skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The most simple act of using a phone as a physical storage device to get something from point a to b....near impossible on apple hardware. Meanwhile its been stock standard functionality for about 15+ years on other devices.

It's been a long time since I stopped trying to like Android devices, but quite a few years ago I remember Android phones no longer working as a mass storage device you could drag files onto. That was a widely discussed intentional decision by Google and was one of several things that made me decide that Android's talk about freedom, openness and all that was just marketing. You can plug an Android in and drop stuff on it like a thumb drive again now?
Allegedly every report and score is reviewed by a human to determine accuracy.
Check-Writing 101: How to Write a Check
Of course. tommy@release.com
if your solution to a problem involves the complete global forced extinction of a species, not only does it show that somewhere along the way you were somehow misguided—it also shows that you're not exactly living in the same shared reality that the rest of us live in.
Trademarks still aren't 100% unique, though. For example, Apple Records is easily confused with Apple Music - both have a similar name, and both use an apple as logo. It is better, but not foolproof.
Ostensibly I assume point of the search is not to filter data,but to examine the data for evidence of malicious intent to sent entry.

But again, taking five months to do it... Seems implausible.
You are misunderstanding how ‘incidentalomas’ are reviewed and managed. You don’t know it’s a false positive until you’ve done the invasive diagnostic tests subsequently (with non-zero risk), at which point you can classify it as a false positive
> I think I'm going to try laying out my next book using Affinity Publisher - I used the Mac version to lay out the last one so hope I can do the same while finding benefits for doing so with my little paddy.

Side note: I wonder if Adobe ever regrets discontinuing Framemaker for Mac given the resurgence of Apple in the intervening years.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_FrameMaker
Activists protesting the Vietnam war weren't participating in sit-ins to change the laws about loitering around campus buildings or in government offices. The people who chain themselves to trees scheduled to be cut down aren't protesting to change laws concerning tree bondage. Some sit-ins are planned as narrowly targeted acts of civil disobedience, but others are simply acts of passive resistance and they are no less valid as a means of protest.

While at a high enough level of disruption, the acts of protesters might harm public support of the cause, I think that level is probably pretty high and supporters will largely understand if they are temporarily inconvenienced, while some people who already oppose the protestor's cause will tend to use any inconvenience as a more socially acceptable excuse to justify their opposition instead of more honest reasons like plain old bigotry.
I mean, CVEs are everything wrong with the system is not inaccurate either.
>I'm sorry, I will not talk about that.
What you say applies in the limit. A lot of stuff is only sort-of non-commodity, i.e. you could always do without, and eventually substitute by something entirely different.

However, my point is focused more on the relationship aspect. Even with a 100% unique, non-commodity creator, to whom I have to go to get my content fix, there's a difference between two scenarios:

- I come if and when I want, consume content and/or support them in exchange for specific content, or as generic patronage - but otherwise, they do not force themselves into my mental space.

- Like above, except I get spammed by the creator, especially with marketing material outside of what I care about; I have to remember to manage recurring payments 'lest I'll be unknowingly spending money on things I don't want; subjecting myself to the above is a de-facto condition to access the content I want.

The ideal non-commodity recurring relation for me is almost purely transactional - I pay and get what I want in exchange, and nothing more, and otherwise can safely forget the vendor exists.
So the software from your company is fully closed-source, isn't it?

The employes can do open-source on Friday but no part of Spacelift is actually open-source?
It wasn't Apple, and it was unrelated to DRM. This device had no DRM.

You could claim that the lack of serialization/identification was the problem.

If they would have known it was a non-genuine part, they could have used the legacy driver. As is, they would have had to find some side channel to identify it was genuine or not, or just never update the driver for that module again, all based on user reports of random phone stopping, and analyzing those phones, because there's no way to know what some random knockoff is doing.
Fun, but as a GitLab user I’d much rather they address missing features of their core competency (code review), like the inability to “request changes” or otherwise block a merge (https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/761, issue open 6 years), or adding the ability to both squash and merge AND use the merge train

I know companies are big organizations that can do more than one thing at a time, but we were just burned again recently by the inability to block a merge, and so I’m salty
Yeah, without application this sounds almost as silly as:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerology
China has basically caught up and exceeded (EVs) in the worst case, or absolutely dominated (manufacturing) pretty much every industry it touched. Why are semiconductors going to be different?
We didn't want to use LoRA to maximize quality, so we used 32 A100-80GB with a sequence length of 4096. It's possible to do a native fine-tune on as little as 8 A100-80GB with DeepSpeed Zero 3, but it will take longer.

With LoRA you can probably get away with just a few 4090s.
I haven't owned an Apple device in 10 years, but I think they're talking about iCloud.
Looks like the CVE grading people had their own overflow problem.
I'll was planning trying this out in a couple weeks. Should I bring my macbook with me as well? I don't know how much I'd actually want to code which seems like the biggest reason to bring it with me.
66% of the US population lives "at the border", and what do drug cases have to do with any of this?
I can't tell if you're really asking, so I'll answer as if you are:

learning these things brings greater understanding and greater understanding brings advances in multiple fields.

the most fundamental questions are going to be answered (or at least conceived of and worked on) first. answering the most fundamental questions often brings the largest leaps in understanding as well, which is why untouchable numbers are considered more notable than "numbers which can be expressed as the sum of 17 primes", and so on.
I keep getting emails from India-based "ethical hackers" who ran a vulnerability assessment against some web property and sent me the results. Then they ask for payment. I keep reporting them to Google (Gmail IDs) but they keep landing in my inbox.
v2 live now

https://buildinpublic.page/
(Chat)GPT-4s practical coding abilities are now 100x because it can code, run the code, and reason about its performance mid-response. They must be using fine tunes for this so the overall model could well be better too
Our models should handle instructions reasonably well. We're working on setting up a hosted Huggingface space to make it easier to play with them and we'll also set up a hosted "Phind chat" mode for these models.
You think that Jason Snell, completely sold into the iPad-only lifestyle for many years, who records and edits podcasts on his iPad, is limited by his perception of iPad's ability?
In the abstract more information is always better. In practical healthcare with real constraints, sometimes it makes things worse globally for reason above.

Think about say a diagnostic blood test with a poor sensitivity (but better than chance) on a very rare disease. As an oversimplification: for a bound take your population * workup rate * fatality rate due to workup and you have a baseline needless death due to the screening (NB there is basically always a fatality rate). The number you are comparing to is lives saved due to earlier detection.

Better than chance means it's strictly more information always. But as policy, you shouldn't do it unless you can be extremely confident that lives saves is much larger than lives lost due to the process.

This is a bit counter intuitive, but it is a fundamental issue in a lot of healthcare policy. The real calculations are more complex but in the end it is unavoidably actuarial in nature.
Basically, this is because web authentication has been very weak for far too long, and it's gotten to the point where attackers literally operate as a business, with human resource departments, call centers, and all.

Unfortunately, the extra security measures are basically bolted on, and I mean that in terms of the existing architecture of websites/applications, the user interface flows (as you've noticed), and the authentication schemes themselves, like using SMS for two-factor.

The good news is that with standards like WebAuthn, a lot of authentication flows will become faster, more automated, and more secure, because your browser or OS will manage really strong credentials for you, and maybe prompt you for a PIN or biometric scan to unlock your local device's credential store. The bad news is that it will take awhile to roll this out, and it still won't replace things like passwords or in-person processes in all cases.

One intro to WebAuthn is here: https://webauthn.guide/
Seems relatively clear to me after reading the "Why" and "How" sections and liked issues. They don't mention Gitea/Forgejo specifically but I assume the idea is to use compatible semantics.

What are you missing?
Wrt. English, it still technically has stuff like Æ, so it too may just as well switch to Cyrillic.
You would literally need to deprecate jpg, png, every other image format in existence to make that happen. It's not gonna happen.
> I do not see why requiring a photograph and government identification is a problem.

It’s a problem for services which have little need for that kind of (intermediate level) verification, because it increases the threat surface for identity theft that can be used againt the kind of services that actually do need it.

It’s also, on the other hand, a problem for services which need actually need strong identity verification, because while government IDs do generally have security features, they are generally not secure for use via a photograph.
What if Apple released a device that was an M2/M3 MacBook, but the back side of the screen was another screen?

I didn’t used to believe this was likely, but now we have the Vision Pro which has an internal and external screen. A combo laptop/tablet would be incredible, and they use the same chip so why not?
What AWS decides to do will determine which way the wind blows on this ultimately.
You are also not the only participant in the conversation.
Call me skeptical, but whenever I look at any new proposed Gitlab feature I wonder: how will this help them convert more enterprise customers to their $100/seat Ultimate plan?
The legal theory is that the information on the device could be contraband. Indeed, some people have been caught and prosecuted for bringing devices containing child pornography (or adult pornography officials decided must be child pornography[0]) across borders even in the internet era.

I do think the law should be updated, but I imagine it being a non-starter politically right now.

[0] https://reason.com/2010/05/03/porn-star-saves-man-from-incom...
Yes this is correct. Shotgun sequencing needs to be aligned to a reference which in this case was publicly free to access.
Seems pretty obvious:

1. Allow interaction between GitLab instances (instead of users needing different GitLab creds for each instance)

2. Emerging "GitLab network" grows to compete with, then replace, corporate-controlled Git hosts.
As I pointed out, people are free to read these articles on their sites, I'm just trying to limit the damage in a way I can control. I am also not preventing anybody from discussing this- we are discussing it here.

Claiming the Koreans made a fake mistake to throw people off while getting publication priority isn't reasonable disagreement. It's within the realm of possibility they are playing 3D chess but I think the consensus opinion is reasonable: they didn't provide enough info to reproduce what they saw, and what they saw likely isn't room temperature superconduction. Since then we've seen experimental groups "confirming superconductivity" (which they didn't) and theory groups claiming the chemistry is consistent with superconductivity, but theorists will come up with theories for anything, often by just tweaking some variables until they get something that appears plausible.
Sorry, it's baffling if I believe what exactly?
That rust supremacists are more than 0.1% of the community?
Then I can only speak of what I hear from it, and my experience is that more often than not, the discussion ends up with an implied ultimatum: either you agree that using c++ instead of rust is irresponsible and wrong, either you are being "a part of the problem" and should not be programming.
I'd like to be wrong and happened to have came across mostly bad apples.
Thanks for providing that. The section you include seems particular to using another person's existing identity, rather than generating / crafting a new one from thin air that isn't you or anyone else, which is what I think the ultimate parent was referring to:

> Nowadays, you could autogenerate both, and it's way more expensive to check the [id] than to generate one

This section seems the most relevant (?):

(5) uses, transfers, or possesses document-making implements to produce false identification or false documents with knowledge that they will be used by the person or another to commit any felony;

..but what if your intent is not for committing a felony, but simply such that X doesn't have your government-issued identification?
I don't understand. There's no iCloud subscription to enable all the cross-device interoperability.

The cloud subscription just gets you more than the 5Gb of free storage. I use Microsoft OneDrive for extra cloud storage. Handoff, shared clipboard, airdrop, sidecar, and all the other nice stuff works without extra cloud storage. You do need to have an iCloud account.
Here's a related one : https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2014/09/02/3452005...

It mentions Angelina Jolie as a good example of how fear can lead to drastic actions.

Probably better to find an article talking about the general problem to find more references.
maybe worth noting that depending on specifics a 3090 isn't necessarily a strict upgrade over an M1 max. While a 3090 will be faster on any model it can run, an M1 with 32GB of ram or more can load models which a 3090 cannot
My drinking is certainly higher than I’d like.
A lot of people don't realize that this sort of privacy right (ownership of data about you) is in direct conflict with free speech rights (which are far more protected than in Europe). We don't have a clear definition of what constitutes "the press" either.

Basically, anything that requires the general public to delete data at someone else's request is problematic.
By End of Day
This is rage farming. Parent post says using a limited tool well is fine, can lead to good results.

“The best camera is the one you have with you” is common photography advice

Whether or not the author is limited by his perception of iPad’s ability is needless hair-splitting.
I agree with you. If you have some time, consider writing a comment to your national or state/provincial consumer protection regulator.

In the US, you can file an antitrust complaint with the FTC here: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation

...and find your state regulator here: https://www.usa.gov/state-consumer
And/or they realize that trying to introduce too large changes in one go will throw the markets into damage control mode, and the results will not be favorable to the legislators and their constituents. Better boil the frog gradually than have it jump out and take its money elsewhere.
I’m pictures photos of grandma…and then nudes…all in one slideshow.
"all" and "none" are simultaneously true, which makes this a tricky edge case that needs to be explicitly accounted for.
I'm studying this comment many times. I do have a hang up with A->B being true when A is false.
The core principles of Robert's Rules are 100% applicable to work. Its about understanding the "reasons" behind the rules, rather than the rules themselves.

1. Roberts Rules states that the #1 order of business at every meeting is a vote on the prior-meeting's minutes. The written record is king in Robert's rules. In an office environment, this means that any meeting that must "exist" must be written down and secondly (this is _VERY_ important), all stakeholders in the decision need written acknowledgement that the written-record is correct.

Consider ISSUE#55, a hypothetical programming feature that should be implemented before version 3.55 of the computer program you're writing. A meeting occurred on January 5th saying Issue#55 needs to fix the GUI to accept usernames of length 20, but not of length 5. Writing down these issues is not enough or sufficient.

The most important part of this "issue" is the signoff: all people of the meeting (developers, product managers, customers if possible) should be on the email saying "Yes, Issue#55 as written in Jira is an appropriate summary of what we want, and the feature you want to program is a good idea".

Because come 5 months from now when crap happens, we all know everyone's going to point fingers at each other and blame each other. Having an appropriate signoff is as important (if not more important) than the written documentation.

So again: Robert's rules on "Agree to the secretary's meeting summary of the last meeting" is HUGELY important, in practice. But you gotta "see" what that really means in your office environment.

----------

Etc. etc. etc. Every other rule exists for a reason in Robert's rules. Minority talking point. Ability to filibuster and shut down debate by filling the space with crap (and how to avoid the Filibuster through time-requirements or other such features).

The 2-times-to-talk per issue helps prevent nonsensical loops. Give people a point, and then one opportunity for a counterpoint, and that's enough for most situations.

Let dead issues stay dead. Do not allow people to drudge up old issues and distract.

Etc. etc. All of Roberts Rules are rules of this nature, but they don't say the "why", instead they're just written as dry "10 minutes per discussion point, 2-times to talk per issue", style because all the rules are so numerous.

Its very more important to learn the "spirit of the law" and the reasons why parliamentary theory exists.
Did you also have access to free email (beyond a measly few MBs), maps, video hosting, and private data storage? Because that's what ad-tech enabled. Getting online wasn't the hard part.

Not saying that ad-tech is purely good, of course.
While that would likely be my experience with a refactoring tool (unless I didn't have a better alternative), that's not my experience with ChatGPT 4.
And that's considering I have very little tolerance for buggy software.

There was a period of a few weeks or months in which it seemed like ChatGPT had really degraded to the point of being unusable (although it could have been my biases). However, it seems to be better now (again, my subjective experience).

Sometimes I still catch it making really basic mistakes, but most times I can convince it to correct the mistake (especially if I point them out).

But what's most amazing to me is how ChatGPT is absolutely brilliant at some things, and not just technical or even obscure topics.

Recently, it gave me the most amazing idea for navigating a complex and nuanced social situation I was having difficulty with. And given the constraints of the situation, there was no way I could have gotten that idea otherwise, especially in the allotted time.

So despite its flaws and mistakes, I still find it to be a tremendously useful tool, even if only to point me in the right direction.
If you want preventive care. Exercise one more hour a week that what you are already doing. This actually reduces all-cause mortality. Anything else is snake oil. Including full body scans.
Doing an MRI without contrast is probably benign (and typical of what you would do for sports injuries), but gadolinium contrast is likely to be reevaluated in the near future, as it is a toxic heavy metal that is not fully removed from the body, even in its chelated form [0]. If you ever had a brain MRI with contrast, you would know it's a lot worse than a typical hangover, which is usually not a great sign for health impact.

[0] https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-safety-podcasts/fda-drug-...
impressive results. i think it would be easier to read at first glance if missing data/clouds were shown in white to light grey
You may not agree, but for context please understand this is a well discussed and researched statistical effect.

It’s hard to dial it in just right, but study after study have borne out that more diagnostics can often lead to worse outcomes.
Thank you, that's certainly more in-depth than my understanding was. Very helpful to read.
Also the game you see within Cyberdelia where Dade beats Kate
> Cows absolutely have a place in the grasslands cycle and saying they don't is simply brushing away decades of conservation grazing research

If cows are required for a conservation of some ecosystems (and I doubt it, sources?), let's have those cows. But those are not the reasons for keeping the remaining 99.99%.

> You seem to be under the impression that every grassland is just a forest that humans have stripped bare

No, I'm not.

> I don't subscribe to the notion that we are going to solve the climate crisis by paving over every square inch of natural habitat with soy fields

I don't either, but we're doing exactly that right now ... for the cattle. 76% of soy is grown for animal feed.

https://ourworldindata.org/soy

We would need just 25% of land to feed everyone on plant based diets.

https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets

If the world adopted a plant-based diet we would reduce global agricultural land use from 4 to 1 billion hectares

And we have to switch to those diets ... because when those developing countries develop, they'll want to eat what we do. If everyone were to adopt the western diet, we would need 5+ earths, and we don't have those. We currently import a lot of that meat / feed from other countries, but that's unsustainable.

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/917471

Feeding 10 billion people by 2050 within planetary limits may be achievable

A global shift towards healthy and more plant-based diets, halving food loss and waste, and improving farming practices and technologies are required to feed 10 billion people sustainably by 2050, a new study finds

> It's not a solution if you can't convince anyone of it

It'd be enough to remove subsidies for polluting sectors. Animal ag would be deeply unprofitable without those, and higher prices would make those products unattainable to most.

> I don't think you're going to be convinced of any moderation on your position

No, I'm not. Animal agriculture is not necessary in this day and age. It's extremely destructive and is an obstacle to the mitigation of climate change and other aspects of overshoot, such as reforestation and dwindling biodiversity.

> so I'm not sure there's much more benefit to discussing

As you wish.
I'm aware of at least one study by Stanford. PDF paper linked in this article:

https://www.techopedia.com/is-gpt-4-a-flop

Of course, I'd like to see more than one study. But this one is by a well known university, and it's pretty conclusive. GPT-4 is getting worse (especially for code, maths, and analytical reasoning) and more censored.