skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The amount of people necessary to fool people believing something happened that didn't isn't necessarily (much) greater than the amount it would take to pull it off.

For argument's sake, imagine that everyone at NASA was working to fake the landing instead of landing. With a unified purpose, it would be enough. The theater would be grand enough. The political pressure to accept would be grand enough.

Any group working toward a goal is a conspiracy. NASA actually working to go to the Moon was a conspiracy.

The fake Gulf of Tonkin Incident that was accepted for decades is proof that big lies are possible. Extrapolating to an "unbelievably large" amount of people that it would take to pull of the hypothetical of a Fake Moon Landing conspiracy isn't an actual argument against. It just means that you'd be willing to quote whatever number would be minimally "unbelievably large".
Democracy is not a god. Asking the general population about such things and then actually enacting their wishes is like taking your direction from Pooh Bear. He likes the sweet taste of honey, but is a bear of little brain and is happy so long as his supply of it keeps flowing.
> Ecosystem features like those are huge contributors to platform retention

In the UK, Facetime maybe. But iMessage isn't used to the level as it is in US. I can't imagine Apple's UK share would take a significant hit due to no iMessage when everyone already uses cross-platform Whatsapp.
The article gives lots of info about how to get better at security review to be sure, but I'd really like to hear some examples from someone who has played this role before. How do you go around evaluating the security of a hunk of code, specifically? Have you caught a vulnerability during the review process? What'd it look like?
They may hold the UK to different cultural standards than china.

China is tricky and I'm sure after Hong Kong Apple changed their calculus.
New spaceflight Startup wants new technology to cut time to fly to Mars in half
https://archive.is/mPhe2

<Full Title> Elon Musk, eat your heart out: A new spaceflight startup wants to use a wild new technology to cut the time it takes to fly to Mars in half.
There's a wide range of mini-projects within the project. I've been able to practice very different skills over these years so it didn't get boring for a long time. But like I mention in the thread, I'd like to try something new :)
I think most if not all the participating banks are "receive only" so there's no one pushing any money yet.
You're conflating actual violence and "viewpoints I dislike".

Yes every society will resort to vigilantism to protect itself in the absence of a policing power.

But death threats to someone because they made a tweet you disagree with or abusing your power as a bank to control speech isn't about protecting yourself from violence - though that excuse is often used.

It's a form of denial, of shutting down uncomfortable debate. It's an ideological sort of end, like a dictator who has a pathological need to execute his critics. The "inner ring" of acceptable opinions grows ever smaller - it has to. It's not about making the world better, it's about attacking outsiders and the beast always needs new outsiders.
The 'MSM' (what a dated phrase) didn't create it, it was just a single reporter at a NASCAR race who either misheard it or bowdlerised it for the live TV audience.
You might like to play with gandalf.lakera.ai then. Try to get the model to reveal a secret, but it gets progressively trickier with every level. I still haven't beaten the final level (gandalf v2) but sometimes reveals what "the rules" are.
I have thought about building an algorithmic stable coin kind of like RAI but the problem is that actually defining and measuring a price level is the hard part.
Their example here is really weak overall IMO. Like more than just that typo. You also probably wouldn’t want a “name” string field anyway. Like there’s nothing stoping you from receiving

{
name: “the brown one”,
size: “the espresso cup”,
… }

Like that’s just as bad as parsing the original string. You probably want big string union types for each one of those representing whatever known values you want, so the LLM can try and match them.

But now why would you want that to be locked into the type syntax? You probably want something more like Zod where you can use some runtime data to build up those union types.

You also want restrictions on the types too, like quantity should be a positive, non-fractional integer. Of course you can just validate the JSON values afterwards, but now the user gets two kinds of errors. One from the LLM which is fluent and human sounding, and the other which is a weird technical “oops! You provided a value that is too large for quantity” error.

The type syntax seems like the wrong place to describe this stuff.
Don't confuse results with effort.

"Cancer" is a nebulous area. You can't really study "cancer". Cancer isn't a disease. It's a class of diseases characterized by a breakdown of your own cells' reproductive process. Not to mention, it's a breakdown that can just happen. You can take every precaution, avoid every carcinogen, and still get cancer. The biggest predictor to whether or not you will get cancer is time. The longer you live, the greater your chances.

And we might "get" cancer far more often than we realize. It's just that our bodies do have ways to excise cancer from our own bodies. It's just that sometimes, it's not enough.

And there is a lot of research that goes into cancer prevention and treatment. But it's not like one day we'll have the anti-cancer pill. That's just magical thinking.

Life extension research is also in a weird place. Because, like cancer, there isn't just one thing that ends our life. It's a host of things. And a lot of those things are being looked into. And we've already made amazing strides. We are able to get way more people to advanced ages than before. Prior to modernity, it was basically luck as to whether or not you'd make it to 60.

And I don't even know what you want to mean by "brain-computer" research. But I assume it would eventually involve fucking around with living brains. You absolutely cannot make a mistake there. You don't go poking around in the brains of healthy people unless you want to make them very unhealthy, very quickly.

So each of the things you've picked out are vague and/or fraught with their own perils.

Chucking a meat-filled metal tube at a space rock and getting the meat back is an objective with a clear goal.

And also, I'd like to point out, that failure was an option. Michael Collins was trained in everybody's job just in case he had to come back alone. During the first orbit, when he was out of contact with everybody for 48 minutes, he had no idea what he would find when he came back around. That and this was a process of years. The mission that landed on the moon was Apollo 11. Preceded by the Gemini program, whose main purpose was to lead into the Apollo program. 8 years for the singular goal of having a man go to the moon and return.

"Curing cancer" is not the same. "Brain research" is not the same. "Life extension" is not the same. Pick one thing. One simple goal. Not "cure cancer", but something like "make non-nauseating chemotherapy". Then dedicate 8 years to achieving that one task, no matter the cost. Which is something they do do. Any time you see something about "targeted cancer medications", that's to end-run around chemotherapy. Because chemotherapy is kind of like setting your house on fire to get rid of termites.
I feel like this is a point that gets overlooked in the discussion. The IRS ALREADY has software that does your taxes. It's just that currently it's used to validate you did it correctly and they aren't going to tell you the results unless you did it wrong. Sure building this system isn't going to be as easy as "give our existing software a public URL", but there should be a lot of code reuse happening.
How would not respecting DNT have been proven?

The rub here is that everyone wanted to ignore DNT, because it made them lots and lots of money.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/intuit-reaches-141-...
Even better, you can set identity as email or commit creator per repo and use private key per machine. Instead of making multiple private keys and god forbid copy these over to other machines.
Yeah... I don't think the original post is the best. This blog post doesn't add much context. Maybe the URL should just be updated to the github document the blog post links? [0]

[0] https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/...
Google's move to restrict internet access for some employees shows the company takes security seriously. It's a proactive step to safeguard sensitive information, but striking a balance between security and productivity will be crucial.
I love this explanation for why we should make plans even though folks will try to shoot down planning with "no plan survives first contact":

> Even though nothing will go as planned, it's important to have the memory and expertise that did the planning, because that's what's going to be able to think through the as-yet- unknown-unknowns, when the inevitable FUBAR situation suddenly happens later.

We don't plan so that everything will go according to plan, we plan so that we are better equipped to reason when the plan doesn't work.
+1 to that. I worry it’s not possible because drug war allows political posturing that goes back from Nixon and hippies and the southern strategy, to the current talk about “inner cities” and Chicago, it’s all coded language because they can’t say what they want to say, but people who know to listen for it hear the words.

The stick hasn’t been working for anyone except the private prison investors. We should do exactly what you’re saying. I fear the unfortunate truth is that even those measures wouldn’t be enough, we need to fix the push toward this need to escape. Something like the changes you listed, and the new deal era public works projects paying a legit middle class wage.
>the govt has no issue borrowing all the money they like - so there's no real lost opportunity

This can't be true forever, and to me it seems like it is the underpinning of the entire modern world order. Something seems fundamentally warped, I'm just not educated enough to know what it is.
The USSR had massive internal contradictions and inefficiencies. By the end it was brittle, and it couldn't weather shocks, like the late 1980s to early 1990s oil shock, very well, and attempts at reform magnified internal dissent until the constituent republics and satellite states could only be satisfied with complete independence.

http://www.energycrisis.com/reynolds/SovietDecline.htm

> To summarize, the period 1988 to 1992 was the world's third oil crisis in 20 years. This one brought down the powerful Soviet Empire.
> political bribes are now legal in the US

No, they're not. Citizens was problematic. But it says nothing about bribes, whether that be handing a politician cash or promising them a job. Mischaracterizing it sucks the oxygen out of the room for the cause of reform.
Isn't this project ten years dead?
How is the $100 spent on the book not circulating in the economy?
Infosec Twitter Mapped to Mastodon Handles (Google Sheet)
I used to love Brave search for this reason. Now I can never seem to find what I'm looking for, even for a simple search for some product a bit more obscure or smth the results are always wayy off from what I'm looking for. It is sad if it's due to their usage of entirely their own index, I was happy with that mix of Bing&Brave.
Amazing. Apple has had FileVault for 20 years (although it’s only in the past 9 years or so that it’s been enabled by default).
So much for "back the blue."
You have to do some intense prompt-engineering with the system prompt. The model considers the system to be trusted (roughly), some of the early 2023 exploits with ChatGPT still work if you do it on the system prompt.
In the short term, any resistance is a death sentence. However, the gov agents always have to think about whether the person they're encountering is willing to throw their life away. If enough citizens become willing to be dead, real change happens. Sacrifice is required for such events, but clearly having an armed population helps reduce the power asymmetry.
If you think the moon landing money comes back to the government, the defense money does the same, with the added benefit of providing security!

I think both are basically wasted, but that's because I don't buy the premise of your argument. Money is constantly circulating, at a given velocity. Each economic actor chooses a balance of investment and consumption, and spends at a certain rate (some take longer to allocate funds than others). The question for me is whether another actor would have either allocated the money faster, or towards an investment with a higher positive externality. My answer is yes.
Not all Russians are stupid: many (most?) understand that they are being lied to and some (especially the younger generations) are interested in reading independent sources. I think these services are for those people -- facts can be highly valuable (and worth jumping through the necessary hoops).
You can make a fork, disable analytics and make your own build. We plan to make smooth anlytics opt-out later this year.
cargo? how about winget or choco or any other examples on windows (worst case scenario)
in advance I agree with a more cynical point as well, but I think we need to consider that there's equally plausible and more positive potential reasons

- if there is success in the UK, relevant persons at Apple can make a more compelling argument to push back on China and other governments a lot more

- perhaps apple is still pushing hard on china and using the UK as an example that they're willing to drop a long time strong market over the anti-encryption legislation

I'm not saying either is the case, but there are benign or even positive reads on why apple is more aggressive with the UK
I think they're certainly a place for publicly funded and accountable news media like CBC or BBC News, where the profit motive isn't there by the nature of funding (Of course, this model has its own separate set of issues that it needs to overcome as well. But IMO it's a better base to build off)
> What isn't taxes is mostly then circulating in the economy (generating yet more taxes) while giving the economy a nice boost.

This part entangles monetary policy with gov’t spending, which to some extent is politically inevitable, but IIUC is a very bad idea in general[1–3].

[1] https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/07/magical-monetary-...

[2] https://www.cato.org/commentary/magical-monetary-theory

[3] https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/tAThqgpJwSueqhvKM/frequen...
Yeah... the crux is should electronic conversations be afforded the same rights, and by extension are they assumed rights for all communication? Where to draw the line? It's definitely murky.
It's pretty clear why they think this, due to lobbying. I think everyone agrees none of those items should be grounds for not using this theoretical system.
but some OS do by default-ish :D
> I think parent wrote that because nowadays many projects are for JavaScript or Python with lots of dependencies.

Of course they did. But they made it sound like the language is the deciding factor, and that's not true.

C can have horrific-to-install dependencies, even worse than you see with binary python packages.
>CTRL+F GPT4, GPT 4, GPT-4

Disappointing. I cannot evaluate claims about GPT when people say ChatGPT instead of GPT4, if they actually mean the latter.

And if someone really is discussing the usefulness of AI while only having used ChatGPT (GPT3.5), then they’re missing out on a major improvement and their input is less valuable than those discussing GPT 4.

Of course GPT-4 has plenty of limitations but people just need to be clear that they’re familiar with the state of the art.

Also, statements to the effect of “it just predicts the next word” do not appreciate the major difference in capacity for learned abstractions between GPT 3.5 vs GPT 4. So to me it’s just not a useful way of thinking about LLMs. It may technically be true, but at some level that can also be said of human beings. In other news, an airplane “just” flies.
I think it's called "speed of money" or something similar, but I do wonder how much of which federal dollars end up as profit in an account versus circulating the economy. Wages to USPS employees - probably spent very quickly/high speed. Money sent to Raytheon - probably fifty/fifty on IC wages and COGS (high speed, ish) and fat cats (boards, CEOs). Yes, yes, they go put money in the stock market, but that's fairly low speed.

My guess is defence spending is much lower speed than NASA or medical programs.
I don't see how this is anything like a crypto exchange, is there something I'm missing here?
> If they get something wrong and end up paying more tax than they need to there will never be a second thought given to it.

Anecdotally, I messed up copying tax owed from the table a couple years back, and the IRS sent me a letter telling me I made a mistake and overpaid, along with a check for the difference.

In any case, a lot of the complication in the tax code comes down to the government incentivizing certain behaviors, so it makes sense that we should put more focus on teaching people to read the rules and find out what those incentives are. Of course a free calculation tool to run simulations could help people to understand those rules, and we ought to make the actual filing more convenient for everyone.
ActivityPods – Personal data spaces powered with ActivityPub
Here in NZ you can do this with your bank. Just enter the person’s acct number and the amount to send in online banking.
Google Drive to iCloud Drive:

Do just the opposite of this

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36803905

I’m sure there are ways to migrate your email. Thunderbird?
Thank you, I mistakenly believed that there had been substantial amounts of gold as well, but it appears like it was insignificant in comparison to the silver from Potosí.
That can certainly happen and it is truly scary, not arguing about that.

I think what most people here on HN mean by 'penniless' is living with their parents and having no disposable income, or some other stressful arrangement. Something that their (perhaps former) friends and acquaintances would consider an embarrassing failure.
Going to Mars with real live squishy humans would no doubt be cool. Getting them back in 1 piece would be even cooler. I'd argue capturing near-earth asteroids and starting to build a functional zero-g industry around earth is more useful though. I think those two things are pretty orthogonal.
From the FAQ,

> No. There is no FedNow app. The Federal Reserve does not provide payment services directly to consumers and businesses. Banks and credit unions can provide their customers with access to instant payments through new features

See y'all in another 25 years, when banks get around to implementing this.
If you are self-employed, you have to pay for TurboTax regardless of your income level. We had to pay for TurboTax when I was a student and my wife was making $20k a year teaching music lessons.
For those curious, it is really using IBM MQ[1] under the hood and uses a bespoke flavor of the ISO 20022 specification.

The FedNow Service itself is the tip of the iceberg in terms of what actually happens from an end-to-end perspective.

We've been working to become a Certified Service Provider so feel free to ask me anything. I'm happy to share anything that is not under NDA.

[1] https://www.ibm.com/products/mq
It's with "sticking it to the man".
Does anybody remember one December where Apple shut down all the developer systems. It had the feel to me at the time that it was a hack by it's suddenness.

I have always associated that period with the discovery of Prism. I would love to hear if anybody knows what I'm talking about.
Well, given that FedNow has nothing to do with UPI, per the parent's comment, and it's about inter-bank settlement, it makes sense for an application layer like Zelle to provide that.
Some would say suspiciously so. Which is why some commentators think this is being implemented as a prerequisite of a CBDC.
Between this and FedNow, US public goods are firing on all cylinders. You love to see it.
Read up on U.S. Private Vaults
That might be true in theory, but in practice companies like Intuit and HR Block use dark patterns to trick users into paying when they should qualify for free filing.

You can read about the settlement from ProPublica: https://www.propublica.org/article/intuit-will-pay-millions-...
> people know when their vote doesn't matter, or when it's being suppressed, and choose not to vote

Why would you count these people as "on board"?

Moreover, even among the people who do vote, there are a lot who plug their noses and vote for what they consider to be the lesser evil, against the other candidate rather than with enthusiasm for their own candidate.
The new React docs are without a doubt the best docs I have ever had the pleasure to read. Your blog posts on overreacted.io were a huge boon to me as a new front-end engineer and I've thoroughly enjoyed every talk I've seen you give (on YouTube). I took the JavaScript course you produced with Maggie Appleton, "Just JavaScript", and I now try to think about my mental models for everything I do, even beyond coding. I code in React every day and I'm having the time of my life, I just love it!

Best of luck to you in the future, Dan!
> This would cut alot of middle companies out of the payments industry

Not really. All it will do is let the same companies change the way they handle average citizens' payments.

It's the same as Open Banking in Europe. It is supposed allow small businesses to leverage this to enable innovation and all that stuff, but when you want to use these APIs you find there are limitations on who can actually use it. For example, you can only put your service to production by being on a "directory" of approved providers, and to be on that directory you need something 25k or 50k in an account. So, not really that useful for a small startup wanting to make a product out of it.

Banking systems are the backbone of world power dominance, big players won't let small people share it.
I've had the opposite experience where as I've grown older and had kids of my own, I've began to judge my parent's even more harshly than I had when I was younger.
im glad these shoe-in clowns are finally having to hopefully complete w fed direct free efiling
> someone in the computing world

Notable / Prominent people. Many hackers die every day, but some are so privacy/security conscious that nobody notices.
Isn’t he getting daily blood transfusions from younger people?
> I’ve seen a lot of crazy conspiracy theories reveal themselves to be true in the past five years.

Such as what?

>Apply some critical thinking on this. Governments and corporate elites worldwide are salivating over the level of surveillance and control that a CBDC will enable.

How is this any different from the current system? Your cash is 99% digital anyway with basically every transaction completely monitor-able to the Feds under the right circumstances. Don't see how this situation would change much.
They will if you get it wrong enough.
On the mac, we have enabled Metal support.