skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, language models were not a secondary application transformers. From the abstract of the paper you posted:

> The transformer model has been widely leveraged for natural language processing
and computer vision tasks, but, to the best of our knowledge, has never been used for stock price
prediction task at DSE.

In general, all the fancy DL stuff from the last decade started on either images (e.g. CNNs) or text (e.g. RNNs, transformers). Applying them to tabular data is generally an afterthought, and for time series in particular is rarely worth the time and compute.

The paper you posted is not very good and should not be used to inform your own work. It includes no comparisons to baseline models, and even the abstract describes the results as "acceptable".
Power is not just about sample size, but also (expected/previously informed by some other evidence) effect size. You can't make that conclusion without that.
It looks like he doesn't specialize exclusively in copper sulfide. His most cited works are to do with gold, and he has articles on a bunch of different materials:

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=7WQhABIAAAAJ&hl=en...
Spring is very good software, and basically and object oriented language will need to use stuff like it after enterprises throw their stack of requirements at it for 20+ years and following 20 years of technology evolution.

Yes its been tied to many java architectural fashion boondoggles of the past (XML config madness, XML namespace magic, overly heavyweight serverside HTML rendering, JSP tag madness, software patterns) but I still turn to it for basic code structuring in any JVM app.

Boot is pretty good ... until its not. If you are doing garden variety web services it gets you up and running fairly well. If you need to do anything fancy with routing or raw data in the html request/response, then it is not. And Spring is now so synonymous with Spring Boot that it kind of isn't a good thing.

Spring also isn't a pure open source project, it has a company trying to constantly steer it to revenue production, but as those types of entities go, stewardship has been decent. Normally things like that have about four or five years of trying to use open source for market expansion before impatience/greed/frustration sits in and they go for the closed source grab (see: Hashicorp recently). 20 years is a remarkable run for something like that.
What risk am I taking on?
This is definitely a thing I have noticed - part of it seems to be, if you refuse to react to trolls, the trolling can actually get much worse - naturally encouraging a reaction that the trolls want.
Does anyone, anywhere still use Coffeescript?
Airline seats seem to work that way. It's purchase insurance.
I really like the video but I disagree with his prescription for peer review to increase trust in science.

People don’t distrust scientists because there isn’t enough peer review or because of pre-prints failing to replicate, they distrust scientific institutions because scientific institutions often communicate their current best theory as the truth and pretend that they can ‘prove’ things true by way of ‘scientific consensus.’ Going against the consensus can ruin or limit your career.

Lots of examples: climate scientists making claims of ice free arctic by 2020, dietary science flip flopping on diet advice (fat and butter is bad, carbs are bad), covid vaccines being a silver bullet, ivermectin not being effective [1]. Add in problems in social ‘sciences’ like the Sokal affair, psychology replication crisis, mainstream economists failing to predict the GFC, definitions of foundational terms like “woman” changing, and you have a recipe for the general public not trusting academia or ‘scientific’ institutions in general. Science and academia in general is being polluted by politics and it is incentivising academics to exaggerate the accuracy of their knowledge.

[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...
I added the reference here because Ivermectin was a horrible case of politicising science: mainstream institutions called it an animal medicine with full knowledge it was safe for humans. And now there is a potential mechanism for its effect, it looks like it may have been effective after all. During the pandemic I heard many scientists laugh at people for considering it, all because an authority they trusted told them it was silly.
I could understand this if it were about Google's old CAPTCHA that used scans from books and could use the user input to improve an OCR system, or Cloudflare's CAPTCHA that asks you to click the pictures that contained traffic lights or bikes or whatever where the user input can be used to improve an image classification system.

Better OCR and better image classifies are things you can make money with.

It is not clear to me how one makes money from a "what way is this animal pointing?" classifier (especially since building that CAPTCHA requires them to have a photo of the animal where they already know it is pointing close to 0, 60, 90, 150, 210, or 270 degrees).

This seems to be a task that likely only be of interest as part of a CAPTCHA and so the most that your solving it for will do is improve the CAPTCHA. It's not like OCR or image recognition where you might be improving some separate money making product of theirs.
The use of "was" in the parent as opposed to "is" tells you that they are already aware.
A stacktrace in a Spring app can be painful to see. Tons of Spring code inbetween layers of your own app. Sometimes it has made me wonder, what happened with just plain old method invocations?

Granted, it can probable be helpful in many ways, but it comes at a price. But I think improvements in developer tooling will make annotation-driven programming unmodern. I see a renaissance coming for plain old programming.
The problem is that at least for clothing, product descriptions are crap, dimensions are all over the place, products don’t match the picture and every other brand has its own definition of sizing.

The retailers/brands are the dishonest ones.

Other items, sure. At least in my country there’s a 7 day no questions asked return period for returns on online purchases. Otherwise, unless it’s a defective product, it’s a done deal.
In hindsight this comment was too short. Clarifying some points:

By "This makes sense", I meant that this kind of thing can happen; as more data are gathered, the Bayesian probability of a candidate value can increase and then suddenly decrease. Here's a Colab notebook demonstrating the general phenomenon: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1Eb1_humiGPdKb0c3qr_...

"Calibration" in this context means "statistical consistency between distributional forecasts and observations" in the words of https://sites.stat.washington.edu/raftery/Research/PDF/Gneit... . If the model's early forecasts predict impact with probability >3% for a class of objects that end up impacting with frequency much less than 3%, then the model is not well calibrated with respect to its early forecasts for those objects.

Based on the GP, it sounds like these early impact "probabilities" are no one's subjective (Bayesian) probability of impact because people who are closely familiar with this model know it is not well calibrated. The reported probabilities may still be useful to them as indicators or flags. However, those of us who are _not_ closely familiar with the model have found it confusing to see things that are not really probabilities reported as probabilities.
The original iMac came a perch slot that could beused for internal expansion. I installed a SCSI card and hung all my SCSI devices off it.
Same here. A sudden up-tick in the amount of recruiter contacts in the past few weeks.

I'm not clear what that says about the number of attractive positions, but it's at least encouraging.
Thanks for the data point re: larger apps. Like I said, haven't had that experience with Tailwinds specifically so I can only go by the various things I read about those who have. I'm sure it's like any other tool - it can be used or abused.
I was thinking of getting a robot vacuum and about privacy and thinking I would cover it with a heavy box when not in use but really that's something I would have to remember to do / keep doing and it really undoes the convenience of a vacuum that does what I want automatically.

Ultimately unless the device by design respects my privacy (both willfully and just with security) ... I feel like hacking it isn't a real long term solution.

Still, the story seems like a cool hack for its own sake.
When radical life extension becomes a thing.
The problem, which is often the case with Thunderf00t, is that he is missing the forest for the trees. No one who knows anything was thinking of using LK-99 for serious applications. The specs of LK-99 where just too shit. What it would have been is a start shot for understanding the effect and creating more useful materials based on the same underlying physical process.
Was anything novel discovered in this material? Is there some more boring application waiting in the wings?
Didn't they only get funding to horse around with that material several years ago?
Stopping paying attention in the sense of "waiting for news" sense, sure.
The larger media outlets were smart enough to stay away from the hype until there was more data available from replication efforts. Maybe they're learning? Everything I saw about LK-99 before the last week or so was on HN or social media.
If you even hate Nintendo, then what company do you like?
If I'm understanding the transcript correctly, the major issue wasn't that Twitter couldn't collect the information or needed to do extra work to collect the information; Twitter just didn't want to provide the information, seemingly so that they could Trump and have him lodge a (bogus) executive privilege claim.
It's a great point, because farmers are literally tied to their land in ways most of us aren't.

If economic structural changes impact them, they can't pack their bags and move their farm to a different region.

Morally, what feels right to me is "Let no person have their livelihood demolished by that which is completely outside their control".

Sometimes, that's unavoidable, but I think with water use we could fold policies in over 50 years to lessen the velocity of disruption.

And hell, why not bind it to subsidies for building out solar/wind renewables on their land, while we're at it?
the buildups weren't a surprise or a sign. there had been previous buildups, often as part of regular exercises, usually accompanied with diplomatic signaling. no signals meant something was up.

for example, Ukraine cut off the upstream water supply and power to Crimea and Russia marshaled troops to demand they get turned back on. it did, discussion over, troops go home.

the real kicker, IIRC, was that the Red Cross/Red Crescent confirmed reports that there had been requests for a blood across Russia, and that they were delivering a lot of blood to the front. something large, like 5000 units or more. exercises can sometimes see casualties -- live fire drills involve risk -- but not 5000 units of blood level of casualties. donated blood is also only good for like 30-40 days, so if it was moving they planned on using it...

there will be similar signals before a real shooting war with Taiwan kicks off.
> Per given amount of energy generation, renewables are requiring employing more people,

I don't really see that claimed backed by sources.

But short-term, yes probably, it'll take a lot of work install renewable energy sources everywhere. But once installed, maintenance will probably require fewer human hours. And certainly fewer human hours spent extracting raw materials (oil, gas, coal).
These are just a simpler abstraction, even though similar to the others.

They enable a bunch of other use cases we'll implement on top. We believe layers (in the way we envisioned them) to be the ideal abstraction.
Global Illumination appears to have been working on a browser-based multiplayer Minecraft clone (https://www.biomes.gg/), not anything explicitly related to AI content generation.

Odd acquisition choice unless OpenAI is going to do an unexpected pivot.
Interesting is that the train passed 3 inspection points before entering the tunnel. One was before it left in Chiasso after the train formation was assembled from the carriage that came over the border. This included a brake test. Then there was an additional inspection in Bellinzona due to a stuck brake on another carriage (not that one that had the wheel break). The 3rd. inspection was the automated one which you can see in Tom Scott's video[1]. This automated inspection point checks for thermal signature, anything that may be loose and also listens to the train running on the track.

The train traveled derailed 8km in the tunnel until it hit the turnout and ripped the train apart sending one part through the pressure door connecting the two main tunnels. This is what cased the large damage since the track is in concrete unlike tracks outside. The concrete sleepers are custom made and require curing time. It is very difficult for the train operator to determine the train has derailed in the tunnel as the locomotive has enough power to just pull the derailed carriages along with ease. These cargo carriages are consider "dumb" rail as there are no electronics on them of any kind to report derailment etc.

The next automated inspection point in the tunnel is 15km in. They will need to re-evaluate this once they figure out what exactly happened.

One of the executives had to eat his words from a while back where he said confidently the tunnel will never be completely closed for service even if there is an accident. They didn't expect a train to destroy the door however.

In the article picture is the door that the rail carriage slammed through. It is on its side and had its top ripped off.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwx_rumXUAw

Illustration of tunnels and the interconnects between the two. The accident was at the "Multifunktionsstelle Faido" side of the tunnel. The door is located between the two main tunnels:

- https://assets.new.siemens.com/siemens/assets/api/uuid:a03b8...

More Pictures:

- https://news.sbb.ch/_file/23659/_r1280x689cc.jpg

- https://news.sbb.ch/_file/23662/_r1280x689cc.jpg

- https://news.sbb.ch/_file/23661/_r1280x689cc.jpg

- https://img.blick.ch/incoming/18829950-v1-fb-img-16916890392...

- https://img.blick.ch/incoming/18830061-v1-img-20230810-wa000...

- https://img.blick.ch/incoming/18830064-v1-img-20230810-wa000...

What the door should look like:

- https://img.blick.ch/incoming/18844389-v0-basistunnel007-jpg...

- https://img.blick.ch/incoming/18844390-v2-mg-0039-jpg.jpg?im...
And therein lay the ridiculousness.
Just because the rate of something has slowed does not mean a reversal.

It’s like when people report on inflation going down. No, it’s not going down. The _rate_ is going down and you need it to go negative if you expect things to “return” to normal.
> Do you have a link to Bhattacharya "pushing ivermectin"?

Not finding one directly, but he was part of the senate hearings that covered it and part of the lawsuit against the government for trying to get social media companies to remove misinformation.

> Among those allies is Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee and who on Tuesday held a hearing devoted to promoting discredited coronavirus treatments and maligning public safety measures. There had been an outcry ahead of the hearing because one of the witnesses scheduled was Dr. Jane Orient, an outspoken critic of vaccines. Another witness was Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya of Stanford, a co-author of a petition against lockdowns called the Great Barrington Declaration. (https://news.yahoo.com/white-house-vaccine-rollout-marred-by...)

https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/missou...

> Masks are harmful, so that one isn't really misinformation.

Masks aren't harmful, as evidenced by the countless people who wear them all the time either professionally or just to avoid spreading/catching illness.
No one would buy from you if you have very restrictive return policies. If you start denying people claims, you piss people off and having motivated angry customers is very bad for business. You also risk the government coming down on top of you especially if your marketing includes things like "hassle-less returns" or "no questions returns".

Also even if you return 11 out of 12 dresses, the margins around clothes is so high, the company still makes money. Landed costs for the dress was probably under $10 and probably sold for $100. When I worked for apparel company, we encouraged people to buy multiple products and return the stuff that doesn't fit or didn't like because in the end, we had 70% gross margins and most people are lazy and don't return stuff.
On the flip side, there was a lot of what I'd call, hmm, "unreasonable" skepticism. If I had a dime every time someone said "This is fake because Korean culture (blah blah armchair sociology)" ...
Hmm, how can you post a form without js and not require sending and loading the full page from the server? I don't think there a way to do a partial form submission?
An iframe could work but it's really messy and likely slow?
Search "wooden water pipes" and "wooden sewer pipes" and you can find a lot of them.
I would charitabily read the parent's comment as referring to the middle brow 'mass media' aimed at those moderately above average in terms of paying attention to these topics.

It overlaps with a sizable majority of the HN readerbase.

Not the mass media of grocery store checkout aisle magazines.
Their family would be miserable, their kids would swear to never become a material science expert, and they'd all be missing on the cross discussions with other fields and inspirations coming from outside the material science world ?

Not really trying to be flippant, but that pretty much feels like a James Bond villain fantasy, and only a few select people would probably enjoy the setting.

We kinda have a real world equivalent with people working on the LHC by the way.
I agree with both of you. Lots of the funded companies of the last decade only got to where they are because of ZIRP, but there are definitely huge opportunities for more profitable companies to be built with current tech, even with positive interest rates.
Sizes are not standardized, and most people don't know how it's going to fit until they try it on. Maybe the right answer is to have every piece tailored, and I'd say that's a valuable way to reduce the need to return, but I've definitely seen clothes online that I didn't like when I had them in my hands.

The answer, to me, is that I won't order clothes online.
Every fps is just new graphics and few mechanic changes, no more different than sequels, at least Nintendo does it better than anyone
I've been wondering if there is a term for 'the choir glamouring you' sort of thing?

I've been noticing odd behaviors in some public figures that make me believe instead of them 'preaching to the choir' - their 'choir' is convincing them a weird direction is a good idea.

I think this is exasperated by the bubbles of social media - I would love to be able to see what social media posts certain people have seen over the past 5 years or so - like individually, say if I could study every post that rob de niro actually saw in the past so many years.

I feel we need new terminology to describe the kind of warping of the mind and outward behavior changes these things can bring -

or is there some old descriptors I can't think of?
Jesus, what is wrong with you? I clearly asked for an example of complex interpolations. How am I "very clearly" asking for CP when we're talking about complex interpolations, not CP?

Please, explain how I am "very clearly" asking for it. Please. Literally both sentences preceding the one you quoted (as in, the entire paragraph containing this sentence) are talking about interpolation. How do you jump from interpolation to CP??
When nature kills enough of us off that industrialized societies collapse because they lack enough people to run it.

At this point, climate change denial is indistinguishable from rooting for a Mad Max existence. Even if someone is not convinced, they should still go along with changes to reduce emissions the way scientists propose because the price of being wrong is nature deciding to reduce emissions its way. And, as we are seeing, that involves a whole lot of destroying everything.
I embarrassingly used to pronounce it as "deebian" before being schooled by a graybeard.
I'm sorry, that sucks.

I've been out for nearly 5 months now, and I'm starting to feel anxious about my domain-specific knowledge fading / getting stale.

I'm hoping to stave that off via interview prep and practicing coding problems. But I'm wondering how long it is before hiring managers start to assume my knowledge / skills have atrophied.

I'm starting to appreciate the old saying, "It's easier to get a job when you have a job."
The thing is we've introduced so much pollution into the environment that it's now incredibly difficult to see what's going on. We really need to put limits on introducing new chemical compounds into the environment.
This isn't about the facetious point that you're trying to make. It's about whether one state's specific judicial decision at all concerns what takes place beyond its borders.
Thank you! I used the key words "Doodle of X. Black and white using ink." Sometimes removing the "ink" part helps. And make sure X is not too detailed.
Why would any farmer in California ever sell their land (to which the water rights are linked) for ANY single payment? Or, really, why would any landowner anywhere, getting money from rent, would give that up for ANY single payment? Of course, there is a price for that.

Even a truly perpetual guaranteed income stream is worth a certain finite single payment, that's how rates of return work given the standard assumption that future money is worth less than cash in hand now.
I would say an abusive customer is one who wears the item, literally uses it, and then returns it to get a free use out of it.

But if someone is ordering things to simply try them on for size or look, and end up returning it, I do not see how that is abuse. If it is costing the retailer too much, then they should dissuade it by enforcing return fees.

I love online clothes shopping because in store shopping wastes time when they do not have the size I need. So I order 3 sizes, the size I think will fit me, the size above, and the size below. I keep whichever one works best, and return the other 2. I never take any tags and whatnot off, so I hope the retailer can simply inspect the item and put it back in inventory.

But who knows, maybe the labor costs to inspect returns is too high. Either way, if a retailer wants to advertise free returns, that is their business.
When it becomes an actual problem.
>I believe Americans rarely try to say jump the line, lie to you for tiny advantages, do you harm out sheer spite etc.

I have a feeling minorities in the US would disagree.
Reminds how me if you turn your iPhone off, it's not really off either.

Apple really needs to hone these 'evil' behaviors in before regulations come down the pipe about it.