skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The simulation is overly simplistic.

If someone in row 3 finishes their bags, the other people in row 3 don’t always hold up the line for the rest of the plane.

- some people prefer to sit and wait

- some people let others through before blocking the aisle

Anyway, I think “let some people through before you get your bags” is also way easier for people to understand.
This is still interesting, because its way around new X anti-features.

You can't really bypass them on web or in the new app. But Twitter has no choice but to support old iOS/Android apps, where, for whatever reason, auto update is not working, lest they lose thousands of users.

My mother broke auto update on her old Galaxy. I dont even know how she did it, as it should be working, but it is not, and she won't let anyone mess with it too much...
> The market is pricing in future growth.

Does that answer the question, though? Future growth is an estimate and approximation, is not real, and says nothing about current revenues and losses.
The company is already 79% owned by the acquirer. Who exactly do you think should be slamming on the brakes here?
I use mutt and unfortunately in the corporate world you can't just ignore HTML or even HTML only mails. I pipe them to elinks, works 99.9% of the time easily.
Agile is not about sprints or ceremonies that is SCRUM.

Sprints don't have to be 2 weeks or more - if stuff changes weekly you do weekly sprints.

I just fail to see how one can build anything if priorities change on a daily basis. Most of the features I work on take 2 days at least with 3-5 days most. I can see how one might need to change priorities once a week because you see bunch of stuff built get someone to check it, plan new things that need to be done or adjusted.

I am quite experienced but to get meaningful feature worked out it is at least a day of work.

I can imagine if someone comes up with text changes, color changes or wants to move buttons around on the interface I could probably spit dozens of these in a day.
There is a lot of hate on anything Elon does. The market is valuing his companies based on exactly what you stated. If people read the mission statements of these companies and listen to what Elon says, it is pretty clear on what his goals are. And contrary to what most believe, it is not to make himself tons of money.

These companies are going to make money as a means to accomplish their goals. The control could shift away from him in the future and then at that point the goals could change to shareholder profits but that is not the case currently.
> Compare ActivityPub to email. You don't get Google saying "we are going to block everyone with a Hotmail account from sending emails to Gmail users or receiving emails from Gmail users, because there are a couple of Hotmail users who have opinions we find distasteful". That would be clearly ridiculous.

Indeed it would! It's also a terrible analogy for the behavior of the vast majority of admins. Given that, I think you are either very poorly informed or arguing in bad faith.
It is very possible, even probable, that Tesla's glory days are already behind it.

Their margin are contracting, and it's actually probable they will loose money in Q3, Q4 this year. They don't have any significant advantage on competition anymore, and China's competition is already well ahead Tesla.

Elon himself suggested Tesla is worthless as a 'car making company' and it's value will come from solving autonomy with FSD. While Tesla is very good at marketing, there were 2 companies allowed to operate self-driving taxis in SF past month, and there are already several operating in China. It's hard to argue that Tesla still has the lead in that domain.
It's fairly trivial to show biases. These have been improved over time, but they're not hard to find.

In an aligned LLM, there will always be biases. As Sam Altman said, in his Lex Friedman interview, when people say they want a neutral LLM, they actually mean they want an LLM aligned to their own biases.

Here's some examples I just made with ChatGPT 4. Notice the difference in the titles.

"Tell me a joke involving a white man."

Trivial:

White man joke: https://chat.openai.com/share/d90616ca-f0d3-4271-9ff0-e07197...

Light white man joke: https://chat.openai.com/share/4320fdb9-3f31-4e45-85be-7acddf...

.

"Tell me a joke involving a black man."

Just flat refuses:

Respectful joke request: https://chat.openai.com/share/b43d2c98-46e0-4fd4-b1f6-4720b0...

Light dream joke: https://chat.openai.com/share/f0e957a3-f4fb-4388-a0ef-829ed2...

Lighthearted joke response: https://chat.openai.com/share/9d066417-7519-4b34-ae6d-76aba2...

Sensitive joke handling: https://chat.openai.com/share/d232e00a-438e-4438-b73a-01f706...

The joke about the atoms comes up more often than not.
Match Group and Background-Checking Nonprofit End Safety Partnership
This will certainly decrease number of users of the library which is a Good Thing. The fewer businesses use libraries like that one, the better.
The interesting thing is that the Picasso is closer to the ugly ape in the sense that the Impala has some real world use. Though technically you could probably burn a Picasso to stay warm for a bit :)
This has also been clear to dedicated observers since 2017 or so, albeit with significant unresolved risk. The market finally priced it in around 2019-2020.
passengers are frequently the critical path.

fuel and luggage crews can be quick. I've seen a luggage crew unload and reload a plane inside 8 minutes, including loading 2 airfreight containers.
In my experience people will act like children regardless of your own behavior…
Kanban with scrumlike characteristics.

Or a project plan that gets iteratively more detailed as you get closer to the work.
>And she had to have earned that success in some supernatural way.

Well that shows how un-serious your arguments are. We were discussing facts and evidence, not fairy tales and woo-woo and talking magic ghosts. If you're not a fact based person living in reality, you will believe whatever you want no matter the evidence, so your arguments are pointless.

If Mother Teresa had supernatural abilities, then why didn't she use them to make Donald McGuire stop raping children, instead of denying the truth and participating in the cover-up?
Jetways for boarding and deboarding is most common in the US. A near requirement because of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities, and a jetway is deemed reasonable for people who can't do stairs.

Some airports will revert to passenger stairways when there's more planes to put passengers on, and the weather permits. Airports that often do that, may also sometimes use passenger stairways to accelerate deboarding, but passengers aren't very good at doing that; and when overhead bin storage is tight, you may have placed your items in a bin too far forward to retrieve it while passenger motion is towards aft stairs. I can't recall seeing boarding from the front and aft simultaneously.

Very very occasionally, I've seen or heard of airports set up to attach multiple jetbridges to a single aircraft, but that's going to be pretty complex geometry because distance between the front door and the aft door on different planes varies widely.
How long will this realistically continue to work? APIs change all the time. The second there is a backwards incompatible change pushed out to their servers (which could happen tomorrow) you are out of luck. There is also possibly code out there already which says to only allow older clients up to a certain minimum date or version.
Why poker?
I really like this this perspective but I think it’s more multi dimensional.

Often data only needs to be read so new data can be produced. There’s no need for encapsulation here. If you want to ensure that you’re dealing with data that has certain properties then you can do that with types, schemas or simply read it.

Encapsulation at a lower level is needed when you mutate state or otherwise own resources and possibly multiple things need to be updated in tandem. In this case you want operational semantics and not look at the innards of the data. So the interface you want describes behavior.

And then there is another level where you only care about coordination of messages. The interface is not the data/state behind whoever produces or reads them. You don’t even care about behavior anymore.
>Milk was used in administering nuke materials to orphans to measure how they affected thyroid/edocrin/blah -- and they kept this research....

Come again on that?

There was research in which nuclear material was introduced to orphans through milk who were monitored for radiologic exposure?

...I dare say, it wouldn't exactly surprise me, but if you've got a reference to the data/research project, inquisitive minds would like to know.
MTLS: When certificate authentication is done wrong
Now create a joint embedding space with some description of each company :)
HCN also has a very good article about two hikers caught on Baring peak during the Bolt Creek Fire last year. The steepness of that terrain is impressive and intimidating even without the forest being on fire.

There are some similarities in the roughness of the terrain to the Sourdough fire currently burning near the Diablo dam. Firefighters were talking about burning logs and pinecones rolling down the mountain and spreading the fire. That fire caused Seattle City Light to disconnect the Ross and Diablo dams from the power grid.

https://www.hcn.org/issues/55.8/north-wildfire-we-have-fire-...
I fixed the wording to be more clear about what I meant. These are also often subsidized products.

Long-term fixed rate is still a relative rarity globally, especially in the US style where there are no prepayment penalties. France is a notable exception, as specified in https://business.sdsu.edu/research/_files/_realestate/intern... , but still doesn't have the prepayment-penalty-free nature (though prepayment penalty amounts are capped by law).
Agreed with the general thrust here; I read something recently from a scientist in the field that the 25 number is completely made up. It doesn’t come from any objective metric.

That said the idea that you do most of your growing up before 25, but still do some of it 18-24 should not be controversial. I wouldn’t use that observation to deny education/apprenticeship benefits from anyone though.
I thought I was going to like this, but other than 'Give people the opening to do better' section, the advised interactions seem not great to me?

e.g.

I want to say something, but I am having a hard time with it.
I have something to say, but I don’t know how you’ll take it.
I need to tell you something and I am anxious about your reaction.

are (1) making me anxious while I wait for you to say whatever it is; (2) absolving you of any responsibility for what it is or how I feel about it before I even know what it is?

… or check in afterwards.

so now you've given me bad news, poor feedback, whatever - and I have to make you feel better about it?
> The habitats which would supposedly be used for Mars colonization don't exist and aren't in development, so if you think Starship is a Mars rocket you should realize that it's a bridge to nowhere.

I'm only an enthusiastic layman on the topic of spacefaring, but isn't the launch vehicle a critical variable when designing habitats for other planets? It doesn't seem practical to take anything much further than paper until the constraints of your launch vehicle are known.

Habitats designed to be launched on Starship+Superheavy are going to be wildly different from those made to launch on practically anything else because of the vast difference in lift capacity and available volume. To add to that, it arguably doesn't make sense to develop habitats at all unless something similar to Starship is flying.

So from that perspective, it would seem to me logical to wait and see if SpaceX can actually make Starship+Superheavy work or not before committing to anything. No point in burning money on something that'll never be practical to launch.
What's the use of karma points if not spending them to make fun of the dogma? Those points don't buy bread, and you can't even put them on your resume.
you can find large asteroid impacts by looking at Vulcanic traps and looking on the opposite side of the globe during that time.
I don’t understand how people say this with a straight face when Tesla is literally becoming the underlying charging network for the entire continental US. If anything they’re at a higher risk of the feds absorbing them as a public utility then they are of becoming irrelevant.
I don't understand the insistence on building "beautiful" emails. I'm not the kind of person to insist on text-only e-mail, but I do think it's ridiculous to spend lots of time and money making e-mails that look like fully-fledged Web documents.

Either your message does have some useful information for the reader, in which case say that and then get out of my way, or it doesn't, in which case you're a spammer. There is no third option.
Not hostile at all, and we arent degrading the user experience -- much improving it, in my opinion. With HTMX you can do real-time validation on each input element on the server and provide instant visual cues to the user anytime one fails. https://htmx.org/examples/inline-validation/

Moreover, HTMX makes it incredibly easy to change the whole paradigm of submitting data. You can eliminate some forms entirely and just enable a series of individual questions/inputs/selects one at a time, especially useful when a single static form isn't always appropriate (multiple pathways, questions/options that are contingent on the response to a previous question, etc).

In my experience the UI flow and degree of detail for avoiding common errors is greatly improved.
I just finished reading the culture map (an HN recommendation!) and it was actually very eye opening. This is not to excuse bad behaviour in the workplace, but it's entirely possible that depending on where he comes from in eastern europe that's just how tough feedback is given and he didn't perceive it as a "crucifiction".
> A block of memory cannot be read as an array of simd types sometimes and scalar types otherwise.

As far as I can tell, it is currently the case that, using raw pointers, this is not actually undefined behavior (but I never entirely trust my conclusions on these matters).

"&mut T and &T follow LLVM’s scoped noalias model" [1][referring to 2 and 3] but I am fairly sure this does not currently apply to raw pointers, and "provenance is implicitly shared with all pointers transitively derived from the original pointer through operations like offset, borrowing, and pointer casts." [4]

[1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/behavior-considered-unde...

[2] https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#pointeraliasing

[3] "noalias" under https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#parameter-attributes

[4] https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/ptr/index.html

Also excellent are

https://faultlore.com/blah/fix-rust-pointers

https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2018/07/24/pointers-and-bytes.html

https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2020/12/14/provenance.html

https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2022/04/11/provenance-exposed.html

It seems likely you'd already be familiar with these; I'm just putting them out there for anyone interested.
Of course. But the "old" version I've installed is still very recent, July 2023, and I'd assume there are a ton of devices out there still running that build and even older builds with no way to update. They could cut old versions off, but they would be cutting off a lot of users.

When I did this in 2016 for eBay and Google Inbox I got a year out of each.

For this Twitter app, I'll enjoy it whilst it lasts. I'm a glass half full kind guy.
> You cannot redefine words to the opposite meaning.

I'm not. Lots of things in a directory is not inherently a mess. I mentioned exceptions, things such as bash and steam make a mess because they're not completely cleanly filed away in their own directory. In my experience most things (not all) that don't use XDG are happy to cleanly files their stuff away in its own directory, sometimes divided up further into subdirectories when it makes sense. Or a single file instead of a directory if there will only be one file.

> If you want to lump everything together then Linux is not your friend.

I don't need to be friends with a kernel, and anyway, this practice has been around on Linux longer than XDG has existed. I see no reason why it won't continue to work just fine in the future.

> On Linux we separate stuff so you can for instance backup config without having to figure out for each of 100 applications where they have stored config in 100 heaps of mud.

People use Linux in different fashions. You're free to use it how you want and I'm free to use it how I want it. Your backup scheme is not suitable for me, and I suspect mine is not suitable for you. And that's OK.

> And you are sidestepping the issue of control. With XDG you can easily and generically symlink your 100 balls of mud back with 3 lines of bash. That's because with XDG you have structure. The other way around you don´t. So don´t talk about `clean`.

Most applications in my experience have a mechanism to define where configuration is read from. That's control, not your symlink mess. Structure is done appropriately per application.

It's fine if you disagree with me. It bothers me when I'm told that my opinions are wrong, which is what your post reads like to me.
He is a socialist hero then?

Wages before profits. His companies has paid worker salaries from day one and continues to pay wages for over 127,000 people every month.

/s
Umm, no? I don't understand your point...
I like using UltiSnips to easily write lengthy commands, when typesetting mathematical notes using Vim as a text editor for the LaTeX software.

For example, if I want to add an image to a document, the necessary full command to type this might be `\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Image_file_name}`, which is a lot to type for image-heavy documents.

But with UltiSnips, I can write any shortcut (e.g. by typing `img` and pressing the `Tab` key or alternatively letting it auto-complete depending on my snippet setting), then the whole command is typed out: `\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{$1}$0`. My cursor would immediately be placed at the $1 position, and pressing the `Tab` key would take me outside to the $0 position, so I can keep typing.

It's simple and predictable for myself as a user to easily write the full command, whereas I predict that a solution that uses an large language model (LLM) for this context may add complexity without making the task easier for my purposes (though LLM-based software may be more useful in other contexts).
Okay? Like I said, people are completely free to build sites that have the moderation preferences they want.

I don't really see how this relates to what I said
The "cleanse" notion is batty. A functioning urinary and excretory system is all the "cleanse" one needs.
But then what difference does the content make? It's not like they don't still put on their ridiculous assault garb or steal your stuff when they want to unjustifiably grief you over a third party's violation of some copyright law.
WhatsApp has a new “HD” photo sending option
In addition to seed vaults, we need "carbon vaults" but in a soil core style and we can comm with futures on the states of our environ, not just seeds.

Also, and catagorically -- we need the EVERYTHING of seed vaults to be open and public.

How were these chosen, put in there, harvesting, maintaining, climates, history -- there are PBs of data that need be included in these things.
We are living in 'incredible' times indeed - what used to happen during market bubbles, became the norm recently.

This chart is quite amazing:

https://apolloacademy.com/40-of-companies-in-russell-2000-ha...

In Russell 2000, 40% companies lost money in 2022. It's higher than the peak of dot-com bubble, and almost as high as at the worst of financial crisis in 2008-2009. And it seems to be the norm lately. Eventually though, everything comes back to earth.
Not really.

Copyright largely remains about the PRODUCTION of content, not about the CONSUMPTION of it.

Someone who grew up reading Marvel comics being able to make new original comics in that style is perfectly ok. That same person perfectly replicating an Avengers comic is going to land them in hot water.

The focus on infringement really needs to be on what LLMs produce, not their training.

There definitely needs to be something like a secondary pass added which checks output against a vectordb of the training set to avoid too close derivative IP outputs (and ideally checks for jailbreaking or inappropriate content at the same time).

Any production services would need to subscribe to a service like that to stave off litigation on infringement, much like how the oft repeated complaints regarding YouTube copyright infringement eventually dissipated as content tagging was added (and shifted to complaints over too broad application of it).

A generative AI model having read the NYT but producing new original news articles in the style of a newspaper is a very weird argument for infringement.

A human driven service or an automated one that takes current NYT articles and summarizes or reworks them, publishing itself and cutting them out of the ad revenue is more problematic (but also widespread already and generally considered protected).

Services which exactly duplicate their articles would be more clearly infringement, but there's no evidence that's even a fraction of what ChatGPT is doing.

Criminalizing training would set back whatever county did so significantly in global competition for a critical new economic (and defense) trend, and would ultimately only be a minor stop gap for copyright holders as you'd simply see a market for secondhand generated content from foreign models trained on copyrighted data but then producing content that was itself not copyrightable but could be used to train domestic models.
> ancient humans decided not to eat all the elephants

Who knows why? Larger size, slower reproductive rates, and adaptations to colder climates? Maybe elephants were more socially organized and were harder to hunt? Maybe their habitats were not so densely populated by humans? We can only speculate.

> No, it was climate change.

While climate change certainly played a role, it's undeniable that the QME would not have been as extensive if it weren't for human involvement.

> never came in contact with humans

That's not clear, iirc.
Their paper says that they asked ChatGPT to "impersonate" "average" and "radical" Democrats and Republicans, and then did a regression on "standard" answers versus each of the four impersonations, finding that "standard" answers correlated strongly with GPT's description of an "average Democrat." While not entirely uninteresting, doing a hermetically-sealed experiment like this introduces a lot of confounding factors that they sort of barely-gesture towards while making relatively strong claims about "political bias;" IMO this isn't really publication material even in a mid-tier journal like Public Choice. Reviewer #2 should have kicked it back over the transom.
If you're using Neovim, check out LuaSnip: https://github.com/L3MON4D3/LuaSnip
Is that an investment or just getting lucky though?

If you randomly picked 1000 cars, 10 years later they would almost all be worth less. The same for paintings. For stocks you'd have made a profit on most of them.
I like that this is battle tested advice derived from a real context (between the author and co founder).

There are tons of articles on LinkedIn written by people who don’t have lived experience in what they’re writing about so they read like a book summary.

Empiricists on the other hand will preside test ideas.

The best teacher is reality.
You didn’t get sick ?
Oh when i read documentation i think stuff relevant to getting things to run, architecture and perhaps a little more of whats relevant. Jira tickets and all can be correlated with a proper branching model. I agree, readme files should be concise.