skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This isn't correct as far as I understand.

The only part based on actual information is they aren't ordering new parts. They are still producing new headsets, and continuing to sell those based on the existing stock of parts. We don't know what stock they have, it's quite possible that given the reduced rate of sales after Quest 3 is released they fully expect to be able to satisfy production requirements for the full lifetime of the device. Which may actually be an indication they are pulling forward a successor as much as that they are stopping further development.

The "stops development of Quest Pro 2" is not new information, it is based on information from months ago that said they had decided to "skip" the Quest Pro's immediate successor in favor of focusing on the one that would come after it.

To cap it all off, Andrew Bosworth directly contradicted this information today.
> The faster humans can get off the planet the better the earth will become.

Long term, the earth will be just fine. The only real question is whether or not it will be a good place for people to live on.

Or, as I used to put it: we are causing an imbalance that will be corrected. If we don't correct it, nature will, and nature's methods will be much more cruel than people expect.
Transferable skills. I don't die frequently to Souls or Monster Hunter bosses. I beat many of the Bloodborne bosses on the first try. Not because I'm a god gamer but because I played a LOT of Dark Souls and Monster Hunter as a kid.

Every new ARPG (or ARPG league) requires many hours of grinding regardless of skill.
I have a Quest Pro, after having had many of the predecessors - Vive, etc. I think that A/R needs to succeed before VR can really take off. And I think AR is going to really succeed.

By VR I mean being totally cutoff from the rest of the world into this new world. It's exhausting in a way and feels like you are at a disadvantage if other people are around.

The Pro has some limited AR and it's actually really exciting. Being in both worlds at the same time feels really really interesting.

Apple is so far ahead, conceptually, that it makes sense to me for Meta/quest to recalibrate here.
> But the chance of a web page actually needing that functionality to render at all is rare for hopefully-obvious reasons.

The chance of a page using something has no bearing on how dificault something is to implement.

> People get upset about WebUSB... but that's not the API surface that is causing us issues.

It's one of the hundreds of APIs, and yes, it causes issues, too. Because it also needs to be implemented, and it also adds to the complexity of the web browser.
Not from US, but whenever I hear about US folks having an annual physical it reminds me of the Scrubs episode on full body scans
Official guidances here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Could maybe be just a mistake when doing the UK registration ? It's an easy fix if wanted.
"This is a mandatory wellness check that is required for all insurance in the US" sounds like you're saying paying for this is required to _get_ insurance - but I think you intend to mean that it's required that any insurance plan cover one check annually (which is sort of the opposite meaning)?
When I first came to USA as a tourist in 2011, one of the most amusing thing I witnessed was at a party at my Couch Surfer’s host when a friend of theirs payed back a debt by writing them a check. This cranked me up, as I had not seen a real world check in use since I was a kid in the early 1990s. I was equally surprised to learn how nobody else at the party thought anything of this. Coming from Iceland where you simply transfer them money via a bank app (or a website back then), this was my first American culture shock.

Now I live in the USA and I actually use checks all the time. I get paid via a check, I pay with checks at my local farmstand, I used to pay my rent with a check, my immigration fees were paid with a check etc.
Why cant you edit your prompts in the app? Such an important part of usage — so strange to not have in the app.
What's new in Chrome 116 for Extensions
Right, that's why my first sentence was "everyone should be skeptical of every source"....

But if I'm forced to trust someone (and most of us are on a daily basis), I'd rather trust the guys whose whole job revolves around the principle of "we require evidence and repeatable results before we believe you" than pretty much every other profession.

Completely separate from my above point, I'd also say that I do believe scientists are on average more trustworthy than other career workers at a personal level. It's a profession that tends to attract people concerned with objective truth and rational logic. Just like how politics tends to attract those who want to work with people and the police force attracts people who are comfortable with violence. At least from my personal, anecdotal view.
No point measuring lines of code for AI tools
Or, they have come to the realization that there is no real future market for "pro" VR
When I need to pick only 1 game (out of all the memorable games I've played over the years) I always pick Portal (the first). The reason is simple: before it I only played adventure and easy platformers (like Mario), but after playing and loving it, I started to give a chance to other genres and my "gamer" personality was formed.

Fun facts:

- I bought it because the game box showed a turret which I mistakenly though was a button for a puzzle.

- It was my first first-person game, and the beginning of the game (when you see yourself through the portal) was such mind blowing that I spent a couple minutes just moving forwards and backwards trying to understand it.

- I couldn't play it at first because my graphics card was a literal potato, half a year later we upgraded it mainly because of this game.

- I loved it so much that I spent several years (until portal 2 released approximately) downloading and playing custom maps from the internet (my first contact with modding too).

- Steam was required and I hated it because of their constant updates that made me wait a couple minutes before playing (until I discovered the offline mode).

So yeah, it changed my life.
So wait, I could make a career in being a software engineering style type of journalist?

I just don’t think they would care, would they?

If anyone is reading it working as such, feel free to humor me by shooting me an email (in my profile). I studied psychology (bachelor), business (bachelor), computer science (master) and game-design (master). I also did some course work related to journalism (though very limited, I only read The Elements of Style). I worked as a teacher (mostly in programming, though one lecture on rhetorics in a rhetorics class) and as a software engineer.

Let me know! I’m up for a chat as I might be a good fit and able to help more accurate reporting on AI and software in general.
add reddit to the end of your search query
Startup using AI for media launches free program for startups to get free publicity, backlinks and distribution to their network of thousands of investors.
The ten hottest summers on record happened in the last fifteen years. The number one hottest is this summer we're experiencing right now. And you call this "hysteria"?
A lot of the companies you mentioned have non trivial investments in ads. I recently was surprised to find how big of an ad business Adobe has for example. Not sure that these companies would cease to exist if it weren’t for advertising but ads do influence these companies’ products.
> eventually devolving into an authoritarian dystopia

Plenty of capitalisms do, have done, and are currently doing, exactly this. I should know: I live in one.
Preview: range over functions in Go
Not the only reason, they also want to sell shovels to gold diggers. Keeping the hype alive helps with that.
I was wondering if they are doing this as a move to undercut Apple by shrinking the pro XR market.
It's a great analogy for what they were pointing out. The point is not that these issues are traceable and thus inarguably someone's fault. The point is many times people don't have to take responsibility for these issues because they are indirect. The more indirect (the larger the Rube Goldberg Machine) the higher chance of avoiding responsibility.
Android isn't conventional Java. For starters, its runtime uses its own bytecode (dex) that's based on registers instead of a stack. But then, also, many things that aren't related to GUI are C++ with a thin Java wrapper on top.

When I think about a "Java OS", I imagine a JVM running in kernel mode, providing minimal OS functionality (scheduler, access to hardware I/O ports) and there not being any kind of userspace.
Mandatory? Unless I'm seriously out of the loop, I don't think there are mandatory annual wellness checks in the US?
I'd be interested in something like a blog post about this
This is a great blanket defense against any kind of improvement for workers. But it’s not logically sound. First of all, companies are already automating and outsourcing jobs away - they aren’t waiting around for people to ask for a raise before they do it. Second, is asparagus harvesting something that can be reasonably automated away at the moment? I’m not sure it is, are you?
I had the misfortune of having to do this twice for real.

I quit the storage / backup industry because 7:30am phone calls would make me hyperventilate in a panic.
Will people stop using Chrome now?
Also coal and that lead is expanding, why?
I feel the same. Refocusing resources from space to earth seems like the magnanimous thing to be doing with extra billions.

Anything off earth that needs exploring can be dome remotely.
Yes.

The whole point of science is that you do not have to believe anything just because a scientist said it. Only thing that matters is the validity of their data, whether the data truly backs their interpretation, and if the findings can be replicated.
The blood testing costs are extraordinarily high--well beyond what I've ever paid even without insurance.

I do not believe the average person in the United States requires an EKG every year.

There is some evidence that annual physicals actually do more harm than good.

ACA mandates that a annual wellness check be provided for free to the patient, and that includes a blood test. It may well cost the insurer $400 but that is because that is how they want to run their grift, not for any other reason.

Put these together and I think this is basically irrelevant.
It seems pretty optimistic to say it's "stabilized over the past decade".

If I'm reading correctly, between 2011 and 2021 (the last year in the graph) there was an increase of 5 billion tons, and that was certainly helped by the big drop during the pandemic...
To me internet in ~1997-8 was like a cross between a full duplex teletext crossed with multimedia and magazines.
Bing’s AI Is Hallucinating in Microsoft’s Own Marketing Materials
> How are journalists supposed to be productively skeptical when the vast majority of them don't receive anything remotely approaching a truly well-rounded education?

Ask questions. Ask "why" a lot, don't take things at face value. Assume you're being bullshitted.

You don't need to deeply undestand a subject to make someone back up what they are saying.
If most women feel that way, then maybe that's a factor of why it doesn't improve? I'm just saying that basing one's decision on whether or not others have made that decision is self-referential and creates somewhat of a self-fulfilling prediction. There are definitely women-only technical gatherings of all sorts, and I don't doubt there are some companies out there which prioritize as such, which leads to the question of why aren't these efforts fruitful and why is this "problem" so persistent and "unsolvable" (if it is something to solve, which is arguable as well).

I am all for 50/50, and I'm trying to understand why it requires effort or awareness from anyone other than those who want to be in it... it suggests that wanting to work with the technology is not enough.
Try these prompts with different models. LLaMA 2 output is pure garbage:
----1----
On a map sized (256,256), Karen is currently located at position (33,33). Her mission is to defeat the ogre positioned at (77,17). However, Karen only has a 1/2 chance of succeeding in her task. To increase her odds, she can:
1. Collect the nightshades at position (122,133), which will improve her chances by 25%.
2. Obtain a blessing from the elven priest in the elven village at (230,23) in exchange for a fox fur, further increasing her chances by additional 25%
Foxes can be found in the forest located between positions (55,33) and (230,90).

Find the optimal route for Karen's quest which maximizes her chances of defeating the ogre to 100%.
----2----
Write a python code using imageio.v3 to create a PNG image representing the map way-points and the route of Karen in her quest, each way-point must be of a different color and her path must be a gradient of the colors between the waypoints.
------------

I have a lot of cases those I test against different models ...
GPT-4 since one week is really degraded, GPT-3.5 became a little bit better, and LLaMA2 is garbage.
Also, paper writing is a collaborative effort, which does not imply that everyone on the paper agrees with every part of it 100%. e.g. if I get Jane on the paper because she knows the more than me about X, but we end up having a soft disagreement about X, I'm not walking away from the paper.

Also ... authors have good reason to manage their interactions with journalists. They don't want to be used or misrepresented. Also, given the politics of the moment, they also had every reason to be cautious about what they said publicly.
Why not just "downloadable"? It describes the actual difference between LLaMA and GPT. Open-data is the only other distinction that matters.
I agree with the sentiment, never said anywhere that it couldn't be achieved in a personal level. Just that defining "good code" is difficult. If you narrow down "good code" to mean "good to myself" then of course it is sad that someone doesn't believe in it.

On the other hand, I find that someone saying that "universally good code" is not possible as understandable.

I personally believe it is only really achievable in certain domains, for some others (especially for code handling a lot of essential complexity) it is borderline impossible to not have at least some uneven corners. And there's only so much you can sweep under the carpet of indirection.
Does it still have that classic Berkeley smell?

"It was a matter of their taking it in and peeing on it until it smelled like Berkeley."
Presumably there are insurance premiums or taxes that you are ignoring.
> This hole didn't simply disappear when -c was added. The vulnerability is simply that ...

Why are you conflating the two? You're making claims that sth has always been utterly, completely broken, and the only evidence you can cite for it is sth that was revealed to the world a few days ago?

This CVE is a secvuln. No one is arguing against that. Secvulns happen. No software is bug-free. Does that mean every software everywhere is suddenly utterly completely broken?

Actually, while we are on the topic, why not argue banning SSH entirely. After all, each SSH connection is a connection back to the host where the `ssh` client runs. Tomorrow, there could be a secvuln discovered in the `ssh` binary that can be exploited by simply printing the right characters to stdout. In fact, this very vector has been used before to pwn vulnerable terminal emulators, even over ssh.

----

> ... which is why they should be tightly scoped.

As can forwarded agents (see 'IdentityAgent' in `man ssh_config`). In fact, this is how I separate client projects from each other and my personal projects. (I didn't do it for security, rather for the convenience of not tripping any 'max keys allowed' limits, but hey, I'll take the security benefit too!)

----

> That one use only is all that is needed. ... tries to limit the exploits to just that one remote box and not every other host your keys have access to.

You're making several assumptions:

#1: someone is disciplined enough to use tightly scoped keys

#2: that they bother to rotate all those ephemeral keys without fail

#3: that the sheer inconvenience of constantly updating keys doesn't bother them enough to say 'screw this!'

Guess what the weakest link is when it comes to computer security? The human factor. You're asking humans to go through way too much hassle they're not going to care about. Which means they'll voluntarily break the security of the system without care (and, of course, without understanding).

You also forget that:

1. Agents can be scoped too.

2. Jumpboxes are often used to jump to a large number (most often, all) of servers. No organization is going around creating point-to-point jump links between servers or dedicating a separate jumpbox for every destination server.

3. Your model, when exploited, gives the attacker repeatable, lasting access. You say, "That one use only is all that is needed", and you're correct, but only for the most determined and prepared attackers. Once-only accidental access is better than repeatable lasting access for the simple fact that most attackers are aiming for only the latter.

4. Your model is also more susceptible to silent persistent malware. My method has the benefit that exploited remotes are discovered before the exploit is given lateral movement access.

----

> ... who managed to escalate to root on the remote host.

No root needed. DAC enough. I say this because I run untrusted code in VMs/containers I ssh into, with my agent forwarded. And I consider arbitrary npm/python/etc. packages automatically untrusted.
> so the people whose opinions actually matter, the people responsible for the health of that company, have already been convinced

Are you new here? It's a VC company with multiple rounds of funding; they burn money like a locomotive burns coal. Do you know what's going on in tech VC companies? You should really work for a few of them to gain experience, it's eye-opening. You would be surprised at what people rewrite as internal tools when you have better open source/commercial products available for a fraction of the price of a rewrite.

> So what if you think their justification is weak? Do you believe the company is worse off because they're switching to Rust? Do you even have all the information to make that judgement call? Do you honestly even care?

Yes, I care, but for different reasons than you do. Seeing how emotionally connected you are to the responses you write (based on your responses to me and others, it seems like you get triggered when someone criticizes Rust). When I'm replying to you, I'm not actually trying to convince you. I don't actually care what you think. I write this so others who read this thread know that there are people wasting resources without any reasonable technical justification, and they do it in the majority of cases for personal reasons (boredom, to add a language to their CV, to justify their employment, etc.). As I said, I've seen it personally multiple times already, in different companies, and it was a waste of time, money, and resources, and in some cases, it even destroyed the product. So, the next time someone tries to convince them to rewrite their product in another language, maybe they will think twice and actually double-check the technical justification. And don't get me wrong, in some cases rewrite is actually justified. I personally decided/my team rewrote one module in one of the projects from Go to Rust where GC was a problem so I'm not some kind of language fundamentalist.

Rust shines in the niche it was made for, it's a tool. If you are creating personal projects, then use whatever you like.
Again, you can write a C89 (even more with C++20) dialect in C++. There’s practically nothing C can do that C++ can’t. Also, the fact that the linked page recommends tinycc and pcc pretty much proves they don’t care about performance or memory usage.
It isn't. I can ask for what I want in a negotiation and accept or reject counter-offers, as can my counterparty. I've never set out to deceive someone in such a situation. I don't know why you're trying to equate Disney with some downtrodden minority, but it's not very persuasive.
It seems to me that the authors of the paper, in anticipation that writing scientifically (that they don't believe the lab leak hypothesis, but it cannot be disproven) will be misinterpreted by journalists and the public, resorted to write in more certain terms.

I disagree with the authors. Scientists should not try to control the reaction to their publication.

I also don't think this cast a good lights on the journalists at all. The nature of the issue is that even if the scientists had been precise in what they wrote, what they wrote would have been distorted and misrepresented.
Exactly how radioactive is an antimatter banana, and would it still be susceptible to fusarium wilt?
But isn't that a journalist's job description?
Says more about the website than about the app.
Reminds me of the good old days when you didn't need an expensive GPU to play the latest path-traced games, just a pencil, some paper, and a few friends.
That is [an] incorrect conclusion to make.

In other developed (or even developing) countries, going to a doctor if you feel anything is not a financial question. You just go. Also annual bloodwork -- without needing to even do a doctor visit -- is sometimes a thing.

You can go to the specialist you think you need. Got a heart/chest issue: you go to the specialist and do not worry if it is covered or how to pay them.

Disclaimer: lived/live for years in both Europe and U.S. I also have a glimpse of how the japanese system works and South America a bit too. These things are not comparable. You would think North Americas are a different "world far far away."

tl;dr: I find the average in the U.S. surprising. Then I look at the median life expectancy.
Did you read the whole article? The author explains that professional licensure is for prohibiting negative behavior, not for advocating standards or best-practices.
Agreed on this too. A favorite hobby of mine is to look up the land ownership of people that speak at city meetings to oppose land use changes that would allow for more housing in an area.

A huge fraction of the people decrying new homes already own many parcels directly in their own name. And if the opponent is decrying "these apartments aren't affordable enough" you can be pretty sure to find a recent apartment ad renting a worse apartment at a higher price.

Which is funny, since using an LLC per parcel is probably a better strategy for the nasty landlord behavior.
mandatory that you are offered one by your insurer, not mandatory that you show up to one
The issue with personality disorders is whether something is a positive or negative is a subjective evaluation. Homosexuality was once considered a personality disorder.

We consider narcissism a personality disorder, but we also reward narcissistic tendencies when one's extreme ego matches reality. Is there a single "correct" personality that we should all strive towards?
The answer is plurality within the scientific community.

During the Covid authoritarian period, scientists like Dr Robert Malone were evicted from society because they didn’t toe the government line on support for mRNA vaccination.

I’m not saying Malone and co were right, necessarily, but the way they were shut down and demonised suggested to me that we stopped doing real scientific enquiry for a couple of years and succumbed to corporate lobbying and government over-reach.
Decades? Try a century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torches_of_Freedom
> Why? If there are legitimate issues, you can always be dragged into court,

One of the major reasons for concealing who the real owner is of, well, anything is to conceal legitimate issues.

> or at least your business can be boycotted and suffer bad PR etc.

Not if you are concealing ownership to separate an act from the business entity that you would be concerned with retaliation against.