skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
René Girard has done an anthropological investigation of this topic. The gist of it is through the psycho-social mechanism of scapegoating, opposing groups can simultaneously believe they are victims while acting as oppressors, often using their victim status as justification for their oppression of "the other".

Girard explores this phenomenon of scapegoating and postulates it goes back to primitive humans e.g. during a drought tensions rise within a tribe, and a certain "witchy" tribe member is singled out to take the blame and either expelled or murdered. After this, social tensions in the tribe are relieved (even if the drought does not subside), and the scapegoat paradoxically becomes a sacred, or savior, figure. Through history, this develops into ritual and religion. It provides a useful lens to reason about messianic cults, as well as social power dynamics.

There's a good overview on his Wikipedia page, but he delves into this particular topic in the book Violence and the Sacred. He also pioneered the field of Generative Anthropology, which other academics like Eric Gans have built upon, theorizing about the mechanism in much more detail, and using it to explain effects in modern culture.
My favorite part of working there when this started being pushed was “source?” And the reply being “trust us bro”

It’s so hilariously mismanaged..the execs are just useful idiots for the globalist agenda at this point
I believe the old verification system actually checked that somebody was who they claimed to be — obviously this required human intervention. Verification now just checks that somebody can pay $8/month (or promise to as a once-off, then cancel, maybe?) So a bot pretending to be Joe Biden or Donald Trump would appear to be legitimate.
That’s what I am thinking. I am ok with food subsidies but we should direct them towards healthy food.
How would you go about watermarking AI written text?
How is this different from using Tor or an anonymization VPN?
There are many who place frames on top of mantles, piano or other objects....
Install PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQL Server on Apple Silicon
I think you're wildly optimistic to think that we can sustain both wars at once, or maybe even more wildly optimistic to think that Taiwan wouldn't be invaded within a year of starting a war with Russia.
A CBA can cover things other than wages. Many states are also right to work, so nobody has to join the union in those states.

How long do you think Amazon will last as a company if their engineering department went on strike? Probably about 15 minutes. Amazon workers could really get a fair slice of the pie of they organized.
I don't think I understand the question. Do articles make you feel good because they're short, rather than because of what they contain?
VCs tend to have specializations, the best way is probably to look into the background of the individual partners. If there is a good match there then a direct approach has a fair chance of working.

I don't see much value in the various services in this domain, they tend to have outdated information, do a crap job of filtering (both positive and negative) and can be a negative signal to a VC if they are the ones making first contact. Always make sure you own the relationship from day #1, lots of these services are just leadgen for the financial service providers ('corporate finance') who would love a slice of your pie, regardless of whether or not you manage to get funding. If you do engage a corporate finance company make sure they only get paid a fixed fee if they succeed, and make sure that they are non-exclusive.
Is there an actual mathematical model of the complexity barrier that I can look up?

I don’t see any reason to limit things to the observable universe. What prevents life from emerging outside of our light cone?
Side note: I feel like dark mode has taken hold in part because of really good LCD screens with great contrast. Dark mode would look horrible on CRTs or even first-generation LCDs.
On desktop I'll stick to the original page, it's so simple and good.

But it isn't that good on mobile.
On mobile I use Harmonic for Hackernews it is the best one I've used. I tried many others but Harmonic is the only one I'm still using. The only reason that made me want to use another App, was that it wasn't open source, but it got open sourced some time ago.

https://github.com/SimonHalvdansson/Harmonic-HN
The most important section of this article:

> This feature is largely bad for the web and the industry generally, like all attestation (see below).

> That said, it's not as dangerous as the Google proposal, simply because Safari isn't the dominant browser. Right now, Safari has around 20% market share in browsers (25% on mobile, and 15% on desktop), while Chrome is comfortably above 60% everywhere, with Chromium more generally (Brave, Edge, Opera, Samsung Internet, etc) about 10% above that.

> With Safari providing this, it can be used by some providers, but nobody can block or behave differently with unattested clients. Similarly, Safari can't usefully use this to tighten the screws on users - while they could refuse to attest old OS versions or browsers, it wouldn't make a significant impact on users (they might see statistically more CAPTCHAs, but little else).

> Chrome's usage is a larger concern. With 70+% of web clients using Chromium, this would become a major part of the web very quickly. With both Web Environment Integrity & Private Access Tokens, 90% of web clients would potentially be attested, and the "oh, you're not attested, let's treat you suspiciously" pressure could ramp up quickly.

----

It's bad that Safari is shipping attestation, but a big reason why Safari often gets a pass on negative features that Google doesn't get a pass on[0] is because Chrome has a 60% market share, many sites are tested only in Chrome, and Chrome's marketshare is only likely to grow in the future once we finally get Apple to finally allow alternate browsers on iOS. In contrast, Safari's marketshare is pretty much tied only to iOS and Mac, and they don't even have a monopoly on Mac.

Like it or not, it matters more when Chrome breaks the Internet.

I'm not saying we should ignore Safari (we definitely shouldn't), but if that "double standard" makes anyone upset, perhaps that's a good reason to break Google up and introduce more browser diversity. If Chrome didn't have a 60% marketshare over the entire web, it would be possible to extend more grace to the people proposing experimental features within Chrome.

The extra scrutiny and tougher standards, and even the lower leeway to make mistakes are partially consequences of being the dominant browser in the marketplace. I'm sorry, but the standards are higher when you're in a position where it's possible for you to break everything.

----

[0]: see Manifest V3, which is also based heavily on Safari's own adblocking restrictions, which are similarly harmful to adblockers but tend to get a lot less attention.
Once when doing tech support at a local hospital, one of the nurses called us stating that she had "some sort of weather report" up in a window on screen, but she couldn't click it away because the most would go under the screen. Obviously piquing my interest, I told her not to touch the computer until I arrived.

Since the hospital was quite big, it took me about 10 minutes to reach her workstation, where she exclaimed that "the window closed on its own a minute ago. I swear it was on there for half an hour".

That, coupled with the layout of the desk, the description of the window led me to a hypothesis. I pressed the button on the monitor (which she had unknowingly pressed with the corner of her keyboard) which called up the system menu of the display. It showed 100% sun (brightness). The mouse would go under it.

Then, I hiked back another 10 minutes to await the next phone call.
This might be where the internet really gets forked, as it's been predicted over and over since the '90s.

On one side, we'll have a "clean", authority-sanctioned "corpweb", where everyone is ID'ed to the wazoo; on the other, a more casual "greynet" galaxy of porn and decentralized communities will likely emerge, once all tinkerers get pushed out of corpnet. It could be an interesting opportunity to reboot a few long-lost dreams.
They do penalize heavy ads. There have been shenanigans on this front also (penalizing non-Google ad networks and favoring Google ad networks). They do penalize some content farms and favor others. The issue they are concerned about with SO and MDN among other user generated content sites is covert seeding at scale for the purpose of manipulating search results.

There's just a lot of fraud on the internet related to search and advertising manipulation, but it's under-policed in part because of the internationalized nature of it and because it is hard to bring fraud cases in the United States because of the particularized pleading standard. That should not stop the feds from bringing criminal cases, but generally the feds care about large dollar value frauds (as they probably should be) rather than on policing very large numbers of small dollar value frauds that have a major aggregate impact on the online economy. They like going after the guys who steal $100 million from deaf children with Lupus rather than doing 200 $500k fraud prosecutions.
NYT piece on AI weapons by Palantir CEO Alex Karp
For those not reading the article, this is in Australia.
Heh, it's a lot of clicks (well, 4, but the website also feels slow) to get to the solutions: https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/table-of-solutions

Maybe I should really take a sabbatical and go plant trees in a tropical forest...
Who would fire him? He owns Twitter.
I'm doing pretty much the same for all my routine paperwork, but with page.css for realistic preview and Mavo for the editing and storage part. Here's an example: https://papers.aedge.dev/payout/
He's not the only person that feels CDDL and GPL licenses are compatible. Their alleged incompatibility[1] seems to stem from a lot of hair splitting over technicalities that don't align with the spirit of either license. [2][3][4]

It's particularly funny that the community (except Canonical and a handful of individuals) largely settled on the CDDL-GPL issue--deciding they were incompatible and giving up on the possibility of upstreaming ZFS--but is still so highly split on the question of RHEL's GPL compatibility w.r.t. calling source code sharing a violation of their customer agreement.

The RHEL issue stems from the GPL literally saying,

> You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.

Conspicuously, you may not impose restrictions on the EXERCISE of these rights, not just further restrictions to the rights themselves. There's a pretty clear argument to be made that RHEL's actions in ending business relationships with any customers would be a restriction stemming from their having exercised their right. There's basically no hair splitting here. This should be done and dusted in the collective open source community conscious.

But the CDDL-GPL issue? There is no smoking gun in either license. The arguments against are much more strenuous.

But the community settled one debate much more decisively than the other.

If ZFS was as desirable to the Linux community as a fully open RHEL, I think there would've be much more enthusiasm in interpreting legal theory around it.

I think the community ought to be coming down much harder around the theory of RHEL incompatibility. It's really not a stretch from the most straightforward reading of the license.

It's also pretty conspicuous that Oracle has done precisely nothing to stop OpenZFS's inertia. If they felt it was incompatible and were going to act, they had their chance.

[1] https://www.fsf.org/licensing/zfs-and-linux

[2] https://blog.hansenpartnership.com/are-gplv2-and-cddl-incomp...

[3] https://opensource.stackexchange.com/a/2106

[4] https://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-cddl...
i never understood the difference between a "bill" and an "expense". my confusion in understanding comes from the idea that a small retail trader for example, pays for 2-3 things.

either capital goods, or purchases of trading goods or expenses. Now, all of these are technically purchases". Just that your accounting ledger defines the further classification.
Now, all of these require "invoice", at least in india, that means you can't just say "i paid inr 500 for fuel" without a receipt/invoice. So what is a bill and how is it different than being expensed?
Not for our MVP but we are working on a feature that will all you to show whether your response was AI assisted or not
I don't even drink sugary sodas and I hate the idea of this.
Coke Zero is way better than diet. Yes, it still doesn’t taste completely like classic coke, but it is good enough that if you want to cut back on sugar it’s a decent option. Diet Coke take a lot of getting used to, you just can’t start on it without lots of willpower. Most of Coke Zero’s increasing market share is coming from classic coke drinkers (and is pulling in more men than Diet Coke did) - it should become more popular than Diet Coke in a few years, so I’m not really sure why you think Diet Coke has won?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/health/diet-soda-vs-zero-suga...
The use of anarchism in the title was the first tell. It's an often misused and misunderstood word. I'm confident Wired knows better, but used it because of the pop culture-y biases it is sure to trigger.

This is why we can't have nice things. Why be rational and objective when there a clicks to bait?
Does it increase equity? I always thought eating healthier is becoming more and more of a costly affair.
I don't know exact numbers, but AFAIK even if HFCS will be 10x more expensive it will not increase drink price significantly because each can/bottle contains only a small (but still unhealthy) amount of it (and raw ingredients only a fraction of cost to begin with).
>Seriously, without ability to add VAT?

99% of people in the US have never heard of VAT, so I'm not sure what you find surprising about a US-based project not including VAT...
Not really a good sign. There's legitimate arguments to have, and then there's creationism, 5g causes covid, q-anon, etc that lower the quality of discussion because the people posting about that aren't actually interested in discussion.
> IPv4 NAT allows people to have quite weak security internally in a network, and not get compromised

DENY from ANY to ANY

on the WAN port works with both IPv4 and IPv6 and allows people to have a strong security internally in the network.

Here, one simple solution, works on both IP versions, does not rely on NAT or hoping everything would be fine.

> How many of those addresses have SSH, Samba, APFS, Telnet, or a DNS server running?

Ah, yes, some idiots have the telnet and APFS running and open to the whole world that's why NAT to the rescue! Instead of, you know, having a brain and, at least, firewalling. At The Router.

You all NAT apologists somehow do have the router with NAT and firewall for IPv4, but at the same time there is only luminiferous æther for IPv6 with nothing between the poor, young and defenseless IoT device and the 3vi1 h4x0r somewhere on the other side of the planet. Come on.

> What if someone gets the logs of an IOT cloud provider with IPv6 enabled IOT devices?

What if someone gets in your house and find your nudes? Should we ban cameras everywhere, because someone might do that?
There is no change you should be looking for. This is who he is, and it doesn't take a lot of digging to see it. You, like most of us, just weren't looking closely at what he was doing before the last couple years.
Seems that for that case you would need to use `mutate_with`, which as you say does pass data between systems.

My understanding is you can use any Series operations without penalty (ie. they get passed into some rust NIF call), https://hexdocs.pm/explorer/Explorer.Series.html#functions-s..., which does include whitespace trimming, but not arbitrary strings, but I imagine it wouldn't be too much of a jump to add arbitrary constant strings. Might just need to expose `str.slice` or `str.replace`.

The docs do imply that `mutate_with` operates lazily, so you only pay the transfer cost once per row, no matter how many mutations you're applying, but whether that's performant enough depends would be case by case.
The browser doesn't interface directly with any of the hardware, the operating system does. And the integrity of the operating system can be attested to by the hardware via a chain of trust all the way to the secure bootloader.
To be fair, "Web Integrity" (aka remote attestation aka a corporate surveillance agent built into "your" hardware) is much more fundamental as it would prevent the running of forked browsers that remove deliberate security vulnerabilities like IPA. It's unfortunate that Mozilla "plays ball" on garbage like IPA, but at least as things stand users are free to disable/remove/fork/etc. Whereas remote attestation is fundamentally game over for the idea of user representing agents altogether.
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to be moderated.
If it's generated by a SaaS, the service could sign all output with a public key.
I didn't get conned personally, no, because I am enough of an engineer to see through his garbage, unworkable ideas. A lot of investors (and municipalities!) haven't been so lucky.
Are you suggesting that you aren't made of chemical compounds?
Dismissing possible negative effects of psychedelics with a comparison to caffeine and nicotine feels off. Psychedelics are much more intense than either - on a different scale, to the point they are emotionally draining. Otherwise, I can dig it. There are a variety of factors.
Nothing prevents life from originating outside the region we will ever be causally connected to, but life that can never be observed doesn't present much of a handle for conducting science.

As for complexity barrier: consider the number of possible stable configurations with N atoms. It grows exponentially in N. You need to argue either that the chance of a random molecule being alive is high enough (which doesn't seem consistent with the structure we see in life) or that the sampling of these molecular configurations is extremely biased toward some that can start evolution (which is just begging the question.)
Advisors - no
32 GPR is a different extension, APX (Adv. Performance Ext.), which also has arm-ish predicated insturctions.
There's a lot of competition in the banking sector, so I don't think banks can afford to start telling customers that they need specific devices to access their online services.
I'm glad that they did, although they should obviously done an announcement for it.

The amount of people in the ecosystem who thinks it's even possible to detect if something is AI written or not when it's just a couple of sentences is staggering high. And somehow, people in power seems to put their faith in some of these tools that guarantee a certain amount of truthfulness when in reality it's impossible they could guarantee that, and act on whatever these "AI vs Human-written" tool tell them to.

So hopefully this can serve as another example that it's simply not possible to detect if a bunch of characters were outputted by an LLM or not.
This feels like such a juicy and divisive area to me. There are an immense number of use cases where we'd like to know we're talking to a 'trusted' hardware and software stack on the web. For many years now, we have just assumed there is little to no trust in the stack, and architected and built accordingly. It adds an amazing amount of complexity and cost, limits features, and makes everything way, way harder than if you could assume a trusted stack.

At the same time, as is being pointed out quite vocally right now, 'trusted' is a very, very difficult concept when large tech monopolies are involved.

On the one hand, it's difficult because there are only a few companies in the world that can field large tech teams that deal with persistent threat actors, and therefore, it would be very nice to be able to trust the security promises made. And, if those promises are trustworthy, they are better promises than any individual can make for their own software and platfoms.

On the other hand, if you're a hacker (in the platonic sense), 'trusted' immediately codes to 'monopoly-backed', along with 'probably back-doored by a local government agency' and we head one more step down the primrose path of control, lack of innovation and finally perhaps a fascistic technology future controlled by a few players.

Ultimately, I think the solution here can only be successful if it involves a trustable, open hardware certification technology that's not registry based, e.g. can create strong local proofs that are independently verifiable. There are a few tech companies I know of working on this on the silicon side, but it's a very difficult problem, and I'm not clear if there's really enough demand to make them viable right now.

I guess I personally come down to leaving this turned on in Safari for now, and seeing what happens over the next year or two.
This is where the terminology becomes a bit annoying, but there is a key difference in the kinds of reasoning at work here.

When you ask LLMs to provide a reasoning, the actual reasoning performed is linguistic; The LLM has (is) a model about language and performs some (limited) reasoning on that model to get an output.

But that is explicitly different from reasoning about the abstract question at hand, thus the answer is mostly a guess.

The key difference to observe is that "semantic reasoners" like computer algebra or prolog, always maintain correctness within the axioms provided. They may slow down significantly as questions get more complex, but they do not start providing wrong answers. Computers are flawless mathematicians, provided they are programmed correctly.

LLMs do provide increasingly more-wrong answers as the question gets more complex. Thus we can observe that LLMs do not abstractly reason about the question and it's model.
But unemployment insurance does, the next door red state has far worse unemployment and social support laws that where I live. They get 1/3 per month then were I am.
I started similarly. I had built a really simple HTML template for my invoices and I generated them using some CLI scripts and Airtable as a database (to keep track of customer addresses, invoice IDs, etc.).

I didn't want to use a full-on accounting tool where everything is kept in the cloud with expensive monthly subscriptions and using Word or something along those lines also didn't work for me.
Another problem is what is the actual root of the attestation? If it was the means to say, "yes this is a real person" it might be useful but this is simply system attestation so no real way of knowing whether it would stop bad actors from doing bad stuff and whether it would be misunderstood and misused like many other systems (CORs anyone?)

The logical conclusion of this system is "if you have a legit system, you are legit; if you don't you aren't".
Then why buy Twitter for $44B to show the world how bad of a business leader you are or how bad you are at leading or inspiring a tech team?

Why not just use that $44B to build X.com from scratch?

Who will trust Elon to build a reliable platform, i.e. use X.com for their finances or any other crucial services X is planning to offer.

He thinks you can run this platform with a skeleton crew. I wouldn't trust that platform at all.