skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The most sane interpretation is that Elon Musk was payed to dilute or destroy Twitter. I can't think of anything else that would make sense.

Throwing 44 billion dollars on a company and then gutting it for everything that was valuable including a unique brand that had even its own verb?

But the sad reality is probably that a 12 years old narcissist edgelord in the body of a billionaire wanted a vanity plate.
> ask some actual women

Just asked my girlfriend and two sisters about your comment and they said it was cringe.

Maybe it’s time you start a poll to double check your (and my) assumptions about the frailty of women when reading online chit chat? Especially with something as basic as being more agreeable with people you want to fuck, something women do too.
How will an older you look back on this response though?
It is fun to see the fall of Musk, I don't know anyone who defends him at this point, everyone I know (myself included) have changed how we think of him since he acquired twitter. He has become an egocentric man with need for acceptance.
I speculate your username is simou.
Your train of thoughts run with great speed!
Running a bakery on Emacs and PostgreSQL (2019)
alchemy != astrology

Alchemy had not yet been debunked; astrology has.
I am not sure you can trademark the Unicode mark though. Doesn’t this preclude trademarks then?
US constitution has already expired in my opinion as an external observer. ,) It is not a good example, anyway, because it is not a product and not something in possession.

Reasonable expectation of account life time is the period when the user needs it, no more and no less, and it is not the same period as the life of the user.
I don’t browse Twitter since 3rd party apps got kicked to the curb but I think it’s telling that not a single tweet I have seen in the interim was longer than 280 (aka one that was popular enough to be posted here or somewhere else I’d see). I think less of people who have a blue check now. The idea of paying for “less ads” and shit features would be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad.
Hey, you're finally understanding that Steve Jobs was a hack!
To me, even if my Linux now use Wayland, X is my Linux graphic interface. I created a rasterizer for Xserver, but i'm sure anybody who has worked on Linux GUI, mouse, tiling or even keyboard event will be the same. Like how at work they called a project group 'GCC'. This perturb me.
> My fellow nerds, remember, we have a whole 88 IAU designated constellations, and they only got...like 12?? We can win this war and teach em some real astronomy.

If you're going to criticize astrology on astronomical grounds, you should at least learn enough of the astronomical basis of astrology to understand how to criticize it.

In this case, there's 12 astrological signs because the ecliptic passes through 12 constellations. (Actually, there's an interesting discussion about Ophiuchus, but this is where it's helpful to know that the constellations aren't well-fixed in divided space, IAU's process of doing so notwithstanding, and for astrological purposes, the ecliptic is instead divided into 12 equal-sized regions, each one labeled with a constellation)
One can be ignorant in different aspects. In various situations, one walks around with blinders on. One "only sees what one wants to see", because the brain filters out everything else that does not match ones world view - which is based on ones knowledge and, especially, beliefs. Psychedelics can act as a trigger (as can other things as well) to temporarily remove these blinders, making one able to see/feel/experience things the brain always ignored before, ONCE. Now, that one has "seen" it, one can choose to incorporate this into ones world view and daily life. There are many stages to this, which are part of the "therapeutic process" of psychedelics.
That Musk's genius acumen were either fake or something that he has since lost, is not an unpopular opinion, but the ruling wisdom here and elsewhere.

It's true, lots of people did fall for his Tony Stark act, but the past year has really opened people's eyes to the fact that it was all narcissism. The signs were there long before, but they were easy to ignore in light of the success of innovative companies like Tesla and SpaceX. But now people are wondering whether the success of those companies was really because of him, or that we was just there to provide the money and bask in the glory.
One would expect the richest Man in the world to also be the luckiest. The latter is simply not possible without the former. I do think he's also pretty smart, and very hardworking, but let's not pretend that lucky isn't 99.9% what it takes to be the richest man in the world. There is a ton of people out there that are just as smart, and just as hardworking, and none of them have 1/1000th Musk's wealth.
If — and it will remain "if" right up until we have actually made it — if we get an AI which is as general as a human mind, then every job can be automated, including the new ones.

What that means depends how much the AI costs to run.

Assuming the hardware stays working long enough to amortise to a rounding error, $100,000 per year at $0.05/kWh is 228 kW (and by extension $10k/year is about 23 kW), so a "good enough" AI can "afford" to draw a lot of electricity while still being cheaper than many experts, or to draw more electricity than most households while still being cheaper than per-capita income in 15 of the G20 countries.

On the other hand, if the best we can figure out how to do while giving it human-level generality is an IQ of 85, and it's a thing that runs on 1 kW, that makes 16% of humans uncompetitive even at the UN "abject poverty" threshold, while smarter people can still be gainfully employed.

Current AI is neither, as it's a combination of absurd training costs, low inference costs, and being very good at specifically and (IMO) exclusivity at the things we use to define "intelligent", but also without the stuff we don't count as "intelligence" because approximately every human has it and it's not a differentiator.
Thank you for pointing this out. We have solved it and relinked it to the correct one.
I don’t think musk brought back free speech. I think he just changed who the limited free speech applies to.
> The Twitter brand is associated with being a toxic cesspool, harassment campaigns, pile-ons, doxxing, bad faith arguments, fake news and other things like that.

I believe there is more than one association with Twitter's branding and that depends entirely on how much of a Twitter user you are:

- Associated with a toxic cesspool of doxxing, pile-ons, harassment, bad faith arguments, etc.: you are an active user of Twitter, tweeting, replying, participating in the endless threads devolving into the usual social media toxicity.

- Associated with public announcements, breaking news, and insider info: you are a consumer of information shared through Twitter, that others sifted through and surfaced it through other means (Hacker News, Reddit, news websites embedding a tweet, etc.)

I say that because I was never an active user of Twitter, pre-Musk acquisition I had my account (and a pretty handle) since 2009 but I never actively used Twitter for discussions, posts interactions, and so on. I would go to Twitter from other media, check maybe a thread or two and get the fuck out of there. And that was exactly because interacting on the platform was not only toxic but pretty chaotic to keep track of, the whole "shouting into the void" style of communication never resonated with me.

I still got some value out of Twitter by seeing verified accounts of prominent people (not celebs) breaking news or sharing inside scoops sometimes by retweeting someone that wasn't verified but was an insider on the subject. All of that has crumbled for me, I can't use Twitter for anything anymore.

So there was brand value, even in the midst of being a cesspool of toxicity, for people like me, that casually ended on Twitter to find information that wasn't available (yet) on other media. That is completely gone, the big question is: what's actually left of value in the platform? I don't see anything that can be recouped.
"At this stage, it’s still unsure that it will achieve such levels where no human is necessary"

Wishful thinking. You might be unsure but the copywriters struggling to find work might disagree.
The "bb" in "mathbb" isn't for "math, baby" (although accurate), but short for "blackboard bold". These letterforms don't originate with blackboards though, using outlines for thick verticals goes back centuries. They're sometimes called open face.
HN automatically converts these urls to punycode, maybe this is a bug and it automatically converts everything to punycode even though it doesn't make sense?
zitadel supports service users with rbac. maybe give it a look/try: https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel
The Cloud:

Outsource things that are important to you, as an individual, to a company that has so many customers it can only treat them as numbers.

They don't, and can't, offer their service in such a way that the value to the customer is matched by the importance with which it's treated by the service provider. This mismatch is at the core of all these cloud provider shenanigans, because it doesn't scale.

Counter example: Steam kept my account unused for a decade as I went through a self imposed gaming exile due to having kids. Had to jump through some hoops to prove it was me due to some old email address that was no longer accessible, but the process worked and everything was still there.
That’s a swastika for anyone who doesn’t particularly want it to show up on their screen in a public place
Go Iterator Experiment
There are 8 billion people in the world.

With such a large population, we expect some people to just be stupidly lucky many times in a row, right? Especially since they aren't really independent events - if you get a lucky break, it keeps you in the game longer, making your second break more likely.

And it would make sense that the lucky outliers would be some of the wealthiest, right?
Upvoted, how you build this?
Again, I don't care what most people believe. Not sure why that matters so much to you. That simply doesn't mean nothing has changed.
https://getcoldturkey.com/
A good bandwidth saver then, even for the 'share this' kind of plugins that exist.
If you identify users with similar interests, look up their favorite comments pages.

Mine is: https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=Tomte&comments=t

There is also "favorite submissions", if you leave off the &comments=t
You're right I should've used "as a symbol" not "as the symbol". It's not terribly common.
You're right, other businesspeople get lucky too.
The reason mainframe persists is it's a pretty slick development and deployment environment. A lot things you might cobble together as dependencies - like maybe a database or a message queue, or observability facilities or even deployment strategies like hot-hot deployments - they're all just built in to the platform. That means they're trivial to consume and they're fully supported by one vendor. It's like the worlds most comprehensive application development framework.

Going back to the hardware that everyone likes to focus on, it's less radically different from normal servers today than it was historically. The mainframe today is a 19 inch rack like any other. By that i mean it is not only a 19 inch rack like your x64/ARM servers are but also the same power density (32 or 64 amp racks), cooling requirements etc.

The most interesting bit is the software, not the hardware. There are cool hardware aspects too - but focus on them and you miss the real reason these things are popular in certain environments.
So WeChat does this:

> text messaging, hold-to-talk voice messaging, broadcast (one-to-many) messaging, video conferencing, video games, mobile payment, sharing of photographs and videos and location sharing.[1]

Twitter does public messaging and DMs, but is not a chat platform and doesn't have any of the other features of WeChat.

To become a SuperApp, X will need a lot of additional features: X will need enough features to both convince new users to join the platform AND keep them using it for most of their daily needs. That would mean Twitter would need to replace WhatsApp/Signal/Telegram when people want to chat with friends and businesses.

That would require a lot of new Twitter users! Twitter is noisy, but quite small for a social media.

Based on the track record of Twitter acquisition and subsequent changes, I don't see how Elon is going to massively increase the user base to have enough critical mass to make this happen.

Wechat is successful and became a de-facto "everything app" in great part because it's extremely useful to the Chinese government as a way to monitor and control its populace.

[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat
Would love to know what old programs you still use regularly do.
Again, the Sparc 64Bit that is used today is not open. So not sure why you bring it up.
On the page you have linked, there is a section titled "Skeptical explanations," which contains explanations of the event that are both plausible and satisfying. If you stare at the sun for a while you're going to see some weird stuff. Don't try it at home.
Can you explain to those who never saw anything in him, what you originally saw in him, and what changed?
Rebranding rue.
No-one's claiming it's _unchanged_. The word they used was 'improvements'.
Quicktime screen recorder! Then count the frames with ffmpeg.

https://superuser.com/questions/542989/getting-the-video-fra...
Almost certainly, the behaviour for all possible values that could have been passed to the function has not changed, merely some new ones have been added. If that's true, then Hickey is right, it shouldn't be considered a breaking change.

If at the same time as increasing the domain of the function, some of the return values changed for some possible values, then it is a potentially breaking change (although one not necessarily reflected in the API), and needs to be communicated. Whether it really is considered a 'breaking' change will depend on a fuzzy evaluation of whether it was legitimate for the client to make such assumptions about the return value, and will most likely depend on how the function was documented.

That case, where the function returns different values to what it used to, and which may break code that had expectations about those values, is a change that can happen any time and is not really related to the question of what to do when a function domain increases.
the good news is it's not going to succeed
> "Several times?"

With enough people in the world, someone will eventually get lucky in several improbable ways and may look like a genius thanks to survivorship bias.

I'm not saying Musk is that, but maybe his primary talent is risk-taking and fundraising rather than product innovation.
We use notion. I never found it difficult to use, but I don't really see how it's a household name. We use it as a hierarchical wysiwyg wiki. It's the kind of thing that could pretty easily be replaced with a free open source version. I also don't see what the crossover with LLMs is
> The Alan Touring movie was also ugly by assigning credit

Not just the movie, many books and articles. They often give him credit for what a team of people did (in the war-time code cracking efforts) and barely at all mention the work for which he was uniquely¹ responsible. He deserves huge credit for his life's work, no one of a sensible mind would argue there, but many give him sole credit for the wrong things at the expense of acknowledging those he worked with. From what I know (or I am lead to believe, to be more accurate) of his character I think he would be rather miffed by this.

[1] “standing on the shoulders of past researchers/thinkers” arguments aside, in some places
Let's keep this simple.

Let's say you are using an ISP to connect to a VPN provider.

That VPN provider does what most of them do and SNATs multiple customers connections to a single exit public IP.

How can they correlate the encrypted wireguard data from my ISP connection to the VPN provider and then from the VPN provider to the final endpoint (say, ProtonMail)?
Embedding citations through images is an odd choice, but the biggest issue this article has is a complete dearth of discussion about mechanism. How are we meant to understand that agency influences genetics? What's the flow of genetic information in "genetic assimilation", and how is it any different from Lamarckism?

Most tellingly, the example of the Galapagos finches doesn't explain exactly what is unique about those birds. If it's agency, then why isn't the same effect seen in other songbirds of similar brain size, as the citation mentions? Why do these birds not show the same varied adaptations to "goals"?
+ is great when you want to censor something that one of the players said but they refuse to delete it. Could also just straight up make everything players say go through a review queue and only approve things manually, skipping anything that could cause drama.

Not saying that this would be better/worse for the public/players, but I certainly could see why the owners/companies would want to silo the players voice into platforms they themselves own.
> Mainframes descended directly from the technology of the first computers in the 1950s. Instead of being streamlined into low-cost desktop or server use, though, they evolved to handle massive data workloads.

I think the first sentence is 100% correct, but the second one not so much: current desktops and servers (not to mention laptops, tablets, smartphones etc. etc.) evolved from the first microcomputers introduced in the 1970s with the idea of having a computer (albeit initially a not very capable one) that anyone could afford. These then quickly evolved during the 1980s and 1990s to cover most of the applications for which you would have needed a mainframe a few years earlier.
Nice concept Jacques.

I’m reminded of the (apocryphal?) story, about the Ranger at Yellowstone National Park who was asked why they didn’t just make all the bins bear-proof. His answer:

“There is a surprisingly large overlap between the smartest bears and the least smart humans.”

From everything I’ve read, outside those models that have plagiarism seeds that their own tools can detect, there is a surprisingly large overlap between the most humanlike AI and the most robotlike human writing.
Getting a proposal for a sufficiently flaccid variant approved by the Unicode Technical Committee was too big a lift.
Does anyone make money from your Mastodon use? I understand how moving to your own place could be good, hell, if you're just talking to each other you could even consider retroshare, but I don't understand the business loss when a bunch of IT professionals move their conversations to a private server.
Wayland is still trying really hard.
Wow I had no clue. Thank you for sharing!
"It’s easy to get lucky several times when you have a rich family that keeps you from truly failing"

This hypothesis is somewhat testable statistically.

There are approximately 25 thousand people worth 100 million dollars+ in the world, with more than a third of that number residing in the US. [0] I think we can safely say that people worth 100 million and more are rich.

If it is easy to get lucky several times with a rich family, you would expect some nontrivial share of Musk equivalents among them or their kids. Say, two hundred?

Not observed. Either the willingness to risk own money in engineering startups is < 1 per cent among those, or it is not that easy.

[0] https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/money/2022/10/18/us...
Thank you for calling this out. It puts this into perspective, it is a long article with ton of video's, ton of quotes, which is a technique I've noticed with some religious organizations putting a spin on science. Take a lot of science citations and examples and simply spin them differently to fit your desire.

Here, what he is going for is to add 'Agency' back in to us, because the entire Religious Framework of Sin falls apart in a mechanistic universe. They must put some kind of Agency back into humans so they can have 'free will', so humans can make 'choices', and thus be liable for their Sin. You can't have a judgmental God, if the humans he created can't make a choice.

Or - More Sympathetic interpretation.
Maybe this guy isn't pushing the Sin/Choice issue, and is trying to go back to the Schopenhauer "Will to Power" type interpretation. But if he is going for this, it would be nicer to call that out a little more clearly.
Assuming this does not yet exist: If anyone is interested in building something like this (that works offline) please let me know, I'd like to join. I have some experience building web extensions but unfortunately not the time to develop & maintain this on my own right now.
The security holes created by Musk's rushed Twitter rebrand
Ask HN: Which recent research paper blew your mind?
.
I do all my computing by voice but just using normal keyboard-focused programs and context-free voice control.

I use the https://qutebrowser.org web browser, which is keyboard-focused, and https://numenvoice.org (which I also develop).
Yeah, it’s up there with HBO->Max in stupidity.

I’m fascinated by the idea that anyone would use Twitter/X as a super app - I don’t see how Musk thinks anyone would use a mediocre social app over the ubiquitous Apple/Google Pay.
As I already wrote in a different comment, KeyError and None aren't the same.
The codebase in few minutes:

def print_localized_string(str):

str = str.replace('Twitter', 'X')

print(str)
I was thinking more of the entropy of the distribution over the distribution sort of thing --- one may say a model is uncertain about its statements if all its potential variants are equally probable and vice versa.
> Remember NeXT? Remember he got kicked out of Apple? Remember the G4 Cube? Remember MobileMe? Remember Ping?

Your rebuttal doesn't really make sense. Only NeXT and getting ousted from Apple were personal events for Steve Jobs. MobileMe (now iCloud), the G4 Cube, and Ping were all initiatives of Apple as a company which was far more people than just Steve Jobs.