skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’ve never had a card stolen where either of those would have helped - they’re stopgaps trying to avoid upgrading the banking system to use public-key encryption with reuse protection.

A couple of times, merchants with my card on file were compromised. The thief could make charges because the merchant had to be able to as well. What would have stopped that would have been having a way to restrict a charge to a particular merchant so the attacker couldn’t have been able to get the money out.

Once, my supermarket had skimmers. A code wouldn’t have been effective unless you were very good at spotting where the thieves planted cameras, too. An active MFA prompt would help against attacks at a substantially later time but it’d have to include the merchant name in an unspoofable form to prevent real-time attacks so I wouldn’t be asked to approve charges from SAFEWAY_, and that old-fashioned style of MFA is painful: it’d always make checkout slower and you’d have some fraction of people who don’t have phones with them or just ran out of battery.

What completely solved this problem for me was the modern tap systems (ApplePay). It requires more smarts on the client but means that I have to approve each transaction and the value the card reader gets can’t be used anywhere else.
Eh, Hare expects you to write and rewrite collections like hashmaps yourself. It just looks like a less flexibe and less useful Zig.
you might want to let Instagram or Github know those are the three choices
I was agreeing with you about the no confidence vote. I was just trying to underline the point, that voters have no confidence in the choices.
Some products are so useless they wouln't sell without marketing. So it's not pointless in those cases.
Eric’s blog is a great read on how to create the uncensored models - link to the original blog here: https://erichartford.com/uncensored-models
I am using Styled Components as well in my current job and like it a lot.

Maybe my post didn't make this clear, but that's what I meant when I said it solves the same problem for me.

No dead styles, no specificity wars, no naming worries.

Edit: I see, I wrote "try to solve" in contrast to "solve". That was unintentional and thus not what I wanted to say.
$5 million raised for hosting? I honestly fail to understand the ways of VC despite a decade of trying to understand them.
There seems to be a lot of confusion about what Kalman filters are for in this thread. Perhaps that’s what happens when you seek a non-mathematical introduction to a mathematical topic but nevertheless I’m going to try and clear this up.

Specifically, the Kalman filter is a recursive way to estimate the state of a dynamical system. That is, specifically, the thing you want to estimate varies is a function of time. It doesn’t matter if that thing is the position and momentum of a robot or a stock price. What does matter are the following:

1. The dynamics are linear with additive Gaussian noise. That is, the next state is a linear function of the current state plus a sample from a Gaussian distribution. Optionally, if your system is controlled (i.e., there is a variable at each moment in time you can set exactly or at least with very high accuracy), the dynamics can include a linear function of that term as well.

2. The sensor feeding you data at each time step is a linear function of the state plus a second Gaussian noise variable independent of the first.

3. You know the dynamics and sensor specification. That is, you know the matrices specifying the linear functions as well as the mean and covariances of the noise models. For a mechanical system, this knowledge could be acquired using some combination of physics, controlled experimentation in a lab, reading data sheets, and good old fashioned tuning. For other systems, you apply a similarly appropriate methodology or guess.

4. The initial distribution of your state when you start running the filter is Gaussian and you know it’s mean and covariance (if you don’t know those, you can guess because given the filter runs for a long enough time they become irrelevant)

The Kalman filter takes in the parameters of the model described in (3) and gives you a new linear dynamical system that incorporates a new measurement at each time step and outputs the distribution of the current state. Since we assumed everything is linear and Gaussian, this will be a Gaussian distribution.

From a Bayesian perspective, the state estimate is the posterior distribution given your sensor data, model, and initial condition. From a frequentist / decision theory perspective, you get the least squares estimate of the state subject to the constraints imposed by your dynamics.

If your dynamics and sensor are not linear, you either need to linearize them, which produces the “extended Kalman filter” that gives you a “local” estimate of the state or you need another method. A common choice is a particle filter.

If your model is garbage, then model based methods like the Kalman filter will give you garbage. If your sensor is garbage (someone mentioned the case where it outputs a fixed number), the Kalman filter will just propagate your uncertainty about the initial condition through the dynamics.
I like how the sci-fi authors have spent time thinking about what an advanced AI could do, yet those building the AI have not taken a moment's pause to consider what they are doing
I don't know where you work, but at my company, I'm struggling to get people to use anything but Python.
Crank is pretty similar to both A Dark Room and paperclips in terms of feel, also not mobile friendly at all sadly: https://faedine.com/games/crank/b39/
Does it work with on-prem Jira?
Some may watch this clip for the first time and see an angry man, but he had a beautiful soul
It's not open source.

Many people find it easier (or think it's easier) to generate a revenue stream from selling closed source software than from selling open source software, so they decide to make their software closed source.

We need to gatekeep terms for them to retain their meaning. We can't just accept it when tech companies try to change the meaning of "open source" to mean "we published the source code so you can read it". The term source-available exists, and it means something different from open source. If these people announced that they're making their software source-available, everyone would be happy, but they're not.
As recently as 2018, Voyager 2 provided a very interesting bit of data in the form of leaving the heliosphere[1], indicating the spacecraft has officially left the neighborhood.

[1] https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/12670
https://archive.is/8KIC5
Do you not have insurance or do you just prefer to pay the cash price where possible? It’s interesting that you might be voluntarily uninsured despite having 3 kids. The system is such that your kids’ health is a bargaining chip to employers. I know people who have stayed at jobs just for the health insurance, and then there are the H1-B folk who are effectively indentured (“yeah we’re paying you $20k below market rate but we are sponsoring you so… try to be a little more grateful”)
For one person stack, you won't have to worry about hiring devs specialized in your tech. That makes Elixir/Phoenix even more attractive.

One caveat, if your backend will be integrating with many external services, in other languages with larger active communities you may find API clients/wrappers that just work. In your Phoenix app, it will be more likely respective packages won't have solid maintenance so expect having to patch things by yourself or reinvent from scratch.
Probably because, as the replies have shown, they have published the things you're asking for.
Made me think of "C compiler used as bootloader, that eats source code for Linux kernel while booting, and boots that".

Ah, still on the net:

https://bellard.org/tcc/tccboot.html

Uses TinyCC in place of a bootloader. Of course that would require other software like a shell / BusyBox or similar besides the kernel. But after booting on-the-fly-compiled-Linux that seems like a minor issue.

Project is from 2004. Surely doing this with source code for current(ish) Linux kernels would be more involved? Especially those including Rust code. :-)

Would be fun to have a more up to date something of the above. Anyone?
Out of curiosity - what are you actually doing on these walks? You're talking outloud to yourself and then editing later or what?
This is Spotify's route to profitability - the Netflix model of generating their own "content" (/music), and not having to pay the labels. Premium plans for us music nerds who want a human at the other end, regular plans for plebs who just want to fill the silence with something agreeable.
David's random thoughts: for some reason I pictured Wile-e-coyote not handling numerical instability correctly and getting, as per usual, blown up.
This seems to distort the issue a little bit.

If you purchase the music, you have a (sometimes explicit, sometimes implicit) license to do certain things with the music, entirely independent of any concept of "fair use".

The question is not "is training part of fair use?" but "is training part of, implicitly or explicitly, the rights I already have after purchase?"

Given that "training" can be done by simple playing the music in the presence of a computer with its microphone turned on, it's not clear how this plays out legally.
Where is X's standing to sue CCDH?

If CCDH obtained login info for a Brandwatch account that's an issue between CCDH, Brandwatch, and that account owner.

Is Brandwatch suing CCDH? If not, why not?

Is X suing Brandwatch? If not, why not?
Next to nothing related to scientific research is tracked in scopus and web of science anyway, so your point is moot.
I can't say I agree. The answer to debilitating addiction isn't to make someone feel even worse about it (to the extent they don't already feel terrible). It's to provide meaningful support to get out of addiction and back to the life the person wishes they could have. Shame is fatal to dignity and self-acceptance. It has no place in public health.
That's a pretty good question. Ideally you're measuring "paid us money" as conversion, and that was the case for the anecdote I had in mind in the above post: we had a checkout screen with a decent price tag at the end of the flow that we could measure against. We could track the impact of changes throughout that funnel on the bottom line.

But I have seen other decisions made based on proxies to "paid us money." Eg we find that X% people who perform action Y wind up paying us money, and for really long funnels it's easier to get statistical significance for action Y than for "paid us money." And so we make some change, find that it increases the rate at which people do action Y, and declare victory. We try to keep in mind potential downstream impacts (like loss of trust), but it's hard to argue a vague, potential downside against a solid, measured number sitting in a google doc in front of you. I suspect the phenomenon you call out is somewhat common.
In my headspace, Sales & Marketing are grouped together. I realize they are distinct functions, but still they feel thematically in the same area. Perhaps the author is in a similar headspace.
Well gee then, why don't explanations of wireless power use this analogy/fact ? I guess if I knew, I'd be running a jargon-infested tech reporting empire.
As someone not in those fields I largely agree
Why did you crawl through this persons post history? Why do you think his opinion should result in a ban? What does any of this have to do with what’s being discussed here?

Seems to me like maybe you should be banned. You’re the only one not adding anything to the conversation and instead trying to instigate a flame war. You’d be happier circle jerking on Reddit.
I disagree, leaving up stuff like that just encourages more of it, and it shows how little HN cares about making a space that trans people can be comfortable contributing to. In fact, originally my comment was downvoted quite a bit too.

Starting about 3 pages in, there's on average some transphobia on every page of comments (find for 'trans', it turns out I've only ever said that on this site in response to transphobia hah). Not as extreme, but it becomes exhausting having to constantly defend my rights with very little help from the community at large, or dang. I've had to take a hiatus more than once because I realized I was getting bitter about the tech community, when it's really just HN.

I really do want to provide helpful and interesting comments where I can, and be apart of this community. I love parts of it so much. But as it is today, I completely understand Asahi's opinion of HN. I have to constantly choose my words very carefully for fear of angering the right-wing contingent on this site, with often no support (the most recent comment is an outlier).
sometimes the war is lost even before the battle begins. During grad school, I wrote a whole bunch of web apps entirely in R using Shiny. It was clunky as hell, but yeah, it worked. I went looking for what's up with Shiny these days and found this - https://shiny.posit.co/

So yeah, full on pivot into python. pip install shiny. Alright!

"No web development skills required. Develop web apps entirely in R I mean Python"...yeah that's not happening.
Tiny radios? You might not care, but back in the day it was the bees knees.

It's always shocking to me how software centric this site is. Everyone here thinks the world revolves around software and electrical engineering didn't exist before, just like it doesn't exist now ;)

Transistor was pretty quickly useful, I think. Integrated circuits took quite a while to catch on. Integrated circuits were available for some time before microprocessors. Microprocessors were arguable available for a long time before they became revolutionary to the average joe.

You could argue that the transistor was a bigger deal than the move to ICs & Microprocessors. You better believe everyone knew how great they were when they got their hands on a radio... it's an iconic moment in technical history.
I don't think the comment is crazy, and I'm going to afford you the grace you didn't afford me in the reading of your comment. My comment was not about the significance of being able to marry or whether or not same-sex marriage was a huge milestone. My comment was simply about the public sentiment around same-sex relationships and that 2013 wasn't some bigoted era where people only changed their mind because of a single supreme court decision.

Reading the past by todays standards are why social progressives are starting to lose ground. They just can't accept their win.
They're talking about exposing it over IPC, not through linking.
New Relic got bought by the same PE house they warned customers of a competitor
When I see stuff like this I think immediately of like, the Four Pests Campaign, kudzu in the US south, Australian erosion caused by rabbits etc. We can't even reliably predict or manage the consequences of our actions across a single ecosystem. Mind boggling to me that we still however have high confidence in our ability to.
A very good article on why Simonyi probably wasn't the one:
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/05/11/making-wrong-code-...

my verdict is that Simonyi didn't communicate the idea - good otherwise - well enough
Funny to post an anti-marketing rant with a link to youtube, a site full of marketing. Here's an invidious link instead: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=tHEOGrkhDp0
Yes. Installation instructions on the front of the repo, then click on the model readme for sample getting started code (10 lines of python and you get output.)
If you have first-hand knowledge of the FDA’s torpor, get in touch
It's an amazingly fun book.
And that's the only "energy system", that I can think of, that is also part of a weapon.
No, those are just the examples I used to make the point that in some cases those discoveries are real and do transform our world. It would be pointless to show that there are also cases where that wasn't true because it is boringly obvious. Speculation, by nature will sometimes be wrong. But sometimes it will be on the money and the people that were stuck in default skepticism until there is ironclad proof are simply resorting to unfounded speculation themselves, some proof is better than none, and we seem to have at least some proof. Science is always going to be at risk of its theories and purported discoveries not panning out, whether it is bicycle mechanics, highly educated people or Einstein himself. And in all of those cases there were things they said or did that didn't work out. And in all of those cases they did amazing stuff that transformed our world as well. I for one would rather be cheerleading them then to be cheerleading the skeptics, because if we all were that skeptical we'd still be living in caves and hitting each other over the head with clubs for scraps of meat.

Progress, and working on progress is inherently risky. But by the time actual progress seems to have arrived speculation on how true it is and what the impact will be if it is true is perfectly valid and those that would rather engage in shouting everything down are technically off topic and I personally find it annoying. Not quite as annoying as crank science but still.

On that subject: there is still a non-zero chance this is a hoax but that chance is rapidly diminishing, there is a very large chance that this whole discovery will not be immediately practical and that it will still take a ton of work and funding to unlock its true potential. The skeptic would rather not spend that money and would rather avoid the work, it's a cop-out, and a cheap and easy one at that, and it's exactly why the skeptics have the better track record: progress is hard. But not impossible so let's see what comes out but let's not give up hope that progress is still possible, especially not when it seems that progress is being made.

My initial skepticism was high (this isn't the first room temperature superconductor claim), then as I read the paper and checked some stuff my conclusion was that this could be the real thing but the numbers are such that it isn't a practical superconductor just yet. That confidence has since gone up a bit but I still would not bet that this material as discovered right now has huge industrial applications. But if it is true then I am somewhat optimistic that it opens the door to lots of new research and that research may well pay off (or not, time will tell).
Is this meant to make us sympathize with Twitter? Since when does anybody care about TOS when it comes to publicly available data?
Spending your childhood soaking your brain in dopamine as you are drip fed risk free game achievements is unlikely to build as much resilience as pre-internet childhood.
Glad to see you active here in the comments. Apologies if my comment comes off harshly, my intent is not to tear you down. I think there is a lot of gray space when it comes to using LLMs for generating code. Your usage here is certainly interesting, and I appreciate the additional context and discussion you’ve been providing.
The heaviest animal ever may be this ancient whale found in the Peruvian desert
Maybe it'll look like the "They're taking the hobits to Isengard" video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKP16d_WdZM
I did not downvote, but I suspect two things:

1. Lack of research. You made it sound like the research was questionable, when it took me 30 seconds to find the publication and the methodology laid out within it. That means you spread wrong information. Even of that was unintentional, don't you think posts with wrong information should be downvoted?

2. The topic itself is not rocket science. Many people on here are also on twitter and have their own anecdotal data on such shifts happening. So by you being overly critical you making it sound as if this was some outlandish claim (Einstein was wrong), while it is pretty obvious to most (water is wet).
Red River Gorge is a gem for the rock climbing community. I frequented the area a few years back, there's plenty of places to dirtbag around outside of the tourist cabins. Hoping the continued development stays positive.
I am at a point in my career that aside from my current company, I haven’t done a traditional submit my resume and interview in years. Even this job kind of fell into my lap without me seeking it out.

My prior two jobs came from knowing someone who knew someone looking for my particular combination of experience and meeting them.

I’m not saying I’m a special snowflake. But I’ve previously been hired for more strategy/architect type positions where the CxO or director wanted someone who was vetted.
I think that the reason this kind of application isn’t popular is because they do not exist, it is that simple! It is impossible to create a reliable data analytic, it is really unpredictable how to better handle the data. Microsoft promised office365 with Copilot and look where we are right now.
> China emits 10 billion tons of CO2 annually, compared to the UK’s 358 million. That means whatever the UK does just matters very little to the overall problem of mitigating climate change.

I don’t think it follows from that that “the actual climate change problem isn’t getting people in the UK to use less“. China has 31 provinces, so if you look at China’s emissions by province, there will be quite a few that are at the level of CO2 emissions of the UK or below it. By your logic, that would mean the actual climate change problem isn’t getting people in those provinces to use less.

If so, who has to do something?

> It’s figuring out how to accommodate western standards of living in Asia and Africa without a massive increase in CO2 emissions.

If we can do that, we can cut the UK’s emissions, too.

I also think it’s not about ‘raising’ the world to what the west currently does, but about changing western standards of living. I think there’s substantial room for decreasing CO2 emissions without decreasing well-being (thought experiment: would people be less happy if the airplane hadn’t been invented? If we had run out of oil in 1980?)
One of the best ways to expand an incremental game’s gameplay is to gradually automate one layer, while introducing new mechanics in a higher layer. So one’s focus for optimization gradually shifts from older and better-understood mechanics to a higher level, where the gameplay is to manipulate the lower layer’s mechanics to make it run as quickly as a basic action did at the start.
> it does not rise to the level of overthrowing a liberal democracy in America on a lie.

In America or not in America, governments are either resistant enough to military or political coups or not, when they occur. There's nothing special about the paper in the US Constitution that changes human behavior.

I happen to think the lives wasted in Iraq FAR outweigh the reminder that Trump provided, reinforcing the waning belief that the US Government structures are still worth supporting.
The idea of working for NASA on a 50-year-old assembly language makes me salivate. What processor? Reportedly a custom-designed 18-bit CPU. So any ASM programmer hired for this would have no prior experience and would have to learn from scratch. Sounds like rollicking good fun. Wish I was there. Still miss my days of hand-coding the 6502.
Its a very good book... Wikipedia says this – which should make some of the people here become either more self aware or
critical of the book:

"The author contends that more than half of societal work is pointless, both large parts of some jobs and, as he describes, five types of entirely pointless jobs:

[...]

*duct tapers*, who temporarily fix problems that could be fixed permanently, *e.g., programmers repairing shoddy code*, airline desk staff who calm passengers whose bags do not arrive;"
Apps and white papers on tech topics too.
It's one more brick in the hype cycle wall next month it'll be something

Panem et circenses