skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As I suggested already: whether the Japanese believed them or took it seriously is moot. Giving them the opportunity to surrender in response to the bomb helps shift moral blame onto them.

Whether the Allies cared much or not is also moot in terms of what they should've done, morally speaking. Clearly my opinion is they didn't care enough. Clearly I find the firebombings morally disgraceful as well. Clearly, at least some people involved in the decision cared a little, as several people did lobby for a demonstration. The US also was known to airdrop pamphlets encouraging civilian evacuation of cities; civilians weren't a total non-concern.

It's not anything like North Korea threatening the US with a space laser. For a multitude of reasons: US spy capability means they would know well in advance the details of any North Korean space laser. North Korea isn't an alliance of the most powerful nations in the world with leading scientific and military capability. And if North Korea did indeed demonstrate a space laser that could obliterate a city in a fraction of a second, you'd better believe the US would stand up and take notice, for that matter.

Moreover, at the time an atomic bomb wasn't science fiction. Everyone at that point had known that an atomic bomb was possible for decades; both the Germans and the Japanese were trying to develop one. Given that, if the Americans said, "we've succeeded in developing one and intend to use it to destroy your cities unless you surrender", along with a demonstration of in action, it wouldn't be unthinkable that the Japanese would take it seriously - nor would it be particularly different from the Potsdam Declaration, which demanded surrender lest they face "utter destruction" without any specifics, which the Allies did indeed think was worth saying.

Delivering a reel of film would have been straightforward; even in total war all communication channels aren't cut off. If you want to do a real-world demonstration that can be observed, find a place to detonate it where it will be observed but will do minimal damage. The Manhattan Project involved solving many, many problems; this is just another one, and a relatively small one at that. When confronted with a problem, you figure it out.
Yes it is. But the fragment support and focus on accessibility is something that was never cleanly solvable with these tools as far as I know.
Duckbook looks promising. I like the clean and neat design! I will share it with my colleagues.

I can take away your fear. The core of Tiptap will always be free and open source. We will do maintenance and improvement, but eventually we have to generate revenue to put Tiptap on a sustainable path. A few weeks ago, the work at our digital agency was funding Tiptap, and it has always been a challenge to balance these two branches.

We are trying to find a good balance between the open source part that a lot of people love and our paid services that give your project your advanced features.

We always think about our pricing model, as we literally do today! Feedback is always welcome to adjust the fine line between our open source and business parts.
NileRed is youtube gold. It's one of very few channels that I follow and learn from.
When I use the datalist element with a text input, Chrome shows an arrow on the right and the list drops down when you focus the input. Firefox, however, shows neither until you start typing, at which point it suggests just those items that match your input. So there's no way to see the full list of options.

I think Chrome's behavior is correct here, but the larger point is that precisely because these are native elements, when they don't work there's nothing you can do. So your only option is to reimplement them from scratch.
The best option to invest in and do business in. If you want to make a deal, and are interested in consistent rule of law, and enforceability of the contracts and juridical outcomes, then you have an interest in doing it in the US.

This is in the context of the USD maintaining its relative value.
SHAKEN/STIR are implemented but the providers have given no tools to the end users to actually do anything actionable with it. Heck, they haven't even exposed it unless you are a megacorp.

The telcos might be a common carrier, but as the end user I sure as shit should be able to block calls originating from providers I see abuse from constantly. I'm looking RIGHT AT YOU, TxtNow.
AI Has Finally Become Transformative
That's why the FCC is there isn't it? I don't see how this leads to telcos making that choice on their own
Don’t forget: cutesy!
You don't need to be rich or have any strong technical knowledge. Setting up and running your own website is cheap and easy, and even if you don't want to do that, there are plenty of others who provide fora to you.
Don't see what is incorrect. What you're talking about is taking advantage of a feature mostly unique to Linux (memory overcommit, not supported on Windows or most other OSs) to construct a vector whose capacity is some really large value so as to never need to perform a reallocation for a given data set.

In practice it is very common for C++ developers to preallocate a region of memory upfront that is large enough to handle their dataset without having to go to such an extreme and non-portable length.

None of this contradicts the CS101 explanation, preallocating memory is entirely consistent with the fundamental understanding of how dynamic arrays work.
I don't understand the netizens of HN sometimes. Can someone explain to me what is going on in their mind?

On the one hand, they complain constantly about this or that centralized service that they are throughly dependent on, and admit to being terrified of that service doing something "unaligned" with their interests. A few days ago, it was Stripe, before that it was Twitter, Reddit, now it's Apple, Google, etc. They complain and throw their hands up in despair, and Cory Doctorow even recently coined the word "enshittification" showing that this will always happen to for-profit platfoms. And Google Chrome's new client attestation API has everyone freaking out.

On the other hand, a lot of them gang up en masse on any decentralized and open alternative, especially Web3-related, that actually solves the problem technologically. They fight tooth and nail arguing that it isn't popular yet, and never should become. Because only centralized, government-regulated platforms that had years to become entrenched, are good, the rest is bad and should not belong on HN.

So what is the alternative?

Also this same group of people, seemingly, is totally nonchalant about the prospects of AI destroying human civilization, despite its own creators consistently giving that a 10-20% chance. They say that you shouldn't be worried so much. I just don't get this crowd, honestly. It seems like insanity.

PS: It's not all people on HN, just the most activist and vocal ones, and the ones with the silent downvote button trigger finger with massive hyperthrophy from constant use.
> It makes no sense why such ephemeral concepts should somehow lead to better investments.

Each component alone makes sense, if interpreted in a way that is consistent with shareholder capitalism.

1. Environmental. Interpreted in terms of shareholder capitalism, Environmental might mean something like "how well does this company work as a hedge against increasingly likely tail risks, and how resilient will it be to policy changes should those increasingly common tail risks result in secular or policy shifts".

E.g., a re-insurance company that is well-positioned WRT coastal flooding risk but which runs all of its offices on artisanal coal-fired powerplants -- that are a cheap and easy to replace with solar if and when needed -- should have a higher "Environmental" score than a "net zero" re-insurance company that is highly exposed to coastal flooding risk.

2. Social. Interpreted in terms of shareholder capitalism, Social should mean that middle management is not eg over-paying for labor from the Good Old Boys network instead of taking advantage of the cheapest available labor that meets quality requirements.

3. Governance. Interpreted in terms of shareholder capitalism, Governance might mean that you don't give a single founder or board member the ability to over-ride the preferences of the majority holders of equity. Also things like decisions being transparent to shareholders and so on.

The joke isn't ESG per se. The joke is that ESG as implemented makes the completely idiotic assumption that shareholder capitalism can do anything at all to solve political fissures or account for externalized costs.
Biden should have come out as the opposite of angry at the rating change.
https://archive.is/xrXKT

subtitle: "After a decade’s worth of innovation, new models can change the world the way the internet did."

"A common failure scenario in earlier-generation AI startups (which I call the AI mediocrity spiral) highlights a few major factors at play.

In order for a startup’s AI-based application to have sufficient accuracy early on, the company hires humans to perform the function it hopes the AI will automate over time. Often, this is part of an escalation path where a first cut of the AI will handle the most common use cases, and humans manage the long tail of less-common ones.

Early investors tend to be more focused on growth than on margins. To raise capital and keep the board happy, the company continues to hire people rather than invest in the automation—which proves tricky anyway because of the aforementioned complications. By the time the company is ready for growth-level investment, it has already built an entire organization around hiring humans in the loop, and it’s too difficult to unwind. The result is a business that shows relatively high initial growth, but maintains a low margin and, over time, becomes difficult to scale.

Fortunately, this doesn’t seem to be the case with the current wave of generative AI applications such as ChatGPT and the foundation models such as GPT-4 that power them. While still very early, we’re already seeing use cases in large existing markets with orders-of-magnitude improvement in time, cost and performance. This has led to some of the fastest-growing technology and product adoption in the history of the software industry. We may be experiencing what is likely the start of a new supercycle on par with the advent of the microchip or the internet.

For one reason, accuracy isn’t that important for many applications. When a model is generating novel images or engaging in entertaining banter, being correct simply means appealing to or engaging the user. In other popular uses, like helping developers write code, the user is the human in the loop—iterating and providing the feedback to improve the generated answers."
Thanks this is a nice way of saying what the other poster said :)

I agree, ESG is just a bunch of numbers but if we can't agree on what the right output is then it's political in nature. I wonder if society has a bigger issue with disagreements about the E and S rather than the G, maybe not?
It’s relevant to the claim that cops are taking more stuff than burglars. Most of the stuff the cops are taking is crime proceeds!
For those of you who have used Jitsi, BigBlueButton or others in production, curious about a few things:

1. What is the largest number of users they can handle in one meeting
2. How is the text chat experience?
3. Do you have a good experience with their mobile app versions? Is switching between desktop and mobile seamless?
For seizures of sums of cash as little as $100 (mentioned in the article), I very much doubt that to be true.

> In practice, however, civil forfeiture is often wielded against regular people who aren’t doing anything wrong. In many states the typical cash forfeiture amount is in the hundreds of dollars — $423 in Michigan, or $369 in Pennsylvania, according to the latest data from the Institute for Justice, a law firm that represents forfeiture victims and tracks the practice nationwide. In many cities police departments have been known to make seizures of less than $100 on the flimsiest pretenses, typically concentrated in the poorest neighborhoods.

The usage of 'typical' sounds like they mean 'average', for such precise numbers.
The one interesting thing I should note is that synthesis of the copper phosphide intermediate tends to result in a copper deficient product, so I wonder if the presence of lattice defects in this might have an effect on where the copper atoms intercalate in the lattice.
> Forget the movies you lose, if your AppleID is disabled

How does Movies Anywhere fit in here? If I buy a movie at one of {Apple, Amazon, Google, Xfinity, Microsoft, Vudu, DirecTV, Verizon} that is from a studio that participates in Movies Anywhere and then lose or close my account at the place I bought the movie, does it remain on Movies Anywhere for me?
But there are laws about that: you authorize tip with your signature, if they charge you more than you authorized, they can get in trouble. Don't see the issue here.
> However, most of the stuff they seize really is crime-related.

Torture might be an effective way to get most criminals to confess and getting a slam dunk conviction when going to trial where a jury may mistakenly exonerate them, but that doesn't mean that it's the _right_ or even _moral_ way to do so.

Further, ask yourself this - what is a crime? Answer - it's whatever the legislature says it is, and as a political body they are influenced by what the dominant group in power wants.
> The dangerous issue is that if a spam operator has 33% legit traffic, do you kill the spam operator and the good traffic with it, or what?

You are implying that "you" means the telco or FCC decides on behalf of "everyone." That is not the correct viewpoint. If the telcos are the common carrier, they dont get to decide. I am the customer; I get to decide. Problem solved. No additional regulation or debate is needed. This isn't hard.
> The cameras would be installed in public places where people have no expectation of privacy...

Does this mean they will make all the data freely accessible by the public? If not, why not?
There should be a distinction between FOSS and OSS. Nobody is trying to infringe on your FOSS rights. But some may argue the term OSS has changed to not strictly mean FOSS. The term "open source" at face value only implies "source available" until you read the license.

Ask 1,000 developers and I'd bet real money the majority would say projects under BSL and other non-"OSI approved" licenses are "open source." Not FOSS, but OSS.
The point as I see it is that a job's requirements are what an employer wants the employee to do.

All of these argument about WFH seem to assume a job's real requirements should be something different.

A good example is people talk about companies wanting in person work to drive their real-estate value, ect.

The obvious answer is "OK, so thats the job they are paying you for"
Founder conceit made manifest through a culture of overwrought branding & marketing? Workforce infantalization? Former summer camp coordinators turned HR executives?
we get a lot of volume and this helps us quickly identify people that are a) strongly motivated and b) strong candidates
I got my first job at IBM in 1994. We definitely got called us IBMers at that time, although it was typically used informally, not in layoff notifications.
Do you mean screenshots on the front page of the demo site, to explain the behavior more clearly?
What if you lose your phone? In my country banks only allow you to use one phone for mobile authorization, so you can't even have a backup phone. I really wish 3DSecure was optional so I can turn it of when going to foreign vacation.
IANAL, and I don't know how this question relates to the bit you quoted, but in this incredibly vague hypothetical situation, there's probably a contract in place and breach of contract is usually handled in civil court. It could be criminal and prosecuted by the state if any fraud has taken place. That would depend on details not given though.
Global temperature change 1850-2023
> There's not much middle ground between "try to have some fun at work because there's no reason not to" and "don't do something someone might take issue with".

There’s a whole Earth between no fun and clown fiesta.
I would love to try it on advanced if you get time to do that. I honestly think I'd use it a lot. If adding it to the UI takes time I'd be absolutely happy with a URL query parameter prettypolly.app?level=advanced if that's easier.
You don't get to 394 billion in revenue by being nice
> The vast majority of Muslims will not kill you for this picture

I encourage you to look up pew polling data on this. While the majority probably wouldn't be willing to physically kill you themselves they absolutely are in favor of you being executed.
Yes the warnings have been there all along not a surprise its happening
I think you may be confusing the freely available Jitsi service with what OP is asking about: self-hosting a Jitsi server and using that.
"The sample they synthesized is reported to have much higher purity than the original Korean team of LKK."

Maybe that's the reason they needed a lower temperature?
Oh my god, some of these tracks actually SLAP.

Like for real.

The last bastion of human creativity is about to be defeated.
They're not blocking hn, they're blocking users who have visited hn. I had been following their project and I had not seen any disparaging comments on hn, nor had I joined any discussion. After finding the comments in question, at least the ones that hadn't been moderated away, they seemed pretty tame... unless there were worse that I couldn't find?

In any case, consider that they've now turned a lot of conversation from being about their project to being about their blocking and they've directed a whole bunch of eyes away from their work to the comments they didn't like. Of course they're free to do so but it seems fairly counterproductive.
How much should the cops take from you before you're allowed to complain about the fact that they didn't set it aside as evidence or property with you upon arrest and instead fed it into their general fund?
how are you able to make this claim?

"Although there are accessible statistics of seizures at the federal level, it often happens that the totals of forfeitures from both criminals and innocent owners are combined; for example, one report was that in 2010, government seized $2.5 billion in assets from criminals and innocent owners by forfeiture methods,[16] and the totals of assets seized incorrectly from innocent owners was not separated statistically. Further, since the United States is a federal republic with governments at both the national and state level, there are civil forfeiture seizures at the state level, which are not tracked and recorded in any central database,[12] which make it difficult to make assessments, since state laws and procedures vary widely."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...
No window snapping.
Also the deductions arbitrarily denied to individuals. Use a car to drive to your W2 job? That's "commuting" and thus not tax deductible, despite it being utterly required for earning that money.
Interesting! How do you get my data into your system to train the AI?
The linked video mentions something about "outer space islands" in the subtitles. Is that just bad auto-translation or did they seriously discover something amazing?
Eh, Congress, The Executive, and the Judiciary are all in the same government. All are ultimately accountable to the will of the people (who will, if pushed hard enough, hang them all - or find someone willing to do it for them).

Letting folks be convinced otherwise is exactly how we got in this situation.

Everyone who has worked in a large corp has experienced finance refusing to pay for something unless you jump through some specific hoop.

Many have experience with budgets being curtailed (despite earlier promises), bosses having to kiss up to the finance folks to get PO’s paid, etc.

And dealing with executive infighting, or having to appease investors or shareholders, etc.

The issue we’ve got is folks have been convinced that this isn’t us trying to all work together and find a compromise we can all agree on (even if we’re not happy with it), but rather an us vs them zero sum game of annihilation. And the latter is an extremely dangerous mindset to be in, but beneficial to specific types of predators.

If a companies shareholders were somehow convinced that the CFO should just not pay due bills or payroll unless the CEO caved on his pet project, we’d see the same thing. Except outside forces would intervene pretty quickly, and you’d have to be insanely dumb as a shareholder to think it was going to end any other way.

The US has nukes and the most effective military in the world (near as anyone can tell), ain’t no one want to get involved in that…. Except folks who already are our enemies, anyway.
Such as?

Keep in mind you can't make anyone uncomfortable, because uncomfortable people come to internet forums and talk about being uncomfortable.

People vary a lot in what they accept. There may be plenty of room for you, but for everyone? I wish you luck.
> if a spam operator has 33% legit traffic, do you kill the spam operator and the good traffic with it, or what?

Yes, we should with these long-time, serial offenders. Having legit traffic is just a fig leaf cover for them anyway. Any legit reseller clueless or negligent enough to accidentally stumble into business with these guys will switch providers as soon as their customer's calls stop connecting.

Also, no real telecom providers are routing meaningful amounts of traffic through these shady operations. Any legit traffic on their networks is mostly coming from fly-by-night, bottom-feeding telecom resellers in the same countries the spam calls originate from. Any retail customers of those resellers are probably paying ripoff prices for unreliable per-day or per-call service anyway. It's not people with normal pre-paid monthly service from any legit telco you've ever heard of.
Association between nose picking&Covid incidence in hospital health care workers
The whole blu-ray.com website is pretty much ads. But I don't mind and I often visit the site to see what movies has been released and read the review to see if it's worth watching (production wise). Goodreads also is ads, because the description is written to appeal to you. I don't want to see blu-ray ads when I'm shopping for clothes, and I don't want to see books ads when I'm buying electronic gears (unless the book is about the gears). So yeah, ads can be targeted. It's just that companies now feel entitled to your attention 24/7 that the whole adtech spac is what it is now.
It’s a content-driven website with user submissions. They don’t even claim copyright or ownership on the content, which is the actual thing that makes up the unique value.

Open source what, exactly? You point makes literally zero sense
To extrapolate from my own company and the orders we got from the suits, it basically boils down to them saying "Been hearing about this fancy Chat AI thing, can you whip up something like that quick so we can put out a press release saying $COMPANY is doing AI as well?".

Most corpos couldn't give a rat's ass about it, it's just the fancy new toy on the block that's saturating everyone's newsfeeds so they have to jump on it lest they be left in the dust by the competition who are doing the exact same shit, aka calling the "Open"AI APIs and pretending they're doing something groundbreaking.

We got interrupted mid-sprint, mid-epic to make some shitty wrapper around their APIs. I suspect the overwhelming majority of companies with fancy new "AI" features are doing the exact same shit