skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I snuck into a banking conference in Miami Florida to meet Kevin. I forged my badge, using the previous years design as inspiration. I got in, and met him, and gave him my badge.

He said "that's really cool" and signed a copy of Ghost in the Wires for me.

Really incredible guy. Rest in peace my friend.
AI as a Therapist
Has anyone else used or wanted to use AI as a therapist?

I've seen some use-cases for this but not a ton and I am curious how others use it
> I suppose the other aspect is knowing that I trust my coworkers. They don't (typically) do something for no good reason

This so much. Depending on the git blame, I'll either remove it blindly or actually think about it way more.
You’ve gotta be in a wild echo chamber if you consider Biden centrist moderate.
You could make your own out of a static file. You could even give it a "boss key" to make it show some very corporate looking spreadsheets or something.
Protected classes are part of the law and "Cop" is not one of them. Treating cops the same as minority groups would be ignorance of the law, not equal application of it.
I think it makes more sense when you consider how many circumstances in which we do handwritten signatures, yet the recipient of the signature has no intent or method to verify it against your usual signature
The same company who showed all governments that mass local photo scanning is possible, now wants to counter security legislation?

The damage done by apple with their previous plans for CSAM scanning is huge, and apple will be partially responsible for all the upcoming anti privacy / encryption laws.
Another good example, thank you.

Over time they got more interesting and less like the "basic unsophisticated | opportunistic | social engineer | inside agent" description given above.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_Group
Cigarettes are fun too. But if you start smoking knowing that they're addictive...

The thing that really rubs me wrong is that you're playing a rigged game (literatively and figuratively) when you invest effort into grind games.

Essentially everything about the game world is under the developer's control, and they can use anything they want to get you to do what they want (spend more money).

Which to me feels like a card game where the dealer says "I'm going to cheat and redefine the rules whenever I want" and customers respond "Deal me in!"

Granted, there are good and bad developers and publishers. I play a ton of Paradox games, and I'm generally happy with the balance.
But Valve does understand (somewhat uniquely) that doing best by the consumer tends to bring in more money - Gabe often talks about this himself. I guess this is one instance where they think more money could be had another way.
> The police have a monopoly on the legalized use of violence.

Is this true? I thought killing for self defense is legal.
That's easy to do, if it's _intentional_. I'm always amazed at how often I see systems rate limited by some seemingly "decorative" upstream component, that when removed, causes everything else to run amok. :/
Likely TheDraw!
"If you pass a prop to a child component, it will update whenever you change state"

Well if you update a state, every children of your component is updated as well regardless of if they have a prop passed.

I know there are way to make react trully reactive like Valtio using proxy or maybe Zustand, but my point is that useState or useContext is not "reactive" at all, you must call a function to rerender the components.
I guess you're hinting towards Switzerland special voting system :)
Now that the media is carpet bombed by Netflix's victory lap over this, I wonder if every single streamer will follow suit.
True. But if you ask them about being filmed, I doubt they love it. Just saying we can’t conclude malfeasance from cops desiring secrecy.
This is exactly how laws like this are intended to be used. They’re entirely about protecting status quo police power and control.
Aside from what ethbr0 said, which I agree, that you're blaming the victim, I want to address the "learned helplessness" idea.

I heard recently that's actually wrong. We are born helpless, and learning to take control. The helplessness is innate, and we learn to overcome it.

In democracy, the innate helplessness of citizens is overcome by learning to participate in governance - activism, elections, public functions and so on.

The people who say "government does nothing good ever" are the ones who want to keep people in their natural helpless state. It's like telling a student, "you're doing it all wrong and can never be good".
We're the United States government. We don't do that sort of thing.
> This "just so" claim has always struck me as quite a reach. Humans are manipulable, yes, especially by (perceived) group pressure, but there are still limits.

You could reimagine it as "convince most people to do anything, including killing people who are unconvinced" if you prefer.

> There's a few links in the article - which person are you referring to?

Sorry, this link, which is attached to "bomb" in the article: https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-no...

> Being the most prominent voice calling something unsafe is not an inherently valuable qualification.

That's true. But the article does something odd instead of making that critique -- it presents bombing GPU data centers as a reductio ad absurdum, suggesting if you really believed in AI risk then you would have to be willing to consider doing that. The people who really believe in AI risk already are willing to consider it, though.
> There is no chance in hell I'm giving it all the phone numbers, emails and names of people that trusted me by giving me their details.

The sad thing is that all their details and yours are already known to Meta.

The dozen of us who behave like you will keep trying though.
>Wait wait wait… the folks involved with moving money around decided that they're not worth as much as they've been compensated?

>You mean to tell me moving money around professionally isn't as valuable to society as maybe the last 40 years postulated it was????

As opposed to tech people working in adtech?
No, the salaries are very high. The challenge is finding sufficient number of people outside Taiwan with ASML experience.
If I recall well a documentary about ASML, each photolitography tool has such trained individual attributed during its whole life time. And that was for "simple" DUV tools (immersion photolitography).

So for the EUV-HighNA tools...
Do you live in China? If so, they probably just send a Foxconn employee or PRC representitive with some sort of firearm.
You lack creativity. You have multiple billions available for that. Where do you want your remains to disappear ? Hell, even sharks with lasers isn't far fetched with that amount of money.

But all playfulness aside:

* Pay professional hitmen.
* Pay a hobo enough to go beat you up in your home.
* Pay enough people enough money to kill you pretty much anywhere.

What are they going to do, plead in front of a judge that sees 90% of his murder cases unsolved or solved through guilty pleas that Tim Cook gave them a wad of cash when all they saw was a subordinate of a subordinate of a subordinate ? There's nothing fancy about it. Especially with an economy that drives people to drastic measures: a huge wad of cash that you're guaranteed to keep is enough for most people.
> It's not possible to encode a higher-frequency signal over a lower frequency carrier..

Actually it is possible. AM modulation is just a matter of multiplying two frequencies together. It's just that the lower sidebands wrap around DC. It's a bit harder to demodulate, but not impossible.

>.. AM broadcasts are in the medium-wave (MW) band...And I'd suspect that fidelity above 10kHz audio is not especially high even at those transmission frequencies.

In the transmitter the fidelity is limited by the bandwidth of the modulator, and in the Receiver by the bandwidth of the IF stage. You can actually get FM like audio from a BC AM radio, but not with cheap and nasty receivers designed for the American market. In Europe many HiFI AM receivers have an optional "wide" IF filter, and the transmitters can transmit 15KHz audio.
Sounds simple, right? It fails horribly, because you lose control of how data flows through your application. One view triggers an update to a model, which will immediately trigger other views to render regardless of where they exist in the component hierarchy or whether there are more changes to make in tandem. This can cascade to other updates, and suddenly you're in a weird intermediate state caused by a race condition between two separate views that's incredibly difficult to debug.

The reason why solutions like React are so popular is because it radically simplifies state management: data flows in from the top of the component hierarchy down. When a component makes changes to state, those changes are queued up for the next consistent render loop, which ensures that nothing renders in an intermediate state. An entire class of bugs, gone.
> The company doesn't have a hundred thousand armed officers with the ability to arrest / kill me

ask Foxconn employees if that's true or not.
> don't know if that would be reproducible on a regular RGB display, though

It wouldn't, and also not with standard camera sensors. The RGB subpixels correspond to the main wave length sensitivity of the three color cells in the eye. I think for tetrachromy there is a fourth cell for UV light with shorter wavelength than blue. There is no way to support this with our current tech stack.
Part of writing and maintaining good code is maintaining useful documentation (such as comments) expressing clear rationale and intent. Simple stuff can be elegantly implicit, and modern languages are getting better at capturing more of this in syntax and eliminating common footguns. But more complex systems tend to benefit from explicit explanation or even external design documents (like diagrams). A fix that doesn't keep those current isn't a completed fix.

When I come in on a consulting basis I often have to help developers unwind the unintended effects of years of patches before we can safely make seemingly-simple changes. It's analysis-intensive, and like an archaeologist any artifacts I can dig up that you've left behind providing clues to what was in your head at the time can be helpful. In some cases where a set of functions is super critical we've made it part of the culture every time altered code is checked in to perform a walkthrough analysis to uncover any fresh unintended side-effects, ensure adherence to design requirements and discover and spotlight non-obvious relationships. The key is to turn the unintended or non-obvious into explicit. Sounds painful but in practice due to the high risk attached to getting that portion of code wrong the developers actually love that time for this is worked into the project schedules - it helps them build confidence the alteration is correct and safe.

I wish it were easier to impress the importance of this on inexperienced developers without them having to go through the hell of maintaining code in an environment where it was lacking.

It's a skill and art to keep the appropriate level of conciseness to avoid the documentation (no matter which form it takes) becoming too verbose or unwieldy to be helpful.
It's morally debased and corrupt to treat deep thinkers like plants that can be harvested, their entire lives and experiences consumed to enjoy the fruits of their intellectual labor.

It's just personal preference, like all politics. We create the world we want to live in. Yes, I once idealized your society, but after years in the corporate world I learned there will always be plenty of snakes out there. I'd prefer not structuring society in a way that rewards them even more.
Yeah, because they are asked to/legally required. I was questioning incentives to hand over information on their own accord, just because they can.
Of course the majority respect cops. It's generally the minority that they abuse.
Tech exec who trashed his body for 23 years spends $2M/yr to reverse the damage
>When making software at least, you know when you’re trying to use a decorative stud to hold up part of your house, and choosing to do it anyway instead

Whenever I find myself doing this, I at least leave a comment typically worded along the lines of "the dev is too lazy, not enough time to do it right, or just has no clue what to do, so here you go..."
This reminds me of the "second arrow." A buddhist idea.

What happened in the story, the ground truth, is real. There was an accident, people were injured.

That this story really highlights is the danger of a second arrow that is not that we tell ourselves stories about the past. The danger is that we tell ourselves stories so false they cause undue suffering.

The point isn't that the past isn't true. The issue is the story.
It's a vicious cycle. The police develop a reputation for toxic culture. People who might otherwise be attracted to policework for the right sorts of reasons (sense of duty, care for the community, responsibility etc.) become alienated by the toxic culture and are driven away. The people who remain develop warrior / siege mentality and toxicity increases. People who are attracted to policework for the wrong reasons (resentment, desire for power over others, greed) fit in among the other toxic misfits.

It's part of a wider pattern of institutional breakdown and the loss of trust in institutions.
That's a misconception. Most contracts or form-free and can be made by handshake if one wants to. There are however some exceptions, which require either physical signatures or the qualified signatures as declared by eIDAS. Those exceptions are some employment contract and most things related to banking.

The need for identification over video, etc., has more to do with the know-your-customer laws.
E2EE is a true/false label. Either it is, or it ain’t.

It is not mathematically possible to selectively break E2EE. If it’s broken, it’s not E2EE.
Not sure that's true, but I'm sure that people with good intentions who are very stupid do often cause unintended harm.

(Here by "stupid" I mostly mean "unable to perceive the world accurately, relative to other people with the same resources at their disposal, and unable to differentiate objective reality from false ideas that make them feel good in some way".)
Yeah - It's at par, if not better than GPT 3.5! This is the base model (13B) with no fine-tuning or censorship.

Feel free to give it a spin for code as well! We're just the infrastructure layer here so we don't use any data for retraining these models. LLaMA 2 70B coming soon! :D
Fentanyl to poison our bodies and TikTok to poison our brains.
I'd say most people want cops, because they hate criminals even more, but even in my conservative groups, no one respects someone for being a cop. It's a shitty job that attracts rough characters.

I want tons of cops, but I don't want to interact with them ever. They are very often just thugs operating within a structured organization to stop thugs operating with no guiding principals.
probably will never be
Thank you for explaining.

I'm not a native speaker and am finding it hard with how many qualifiers one needs to put into English sentences as to avoid looking like one is making sweeping absolute statements. Is this also necessary for verbal communication?

To fully pad out what I meant with that sentence:

... where I assume that most people doing that type of heavy physical labor were, on average, quite likely to have had very plain diets when compared to what a lot of laymen in modern days would deem/assume sufficient for developing such a physique in modern times.
By 'project-based learning' I understand learning by building projects (guided or unguided).

What do normal people mean by 'project-based learning'?
I currently have WhatsApp installed without access to my address book (on Android). It doesn't require it, but it makes it harder to use and locks out some features. Among other things, you can't start a new group / direct message, but you can participate / reply if someone else messages you first.
Like most of us, I've had this discussion an infinite number of times, never reaching an adequate agreement.

I myself have always used 4 spaces for C++ codebases. Spaces provide fixed width and consistency, regardless of the code editor. Tab proponents say that the power of tabs is that they can be configured. Thing is, I don't want to configure them everywhere I go, and I change stations a lot. Think also of code viewers: non-logged in GitHub defaults to a 8-spaces tab width, which is enormous and code becomes too wide to read without horizontal scroll in a non-ultrawide screen.

Also, people are clumsy. I'd wish this was not the case, but that's the world we live in, and people (I'd even say MOST people) are clumsy as hell and will somehow mix spaces with tabs.

Long live the glorious and sweet dictatorship of opinionated, unconfigurable code formatters. Whether they impose 2 spaces, 4 spaces, or tabs, I don't care. Code getting automatically formatted in a consistent style across all teams and contributors, that's bliss.

(I myself actually believe that tabs for indentation + spaces for alignment would be the best of both worlds, but never tried to enforce it in my projects)
Why not? I do.

Non Apple work machine?
The support person should not have that kind of access without auditability and traceability. Even Sundar should not be able to log into a console and read your emails either.
>Many (most?) important workloads are not meaningfully improved by adding cores.

Absolutely. No browser can use more than a single core. And in any case, who in their right mind uses more than a single thread at a given time anyway? I certainly never open more than a single appliation at a time.

In all honesty, this is one of the more delusional comments I have seen on here...
Your comment would have been stronger if you left out the piece re: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because it's an eye roller. Article 12 is:

> No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

I'm no fan of Meta or their privacy violations, but saying that voluntarily downloading an app (which by the way does clearly outline their privacy practices) is equivalent to having my humans rights violated just really waters down what "human rights" should mean.
> Wait, you're telling me I can just download these 3-5 source files, type `make`, and it will _just build_?

No. You need make and a C toolchain installed.

If you have those installed, you almost certainly also have Python, Perl, and possibly even a reasonably recent Java (not on MacOS, yes on most Linux distros, i think) installed, and all of those are also capable of doing this with zero dependencies.
"it would", not "it will". this submission's title is misleading and should be corrected to match the article
I totally feel that! :)

One of the things that I found great about working with computers was that it got me away from being a few inches away from a fryer for 8-16 hours a day. Not having to deal with screaming parents, sobbing children, and people literally (yes, literally) throwing hot food at me that "had too much (whatever) on it". Instead, getting to sit in a calm quiet environment for literally something like 5x the pay, for barely 3 to 4 hours of work, was a massive improvement. Over time, I managed to get into a role that has even less customer interaction, for higher pay, and less stress. It's also in something I actually care about, too! It's really great how freeing things can be, once you start to get specialized into specific areas.

Anyway, I was kind of tripped out on how the commenter had phrased their initial comment, "people quitting left and right". I had taken to mean something like "...because of a recent change", and was wondering what it was.

The commenter made a follow up and it sounds closer to something like, "People would join and work for TSMC for a short time, then get disgusted and quit." I had assumed that there was a long-term American work force that had been floating around, but left because of something that wasn't covered in the article, and I wanted to know what that was. It sounds like that's not really what they meant.
John Carmack's 10yo son created a game in Racket
I never knew this was the source of the Rage Against the Machine lyric.
Reliable date information too.
> Ignoring the client side scanning ability that is built into the OS

Which client side scanning would that be?
I am involved with two nonprofits that need to have an easy way to get many non-technical people to sign a document. Each is paying for their own DocuSign account. The thing is, they only need to do 6-12 documents per year each, so the cost per document is insane.

Testing it now with fingers crossed and hoping that the cloud version sticks around.
I agree, but what I'm talking about is distinct from a usual "process of understanding", because the goal is explicitly remain as ignorant as possible. In many cases I want to learn the exact minimum needed to safely make a change. What were they thinking? What motivated them? Don't know, don't care. I just want to clean up the mess and move on to something actually useful and pleasant.

As a practical example, last year I was supposed to figure out why a data collection system was not getting all the data we wanted. The person who worked on it was long gone, so I looked at the code. It was a bunch of stuff using Apache Beam. No tests, no docs. The original author was not a very experienced programmer. It jumbled together a variety of concerns. And after a day of trying to understand, it became obvious to me that some of the uses of Beam were unconventional. Plus Beam itself is its own little world.

The next day, I said "fuck that", and wrote a very simple Python requests-based collector. I pretty quickly had something that was both much simpler and much more effective at actually getting the data. And from there I went into the usual sort of feedback-driven discovery process to figure out what the current users actually needed, with zero regard for original intent of the system was in solving problems for people no longer present.

What was the thing doing? Why did it to it? How did it end up that way? All excellent mysteries that will remain mysteries, as I eventually deleted all the Beam-related code and removed its scheduled jobs. For me, this ignorance was truly bliss. And for others too in that the users got their needs solved with less work, and that developers had something much cleaner and clearer to work with in the future.
("undue" suffering, in the sense of "unwarranted", "disproportionate" or "more than your due". "undo" suffering would be removing it or undoing it.)
WTF? I can buy a phone from another company if I disagree with Apple's approach, or use no phone at all. Try doing that with your government sometime and see how it goes for you.

Nobody worries about the government giving customer data to Apple, do they? Why do you suppose that might be?
That might be your opinion, and it might even be true, but it’s not really the point of the article. Personality traits aren’t mentioned at all.

A better summary would be “Project-based learning does teach you things, but often ineffectively because you’re also made to focus on other concepts besides the one you were initially setting out to learn. Thus the best approach to learning needs to be targeted and customized with the help of a personal coach (and here’s my course).”
FedNow, the Fed's instant payments system, is live