skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That’s like saying the amount of calories someone consumes is irrelevant to their weight.

I’m not giving China a pass. If anything, we need to prepare for a world where developing nations might meet the same standard of living we have in the US, their emissions per capita will increase
Not the OP. I was thinking about this the other day in relation to social networks like Mastadon and Bluesky vs HN and Reddit.

I have found Mastadon and things like it to not be sticky at all. I wanted to be involved in the community because it seems like its growing, but when I open the app nothing grabs my interest.

I think it is because social networks like Mastadon, Bluesky, Twitter... are "people" or "stream of conscious" oriented, while sites like HN and Reddit are "topic" oriented.

I am really interested in engaging with a topic, and want to read have have long conversations on that topic. However on "people" oriented networks there is no broad coherence to what people are talking about, and I lose interest
Has GPT4, using a SmartGPT system, broken a major benchmark, the MMLU, in more ways than one? 89.0% is an unofficial record, but do we urgently need a new, authoritative benchmark, especially in the light of today's insider info of 5x compute for Gemini than for GPT 5?
His point is that the way the term is used, to protect vendors, has nothing to do with ethics.

If a researcher found a serious vuln, the ethical thing may very well be to document it publicly without coordination with the vendor, especially if such coordination hurts users.
Does California have a plastic bag ban or what?
Improved build times is _the_ reason.

> and a compiler cache already does that and leads to greater gains

Can you back that claim up? I've not benchmarked it (and I'm not making a claim either way, you are), but a build cache isn't going to be faster than an incremental build with ninja (for example), and I can use precompiled headers for our common headers to further speed up my incrementals.

You did encourage me to go back and look at sccache though, who have fixed the issues I've reported with MSVC and I'm going to give it a try this week
British Museum warned reputation seriously damaged; decades to recover treasures
I've made it a habit to only create IAM roles/users/policies using CloudFormation. This way they can be easily removed, are version controlled and you can see why they were created in the first place.
I like that a lot! It would be awesome if the client running on goal mode had capabilities to request some search engine API + do some crawling. Imagine getting the info out of up to date github issues or directly from AWS docs.
> I often wonder how different public attitudes would be towards treatment and prevention if the US healthcare system wasn’t profit driven.

in japan some prefectures or cities will send you leaflets/guides about how to get prescreening for cancer markers and early treatment for people past a certain age

i seem to also remember seeing they offer incentives like first screening only 700 yen (about 5 bucks) etc

so, yea, different systems, different incentives i guess
> There are these "audiophile" earphones from companies like Etymotic that are basically earplugs that block all frequencies equally and still make sound good enough to rival the top end of regular headphones, yet we don't hear of those kicking the bucket.

I don't know if you've tried to use those next to lots of rifle fire, but they don't work that great. If we're talking about their ~$40 passive earplugs, the sound reduction isn't sufficient for rifles, even with a perfect fit. You're still over 145dB after the earplugs. It's explicitly not for use with gunshots, it says so on the box.

If you're talking about the active ones marketed for shooting sports (which incidentally don't block all frequencies equally), it's okay reduction for outdoor rifle (still painful for indoor rifle). It's much more passable for pistol than super loud rifles (let alone artillery/etc).

Plus those are $300 a pair, and the 3m plugs in question were what, $10?
You're right there – It looks like the author is trying to express "this lifetime lasts as long as the VM exists", which isn't possible to express in Rust. For VM::new, the callsite just picks a lifetime that lasts long enough – even if that outlasts the VM, making the lifetime useless. This is a bug and unsound.
Here’s the dissent for anyone looking for it:

https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-uyeda-statement-nf...
I mean, I didn't own the car so I have no idea what "options" a luxury car could have over a standard car with all the extra options included, but he sure seemed to think that the Prius had exactly the same things he enjoyed in the Audi.

Note, we were in Austin where something like leather seats would be a bad idea.
Chompsky makes a biting critique of the US military-industrial complex. It's a great book that I recommend everyone sink their teeth into at some point.
https://archive.li/EISxd
Yes, it should add! If we cascade a 30 dB reduction with another 30 dB reduction, we should get 60 dB reduction.

The only reason you likely won't get anywhere near 60 dB from a combination of plugs and muffs has nothing to do with logarithms, but with physics/topology.

Namely, the reason why these devices have the rating they do and not something better is not only that sounds goes through them but that it goes around them, e.g. through your skull or Eustachian tube or whatever.

When signal is leaking around the attenuators, then their decibel reductions cannot simply add. Even if the attenuators completely block signal, they will be bypassed, and so the best decibel reduction is limited by the floor of the bypassing signal.

But decibels definitely add. E.g. in an electronic circuit where we have vanishingly low leakage around our attenuation stages, if we cascade a -6 dB drop with a -12 dB drop we will get -18 dB. Now suppose we have a parasitic leakage from input to output so that even if we disconnect our circuits signal path, some input still reaches the output: say -100 dB. It might be going through ground wires, or inductive or capacitive cross-talk between circuit traces or whatever. That then sets the upper bound on our attenuation; we will not be able to attenuate better than -100 dB, because then the leakage dominates.

I mentioned the Eustachian tube. If your ears are stuffed to heck and you have muffs over that, and then yawn with an open mouth, you may suddenly hear a lot more noise. Oops!
Based on past discussion, my guess is it was removed because the name and description were wildly misleading. People starred it because it was a repo published by Microsoft called "azurechatgpt", but all it contained was a sample frontend UI for a chat bot which could talk to the OpenAI API.
In my experience Left-Write is the clear place to start. It's general purpose and fast for reads. Only if that is unsuitable (eg memory usage) does one design a custom data structure. There's a Rust lib implementation with links to more resources:

https://docs.rs/left-right/latest/left_right/
Interesting concept! Much good luck with this. Incidentally: helicopters do a lot more than just monitor, they also do repair jobs, transfer personnel and clear brush all of which might be avenues to look into.
Custom mold earplugs work _too_ well for motorcycling. They block emergency vehicle sirens.

I once got chased halfway down a mountain by a cop I couldn't hear (my KTM had nearly useless factory mirrors). Cop said he was leaning against n his horn and my foamies blocked it out entirely. Somehow I didn't get a ticket...
Intel promises next year's Xeons will challenge AMD on memory, IO channels
Want about locally running LLM?
Hopefully this study by Wendy Wood and Ian Anderson is experimentally
solid and replicates. If true it deals quite a blow to the plague of
social media - one of the ugly faces of surveillance capitalism.

If the more people engage the less value their engagement yields,
that's a great natural feedback brake. It might seem like obvious
attention dilution, but I think it counters the foundational 'scale'
model of surveillance capitalism, eventually making the observed
"choices" of users barely above the noise floor.
Short version: "A large, poorly performing fund (1.5x) pays its GPs dramatically more than a smaller, higher performing (4x) fund."
Wikipedia's mission has always been about democratizing access to information. If they're directing funds to social justice causes, it's likely an extension of that mission. Social justice is about leveling the playing field, and what better way to do that than by improving access to knowledge?

Also, another point, Wikipedia has a large community of volunteers who can influence its direction. It's not solely up to Jimmy Wales or the Wikimedia Foundation.

An as per their financials, they publish annual reports and financial statements that anyone can access. The question of transparency might be more about public perception and understanding of these reports rather than the availability of the information.
> Social media dramatically increased political polarization

No, it didn’t.

Social media emerged at a time when the US was returning to the long-term norm of partisan polarization from an aberrant period where political polarization was less aligned with the divide between the two major parties because it was a long period of overlapping political realignments (pivoting around the New Deal and the Civil Rights.)

It was also during a rise in overall political polarization, but that had also been going on since about the end of the realignment period in the mid-1990s, after a drop over the preceding couple decades from the long high of political-but-not-necessarily-partisan-polarization in the overlapping Civil Rights/Vietnam period, but it can hardly explain a trend that started before it existed.
I must say I never had this train of thought. Whether I'm unhappy or happy I greet my neighbor as it is just common courtesy.
That's an important correction. Thanks, I got a bit carried away with the comment. There's enough hearsay on the internet, and I don't want to contribute.

While we're at it, another exaggeration I made is "security incidents"; in fact, I am only aware of one.
In observing 100s of deals, advisor to dozens of early stage businesses I'd add:

So many folk show up asking to raise because they only see how their company can work "at scale". They have forgotten to do things that don't scale. It's like they skip problem-market fit, jump way past MVP (but still call it that) and almost have to raise - then try to force the market to exist.

Many (most?) of these companies I've seen could have started with a smaller fit. That could test the market theory for cheap (Lean) - cheap in terms of time and money. If the fit is good one ends up with a small business with medium good margin - and a way better idea of what the scaled up universe looks like.

Much easier to raise when you've got a) solid foundation and b) actual unit economics. However, now the raise is on real numbers - so less likely to be the crazy raise one could do on dreams alone.

Like, do you want a 0.01% chance to raise money or a 2% chance to build a business that keeps you and a few others well paid and perhaps out of the rat-race.
well, the title is really out of context, afaict (not a native speaker). I think he means they built a community by playing the big cloud platforms against each other (e.g. tell microsoft that they should advertise terraform so their users can more easily switch to azure, tell the same to amazon, google, oracle, etc). Sure, he says malicious, and it seems to be a bit forced, but for me the HN title really oversells it.

The other aspect is that this is 4 months old and not really relevant for the current debate regarding the license changes (which it seemed to aim at, when first reading the title).
Ya, with ADHD its crazy how easily things are forgotten if its not in front of you
Not to create, but at least not make it harder due to regulations/legislations.
I never said you should, but I probably would because another top level comment on this post currently says that they’re “curious how far it will progress”. Clearly it’s not obvious.
Wikipedia has lasted this long without directly paying editors. Why start paying them just for the sake of it? Also, if you don't like how they are using money, don't donate. As long as it's not being used maliciously I don't see a problem. And yes, donating to racial and climate justice causes is not malicious, we really don't need a woke boogeyman culture war targeting wikipedia. Those have done enough harm.
Well there it is. Rust is difficult not because it's inherently difficult but because it's not the spitting image of the languages you've learned and you're not interested learning (which is totally fine). Things like putting dependencies (instead of program source) in 'modules' seem intuitive not because they're inherently intuitive or common but because you've taken the time to learn Python.

IMO ripgrep is a poor example of project layout both because it does "non-standard" things and because it encompasses more than the C-based grep you're comparing it to. A simple project will almost always have its source in a directory named "src", and a project with multiple subprojects (like ripgrep) will typically not shove them into a "crates" directory.

Compared to GNU grep, the ripgrep project serves as the repository for a bunch of libraries as well as the ripgrep binary. So there's already a lot more moving parts than the name "ripgrep" might otherwise suggest.

I don't know Java, but I can read the Falstad circuit simulator source.

If you can read Java, I'm surprised impl blocks threw you for a loop as the first comparison that comes to mind is that with Java interfaces. A quick look at the Falstead simulator suggests it's using a pretty small subset of the Java language (e.g. no generics, interfaces, or exceptions) which would certainly make it seem a lot like C. Not all Java is like that.

& and *? Akin to reference and dereference in C, and given that you can overload both the comparison to C++ seems pretty apt.

In any case, for more direct explanations the API reference is a better place to look. Two short sentences explain what unwrap and explain do, and what the differences are.
LFortran can translate your Fortran code to Julia via our Julia backend. Once Julia can compile to a binary, it will be exciting to do some comparisons, like speed of compilation and performance of the generated binary. As well as the quality of the Julia code that we generate, we'll be happy to improve it to create canonical Julia code, if at all possible.
Good. It's heartbreaking to see modders pour years of love and effort into a game, only to get a cease and desist or DMCA takedown a week after launch.

Looking at you Nintendo. Iwata rolls in his grave.
That's actually exactly what I did! I removed this part from the article as I felt it was not relevant for the concurrent protocol design and it was adding mental load for readers not that fluent in Java.
Anyone have a textual version of this content? I'm not keen on watching unknown YouTube videos.
Still a better use of energy than the bytes you just wrote.
Structural Subtyping as Parametric Polymorphism
Yeah, I sort of get your point.

> So we did what any good security researcher does: We responsibly disclosed what we found. We wrote a detailed vulnerability disclosure report. We suggested remediations. And we proactively agreed not to talk about our findings publicly before an embargo date to give them time to fix the issues. Then we sent them the report via email.

This is why the whole “I can’t believe my classmates threatened legal action” line of thinking doesn’t make sense. They weren’t acting like classmates themselves. They were acting like professionals. I imagine the embargo date wasn’t well-received.

It’s also interesting that they listed all of the steps they followed that a “good security researcher” would do. So why didn’t they start with communication first before trying to hack the system? Good security researchers do that. (Not all of the time, obviously.)

> Well, a me and few security-minded friends were drawn like moths to a flame when we heard that. Our classmates were posting quite sensitive stories on Fizz, and we wanted to make sure their information was secure.

> So one Friday night…

And this is where the “good-faith security research” line of reasoning broke down for me. Think about the wording. To my ears/eyes, those sentences above seem like a carefully crafted but still flimsy excuse. It’s like a lie that you tell yourself over and over so much that you end up believing it. It seems like the researchers just wanted to have some fun on a Friday night (like he said). (And there’s nothing wrong with that. But to characterize it as only doing “good faith security research” seems like a stretch.) I guess I’m saying that I’m just not convinced. I don’t buy it.

But I get it. Articles need to be written. Talks needs to be given.

(And yes, I do believe that Fizz didn’t need to threaten legal action.)
I believe the distaste is with the donation banners begging for donations like they're going out of business while funneling funds to these campaigns that donors might not realize their donations are going to, versus keeping the lights on. If you have to "manage the facts" to get the donation volume you're after, that's the problem.

Perhaps allow for folks to provide a directed donation to Wikipedia proper, while also allowing unrestricted donations for the social stuff. Otherwise, you're no better than the Red Cross [1] [2], riding on your brand to raise funds while not delivering the impact your donors expect of you.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G_dBggzu-c

[2] https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-red-cross-raised-...

(previously donated to Wikipedia, now directing those funds to the Internet Archive instead)
Some users have always complained about profanity on HN and it has always been a minority. I don't think sensibilities have changed much.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Just 18mph of wind is enough to cause permanent hearing damage. Windshields and helmets don't block enough of the air (the rider needs some air ventilation for defogging in cold weather and cooling in hot weather.)

If you try to fully seal the helmet you cause measurable oxygen deprivation. https://youtu.be/x_ej8sehs8k?si=9LtvP0TfhQzgNDVM
> you need a license to have a copy in the first place

I'm pretty sure you need a license to make a copy.

When you buy a book from a bookshop, you don't need a license to own it. A license was needed to make it, but the publisher got that from the author when the author agreed for the publisher to publish the book.

After that the first-sale doctrine kicks in. You can resell books you own, or scribble in them, or set them on fire, or rent them out, and there's nothing the copyright holder can do. They authorised for that copy to be made, what happens next is up to the owner of that copy... with the exception of the right to make another copy from that copy. That's still reserved for the copyright holder. Hence, copy-right.

> so yes, you need a license to cross out words.

Sorry, but that's absurd.
Ashton Cofer and Teddy Solomon, according to this article:

https://stanforddaily.com/2022/11/01/opinion-fizz-previously...
Yes. Frequently any tool set that has gawk will also include sed, perl, cut, head, tail, less, vi / vim, etc.

It is nice that Git for Windows includes bash and all these tools.
Plus you will tend to take committing decisions like hiring, location, or business goals that will limit how much you explore alternative paths.
Having a team to manage forces you to find problems they can solve, which is not necessarily where the money is.
You have a css/js developer? Ok I have to find frontend tasks now. Etc
also Hell's Kitchen (since 2020), downtown MPLS

https://www.hellskitcheninc.com/#about-us-employee-owned-sec...
>Social justice is about leveling the playing field,

Social justice is just a nicer term for anarchy, because it's justice as society (read: certain vocal minority groups) deems it. There is nothing consistent nor fair about it, because what justice is can differ from day to day depending on the mood of society.

Leveling the playing field, as you put it, is done by pursuing legal justice: Writing and passing legislation and judging all parties concerned before a court of law equally and fairly.

Neither have anything to do with democratizing access to information either.
Startups don't have big reputations to protect unless they're tied to someone famous, and also they need a path towards acquisition for early investors to care. There isn't really a way around that.
> society is fair and balanced (when it's not a white hetero-patriarchy), men just aren't fit for it, is the takeaway.

that is most certainly not what the article says. it squarely takes aim at soaring income inequality as a key factor, for example. Are we to read your anecdotes and then conclude, "wow Andrew Tate is right, women really should be treated as second class citizens, to be sexually trafficked and otherwise by people such as myself, otherwise men will continue be mistreated" ?

Re the Lockheed thing, that article is written by Chris Rufo who is pretty much the most successful right wing propagandist of our time right now, literally single-handedly convinced half the country that "critical race theory" is being taught to public school kids, which it is not, in any way, or has ever been, or will ever be [1]. One Chris Rufo is worth 25 "Mother Joneses" on the scale of bias.

I work for a large multinational company with a robust DEI program (Red Hat via IBM) and DEI programs are nothing like whatever that was that Lockheed was doing, which based on the ultra-right-wing propagandist source who wrote that story I would be extremely suspect is vastly out of context.

[1] https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conse...
I use AI all the time for my job because why waste time writing some JsDocs, pull request etc. When LLM are so great at writing summeries?
It's a tricky problem: a lot of people who find bootcamps appealing are self-taught like you and me, but don't have the elusive "experience" to put on a resume.

There is no reasonable way to differentiate between the two, despite that being the entire point of accreditation.

Maybe instead of acting like there are 100 million open six-figure-salaried positions and nothing else, we can actually give inexperienced devs a mediocre place to start.
Haha i also thought about that Y Combinator video. Yep, their prediction didn't age well and it's becoming clear that openAI is actually a direct competitor to most of the startups that are using their api. Most "chat your own data" startups will be killed by this move.
Here is how to properly use the inexpensive soft foam ear plugs:

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/content/earplug.html

What I often see people do is skip all that and just stuff it in the ear until it doesn't fall out. This does not get a proper seal. It might still be better than nothing but I doubt it protects much when used incorrectly.
Probably not the entire team.
At just 30kph you are getting permanent hearing loss. https://www.noisyplanet.nidcd.nih.gov/have-you-heard/wind-no...
The scooter company was well aware of it as I told them about that + several other issues immediately. :)
That depends on the task. There are plenty of LLM that will run locally that will do things like write emails, write a summary of some text.
I am more impressed that he was able to configure all those services in just 48 hours!
Nice selective quoting. I said in Houston repeatedly and you still try to skip it in the exact same sentence you quoted. If you have to take things out of context to make a point then don't make it.

I said the state government leans right and the local government leans left and they balance out. Which is exactly the case why there is a lawsuit right now which they may win.

Your dishonest argument is just pathetic and honestly made the cause you support looks like trash.