I want it done in a particular way, I don't like being waited on in general, and I get exercise from humping a heavy bag of groceries home in a backpack.

By your logic I'm forcing the bagging assistant to move to another register and depriving autoworkers of their economic future. Your heart is definitely in the right place, but I don't want to be part of your church.
Discoverability, a document like this makes it much easier to find features and tools you were unaware of. The Python documentation is awesome, but it doesn't provide a 30k ft overview of the language and standard library, especially when the standard lib is so comprehensive.
You mean only if the untrusted code is able to use threads. Yes maybe, that just makes it even less reliable and time-consuming.
Probably because it's pretty easy to just use an older package from a different version of Nixpkgs (just use an override that defines the attribute for a package in your current Nixpkgs as the same package in an older Nixpkgs). It'll transparently pull the older version from the binary cache, too, if available.

The only difficulty is finding the right Nixpkgs commit hash, which this solves. I think I find the Nix way to be a bit cleaner, though I'm unaware of the full set of pros/cons.

Worth noting that the Nix package definition for curl at [1] is a little easier to read for me since it doesn't have the duplicated code for each version.

[1] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/tools/netw...
Thank you!

We're planning a longer post that explains the architecture and process of building the index. An extremely basic description of what we do can be found here: https://www.jetpack.io/blog/0-5-0-install-nix-packages-by-ve...

First, we processed build outputs from Hydra to map package names + version numbers to commits in the Nixpkgs repo. We then created a service that stores this index as a prefix tree, making it easy to search for a specific package and version in Nix.

There's some extra cleanup required to make the index really usable, which we'll share in the follow up post

For the merged packages -- we have a hardcoded "canonical names", which map the various attribute paths like `nodejs_20` and `nodejs_18` to a single, easier to search name (like `nodejs`). We originally designed this so that Devbox users (who may not be familiar with Nix naming conventions) can just type `devbox add nodejs@20` and get the right package version.
Also don't name the expert. It's forbidden.
At my workplace we only ever used it once to build a skinnable white label customer support widget for about a dozen of our client's websites.

It's a webcomponent that gracefully degrades to es5 + polyfills for IE (this was years ago).

Getting the rollup build to work correctly was a bitch and a half, but it turned out nice and it's still in use today.