skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9161017/

Abstract: "The[] findings suggest that SSB [sugar-sweetened beverage] taxes may work as intended in reducing demand for SSBs through higher prices, yet further research is needed to understand their associations with diet and health outcomes and heterogeneity of consumer responses."

I am ready to believe that drinking less SSB has a positive impact on my health. Looking forward to solid results proving or disproving that.
The latter. Google could easily pressure many sites to adopt this by including ad revenue incentives.

If that catches on, it could rapidly be 90% of websites that won't serve content until they get the magic Google "no-adblock-here" handshake.
I think the whole changing identity all the time is the exact opposite of a human system. The type of system only a computer could love.

This seems like a such a wrong headed approach. LetsEncrypt favors constantly changing magic handshakes over long term good social behavior.

Imagine a network where machines that misbehaved were ostracised instead of being able to register certificates frequently.

I see the promise in the Fediverse as it's ability to develop reputations.
I really have to read up on the Mongols, and central asian history in general. That subject is terribly undercoverd in Western history. For somewhat understandable reasons, but still.
I've been self-hosting invoice-ninja for a number of years now... quite like it. Coupled with integration with Mollie payments all invoices also have a payment link and most smaller invoice payments are processed automatically.
Because you can complete captchas on "unsanctioned" devices, such as your Linux PC or the DIY Windows PC you built for your grandma.
... that in turn will trigger a new age of open devices, browsers and OSes.
The biggest one in here: Strategy Objective 3.3: Shift Liability for Insecure Products and Services

A safe harbor provision exists only for companies following secure development practices.
Employment relationships and tradeoffs are negotiated at the time of hiring. Abruptly changing the terms in the middle with no re-negotiation is unfair. Sure, employees are free to leave and find another job, but with a layoff an employee has many benefits such as severance that are offered, where as in this case there are none. Instead of laying off people, should Amazon be able to just reduce their salary to 0, then say they're free to resign if they're not happy with it?
If the customer is already running in an attestable environment, why would they disagree with attesting to that environment?

> this has so much potential to adversely impact everyone(including businesses) except Google in the long term

How so? It prescribes mechanisms to ensure websites don’t exclude certain browsers/OSes

> To protect against both risks, we are evaluating whether attestation signals must sometimes be held back for a meaningful number of requests over a significant amount of time (in other words, on a small percentage of (client, site) pairs, platforms would simulate clients that do not support this capability). Such a holdback would encourage web developers to use these signals for aggregate analysis and opportunistic reduction of friction, as opposed to a quasi-allowlist: A holdback would effectively prevent the attestation from being used for gating feature access in real time, because otherwise the website risks users in the holdback population being rejected.
Promptimize
There has been a large cultural shift in how he is discussed in public. And the left has made him into an enemy, while the right has turned him into a hero… ish. He’s now part of the larger cultural wars, and as such it’s almost impossible not to have that creep into any discussion about him. And a big theme on the left is how he’s a fraud and only was able to achieve what he has because of his dads money. They don’t seem to realize that most startups that get lots of money still flop.
Promptimize is a prompt engineering evaluation and testing toolkit.
We're still on the exponential rise of the hype cycle. If capabilities appear to plateau - no GPT5/6 that are even more amazing, then the hype will not merely plateau but plummet. For now, anything seems possible.

As for a killer app, I'm another person for whom ChatGPT is it. I use GPT-4 something like Google, Wikipedia and Stack Overflow in one, but being very aware of the limitations. It feels a bit like circa 2000 when being good at googling things felt like a superpower. It doesn't do everything for you but can make you drastically more effective.

There's three levels of what's going on with AI at the moment, each with their own momentum and hype cycle: (1) the current generation of chat bots and image generators, which some of us would be using for the rest of our lives even with only minor refinements; (2) the prospect that new tools built on top of this and subsequent generations could remake the internet and how we interact with our gadgets; and (3) the prospect that the systems will keep getting smarter and smarter.
It’s not viable. The United States is too wealthy for passengers to waste days on a train. They’ll simply fly in 4 hours. Furthermore, that Chicago to Los Angeles train already exists and runs daily.
> Trying to bluff to see if NATO will actually respond to an invasion of Poland?

Possibly. They might try a "little green men" scenario where these aren't Russian or Belorussian forces, but "Wagner" forces.

Darker possibility: after the mutiny, Wagner are extremely dangerous to Putin. But they're also too dangerous to move against directly. They've been parked in Belarus to give the sides some distance. Maybe they're going to be ordered into Poland to get rid of them (killed or captured), making them NATO's problem.

(What was the old Mission Impossible line about "if you are caught, we will deny any knowledge of you and your actions"?)
Invisible characters in a specific bit-pattern.

Pretty common steganographic technique, really.
The trick to surviving in Enterprise environments is consistently and credibly beating the longest horizon dtrayegic rate of return budget (luck has it enterprise's stategic horizons are not that long). At any point it is still better to stick with the current than to change. You boil the frog, but very carefully.
GPT-4 via ChatGPT, mostly for coding and GPT-4 via https://flowch.ai (our tool) for anything that involves my own data (including my own code), or where I want automation, such as running a prompt on many pieces of data.

Overall this has at least 5x my productivity, possibly 10x.
My recollection is that there were also scoring changes for the SAT in 2010s that significantly reduced its predictive power.
Mistake I think. Because more and more facts are already covered by existing answers and more and more noobs (no judgement just fact we've all been there and I am still a noob in many regards) come into the industry as computing becomes more popular worldwide, it's unscalable unless the focus shifts towards getting people to find existing questions and answers instead of reducing SNR by asking and answering the same questions again and again in worse ways.
I enjoy the internet because I can interact with and learn from people with very different skillsets and experiences than me. I don't think I would enjoy it very much if it were only used by computer enthusiasts.
The domestic chicken is supposed to have come from the junglefowl of India, as it says in the above Wikipedia article.
All of these proposals are in fact the same thing. They're designed to obfuscate, complexify, and over-engineer the Internet to fuck people over. I don't care if my Magic the Gathering fan site has an auto-rotated 3 month expiry TLS certificate to "protect" the users. Those of us who have been online before the 21st Century see this exactly for what it is. A cash grab and a increasing mechanisms to tighten the screws of monopolies like AWS, Google, Apple, and Microsoft, and to lock down our devices and the web into a walled garden that only the tech giants can control.
I've been using the ChatGPT API to do summarization of text from free-form documents. Not in the legal domain though, so no real regulatory risks. It works very well. I didn't see any hallucinations when spot checking, though of course I can't rule it out. But even if it only gets things 98% correct, that accuracy is good enough for my use case, and being able to programmatically feed these documents in instead of hiring multiple contractors to read through and parse out the data is a massive, massive time and money saver.

> Or for that matter the privacy implications of sharing such documents with entities like OpenAI that don’t respect IP?

Their permissions/organization model is a mess, but ChatGPT does offer the ability to opt out of data collection, at least for corporate accounts.
I've only tried a couple of those and the original web interface is better than those for me. From the descriptions of the others, I doubt that they would be better, either. Not saying those things are bad or misguided, just that HN's web interface meets my needs well as-is.
Definitely. For staging temporary tables to merge for our Redshfit destination, we're uploading it to S3.

We will be creating a S3 destination with TSV, Avro, Parquet format support verily soon.
Signal just works. Thst’s the only thing I need it to do, and it does it beautifully.
The ESRB wants to start using facial scanning technology to check people's ages
Doesn't even matter, it's the feel good trigger word to get you on board.
It's establishing whether I have the right to view or use this site, as determined by whether some far off entity such as a Google approves of my computer or not.
I thought preset aspect ratio would look cool but now that you said that there should be a way to drag the canvas then I will add that feature
A pixel matrix sounds like a video display to me.
Ivy Speech – Realtime audio processing to block or allow certain voices
Howdy all,

Recently, a friend and I were joking about ways to ignore unpleasant voices at a family BBQ. A quick look at current speech detection methods led down a rabbit-hole (of course), and resulted in this fun proof of concept.

I was surprised at how well speaker embedding performed (and also acknowledge the sparse, subjective nature of my results).

It was a fun weekend project, and I hope you enjoy the write up!
As long as the mechanism will be open source standard and isn’t controlled by corporations AND the user browsers are in control to enable/disable it, sure.
I agree; that's why children should also be allowed to smoke cigars if they say they want to
Show HN: LLM Boxing – GPT 3.5 vs. Llama 2
Well, if I had the budget, I would. Shops like Fiverr might be the way to go, but it could easily go up to thousands of dollars if you don't like the design given, with only 1-3 revisions.
We don’t, and TFA is Mozilla rejecting this.
Hi! Yes, our next 2 connectors are going to be S3 and DynamoDB.

GitHub Issue: https://github.com/artie-labs/transfer/issues/157

If you'd like to be another design partner for us on this, do reach out. I'm at robin@artie.so.
Can't you only install it on a single iDevice?
I guess that's only for Safari, but not Chrome if you have that installed as well? Also, what if you never signed into your iCloud account? Is it impossible to disable?
Np(C8H8)2
Just not using a trademark is not possible. You must use and actively defend it in order to keep it. An unused trademark can be reported for deletion by competitors.

Otherwise anyone with money could just trademark billions of auto-generated names and wait for someone to start a business, then selling them a name.
i mean, for example here in europe there’s no such iiuc, sugary drinks are still way too sugary and way too cheap
Sugar taxes have also been proposed in the UK, and heavily combated.

Something being fought by lobbyists seems like a sign it might be a good idea rather than the other way around.
Is this the "fight global warming with nuclear winter" plan?
Do you mean to suggest adding another predator would address the first? That somehow, because there's a legal writ behind it, it makes it any more morally right?
Dark mode is fine on CRTs. They have excellent contrast; they are like OLED displays in that regard where the unlighted regions are truly not lit. CRTs have a harder time with black on white. The Mac's choice of black on white was unusual for the time, it was usually only seen on high end systems like workstations, with really good monitors with high refresh rates. (White on black was standard with computer displays thru the 70s into the 90s -- think of serial terminals and DOS PCs.)
Sounds good to me, I'd like to be able to visit local parks without having to watch out for needles
Why US has banned funding for Chinese lab at center of pandemic origin dispute
Yeah but what's to stop me from spawning a hidden instance of edge, sending keys etc to it to get it to visit some page, and using either window sub-classing (to hack it's memory space and read the request directly) or a local proxy server to steal the attestation it generates before terminating the request?

Likewise what's to stop you from patching the operating system directly (ok secure boot)

You could also just emulate an entire windows OS + TPM and have the emulator do it it sounds like

Like any scenario where I'm allowed to run arbitrary code within the OS with administrator privileges sounds like you could escape this.
I actually finally made an account this year to leave a comment on this question[0]. I'm not familiar with what or why curricula are what they are so I can't really answer the question, but as a math teacher it'd be helpful for the OP to know that calculus and linear algebra are deeply related; the derivative of a function is the best linear map (i.e. matrix) that approximates it! For practical purposes, calculus is a toolbag to turn (intractable) nonlinear problems into (tractable) linear ones.

But apparently I can't comment as a new user so I guess the discussion will just be "because calculus classes use matrices in examples".

[0] https://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/26417/why-...
1. There isn't any honesty or transparency in the ad industry, it's scams all the way down. This was the case way before today's current wave of platform monopolization, but Google owning everything makes it way worse.

2. Great, they should do that, but good luck doing that when the data you need to audit is on a bajillion client machines.

3. People do that already

4. This became a thing a while back as a way to defeat third-party tracking blockers in browsers

5. This is literally the attribution system you're arguing against

6. They do that already. But good luck finding an ad marketplace that Google and Facebook don't have their fingers already in.

Also...

> What prevents any of the following solutions from providing assurance to advertising clients, without also destroying the Internet and general purpose computing

I was replying to a comment asking why Mozilla supports Interoperable Private Attribution (IPA). None of what I said should be taken as support for Web Integrity, which is cancer.
Perhaps I chose that example for a reason ;-)
This discussion is not about cultural perceptions of Elon Musk. It is about how much of SpaceX and Tesla's success can be attributed to him. If you think cultural perceptions are why I categorized SolarCity, Boring Company, Hyperloop, and X.com as duds, please feel free to give specific criticism. Otherwise, the discussion is best helped by airing cultural grievances elsewhere.
The 3-Person Unicorn Startup
yes -- these authoritarians are causing problems in our society. we simply need to root them out and expel them all, then we the people could live in peace in a society free from authoritarianism...
Owner of x handle says no one reached out ahead of Twitter’s rebranding to ‘X’
I use an Excel template, fill it with the numbers and print to PDF.
> Transporting people by train in most of the US is laughably inefficient and inconvenient next to the car due to the low population densities across most of the country.

I get so tired of hearing this flawed argument, which places the cause and effect backwards. Ohio has the population of of Sweden, Indiana has the population of Denmark. Texas is almost twice as populous as The Netherlands, and its population is mostly confined to a triangle of urban areas that are within commuter rail distance. The Northeast Corridor is an uninterrupted urban development from Washington DC to Boston. The USA has numerous large population centers, many of which are completely unconnected by usable passenger rail despite close proximity. Over 80% of Americans live in urban areas, and most of the populations is confined to the coasts and the Midwest.

If you think trains are too inefficient, all you have to do is observe the ridiculously huge short hop flight network in the USA. There are at least 6 daily non-stop flights from Charlotte, NC to Washington, DC, which is a 6 hour drive. There are at least 30 nonstop flights from San Francisco to Los Angeles, which is also a 6 hour drive. There are 3 non-stop flights from LA to San Diego, which is less than 3 hours away. There are at least 10 non-stop flights form Chicago to Columbus per day, a route that has no passenger train service and under 6 hour drive time.

These short flights, which save effectively no time over high-speed train travel, exist because there is demand for non-car travel that is being unmet by the the trains that do not exist.

Switching to cars was not an inevitability, it was a not an obvious choice, we actually went out of our way to destroy existing, functional rail infrastructure and neighborhoods to replace it with interstate highways, and a lot of it was motivated by a massive automotive manufacturing lobby exerting government influence.

In the US, the automobile is also massively underpriced and subsidized as a policy choice, which pushes citizens toward choosing personal vehicles instead of alternatives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbEuaCCV-zg
Where does the money go? If it goes into the general fund and gets to be large enough, then government programs become dependent on it. The funds start to dry up if people actually stop engaging in the behavior. Then the government starts running low on funds they were dependent on.

I've always thought that these kinds of "vice taxes" shouldn't go into the general fund. They should go toward things that are related to helping the cause. In this case, the funds could go into awareness programs, subsidies for healthy foods, etc.
I don't think banks can afford to start telling customers that they need specific devices to access their online services.

They already make demands.

Two of the very large national banks I have accounts with restrict your access if you're not even using the right browser version. One puts a warning in every page. The other won't even let you log in.

To make the second one even worse, it requires a very specific version, not just > $version, so if i update my OS too quickly, it won't let me in.
Maybe initially (like Widevine L3). Then they'll expect your OS to attest the browser's integrity and your firmware to attest the OS's integrity.
So one... what you propose is purely hypothetical. One could construct a almost infinite number of different scenarios 'bridging the gap' between how a superior emotional intelligence might view humans vs. software on a computer that humans created.

Two.... we are labeling these programs AIs' but, IMO, we have never actually created an artificial intelligence... we are creating expert systems. Labeling them as AI is just hype.

Three... there is a massive fundamental difference between a biological organism that displays innate intelligent (humans, Orcas, cats, dogs, raven, bonobos, etc.) and software humans write that is compiled [by software we designed] to run on electric circuits we designed and created. Consider that, today, we can deterministically map a running neural net algorithm to electrons moving in fabricated material structures on a GPU or CPU... in explicit and complete detail if we really want to... there is no magic or mystery hidden from us; we designed it all. We certainly cannot do this with an animal brain and is doubtful that we will ever be able to map a single logical decision made to the extraordinarily complex chemical dynamics happening within the animal brain... today, we can only observe general dynamics using fMRI and the other techniques but with very poor spatial and temporal resolution. We need orders of magnitude better space/time resolution to observe real time brain chemistry, and possibly quantum mechanics tells us we'll never get there. Neural brain chemistry is orders of magnitude more complex than any circuits or fabricated circuits we will ever be able to design and fabricate with any sort of yield.

I am not trying to take away from the cool/wow factor of ChatGPT and other systems... they are impressive achievements and are going to get better, add more features and capability, etc. But they are still just expert software systems.
What if my problem is with the existence of the standard itself instead of implementation details?
So, all I have to do is copy-paste it into a text editor with remove-all-formatting to circumvent that?
ONNX runtime: Cross-platform accelerated machine learning
<P>age SysOp
If he didn't decapitate me, but stabbed me instead I'd say he's a friend
That is not possible, because the User Agent (UA) does not return a simple boolean value to the endpoints that requests attestation.That endpoint requests a cryptographic proof that originates at a shared root of trust between that endpoint and the device you are using (which has an embedded secret that its user cannot extract, and which was blessed by this shared root of trust with a cryptographic signature at the device's factory). Being able to generate that proof will attest that your device, its operating system, the software it has installed, as well as the UA have all been deemed acceptable (i.e., cryptographically signed by something/someone that root of trust has extended its trust to) by the attestation arbiter - so probably either Apple, Google, or Microsoft.
Can you elaborate on "invisible?" The only invisible character I can imagine is a space. It seems like any other character either isn't invisible or doesn't exist (ie, isnt a character).

Additionally, if I copy-paste text like this are the invisible characters preserved? Are there a bunch of extra spaces somewhere?
One way is trying to sneak in a specific structure/pattern that is difficult for a human to notice when reading, like using a particular sentence length, paragraph length, or punctuation pattern. Or use certain words in the text that may not be frequently used by humans etc.

Watermarking needs to be subtle enough to be unnoticeable to opposing parties, yet distinctive enough to be detectable.

So, this is an arms race especially because detecting it and altering it based on the watermark is also fun :)
If they sell anything at all, it exposes them to the local regulations of wherever they are taking money, and then the survival of the org and technology becomes dependent on the income, which has conditions attached to it.
Saying Signal should sell something is like recommending someone develop a drug habit.
There's no one single thing, except internalizing a bunch of small ones.

My favorite guide is by Tania Rascia [1]. It walks through each of the "rules" and applies them to a simple example. My second favorite is by Anthony Hobday [2] and each "rule" gets its own, simple example to demonstrate.

[1] https://www.taniarascia.com/design-for-developers/

[2] https://anthonyhobday.com/sideprojects/saferules/
If they wanted to oppose it they should have concentrated on being actual competition with marketshare, not checks notes selling VPN subscriptions and a bookmarking service.
I want to search based on semantic meaning, rather than partial or exact keyword search.

I'm using pgvector within postgres, so I get all of the postgres benefits.