skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Most of the professional science we produce right now is bad. Seriously, pick a paper at random and see how well it holds up.

This is utter BS. Occasionally, a high-profile fraudster is found out, but the overwhelming majority of papers in most disciplines will hold up very well under scrutiny (not that there couldn't be more scrutiny!). Scientists are humans though, and a certain percentage are scumbags. Given how scum rises to the top in private enterprise, I'm actually surprised we don't see more fraud from top administrators at ivy league colleges.

Academia has always had to strike a balance between embracing new ideas and resisting quacks. It's not news that revolutionary ideas sometimes have a tough time gaining acceptance. Science provides a framework that makes accepting ideas that work almost inevitable, but sometimes it takes time.

Can millions of backyard scientists really move things forward? Only if they're actually scientists in the sense that they keep careful notes and can reproduce their findings. If you find something weird and can't reproduce it, why should anyone take your word for it? Science has to be replicable. You can't have some secret process that only works in your backyard. You need to be able to write down how you produced your result in a way that someone else can read it and then replicate it in their own backyard. Only then can it become useful.

Unfortunately, for some areas of science, there are certain requirements that are impossible to meet in your backyard. You can't experiment with creating anti-hydrogen in your backyard because you need a massive particle accelerator for that kind of work.

What is most direly needed is better lines of communication between academia and the public. Currently, most university laboratories' communication with the public is carefully managed by PR departments. You don't just talk to anyone you like about your latest work. The PR people must be involved, lest you say something embarrassing or fail to sufficiently puff up the university's image. This needs to end. Scientists are sometimes awkward communicators. Certain words sometimes mean very different things to them. We need to get the public used to letting the occasional gaff slide and we need to get scientists out of the PR hustle sideshow.

We need scientists talking directly to the public, explaining what they're doing, and listening to screwball ideas from the peanut gallery. It lets the public know what's being done with their tax dollars and gives amateur scientists a chance to get up to speed on cutting edge research. It also bombards scientists with ideas. Even bad ones can be valuable prods in novel directions.

We don't need people saying that academia has failed and it's time for unpaid enthusiasts to pick up the mantle of progress, because that's not true and not how we move forward. We need to bridge the communications gap and unite the creativity of amateurs with the resources of professionals.
I think this is a great application/service. You can have source code, self-hosting, and construct your own network of your devices. Nice work, thank you.

Maybe some kind of P2P network support web browser - without someone's server - would be nice but this does require so much more work, I assume.
I dislike weird semantic hoop-jumping articles like this. It purposefully obfuscates a simple question to make it seem more complex. Just in the GPR section, the answer is simple...in long mode there are 16 that can be subdivided. There aren't 58 additional registers because of that.

Or, to get more specific, how many pieces of data are there in this union:

union Registers {
struct { unsigned short int AF; };
struct { unsigned char F, A; };
} regs;

Most would say one, with multiple interfaces. It might be "controversial" to some that consider each field independent, but I'd wager that they're a rare exception.
> It's impressive.

Haha, indeed. It reminds me of those extreme coding competitions where people achieve amazing results with very little code, except in this case the content creators manage to achieve shockingly poor results by bludgeoning the universe with their "cool story".
When you have things that move or resize windows instantaneously, e.g. snapping to one side of the screen, the wobble in the windows was a transition, one that helped you keep track of elements rather than everything just… changing.

Seriously, so useful for floating window managers, it’s a simple and obvious form of transition, significantly better than what window managers have ended up at these days (if anything).

(Then I switched to i3, and more recently Sway. Not sure I’d appreciate wobbly windows in tiling window managers, though maybe with gaps (… which I’ve never understood the appeal of) it might be better.)
Or is always backwards compatible. Upgrades aren't free.
So did eunuchs, back in the day. If longevity is your only goal, I don't think you need more estrogen, just less testosterone.
I balanced a consulting job and my PhD, so thesis time was incredibly productive. When I didn’t want to do one, I’d become very productive on the other, and when I got tired of that, I’d switch and get very productive again.
Show me the evidence or it didn't happen.

There is no fingerprint or smoking gun in textual prose to distinguish between bullshit human writers and generative AI.

If we wished to prove humans are behind content, then we should all be posting pictures of today's newspaper with the handwritten message we intended to convey. Imagine how much less shit social media would contain if that were the barrier to hitting the "post" button.
Spoiler:

> So I came up with the idea of a decentralized Internet, which I called “Dec Int”, which means that the user has complete freedom to use websites, software, etc., without anyone knowing who you are, and this idea is based on artificial intelligence and algorithms that work under the protocols. Some technology companies or programmers, who create websites, software, etc., cannot obtain information from a user or reveal the identity of a person. The cryptocurrency is transacted peer-to-peer, without the participation of any trusted third party.

The entire thing is like this -- all the keywords, unconnected phrases, and wishful thinking, no specific ideas, and of course no comparison to any of the thousands of existing systems which purport to do the same.
You inhabit a global economy that was imagined by students in dorm rooms and couch surfing launch failures.

Working people today have the wealth and leisure of every single lady and gentleman scientist who has ever made a significant contribution - and we have the sum of human knowledge at our fingertips. You have running water, flushing toilets, and food delivery. The only thing standing in the way is a commitment to curiosity and competence. The beauty of science is it is in the evidence of reproducable experiments. All models are wrong, most theories are bullshit, and the people charged with progressing science for our species learned it in a couple lectures a week over three years or less. You can do valuable and edifying work in less time than it took to fully apprehend the disappointment of the Game of Thrones finale if you'd only watched 3blue1brown videos instead.

Prestige is what they offer you when they don't want to pay you what you are worth, and their esteem isn't worth the envy and sabotage it costs. If you are curious about something, find out. The one thing that I can guarantee that is true about this world is that it forgives you when you prevail, and when you fail, nobody cares. I say this to myself as much as anyone.
So something like Stripe would benefit from this?
It was a 0 in both names, but cosmic rays flipped one of the bits.
looking at his (recent) comment history, I can’t imagine this is the one in particular that got him shadow banned.
That was a damned entertaining read, friend. Thanks for putting it together.
> Haven’t all the easy ideas been taken?

In certain disciplines (astronomy) the bar seems to have gotten (literally) higher.
I recently bought Premium because I realized 80% of my media consumptions is from it. Compare that to Hulu plus or cable and even at 14 a month its a great deal
Ask HN: How is the Software Engineer market for 45 year olds?
I've been a software engineer at my (large) company for a long time, in a very highly technical job at what you would call "staff level".

So far everything went well, but factors outside of my control start to turn things sour. It's not an issue pertaining to my individual role, just general developments in our particular part of the company.

I'm thinking about seeing what else is there. Before I go into disappointment, what is the market like when you are 45 or older?
don't forget SARs to FinCEN and other AML requirements

the government already knows.
I don't know about that. If you adjusted the "settings" of CRTs, some of the effects in Cool Retro Term would be achievable.

For those unfamiliar with CRTs, you could adjust the value of some components. These adjustments could affect things like the beam brightness, sharpness of the picture, horizontal and vertical synchronization, and geometry of the screen. Typically this was done via user accessible knobs on the front or back of the monitor, though some were only accessible after opening the case. Adjusting these knobs is better described as calibration, rather than changing settings, since you were adjusting the physical properties of components that directly altered analog signals.
> If you're on v37 of a service and your forced to continue to support v1 (and 35 others) there's a problem somewhere.

I think you misunderstand.

v23 was built on v5, which is built on v1. Re-using the earlier logic was obviously better than duplicating it. v24 is used by an external system that nobody has any control over, so it’s impossible to change. All the other versions… well, no idea if anyone uses them, but everything works now, why invite disaster by removing any?
This reminded me that I needed to settle on a good system-wide Snippets manager for MacOS.

Having waded through the morass of buggy (including MacOS’s built-in expansion, which seems to only work around 20% of the time) and subscription-only services many times in the past, I thought to give the open-source Espanso another go - having found it flaky and unwieldy in the past - but its last commit was many months ago and I simply could not get it to recognise Ventura permissions.

It was then that I remembered that the excellent Dash (https://kapeli.com/dash), for which I had already paid a very reasonable one-off fee, has a snippets manager. And it’s perfect.
While this is true, if a job ad is telling me that that's _their_ experience of their average hire, it's probably not somewhere I want to work!
> We absolutely limit what we can do with vcrs - they have copy protection, and their modern counterparts do too.

There are plenty of examples of protection on media trying to protect its own contents, like Macrovision on VHS's, or a website blocking certain user agents.

But I think what the author objects to with the photocopier analogy is limits on the tools that could be used for copying - like if you bought a photocopier that refused to photocopy copyrighted images. There are still cases of this (e.g: EURion constellation on banknotes), but it's rarer than the former.

> Your memory cant ingest millions of books and then spew them out

Nor can an LLM with any reasonable degree of accuracy, really. You'd have more success with Google Books (which has been determined to be Fair Use due to its transformative nature).

> For instance you cant memorise a song and then sing it commercially without paying copyright royalties.

> You cant copy books with a photoscanner at scale without getting in trouble.

I'm pretty sure the author's argument isn't "all uses of memory/photocopiers/VCRs are legal, so all uses of LLMs should be too". They explicitly acknowledge that you can do things with those tools that'd make you legally liable.

The argument seems more along the lines of "when memory/photocopiers/VCRs are used for illegal purposes we make the person liable for it, not build anti-user measures into the tool itself, so we should do the same with LLMs".

> Are ai folks really desperate that their tech is worthless without theft

Calling machine learning theft seems absurd to me, though I'm already against calling piracy theft.

In my view there's a huge amount of machine learning which is uncontroversially positive (defect detection, language translation, spam/DDoS filtering, agriculture/weather/logistics modelling, etc.) and not worth disrupting just to let Getty have what they feel entitled to.
Damn. We only have to pay fees to the EU after brexit (and I assume internationally too. edit: I've never transferred internationally).
Oxide + Friends is very good. It's very motivating to listen to and gets me excited to try and build new things. Way more positive vibes being put out there than a lot of stuff.
I hope they extend that to actual invoicing standard, i.e. pass the invoice details in that RFP message, like something similar to https://www.finanssiala.fi/en/topics/finvoice-standard/
The issue so very many people fall into is assuming some foreign-looking codebase is awful.

What people typically mean to say is something along the lines of "I haven't a clue what this does, haven't enough experience with the language to understand it, or how people use it".

Go look at code written in "safe" languages like Rust and tell me you understand what it's doing any better than well written C code.

You have to know the language to understand what is sane or not, what the conventions are, what the common issues are, etc.

Same with all the Functional stuff out there. To a OO person, it looks bat poo insane. But if you learn FP, it's natural.

Some of your complaints are valid from the perspective of someone who doesn't do kernel work. For the people who do work on the kernel, the macros, abbreviations, etc are common place and well understood, and a complete non-issue.
Sadly, the internet is entirely filled with "wow that's really impressive" on absolute bunk. So my first instinct is to kill, kill, kill whatever is in front of me.

What survives, is true.
I typically get salty about big picture feel good garbage getting posted on here, but this one kinda warmed my heart.

The past as we understand it is indeed a lie. And while we should strive to reconcile ourselves with our past, apologizing, forgiving, remembering, and regretting as appropriate, ... it's important to work to leave the past where it belongs, behind us.
>Why is that? The explanation is actually trivial: no matter how well things work, there is an absolute minimum time required to get to the airport. On the other hand, there are many things that might delay your trip: heavy traffic, closed roads, accidents...

Perhaps an easier explanation is that within driving the course you will encounter several Poisson processes, and the waiting time for a Poisson process is an exponential distribution.
I seem to have gotten around this by building from source. Super painless.
"Why it was there" is something that matters to people, plural. Knowing why it was for some people doesn't rule out the possibility that you don't know why it was there for other people.
For transfers between bank:a and bank:b do both banks have to integrate with Fednow?

Thanks!
Ah. Faster Payments in the UK are free.
I'm a little surprised that, according to the docs, "the Oxide rack does not come with any preloaded machine images" [1]. But I guess it makes sense that the initial, early-adopter customers wouldn't have a problem with rolling their own VM images. I'm at least glad that Oxide didn't decide to start by only allowing VMs that use a pre-defined set of pre-made images in some custom format.

[1]: https://docs.oxide.computer/guides/creating-and-sharing-imag...
I think we can start by checking whether energy is conserved given everything we know. If not, then you may have discovered a new particle/force.

(If we didn’t know about electromagnetic induction, and pushed the magnet through the coil, then we’d find that energy is not conserved.)
Full-time staff, including multiple private doctors(!) to secure, prepare, and then apply the stuff to your body probably makes up a large part.
> the tools of science are cheap

More accessible, but not always cheap.

Still a lot of expensive equipment involved in particle physics, nanotechnology, astronomy, etc.

Training large AI models is still expensive and requires tons of data.

And medical research still requires expensive clinical trials.

And of course if you're not getting paid to do science then you probably need income from somewhere else.
> top-quality work

Why are they rated so poorly for initial quality?
Links for OpenType and TrueType downloads at the bottom of this page: https://iginomarini.com/fell/the-revival-fonts/
Thank you for this...W3C specs tend to be the more confusingly structured ones, in my experience. I had a hell of time finding this.
The text of law is pretty short, you can read it yourself https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/55leg/2R/bills/HB2319S.pdf

It was only put in place a year ago, and it was very quickly contested as unconstitutional, which it is, and a judge stopped it from being enforced. The Republican who drafted and sponsored the law has vowed to try again. ”If if the judge says, you know, this is bad because of ‘x’, next year, though, the bill will come in bill minus ‘x’,”
A less controversal site, at least on hn, may be wikileaks https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2010/12/07/visa-m...
Same feeling. "Dark Sun" feels very much like the grinding of an axe. But yes, "Making Of" is an absolute classic. Not just if you care about the field, but if you care about good science writing at all.
https://iginomarini.com/fell/the-revival-fonts/
Logseq's journal is the biggest productivity hack we got that we never thought we needed.

Don't know where to put the idea, note or just a scribble? You have a 2022-05-12 page without the cognitive load or confusion.
The short answer is that on-prem is used by a lot of companies for many reasons that go beyond "legacy/people don't know about cloud" (and even go beyond "regulatory environments"!), and these boxes are meant for people who have serious requirements.

I'd recommend the O+F ep posted in sibling, but I think here the pitch is "well you need this hardware anyways right? How about buying one that's easy to use and doesn't take a month to get working?" All built by people who are so obsessed with root cause analysis that they've ended up writing their own firmware, running on an OS where these people are common contributors.
The highest paid state government workers are typically coaches. Go figure.
Yeah I had the option and enabled it. An hour later I checked the beta tab and the option is gone.
I'm not a native speaker of English and I think I found out that the meaning of "past" in English contains the memory of someone, as well as - this might not be correct, though - factual events.

Anyway, this is a warm story, I have more belief in human being, especially as a being who has lived in Asian culture, who have learned 人間, the human, which in fact has more than mere human being, but also the one in the community of human beings.

Rhetorical, I know, but we need more love of each other, I think. :-)
Certificate Authority Trustworthiness
The Tesla Way of Making a Great Product (2017)
I'm very surprised that they're not using `guidance` [0] here.

It not only would allow them to suggest that required fields be completed (avoiding the need for validation [1]) and probably save them GPU time in the end.

There must be a reason and I'm dying to know what it is! :)

Side-note, I was in the process of building this very thing and good ol' Misrocoft just swung in and ate my lunch.. :/

[0] https://github.com/microsoft/guidance

[1] https://github.com/microsoft/TypeChat/blob/main/src/typechat...
I assume to stop one dedicated person doing too much of the image. The novelty here is the community aspect.
web components are standard, and have been for a long while. Virtually no one uses lynx, and it's not anyone else's fault that lynx has lagged on implementing long-existing web standards.
Yeah, jokes are touchy. People commonly feel that it detracts from interesting conversation. In practice, there are sometimes “allowed” jokes; otherwise timing it later after the post at least garners fewer downvotes.
Relevant competitors would include higher paying software technology businesses because a smart enough person to work at TSMC doing advanced microchip work will instead choose to go into a different field.
Was that true during the Apollo program?
Unless they look at it and say "there's no abstractions anywhere. Why did they use 'THAT' lib? Full rewrite needed. Hate this code in paticular."

Good code is contextual and subjective.
You may enjoy https://brooker.co.za/blog/2020/06/23/code.html
Seems on par with inflation
Reminds me of this good old rant from Peter Welch, Programming Sucks

...

Every programmer occasionally, when nobody’s home, turns off the lights, pours a glass of scotch, puts on some light German electronica, and opens up a file on their computer. It’s a different file for every programmer. Sometimes they wrote it, sometimes they found it and knew they had to save it. They read over the lines, and weep at their beauty, then the tears turn bitter as they remember the rest of the files and the inevitable collapse of all that is good and true in the world.

This file is Good Code. It has sensible and consistent names for functions and variables. It’s concise. It doesn’t do anything obviously stupid. It has never had to live in the wild, or answer to a sales team. It does exactly one, mundane, specific thing, and it does it well. It was written by a single person, and never touched by another. It reads like poetry written by someone over thirty.

...

[ https://www.stilldrinking.org/programming-sucks ]
Can't, the PC is hot glued to the floor
This is a statement which is technically-true (so long as your language of choice has no length on names), but unhelpful since it does not apply in most practical cases.
Chinese military officials have stated outright that ethnically targeted bioweapons are important for the future of China's military development. Kennedy is saying that countries around the world are working on this technology and that "there is an argument" for what you said. These all seem like factual claims to me that can be verified by citing papers and speeches. If any of this is wrong why not just fact check him?

Here's a video talking about China's genetic bioweapon program:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biNxl7tiVSY

There are more speeches available online of Chinese officials talking about these kinds of weapons, I'm happy to dig more up.

A: he also said Chinese people were more resistant, but the only part you care about is the jewish part, why?

B: It is obvious that his intent is not hateful, there is nothing in that sentence that denotes hatefulness.

The vehemency with which he is being attacked makes it kind of obvious that he poses a real threat to the political establishment and that attaching the classic pejorative labels "antisemite", "bigot", "racist", etc are a tactic to stop him. The more you try to obviously censor people like this, the more obvious it becomes how authoritarian the left has become.
NetToaster – a toaster with a World Wide Web interface