skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's been a very interesting deep dive over the past few years is that there was almost a simulation theory like rethinking of these ideas attributed to Jesus of all people in the first to fourth centuries CE.

Part of the debate on these ideas in antiquity that's often left out of discussions were the naturalists, specifically the Epicureans.

Around 50 years before Jesus was born, Lucretius wrote De Rerum Natura, swapping the Greek word for indivisible ('atomos') with the Latin word for seed. And in that work, explicitly describing randomly scattered seeds plus survival of the fittest as the origin of life, even describing failed biological reproduction as "seed falling by the wayside of a path."

So around the first century there's this ongoing pre-Neoplatonist debate between whether we are some physical incarnation of a pre-existing 'form' like Plato said (and connected to Judaism's dual creation of man in Genesis such as in Philio) and the idea that there was no design but simply randomness and survival to reproduce.

An important nuance to Plato's ideas is in Book 10 of The Republic in the bed analogy, where he lays out the idea of a spiritual 'form' of a bed, then the physical bed, and then the 'image' of the physical bed as rendered by an artist (which he considered least valuable of all).

Well this later apocryphal sect of Christianity is all about rejecting the Epicurean surety of final death by building on their own recurrence thinking using Plato's ideas - not of 'forms' (as the Neoplatonist influences on later developments in Gnosticism circle back to), but specifically on 'images.'

The later Naassenes allegedly described their belief of an original spontaneous being bringing forth a creator of a non-physical copy of a physical original (with the original likened to a spontaneous tumor). They seemed to regard the first spontaneous being as 'Man'/'Adam' (which in Hebrew/Aramaic can mean the proper named individual or more generally humankind).

So you have this rather wild reworking of Plato and Epicurus's ideas into a combined picture where naturalist physical origins can eventually result in non-physical recreation as enacted by a creator itself brought forth by an original mankind.

What's particularly wild is their thinking that the proof for all this was in "motion and rest" and their claim that the ability to discover "an indivisible point as if from nothing" (how the Naassenes described their understanding of seeds in the mustard seed and sower parables) would not be possible in the physical.

It's a radically different set of beliefs from what modern Christianity is across the board. Nearly the complete opposite.

Very negative views of religious obligations and especially payment. Advocated self-discovery and being true to oneself. Saw salvation as a birthright entitlement. That being "born again" was literally being born as a baby into the non-physical copy of the original, not some symbolic ritual. Encouraged the drinking of words to become one with the author, not the consumption of blood and flesh.

Overall one of the most interesting things I've ever studied.
> The problem then, is everybody who claims "it's all in your head", proclaims the problem solved, and walks off with their fingers in their ears, not listening to people suffering, not helping them "get out of their heads", not even trying to help get to that place of magical thinking that would fix everything.

I think that a lot of this is reading into attitudes that arent really there. Doctors see a lot of people, and when they determine that an illness is phychosomatic, there is nothing they can do about it. There is no treatment they can proscribe, no medicine that can make it better. People have tried all sorts of tests for helping people with psychosomatic
issues. It turns out these instances are specific to people and their circumstances.

So after they determine the illness is in your head, and then leave it at that without helping, it sure can seem cold. But think of it from their perspective; what else could they do?
The argument is that they're more efficient than the alternatives:

> People being defrauded, injured, poisoned, and dying must be much more efficient

> I'm sure an inability to trust the safety, quality, and accuracy of the things one buys wouldn't have any negative effect at all on a market.

And that private business is not an alternative, having given rise to the need for such an agency in the first place and a demonstrated inability to oversee, audit, or classify honestly:

> The illustrious and unbesmirched track record of the worlds major auditing, accountancy, and credit firms has demonstrated beyond doubt that private enterprise can truly be trusted to handle these matters in a manner that puts society's needs at the forefront.

That's not to say that the public agencies responsible couldn't be improved but the idea that privatisation of these matters leads to increased efficiency is farcical.
I tried Orion a while ago: in that version background tabs with YouTube on pause made the bottom of my m1 air get very hot. I really liked that it supported chrome extensions but battery life was not great. I’ll give it another go now that I’ve been using arc for some time.
Yes but the implication didn't quote anything to back it up as being correct.

While certainly it has been shown that students with better upbringing perform better on such things the amount of that is way less than the difference in students.

Thus it isn't as simple as "those who are given all the tools do better" there is also an aspect of something else.

After all "they are just better students" would imply only a similar increase in application acceptance.

The is a large trend of "overrepresented groups are just better" again and I prefer to push back on "I don't have evidence of why else there is overrepresentation so obviously it is fair"...

Especially when Legacy is literally the opposite of fair.
I think tying politician salary to median income (or even some weighted average of median and the lower percentiles) could be very good for politics. Along with remaking the system for lobbying (buying influence), which should be done in a very careful setting (maybe a public or semi-public forum), to bring legitimate concerns to politicians and not buy influence... (cost should not be a significant barrier to reaching congress members as much as legitimacy!)
Because the philosophy revolves around the competitiveness of the position. Sports teams have limited roster, and make bales of cash (or are planning on doing so, with massive funding). The goal is for the position to have some cachet.

Why put up with "do well and stay or poorly and you go away" when other places pay the same for better culture and less drama?

One note: high turnover causes lots of workplace challenges - so you have to have a carrot along with your stick or you'll create a doom loop. Just "do well and stick around" is way to glengary glen ross for me.
> then what else are they getting wrong by 1%?

They could get 1000 things wrong by 1% and they're still 1% wrong. You can't really add them up.
yeah i have a deep infatuation with it too. i like disk inventory x and the visualization really works for me. i wanted to visualize my financial accounts and how much each one had etc (rather than seeing it in numbers) so i built a script to generate files in bytes representing the amount of money in each account and then build a temporary directory and then load it in disk inventory x. really interesting.

i ended up building my own library in react to render various things like what i spend my time in throughout the day (using rescuetime api) to gain better insights into my day. really neat stuff!
You could probably do that but it wouldn't be a whole lot better than the existing traces: it's not usually the resistance that limits the size of circuit traces but the mechanical requirements, such as your ability to connect to them and to space them apart so you don't get crosstalk due to capacitive or inductive coupling.

If you could use it to make circuits, especially of a high level of integration then it might well be something much more interesting (Josephson tunneling is briefly mentioned in the article). That could theoretically give rise to very efficient switching gear and if it can be miniaturized enough to efficient CPUs and memory. This is because the typical transistor uses power mostly in the time between the transition between the 'on' state and the 'off' state, when it is acting as a resistor. If you could get rid of that resistance during the transition then you might be able to reduce the amount of power a given circuit uses, but there are still lower limits off losses that you won't be able to escape, so it will not make your CPU magically use zero energy.

Given the contents of the paper such applications are a very long way off and may in fact never happen. Let's first see (1) if it is true and (2) if it is true how well it stacks up against copper wire of the same diameter and commercially available super conductors in terms of cost and practical current carrying capability. If that's all good then this will really be a game changer.
That's also the contingency plan for the national postal service in Brazil (ECT/Correios) - a state-owned company. My father, an instructor, had to drive a van around the town to deliver express packages during strikes. The strangest thing about these situations was that old employees (a few were 80+) were also assigned to package delivery duties and some of them would end up getting lost. This was before cellphones were widespread, so Dad and his colleagues would go searching for the missing employees after lunchtime and bring them back to the office.
I think the point of real-time analytics is not to make product decisions but to get a sense of presence from your product and celebrate with your team.

As an engineer on many teams shipping features I've found that it's somehow underwhelming to finally launch something after months of work. You launch and the only thing you get to celebrate is some donuts in the office and if something goes wrong a notification from Sentry or Datadog :P

I've spent the past 3 years building a product analytics tool (https://june.so) and I think product analytics can deliver some real-time value to teams.

Some of the ways we've built our product to do this is:

- Live notifications in Slack for important events - to get pinged in a Slack channel when users use the feature you just launched

- Achievements on reports for your features - to celebrate the first 5, 10, 25 and 50 users using your product, see the progress live

I think for team morale, especially in the earlier days of a company it's great to celebrate small wins and as engineers we should be more connected to what happens inside of the products we build - not only when things go wrong.
Syntax doesn't matter much, what in the optimizer does.

I think that right now a lot of SQL problems are baggage. Too many people are battle-taught to write hard to read, complex, deeply nested queries because older engines were bad at handling modern constructs (e.g. look, somebody got common table expession (CTE) here, let's materialize it immediately). So older style was mess of

SELELT FROM (SELECT FROM (SELECT FROM A JOIN (SELECT ) B ON A.x=B.x))) etc

With things like improved CTEs handling by engines, it is getting easier and easier to write understandable, composable queries of structure like below. Add modern window functions that decrease another layer of complexity, things like SELECT * EXCEPT, more complex TOP statements like TOP X FOLLOWING etc and SQL will be even more simpler.

WITH A AS (
),
WITH B AS (
),
WITH C AS (
SELECT y FROM A)
,
SELECT result from C
WHERE

and in new-ish world minor improvements of different syntax shape (like that PRQL) do not really bring the benefit, from my POV. Yes, you can rewrite it in imperative looking pipeline, but optimizer can throw away some of it etc

Yes, there are things that can and should be done better in SQL, but I have yet to see compelling case for cosmetic, syntactical differences.
The main use-case I have is running a remote vscode session on an HPC cluster. The cluster (and data) are secured, so making a tunnel connection to an outside server (vscode.dev) is not allowed. The data files are also very large.

Remote-SSH works, but it is slow with larger/many files. One of the workflows I have is to start a remote R session and load a bunch of datafiles into that environment. The vscode R integration is pretty good, and I'm happy to use it over Rstudio. But, because of this, I want to have this session running on the remote servers -- hence the remote web access.

I used to be able to start the vscode web server on the cluster and use SSH tunneling to connect directly to that instance of vscode (through ssl or with other cluster-side proxies as required).

It's not a standard use-case, so I see why they are deprecating it. It's using vscode more as a notebook instead of a traditional IDE.
Check out maccarone (https://github.com/bsilverthorn/maccarone) for a different take on this concept.
That's exactly how FedEx worked -- the "contractors" were usually small companies of 5-10 delivery trucks and a little more employees. FedEx just provided them access to tracking scanners, training etc.

Didn't persuade the court.
Imagine that someone is about to run out of funding. They spin up an semi-plausible story that they have just discovered something great. But "the man"/big oil/pharma/Illuminati is suppressing you and the truth. It might allow them to save face with certain people in their social circle (at the same time burning their bridges in the larger world). And/or your creditors might think you have gone crazy and not try to collect on their debts. And/or they might be in the midst of a manic phase of their bipolar disorder.
>In this vision, links are no longer lonesome strands precariously holding together a sparsely connected Web, but a booming choir of connections tightly binding together everything I have read and I will read

That isn't a good idea. For links to be purposeful they need to be high in signal and low in noise. If machines auto-link the word 'vision' in the quoted text above, I'll probably get a long list of optometrists. There's a reason the text itself has maybe half a dozen links in it, like " Andy and Michael’s excellent essay[...]". That's a specific piece if information that's relevant to the context.

Sparseness is a feature and not a bug when linking as you otherwise very quickly end up with a network where everything points to everything else, and that's meaningless. You don't want to 'tightly bind' everything together, because many of the things you read have nothing in common. In Schizophrenics, one important symptom is Apophenia, the tendency to see patterns in unrelated things. Hyperlink Maximalism is basically doing that to your text processing.
Agreed about the statistic of failure rate. For consistent profitablity it's probably at or below 2%, even if it's higher in a given year. The reason is not only lack of a strategy that doesn't depend on specific market conditions, but often (unless you're talking about algos) is psychological. Trading is psychologically very difficult.

You're right in that most of the time, the directional probability of the market is close to 50% for a 1:1 trade.

There are instances where the directional probability is significantly above 50% to make a trade have a positive EV (if it's not 1:1, the baseline is not 50%, and there are similarly moments where the directional probability for a different risk-reward is above its baseline for some direction). Different strategies tailor to different RRs, but you can absolutely find those entries.

However, as you said it's easy to get caught up in the illusion of profitability for a given market condition. For example, in a strong bull market like the post COVID stimulus, you could trade to the long side in a large timeframe and just win money because of the anomaly of such a protracted spike in the daily charts.

That's not a sustainable strategy though which explains what happened to your friends. A price action system that takes into account markets structure works in every environment, be it ranging, surging or a bear market.

Learning price action TA takes time to learn though, it's a skill like when we learned to code till the time we got paid for it. And trading, in general, goes against how our brain works. Psychology is the great barrier to profitability once you have a strategy. It explains the high failure rate. it being a hard skill is why there's so few people doing it, But it's not because it needs a very high IQ or Rafa Nadal's strength of mind. Most people could get there, but it takes a lot of effort, and theres so much deception and scamming around it, it's easier to pretend it's impossible based on the amount of people that fail.
Easy thing to do would be very low maximum word counts. ChatGPT is incapable of brevity.
An ordered list of headlines is very different from a body of text littered with random hyperlinked phrases. Even in the article, the example screenshots are super messy.
Fluorinated water reduced the rate of permanent dental damage among children by 25%. It's easy, cheap, and extremely effective.
> They are the ones who should bear the burden of mopping up their mistake.

This is true to a large extent but having worked in resolving "identity theft" I can say that it is complex.

In a place like the UK the requirements for a bank loan are pretty stringent but here in Australia they are much much lower and people hate friction. Authentication is a hard problem. Knowing someone's creditworthiness is a hard problem. There are a also many of people out there who are willing to claim "identity theft" has occurred to mean that it is complicated.

Most of the time for people whose identities had been stolen it was fairly easy to remove based on the most cursory evidence (which often I only had access to because I had access to air gapped data that was kept for far longer than the 7 years it was meant to be kept).

The status quo exists because it inconveniences just few enough people and is an acceptable amount of risk to the powerful. One side of politics will denounce anything that looks after the interest of both these groups as too much "red tape" and the other will denounce it as "discriminatory".

For comparison I look to the family violence measures we introduced here in the last decade. It was a battle which took years of firmly but politely refuting the opposing ideas "family violence victims should never have to justify themselves to a credit provider" against "credit providers should never increase their risk without having charged more up front".

A compromise model was found where the credit providers effectively pay for the losses but in reality they just charge it back to their customers. Right now paying for identity theft is a lottery. In future it's going to be internalised up front. This will be good for the victims but for the rest of us its an increased cost.
How do we ever hope to differentiate between useful evangelism and stockholm syndrome? Either way, I'm probably learning a lot of postgresql this year.

I do really wish we had at least settled on one data format instead of having enough differences between PL data and DB data to start building ORMs.
I had absolutely no feeling of time pressure on the SAT. If anything, I already had too much time and the boredom of waiting to start the next section was more negative than any other effect.

I think the same is true of the overwhelming majority of people scoring 1500+.

I don’t think unlimited time is much of a cheat code if you’re faking (or getting a “light” diagnosis) and trying to break into Harvard level of SAT scoring. More time isn’t going to transpose the middle digits on a 1450.
Oh I agree the actual mapping framework where it converts the EF/LINQ is deeply flawed. But that's the underlying implementation.

I just mean on a linguistic level, I tremendously prefer EF/LINQ/C# to SQL.
All solid and I have accounts with all of them. I threw in NJAL.LA if you want some privacy.

https://www.ovhcloud.com/en/domains/

https://njal.la/

https://www.sav.com/
> Can you embed it in Python as a library?

https://github.com/chdb-io/chdb

pip install chdb
Reminds me of Abilene Paradox

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox
And if you were working in an office who would be looking after them?
Hm, well, ChatGPT is a boy.
The question isn't _neural_ networks, it's _physical_ networks (and power, and cooling, and racking, and deployment, and and and). Actually marshaling enough compute to do anything is a serious real-world-moving-atoms endeavor.
What made you think the goal is to not know SQL?
I think their point is that 8GB is fine right now, just like 4GB was fine 10 years ago.

If you want laptops produced now to be fine in 10 years, it's very likely going to need more than 8GB.
I believe that tracking the number of potentially-changed direct inputs per node would be sufficient, would have better performance and would require fewer workarounds like durabilities. Further, it wouldn't turn O(N) updates into O(MN) ones (where M is the total size of your computation and N is the nodes affected by an update).

However, it would require dependencies to be tracked in both directions, so it's probably not possible to engineer it into Salsa, which seems to only track dependencies from consumer to producer.

I was going to blog about this design in detail, but never got around to it.
The JS ecosystem has moved away from massive monolithic packages due to bundle size constraints. Unfortunately, JS code has a lot of extra constraints placed on it since it has to be instantly performant over the wire. Something desktop apps don't have to deal with!

jQuery and Lodash could be considered "secondary stdlib" packages. Lodash for various data functions, and jQuery for dom manipulation functions. Now that other frameworks are more common and the basic stdlib is larger, many projects have migrated away from them to improve bundle size. (As an example, pulling in one lodash function tends to pull in lots of other functions from within lodash, unnecessarily inflating the amount of code sent to the browser.)
This garbage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IntelliTXT
> This has the scent of sensationalism. You can dig into any empire and find glowing accounts of their tolerance.

Dig into it. Given the stereotype of the mongols as bloodthirsty genocidal maniacs, it's surprising that they committed no genocide. Not a single one. And they were rather benevolent and beneficial. Everywhere from the islamic world to the rus to the chinese to the persians to central asia actually benefited from mongol rule. Everywhere the locals got wealthier and were better off. I'm more than happy to be corrected. And please, nothing about baghdad and the fall of the islamic empire. The mongol conquest eventually led to the greater, wealthier and more important islamic ottoman empire.

> The vikings were the Rus, and they continued to rule as vassals under the Mongols in Moscow.

Yes. But by 'the rus' I'm talking about the slavic peoples ( the eventual 'rus'sians, bela'rus'ians, ukrainians, etc ) that the vikings conquered. In other words, the viking ship is on the ukrainian emblem, not because the vikings protected the ukrainians from the mongols, but because the vikings conquered the ukrainians. The ship would have been on the emblem regardless of whether the mongols invaded or not as it is ukrainian legacy of viking conquest.

It's difficult to talk about that era since the conquered took on the name of the conquerors and eventually displaced the conquerors. It would be as if the native americans started calling themselves english or anglos. Which would have caused more confusion than calling them indians.
Because if you manage to get to some level of POSIX compatibility you can leverage that into having a whole toolchain and lots of other goodies up and running in a relatively short time. This limits the amount of effort required to get to 'first base', a self hosting environment.