skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ok, so I was a bit bored...

- no external grep anymore

- smaller (303 instead of 400 bytes)

- cleanup of mouse mode on exit

p(){ for i;do printf "\e[$i";done;};r(){ read -rn1 c;[[ $c = $1 ]];};stty -echo cbreak;p H m J ?1003h;trap 'p ?1003l' 0;while d=;do r $'\e'||{ [[ $c =~ [0-7] ]]&&b=$c;continue;};r \[||continue;r M||continue;r @&&d=y;read _ x y _< <(head -c2|od -tu1);[ $d ]&&p "$((y-32));$((x-32))H" "4${b-2}m " m D;done
In theory, yes, but that’s what every thread about switching to Firefox gets: Lots of flames about Mozilla. But when the only sensible alternative is staying with Google, why would these people make these arguments as replies to suggestions to switch to Firefox? It is only reasonable to conclude that it’s not Firefox fans making these arguments, in those threads.
I also immediately thought of this movie when hearing all of this hubub, we live in the weirdest timeline. How do we get back out of this line
On top of that there is vastly more selection than just 20 years ago.
People who signup for free accounts generally provide personal data in exchange for services according to the ToS they agreed to while signing up. You are owed what is prescribed in the ToS and other agreements.

"pay" is inaccurate. "Consideration" is the word you are looking for. It's silly to think otherwise.
>People give up ownership in the hopes of a reciprocal relationship

I think this is it. With your account, you get an easy platform to post on. The platform gets to use your content to presumably get more visitors to show ads to and publicize itself.
For the same reason that you still pay for games, even when they run on your machine? There’s a lot that Netflix can sell, including proprietary code, creatively unique prompts, etc.
Cool! I love collections like this :) A 10-min format and sort (alphabetical or chronological) would make this so much more scanable though
Nobody disputed its legality. Actors are using their existing bargaining power to negotiate for a contractual commitment.
The various congressional committees are supposed to know everything the federal government is doing so they can provide oversight, AFAIK. Something big like UFOs should have come up I'd imagine
>> Regardless, almost no one here is willing to treat this subject with good faith, only to discourage curiosity and encourage dismissive ridicule.

Yes. The same as -not everyone but many- here will treat magic, homeopathy, osteopathy, chiropody, Christian science (!), voodoo, astrology, tarot readings, palmistry, and other quackery. Being scientifically curious doesn't mean believeing any old bullshit anyone tries to sell you.
For a specific segment of the population - for example their age range was substantially tighter than the population at large.
Agreed - if anyone else is curious to see Google's "side" (motivations, technical or otherwise), here's the explainer:

https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/...

It's nakedly user-hostile. A blatant attempt to invert the "user agent" relationship such that the agent works for the advertiser/corporation/government to spy on the human behind the screen. The way the intro paragraph tries to disguise this as something users need or want is frankly disgusting:

> Users often depend on websites trusting the client environment they run in. This trust may assume that the client environment is honest about certain aspects of itself, keeps user data and intellectual property secure, and is transparent about whether or not a human is using it. This trust is the backbone of the open internet, critical for the safety of user data and for the sustainability of the website’s business.

Ugh. Here's a fixed, honest version:

Corporations like Google often depend on advertisers knowing as much as possible about their users. Their revenue may depend on fingerprinting the client environment, tracking their behavior and history, and attesting that a human with sufficient disposable income is behind the keyboard. This personal data mining is the backbone of Google's business model, critical for their continued dominance of the web and for the sustainability of their enormous margins.
I understand that commercial fishing, like everything else, is complex and diverse with both good and bad actors.

However, if it were balanced, fish populations wouldn't be in such a dire state. This suggests to an outsider that the majority of the industry is harmful, and as such, I have no sympathy for it at all.

Considering the fact that fishing is decimating fish populations globally (even sharks are facing extinction due to overfishing, bycatch, and plastic pollution) and causing havoc on sea floors with trawling for example, I don't feel sorry for having such a black and white viewpoint.

> But I don't believe we will make any progress by tarring entire industries

Considering that meat consumption is not essential for our sustenance or health, I believe that the only way to prevent further environmental damage and restore biodiversity is to ban all forms of animal farming, marine aquaculture, and fishing.

We need to explore sustainable ways to harness the sea for our nourishment, sure, but I don't believe it has to involve fishing. I'm excited about the prospect of more affordable omega-3 from algae and seaweeds. I bet you'd prefer to see vibrant seaweed farms teeming with life rather than ecosystems devastated by overfishing or polluted by aquafarms.
> Automation and outsourcing gutted the middle class in the US

What statistics can we look at that shows that the middle class is smaller and less well off than before (“gutted”)?
I was unaware that after thousands of years of the debate over ethics, that we had settled on a objective set of universal ethics.

Can you please tell me what those universal objective set of ethics are first?

And following that, how this is unethical
> The current players can whitelist/attest their own clients while categorizing every other scraping clients as bots.

I hadn't really considered this. In a roundabout way, is there a process for this to be rejected on grounds of "fair use" limitations?
Sony Group Corporation is a kabushiki gaisha under Japanese law, which translates roughly to “stock corporation”, which is a legal entity representing its owners (individuals and institutional investors, but if you follow the trails of paperwork all the way to the end, it’s all individuals) in the marketplace. The arrangement is complex, but it is very much all people. Loads of them, as employees, management, executive management, owners and beneficiaries.

Your point is taken that the entity is not literally human—sentient paperwork is a joke but it’s actually not too far off—but your statement is still dehumanizing to actual people. The actions people take acting as representatives of the company are still human actions with human incentives behind them. I was hoping you would take the hint rather than the full explanation.
I absolutely love that Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp are sitting behind them hearing this. They did a lot of the heavy lifting on the issue to get this hearing public, and this is really a triumph for them.
There is a lot of urgent important work to be done in this world.

We don’t need luddites to fight for creating artificial jobs.
Its sad for me to see Google being herded in this direction over the last few years. Google was one of the main push behind an open web thorough 2000s-2010s as they wanted data for search and when everything was open they had access to everything. But as new web 2.0 companies came about like facebook that started siloing the internet it started changing things. I have been anti facebook for this reason alone not its data mining etc but because it was the reason the web started to change where instead of websites a lot of companies started building facebook pages with the data not being available unless you are logged in to facebook.
Because that whistleblower was paid to make those allegations by the DoD.
Kiwifarms did not have to use Cloudflare.
I didn't say it was. We have a long way to go before we entertain that notion.

Don't put words in my mouth.
I predict that hardware attestation will in 10-30 years become a requirement to maintain an internet connection.

Given Microsoft's push to make their OS support hardware attestation as well as Google's push for technologies which use hardware attestation in broader and broader scopes (Android and iOS has supported this for apps for a long time), the technology to make this possible is increasingly becoming widespread.

Hardware which supports hardware attestation is expensive and some people who can't afford it would therefore be excluded. But I don't think this matters.

If Google forces you to see all their ads then they can sell the ad space for more money. This can make it increasingly profitable to sell devices at an ever increasing loss. Likewise for Microsoft.

As a side note, this will make it incredibly difficult for anyone to compete in the hardware space. Why would someone spend even £500 on a phone or computer from a non adtech company when the adtech company can sell the same device for £100 or £50 or maybe even give it away for free?

By making hardware attestation more mainstream, it will become increasingly difficult to argue that enabling it for things would cut off customers.

I think it's easy to argue in favor of requiring hardware attestation for internet connections from the point of view of a government or an ISP. After all, if your customers can only use a limited set of hardware which is known and tested for security, it decreases the chance of security problems. For a police state like the UK it also seems even easier to justify too.

Even if things don't go that far, in a few years you will become a second class citizen for refusing to allow this on your devices. I can easily imagine banks requiring WEI for their online banking portals (they already do it for all their apps). Likewise I can also imagine my water, gas and electricity companies, or really any company which handles payments, considering this technology.

The worst part is, I don't think most people will care as long as it keeps working seamlessly on their devices. Likewise I don't think governments or the EU will do anything about it. I am not even sure what I can do about it.
I treat streaming services like radio without ads. And it's always possible to buy music from sites like bandcamp and own it permanently.
On what planet were liberal voices being censored in any way on twitter? Left-wingers were being banned because the liberals that filled their responses with invective, invitations for them to kill themselves, and appeals that they be arrested were mass reporting them.
seems they have a 7 day max limit now
To paraphrase John Maynard Keynes: Google can stay irrational a lot longer than you or I can retain our freedoms. And when the precedents have been set, a new normal has been established, and when/if Google does finally fail, the next actor will step in and keep those freedoms from us all.
> It surely has a marginal cost. But is that cost significant, is the question. In particular, significant enough to warrant a recurring payment business model.

I think you're assuming more of my answer than what I gave. That's fair given that this is the point of the article, but it's not mine. I'm very specifically only responding to "is there a per-user marginal cost on software?", and my answer is most definitely yes.

To warrant a recurring payment business model, I think the right question to ask is "Is there a per user-year marginal cost on software?", and now the answer is in my view, much more complicated and domain-specific. Worse yet, I think that there's perverse incentives at play here in recurring payments.
Omega Sports Apple Computer Sneakers
Even if you’re not a shareholder, you’re welcome to discuss and criticize the action with anyone who will listen.
Michael Pollan wrote about it:

https://michaelpollan.com/books/caffeine-how-coffee-and-tea-....
AI extras are not that great, or studios/production companies wouldn't be trying to get full scans of background actors.
The same thing can be said about the opposite stance you are taking. The question is: do we already know things, and how easy are the things we don't already know to look up?

Regardless, I have Googled this for you: please return the favor by helping others learn to use search engines in the future before leaving comments insinuating that they are lying.

The tldr (as you'll probably insist on that also) is that Firefox finds Mozilla, not the other way around, as the latter is a non-profit while the former is a FOR-profit, so Mozilla actually can't directly fund Firefox.

https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/ow9k0y/is_there_a_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/a98gmi/donations_t...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24200395
For additional context, the 14N (Air Force Intelligence officers) community broadly does not support this person or his claims.

Take that for what it's worth
Did you by any chance went by the name of Spiff in your daydreams? :) Sounds familiar...
JEP 400: UTF-8 by Default
The slaves knew slavery was wrong. Why are you only interested in the slaver's viewpoint?
> But if you can give people the virus whether vaccinated or not, there is functionally no difference in how much you were endangering people

You are now suggesting that vaccines did not prevent severe illness, which is not true.
Unfortunately it seems that nearly all software platforms with a dominant market share, end up degenerating to serve only one purpose: to shove advertisements and subscriptions onto you.

My mother's new Windows 11 laptop's out-of-the-box configuration had me clicking through half a dozen things attempting to manipulate me or her into spending more money. There are (I can only assume paid-placement) news and adfotainment in the start menu! Repeat pop-up reminders from Lenovo to subscribe to their protection package. Emotionally-manipulative reminders to subscribe to virus protection services. To Microsoft Office. Etc. etc.

It's been the same thing in the mobile market, where the move to "apps" means you are running their software on your device all the time, so they can optimally surveil you, and target the advertisements and behaviourally-modifying nudges. Quite a few messaging services now actively mess with delivery of notifications, spacing them out, delaying them, according to research that shows what maximizes engagement.

I saw the trend 20 years ago and switched to free software around that time -- I liked Linux anyway, but it was partly on principle. Still, the new laptop was eye-opening. The degree of intrusion, the degree to which even desktop computers have turned into user-hostile advertising terminals serving the purposes of their manufacturer, rather than a computer for the user to accomplish their work, is quite shocking.

Everything networked is becoming like that - twisting the user's hardware, turning it into nothing more than a terminal, an extension of the corporation, serving their interests at all times. Even smart TVs now have ads built-in to their menus and such.
> Right because that's objectionable speech.

Objectionable to whom? Elon seems to have no issue blocking speech objectionable to pseudo-dictators[1] or declaring that cis/cisgendered are slurs that can get you suspended. He seems fine with blocking speech objectionable to those that agree with his political sensibilities.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/05/13/turkey-...
I've heard oakland is a bit more rough than SF. Which are the bits to avoid?
Research the neighborhood you're staying in. It's not uncommon for people to find a hotel that's TL-adjacent, think it's a great location because it's close to Union Square, then find themselves horrified when they step out in the morning.
This is unlikely to be a direct initiative to create AI movies, seems more likely as a leading tech company they need to hire the best AI people.
Artificial actors, AI script writers and producers will exist only as outlying novelties. Our entertainment is part of our culture, and we will not let go of real actors whose lives we follow, real writers like jk rowling, tolkien and grr martin who created the worlds that became billion dollar franchises.
AI will more likely expand as a production tool as well as its current role as “the algorithm” that decides what we may me like.
Why would you not link to that "good evidence" to support your claim?
> * Software needs maintenance. You can't just build an app an call it a day, you need to employ a team to maintain it continuously. You can build a massive, gargantuan bridge and maintain it maybe every few years/half a decade to keep it safe for 30+ years, you cannot do that in software.

> * Unlike what outsider think, software -- even "boring" CRUD/web software -- is still very much a research project. If you ask a civil engineer how to build a bridge, they'll tell you about all the techniques that were developed over the many many decades.

As a nonpracticing civil engineer, you're underestimating the ongoing maintence that goes into any large bridge.

Also, though the techniques may be more established, every bridge must still be designed to fit the specific characteristics of its local geology and geography. But come to think of it, fundamental computer science algorithms are pretty well established, like bridge-building techniques. Software engineering is simply fitting the code to each unique problem, as bridge design fits a bridge to each unique place.
Linux has a stable ABI for user land programs. For drivers the ABI is not stable, but drivers are not sandboxed in linux.
> still blows my mind how much easier it is to run a business that deals with bytes instead of atoms

That must be why most software startups succeed.
This regularly happened to me in adulthood, but Vyvanse cleared it up for me (for as long as it’s active).
> significant economic coercision meets my definition of force.

Ok, but I hope you apply that criterion to every situation, and not just vaccination.

I find it interesting to consider the Venn diagram of people who claim that vaccination was forced and people who claim that everything (else) that happens in the free market is voluntary.
TL;DR, your best option right now is the RTX 4090 with the budget picks being either a used RTX 3090 or a used RTX 3090 Ti.
I could be wrong, but it looks pretty reasonable to me assuming fulltime study. Obviously, I'll scale how much time I spend on each topic based on what interests me, what I find difficult and how much theory vs practice I want at the time. Too much time coding and I might never get through all the content. Too much theory (lectures) and I'll lose motivation, and stop remembering the lessons as well.

I haven't asked for specific lessons from chatgpt. But there's fantastic material about most of this stuff online. Pick just about any of those bullet points in the lesson plan and there's a ton of great videos on youtube, and courses on coursera and friends if I want to go deeper. And I'm sure I'll be asking questions to chatgpt as I go as well. And, maybe, ask for more detailed lesson plans and suggestions on example problems to code up.

With chatgpt as a personalized tutor and youtube & coursera for lectures, its astounding how easy it is to learn stuff like this now.
I approach the tails as being open to it (a null hypothesis) until data and experimentation can reject -- within reason, as snake oil sales happen.
The consideration here is the exchange of personal information for services, as covered by the ToS. The belief that money is the only acceptable form of consideration is foolish and not realistic.

Just because you don't exchange money doesn't mean nothing of value is being exchanged. Netlify does owe people certain things for that exchange. "Nothing" is absolutely and factually false.
There is a difference between traditional colonies that were exploited for resources and some of their wealth was stolen and those like the US where the natives were outright exterminated and all the wealth stolen outright.

A world of difference between say the philippines or india and 'settler colonies' of the US, Canada, etc.

When people talk europeans exploiting their colonies, most are talking about traditional colonies, not settler colonies which are ultimately european nations themselves.
I'm quite aware of your advice regarding using `` against table. However, I'm talking about using `` against subqueries and CTEs where the pieces of the table have already been extracted.
I also found it odd looking through the whole piece waiting for an example only to reach the end with no idea what these daydreams actually are?
Sure, I see where you're coming from, and much corporate software has traditionally worked in this quasi-consensual hostile-default kind of way. But the specific terms used in that passage are highly indicative of this being intended as implementation of remote attestation for the web.

Furthermore, even if the "key facts" it reports don't initially include results of hardware remote attestation, it's entirely foreseeable that over time these will be added.
Yes. Wasn't Google also one the main forces behind PWAs? Google also introduced so many new web APIs (even WebUSB!) in an attempt to make web apps competitive with native apps and their native APIs.

To resolve this conundrum, Google as a whole cannot be said to be "for" or "against" the open web. Instead, Google's infamous internal infighting means that you can only say some parts of Google are for the open web, others are against, and sometimes one has an upper hand.
The "death of democracy" criticism is strange because the functions of judicial review, enshrined civil rights, and (where applicable) a written constitution exist for the purpose of making a country less democratic. In an absolute democracy the people can change any rule they want whenever they want.

If there is a criticism of the UK, New Zealand, and now (if this additional law were to pass) Israel, it would be that they're overly democratic. Though based on what I've read the current Israeli Supreme Court does go too far in the other direction since it has no written constitution to work from and is basically winging it.

At the risk of going off topic I do find it weird that the Americans who are terribly worried about the Israeli Supreme Court being made more accountable to the people are mostly the same Americans determined to do something similar to the American one (and the U.S. Senate).
Say that to the railroad workers.
I think what can be confusing to people who receive this advice at a time when they are already searching for a job, is that this is potentially a bit too late. If you publish something once or twice a year (like you suggest in the post) it all adds up and in a few years you have a body of work to present. If you're applying for a job next week there's not much you can do in this one week (although I've seen some exceptions to that too, where people did something cool and heroic in a few days to draw attention to what they have to offer before or while going for a job).
The TOS doesn't say anything about that
https://twitter.com/en/tos

> We may suspend or terminate your account or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any or no reason
My problem with this is that it looks too similar to a CPU heat/component map.

And, frankly, the actual layout in treemaps is basically arbitrary. Indeed many early "disk utilization" charts that look a lot like treemaps were entirely based on physical location on the disk. As such, the logical layout was not on display, and you were only able to see the physical layout. Which was usually important, as you could see if there were obviously bad sectors or if fragmentation was out of hand.

That is, the very concept of "neighbor" that treemaps show is completely logical in nature, and doesn't really indicate any physical neighboring relationship at all. I suspect that is why I'm not a huge fan of them.