skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"For all" but from their cock, I'm sorry, Code of Conduct:

> The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind

No porn and probably more

> Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or email address, without their explicit permission

No saying the president of the united states lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

> Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting

No t-shirts and jeans.

> distributing or hosting any adult content, including but not limited to, pornographic images or videos

No porn again

> content which may be illegal under German or Scottish law

No youtube-dl allowed!

> This list is not comprehensive, and we reserve the right to revoke any subdomain at any time

So basically if you piss off the CEO he might wake up one day and boot you off. Say hello cloudflare.
In the case of satellites in GEO that "eventually" is on the order of millions of years. For LEO it's a lot shorter obviously.
China at the time referred to the Republic of China, i.e. Taiwan. And the USSR's delegation to the UN was boycotting the UNSC entirely (and immediately began using their power to prevent any further UNSC resolutions regarding Korea being passed as soon as they stopped boycotting).
You mean, like, SBF's own tweets? https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1173351344159117312
> This idea that he's going to "be studied" just plays into his own paid for media created mythos.

It’s not as if people are saying he’s going to be studied because he’s fascinating. I don’t think he ever tried to cultivate the image that he’s idiotic bordering on the pathological, because that discrepancy seems to be study-worth.

It’s like on one side, there are Musk actions, some call them insane and idiotic, but they can be explained away, theoretically, and then there’s SBF where even the most adamant supporter would just stand there, open-mouthed.
It might interest you to keep in mind that you should care about a branch of government breaking its countries own laws and acting intentionally against the will of the senate, even openly and directly misleading them.

Such a thing is akin to a rogue government entity, it’s the stuff of Mission Impossible movies; though much more mundane and sleazy as people were shown to be stalking ex-lovers using the tech.

I won’t jibe with comments about how totalitarian regimes come about, though that’s certainly an issue- I would invite you to read the thought experiment of Roko’s Basilisk though, you should be warned that some people consider the awareness of this thought experiment to be akin to a virus[0].

Essentially, you don’t just trust this government and all it’s employees implicitly, you are basically trusting all future governments and government employees, and you are trusting them to only break the laws that suit you. I’m not sure what laws you think they should be beholden to in that case.

Law is not optional, it works or it should be changed, via the democratic process.

[0]: https://youtu.be/ut-zGHLAVLI
Radio has since the mid 1990 moved towards digital signals, and by now almost all conventional radio receivers do not covert electromagnetic waves into sound waves. They covert electromagnetic waves into a digital sound file, which then get copied into local memory and run inside a software program that plays the sound (and generally outputs meta data). It can also buffer sound if it wants to.

As a interesting side-note, Norway has stopped using FM radio in favor of digital radio, and Sweden is on route to do the same. The primary argument here on Sweden in favor of keeping FM radio is that older car models might still not be compatible with digital radio, and the FM radio could in theory be useful case of national emergency.
It sounds like you don't actually understand the contents of the law. It has nothing to do with "stolen content" as you put it. Just the act of Facebook linking to a news article without any information from the article (title, snippets, images) is enough. How is that theft in your mind?

I have no idea of where your reddit analogue is coming from.
They're talented at getting into power, and may be talented at any number of other things.

They're not always talented at the things we may want them to be, unfortunately. And that's true of both the ones I agree and disagree with.
> they could detail things like improving retention by ... subletting the space

nope, that's actually the root of the problem, nobody else wants to be in the office either so the commercial real-estate market is in slow-motion meltdown for the last 3 years. even if you fervently believe that WFH is the better path, you simply cannot exit your commercial real-estate investments right now without locking in big losses.

at the landlord level the game is to simply let the office space go vacant rather than write down the notional value of the property (which is going to be based on X years of rents, and if you lock in a lower rent value you just dropped the value of your investment). But at the tenant level if you want out, it's not like you can just find someone else to sublet your space either, because the building is full of unoccupied offices already. Nobody wants to sign a deal that realizes the losses that exist on paper.

So instead the move is to force everyone back to the office so it looks like there's value being generated from the property, as opposed to a white elephant standing empty, which is effectively what it is. And yeah, middle managers and CEOs have every incentive to push for people back in the office from their own ends too... the feeling of power/control and the facilitation of their own communication-focused work as opposed to the output-oriented work of the actual ICs.

--

Anecdotally, my current employer has had some weird communication mis-steps where my manager clumsily relayed some "we really want everyone to be at the all-hands this month, in-person if you can!" and it came off as more of a "more layoffs incoming" tone when actually the problem was more that this was boardroom politics around being seen to be using the expensive building we just bought a couple months before the pandemic started. And this is a company that is all-in on remote work already, we have people everywhere (I and another coworker are at least 4 hours from the closest satellite office) and we're nearshoring some junior roles etc. We will never get everyone into an office because that's not the strategy, but even we are not immune to the "we bought the building and can't exit" politics.

Last employer, same thing, but they are going all-in on forcing everyone back to office... despite having hired a bunch of people remote during covid for a project. Since the project crashed I guess they dropped all the contractors and are hiring from a bodyshop, and I guess maybe they're doing local hiring for that. But between IC turnover due to the project being a shitshow, and heads rolling in the team leads due to the project failure, and dropping all the people they hired on remote since COVID... I think they basically turned over the entire team that existed pre-covid minus like three people. So they are starting from (almost) scratch anyway.
If a 'particle' (I don't know a better word) finds itself near one of the top divertors, at the same point in the next orbit it will find itself near the bottom divertor. That is a product of the "mobius-like" shape, so although it isn't really a 'ribbon' and isn't really a mobius, it helps explain the concept concisely. I just don't know WHY that shape helps lol. Maybe it doesn't and it was just a practical design change like you said.

edit: changed language about the divertors.
Maybe, but it's a moot point, because there's no way to get from here to there. If the browser vendors want to add a standard, they will; and if they don't, they won't. On one or two prior occasions the W3C has proposed something that the browser makers didn't like, they unanimously told the W3C to go pound sand, and that was the end of it.
No. The US regularly defies and ignores the UN with no consequences. One example is that the US doesn't recognize the International Criminal Court.
Interesting. With a very strong reference for the experience of skateboarding, reading your sentence made me think about how hard it is to explain! I suppose when it’s going well, it feels like body/mind flow, when it’s going poorly it feels like physics :)
I wish we could stop it from lecturing me about how unsafe what I do for work is.

I am a SWE and I work close to the metal. ChatGPT is helpful, but it always says I shouldn’t do what I’m doing and I should use safer abstractions for my work. I write the low level abstractions, that is my job. Even if I ask it not to, it soon (over a few dozen messages) forgets.

My friend is a doctor and it’s the same story. He is always being told to see a qualified doctor about his questions. It just comes off as patronizing.

Sam Altman said a while ago that he believes the future of LLMs involves the user being able to customize them. I hope he hasn’t changed his mind. I definitely want a model I can make just give me straight answers without the social responsibility/legal disclaimer attached to each.

Come to think of it… what happened to legal disclaimers buried deep in the EULA? Why are they burned into nearly every answer LLMs (including Claude and Llama2) give us?
The smarter ones would find some way to reduce their cost on office spaces.
The sunk cost fallacy is that you should continue spending money on something you've already spent money on.

Make a bad expensive investment but give it up and move on? That's fine.

Make a bad expensive investment then keep pouring money into it because you've already spent so much and can't throw away all this money now? That's the sunk cost fallacy.
I don't know what to tell you other than I've seen vertical scaling hit its ceiling, several times. The OP lists "scale vertically first" as a given; to an extent, I agree with it, and the comment you're responding to is made with that as a base assumption.

There are sometimes diminishing returns to simple scaling; e.g., in my current job, each new disk we add adds 1/n disks' worth of capacity. Each scaling step happens quicker and quicker (assuming growth of the underlying system). Eventually, you hit the wall in the OP, in that you need design level changes, not just quick fixes.

The situation I mention in my comment was one of those: we'd about reached the limits of what was possible with the setup we had. We were hitting things such as bringing in new nodes was difficult: the time for the replica to replicate was getting too long, and Mongo, at the time, had some bug that caused like a ~30% chance that the replica would SIGSEGV and need to restart the replication from scratch. Operationally, it was a headache, and the split moved a lot of data out that made these cuts not so bad. (Cassandra did bring its own challenges, but the sum of the new state was that it was better than where we were.)

Consistency is something you must pay attention to. In our case, the old foreign key between the two systems was the user ID, and we had specific checks to ensure consistency of it.
That's not what troll means. Astroturfing as you said is much better.

They're going to be pushing for WEI/Attestation/Requiring easily doxxable accounts using this a bogeyman, aren't they?
But then you’d also need a world police who enforces that.
The letter to the FTC might do something, in a statistical sense, if they're already tracking the correspondence they're getting because this issue is in their purview. The other letters are a waste of paper and ink.
Elon Musk vibes. For example when he was shilling dogecoin, or bragging about not caring at all about the $420 SEC settlement. It's oddly fun to watch such exceptional narcissists, both when they rise and when they fall. They're so invested in their image.
> The right to free speech never means freedom from consequences of that speech.

To the extent that there is a freedom of speech it is exactly a freedom from government imposed consequences for that speech.

(The statement is true in the context of private social consequences, not government punishment.)

OTOH, being arrested for a crime pending trial, even when released on bail, involves a loss of liberty (with due process of law), and that can include, insofar as is necessary for the administration of justice, limits on free speech.
Pijul: Version-Control Post-Git [video]
https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=36882166

W3C is not only about HTML, JavaScript, and CSS.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web_Consortium#St...

E.g., I don't see WHATWG contributing anything of relevance regarding web accessibility, whereas W3C takes care of accessibility with WAI-ARIA and WCAG.
I don't know that you need the condition "people who enjoy having a lot of control" -- having other people or forces take control of your life is a hard situation for almost anyone. People respond as you say-- if hurting themselves is the lever they have left, they'll often pull it. And sometimes that means "hurting" in a very literal sense, like cutting themselves.
Having bounced around very different things a lot, the NodeJS community feels the nicest. It's not about flexing your tooling, flexing your lack of tooling, or dunking on other languages, it's about getting stuff done by whatever means necessary.
Ask HN: Is it still worth doing Red Hat certs?
With all of these recent developments, and even big companies like SuSE and Oracle reprimanding Red Hat, it sounds like Red Hat has become a blemish in the opensource world.

But as a Windows sysadmin who's been struggling to break into the Linux sysadmin world (due to lack of opportunities), I've seen that most companies still seem to be asking for Red Hat certs.

I know LFCA/LFCS exists but so far I haven't come across any adverts asking for these (at least, where I live).

So the question for all you peeps is, is it worth feeding the devil and doing an RHCSA/RHCE? Or is all of this just political theater blown out of proportion, and Red Hat isn't really evil but just a regular business doing business-ey things, and nothings changed in the real world?
> This is the same guy who tried to make "effective altruism" part of his image. That was a pretty strong signal that the outcome we all witnessed was highly likely.

Why do you think that was such a strong signal?
"Everyone" is still buying crypto.
Home builders can buy water rights from farmers. Regulators are requiring water market participants allocate a fixed amount amongst themselves, but as the quote I copied mentions, there isn’t enough water to go around. Hence the need to inhibit unmet water demand new development would incur.

> The Department of Water Resources said developers would need to find other sources to build.

> Those sources could include officially designated entities that have excess water to sell, or farmers or Native American tribes with water rights, but all are facing short supplies given overuse and a historic drought this century.
For a proper/sane forward iterator, front[index] is the same thing as *(front + index) and front + index achieves the same as std::advance(front, index) (just not in place).

Or are you pointing out how first[length] and first += length + rem would technically result in advancing a forward iterator through to first + length twice? (Trivially fixed with a middle = first + length temporary variable btw).
He reminds me of a few people Ive known who have a kind of "it'll all work out in the end" syndrome.

All very privileged and sheltered.
> Maybe it should be their role.

Who would grant them such a authority and how would it be enforced?
By importing leftpad
> Judge Kaplan: This defendant tries to go right up to the line - his use of the VPN to watch a football game over an account he wasn't authorized, there it is..

> Judge Kaplan: He subscribed from the Bahamas and used a VPN as if he were in the Bahamas when he was in Palo Alto and could have watched it on public TV. It shows the mindset. All things considered I am going to revoke bail.
> It's not W3C's (or WhatWG's) role to "oppose" random things browser vendors decide to do.

Then why are they making standards in the first place?

They're already deeply involved in the operation of browsers; they are practically morally obliged to object to things which could harm the Web.
He was lying his ass off on conference calls while playing RPG games.
I'd agree with you there.

The specific data that went into Cassandra in our case was basically immutable. (And somehow, IIRC, we still had issues around tombstones. I am not a fan of them.) Cassandra's tooling left much to be desired around inspecting the exact state of tombstones within the cluster.
The passive aggressive fix for this is to meet in the conference room and put him on the big screen. In the before times I worked on teams with just 1 or 2 remote and this practice was (unintentionally) awful for them.
> If you are expecting them to do something that you or your city hasn't paid them to do, how is that possibly right of you?

It is a paid service, hence my complaint-- they bill you after pickup. To get them to pick it up, you have to leave it on the curb, where you remain responsible for it. When they fail to pick it up as scheduled, you eventually get fined by the city or the HOA for dumping-- and you still have to deal with it somehow, like lugging it all back into your house.

This is the sort of situation you don't win (all risk, no reward), so there's no point in playing by the rules. The city makes it WM's problem. WM makes it your problem. So make it the city's problem again and stop them from passing the buck. I'm not saying it's right, only that it's a solution.
Reading through that page it looks like a combination of Safari (a) prioritising privacy and performance and (b) not implementing draft specs. With a whole bunch of bugs that have already been fixed.
> it's the best one can
> do, I guess?

You could just cut out the middle man and pay to sequester carbon directly, why do that with an airline at the point of sale?

Some quick searching suggests that on hour of air travel is approximately 100 kg/hr of CO^2 per person.

A 2x4 that's 12ft long weighs around 10 kg, burning a kg of wood releases around 1.5kg of CO^2.

So, to a first approximation if you take a coast to coast flight in the US you'll come out around even if you buy around 35 (100x5.5/15) 2x4's, and then find some way to store those permanently.

That's around a 10ft wide wall of 2x4's stacked side-by-side.

Of course buying processed lumber just to store it is really inefficient, which is where carbon credits/offsets etc. come in.
Do you see me arguing against charges where there is evidence something is up? No.

What I am saying is that any normal parent will protect their kids.
if people quit you have the evidence
Perhaps they also offer drugs to patients in addiction rehabilitation centers "just to assess their risk"
passed quant interview at jane street.
> Certainly, one charge of any kind of rape should be enough to have him brought to the jurisdiction where the charge is made.

It wasn't for any of Epsteins clients.
I built a tracker for German legal acts. I started in January 2022 and once a week, a GitHub Action downloads every published legal act:
https://github.com/jandinter/gesetze-im-internet

Parsing the legal acts with the tools you mention looks very interesting! Currently, I simply collect the published XML files whose structure is optimized for laying out the text and not so much for representing a structure of sections and subsections.
It’s the same energy that sees an obvious Musk adderall no sleep for days ridden emotional decisional fuck up and strokes their chin mumbling something about 4D chess.
The US would infiltrate and dismantle any uprising before it could pose a threat to the local state.

The sheer number of things that must go wrong for the US army to reach out to nukes is enormous.
Can Field Sobriety Tests Identify Drivers Under the Influence of Cannabis?
Because it's vague and no protective order had been entered at the time it was composed. It could be interpreted to mean anything about anyone anytime. I agree that it was a veiled threat, but consider the court's prompt and decisive response to the protective order request before going into snark mode.

To be sure, Trump's own counsel adheres to an entirely different standard than that which they seek for their client, arguing in one brief that a meme tweet of a smug Joe Biden sipping coffee and saying he likes his dark was evidence that the current administration is out to get the defendant.
The hypothetical Chrome Browser Corporation will likely become like Firefox, trying not upset whoever gives them a search deal.
I feel being catfishes is pretty harmless. If you never learn the truth how is that any different the talking to an actual women
Make sure to mutter whenever possible, and make all decisions via 1-1 asides.

If possible, have a whiteboard way at the back of the room where it's visible but incomprehensible.

And order food! Have some cookies, croissants, pizza delivered right as the meeting starts.
ChatGPT does have a loop, that's why it produces more than one token.

In this context, that the possibility of running "forever" would also exclude the humans (to which it is being compared) is relevant — even if we spend all day thinking in words at the rate of 160wpm and .75 words per token, we fall asleep around every 200k tokens, and some models (not from OpenAI) exceed that in their input windows.
Apart from compiler bugs, this issue with "time-traveling UB" shouldn't really occur in practice with any side effects other than volatile accesses. As noted by Martin Uecker [0],

> In portable C code I/O is performed using function calls of the standard library. A compiler can generally not assume that a function returns to the caller, because the function could call ‘exit’, ‘abort’, ‘longjmp’, or enter an infinite loop. For this reason, it is never allowed for a compiler to use any information derived from an operation with potential UB that comes after a function call in a way that could affect observable behavior before the function call. Consequently, observable behavior that is accessed via function calls (i.e. all except volatile accesses) can not be affected by time-traveling optimizations even when using the abstract interpretation. In principle, a compiler could use special knowledge about C library functions and use the fact those functions always return to the caller, but we are not aware of any compiler which does this (and it hardly seems worthwhile).

I believe LLVM has a "mustreturn" attribute expressing this, but as noted, no standard C library messes with any such attributes for functions that cause observable behavior.

So time-traveling UB really only affects programs which use volatile accesses for MMIO, and it might eventually be banned entirely from the C standard if the linked proposal N3128 goes through. I'd say that even "some C bugs" is a overstatement outside of embedded programming, given the rarity of MMIO in a hosted environment.

[0] https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3128.pdf
Trump: steal money from tubes, tamper at will.

SBF: steal money from Wall Street, best not do anything
To these people, anonymity is the problem. being easily doxxed and public is considered a good thing to them.
For the same reason morally bankrupt people are elected in politics, or in any leadership role. Connections, charisma, money, power, lies, and the willingness of people to believe and follow them blindly, or the desire to join them on the ride.