skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How did you configure the Wacom? Like in xorg.conf? Any tips?
I think the ridicule comes from the fact that it had the feel of a regurgitated ELI5 explanation that someone had given to him. You can't exactly call it inaccurate, but it was a bit like hearing "an airplane is like a big metal bird" from the head of the FAA.

(A sibling comment points out that calling them "tubes" instead of "pipes" reinforces this garbled-regurgitation impression)
Yesterday I saw my nephew, just four years old, talk with such excitement at a train he saw last week. In eras gone by I'm sure this would have people wondering if he'll be a train driver when he grows up, but I'm under no illusions that "climate refugee" is the only possible future he is hurtling towards.

I don't know how his parents handle it, if they have accepted it at all.
> This tendency to invent “facts” is a phenomenon known as hallucination

No. It is a phenomemon misrepped as hallucination by the "AI" marketeers.

It is a phenomemon known as fabrication, little different from e.g. feeding random data to a 3D printer for a month then selecting the output that looks credible.

There's nothing inventive about it. Invention is exclusive to intelligence.
> ChatGPT is great at executing, but it’s not so great at coming up with new ideas.

I’m not sure if I agree with the second half of that statement. Several times I’ve asked GPT-4 to suggest ideas, and it came up with some very good ones that I would not have thought of myself. Here’s an exchange I had with it just now:

https://chat.openai.com/share/d23ce0d2-ed60-4259-9176-73b590...

I’m also not sure if I agree with the first half, particularly the “great” in “great at executing.” While I have also been amazed a few times by code it wrote for me, I have run into more cases where, despite repeated back-and-forths with me, it was never able to produce code that ran.

Maybe better, in my experience, would be “ChatGPT can often come up with good ideas, but it is only occasionally able to execute them.”
Surely it would be easier to simply disable internet access until the user enables it. Bonus points if you can control what it talks to at the IP stack and DNS level. Something i've wanted for decades at this point.... yea, little snitch does this, but it's not built in and belongs on my phone as well.

Preventing an app from accessing browser data feels like an approach to make people feel safe while providing no meaningful protections from most malware behavior.
You can’t. I know this because I’ve used it a lot, and it’s like a newspaper article. Anytime it’s the talking about something I’m an expert in, I spot tons of errors.

I don’t notice nearly as many errors when I’m asking it about things I’m not already an expert in. The most likely explanation is that it’s fooling me.

I pay for gpt4. People using chatgpt to “learn” are absolutely slurping up incorrect information without knowing it.

Imagine trying to teach yourself physics with textbook where 10% of it is completely but convincingly wrong.
I have a vague memory of the Ruby community from around 2008-2010 going through dramas as well, but at least it wasn't in the core-lang layer.

It left a very similar impression: silly and unprofessional.
Android. However I found Expert Mode and activated it. Then Taps and gestures, Gesture Manager, One-Finger Swype and there are the two swyping gestures to set brightness.

One is done. Text color next, maybe.

As a side note: I always thought that CoolReader settings UI was a mess but Koreader's one is much worse: less funky but even less efficient.
Do you know what the point would be of it spitting out an Airbnb clone ? Very little because Airbnb is a huge business which has to solve a lot of problems outside of copying someone’s code ?
The TypeScript Access Control Library for Unmatched Typesafety
"iamjs" - the game-changing TypeScript Access Control Library is here!

Tired of authorization headaches? Look no further! iamjs is the complete solution you've been waiting for. With its unparalleled typesafety and end-to-end functionality, iamjs makes authorization a breeze for both Node.js and browser environments.

Featuring support for popular frameworks like express, koa, next.js, and react, iamjs is versatile and adaptable to your project's needs. Choose from a range of packages:

@iamjs/express - Express middleware that simplifies authorization workflows @iamjs/koa - Koa middleware for seamless authorization integration @iamjs/next - Next.js middleware for effortless authorization management @iamjs/react - React component for hassle-free authorization implementation

And that's not all! For maximum flexibility, you can also opt for the @iamjs/core package, which contains all the necessary logic and can be seamlessly integrated with any framework of your choice.

Don't waste time on complex authorization setups anymore. Join the iamjs revolution now and experience the power of typesafety combined with effortless authorization management!

Check out iamjs on GitHub: https://github.com/triyanox/iamjs
Oracle Oriented Programming, ask the oracle and it shall answer.

The whole AI hype reminds me of the ancient Greeks going to the Oracle at Delphi to obtain answers.

From the perspective of an outerspace alien, what is the difference between asking a god like figure for answers or an AI is some data center?
Is it only for people with developer access?
I have no judgement, I was just curious.
We seem to be moving further away from "physics" based reasoning with this analogy. Do trucks not like wearing hats? Do they get crushed against their pillows when they sleep?

All this time and I never realised Pixar's Cars has been spreading misleading physics.
Do you double check everything? The hallucinations is what keeps holding me back from using it more as a private tutor.
I haven't tried ChatGPT for coding yet but I have used it to study human languages (I've been studying Japanese for a little while) and it's so easy to get it to spew complete nonsense with perfect aplomb that it makes me super wary of using it for any "serious" things. In particular anything you're not super familiar with where you can't easily evaluate if the output is correct or not.

The other day I was struggling to parse a Japanese sentence, a particular grammatical construction made no sense to me. I wrote the sentence in ChatGPT, asked it to break it down for me, and it came up with a plausible-sounding explanation. Problem was, I couldn't find any hit on google when I searched for the thing it was talking about. So I asked ChatGPT to give me more details, tell me what I could search for, and it would insist that its explanation was correct and then gaslight me by telling me that the reason I couldn't find anything on Google was because it was a niche subject not usually taught in grammar books.

After some more searching around and double-checking it turns out that I had misread a kanji and the sentence I typed into ChatGPT was complete gibberish as a result. ChatGPT's explanation, while sounding very plausible, was complete fabrication.

The idea that some inexperienced people are shipping software using this tool is insane to me.
I was once invited to give a talk (which was more or less a keynote, although I don’t think the word “keynote” was used) at a major conference. I was specifically invited to talk about my work on X. IMO it would have been really odd for anyone on the program committee to subsequently say “well, I’m skeptical that project X will pan out — maybe the talk should just be a regular track talk about X or a plenary talk about Y instead” after the invitation was given.

It’s not as though giving a talk implies any particularly strong endorsement by the community at large that the subject is going to pan out. And if the talk is just about “whatever the speaker is working on”, then there is absolutely no implied endorsement of what they end up talking about.
Apple has developed the first and only generally available "evil maid" resistant computer systems. Part of participating in this secure ecosystem involves more effort on your part to comply with the security requirements.

Or you can just develop for vulnerable-as-all-getout Linux or Windows systems. Your choice.
One of my things to try to make is an isometric flowchart editor like the amazing isoflow.io (which is slowly being open-sourced by the dev)
Show HN: An Open Source Starter to Build Shopify Apps Using Nest Js
I don’t know where you (or your nephew are) but you’re tremendously underplaying the human races ability to simply adapt.
Cold war is back. Yay!
In the simplest case sure. It’s just as likely to add subtle bugs that don’t immediately show up.
> I think we have to consider that the principles of the free software movement,

> They are principles that deal in software development and licensing in strict isolation, outside of the social context of their use. They are code-centered, not human-centered.

That's kinda the point. There is no human-centered alternative to copyright; GPL and the Free Software movement is about weaponizing the only authority licensees seem to respect.

> The first is: how easy is open source software to use, anyway?

That's like asking how easy Creative Commons software is to use. Is there any common denominator? We're talking about open licenses here; anyone from Joe Blow to Raytheon can use them. A license rarely speaks to the quality of the software provided, especially when it's an open one.

> The second, more complicated one, is: I don’t want my software to be used to cause harm.

Simple solution: don't publish it.

Seriously. If you have overly-conscious work and want to ensure it is never used to harm someone, then don't share it. If your software is particularly useful for killing people, killers and fiends will use it regardless of the license you impose. By sharing it, you make that possible.

> They should not have to simply accept that someone could use their work to kill people, commit hate, perpetuate systemic injustices, or otherwise harm. There is nothing good and principled about that idea.

Then why publish anything, ever?
It's trivial plumbing, but is it efficient?

I can't see the full details of the states/all API call in the code screenshot but it appears to be iterating through the entire dataset of Open Sky Network flights and for each one determining if it is within the observable radius.

That's a lot of work and inefficiency and could hit the API rate limits.

A more efficient approach would be to call the states/all API passing a bounding box ( supported by the API ) and then just eliminating any aircraft that fall within the disjunction of the bounding box and the observable radius ( the corners ).
> I am actually not convinced either way. Some people believe it is so expensive it will necessitate degrowth, while others think that so much economic change will almost certainly spur economic growth. Either way I think that people who push the degrowth narrative are further reinforcing the view that climate action is too costly. Nonetheless it could be that they are right.

Whatever your view on that is, it doesn't really matter because the costs if climate change goes unchecked are going to be catastrophically high - direct in terms of e.g. having to rebuild burned down/flooded/etc. areas, more electricity for AC, etc. or indirect such as having to accommodate mass migration from climate refugees.
> I don't think she set out to deceive, and your stated reasons for thinking so don't pan out.

If you don't think that, then you should read her Twitter, at which is pinned to the top her paper with this introductory text: "This paper details how an innovation some historians have called 1 of the top 10 of the industrial revolution was first developed in the late 18C by 76 Black Jamaicans in a foundry just west of Morant Bay, but the central concern of the paper is much more important.. 1/4"
This feels a bit like survivor's bias. Or perhaps more accurately akin to the file drawer problem in academia. This may have worked really quickly this time for this specific use case, but what about the vast number of times a prompt like this this won't have worked for other people? The other metaphor that comes to mind is monkeys and typewriters, although clearly here the odds are a bit better.
Plasma Etching
I was with you on most of your points until you extrapolated this to "the left" and rolled on into Netflix shows as evidence of the degradation of academia due to politics you don't agree with.
Why even use kubernetes then? You’d be better off just deploying the applications with docker compose on the host.
I noticed the "make a website in X minutes" video phenomenon too. I wrote a blog post about it where I examine about 10 of these videos and discuss how serious they are. You can see it here. https://joehuntblog.com/posts/build-website-with-chatgpt-no-...
As human being have been doing since the dawn of history.
My mom was a computer in a bank.

I was a word processor for two or three years before I really got a programming contract.

My dad was a computer programmer and so am I now.

My main project at the moment is a plugin for ChatGPT to be able to program simple websites or web apps that I host on my server for people.

The next generation will also find it interesting that a "computer programmer" used to be a person.
stretching my fingers is actually good for my injury, I do stretching exercises when I have breaks
The story of Windows 95 as a feat of software architecture is under-explored.

This team made a wildly successful transition from a 16-bit, cooperatively multitasked, unprotected, DOS-extender OS to a 32-bit, preemptively multitasked, protected memory “real” OS while maintaining excellent DOS and Win16 compatibility—in three years.

It took Apple, working in a much smaller hardware and software ecosystem, at least a decade & a near-death experience to do much the same, and only via acquisition.

There’s a great book about the creation of NT, Showstopper. Its implementation has been explored extensively since the beginning in Microsoft Press’ own Inside Windows NT and Windows Internals books.

But the story of how Microsoft pulled off “Cougar” and “Panther” remains largely untold, AFAIK.
It's honestly not different from coming across a blog post or a StackOverflow answer, which might be wrong or outdated. You just try it and see what works. If it doesn't work, you tinker with it, go to the documentation, etc. You can also tell ChatGPT it doesn't work and show it the error and it sometimes has ideas.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Could you give an example? Juries can’t pull people off the street and convict them. Are you saying this evil person is being charged with a crime they clearly did not commit?

Judges have been known to set aside jury convictions when they believe the jury erred on the facts. They specifically give the jury instructions on the matter they’re supposed to decide.

Juries are supposed to decide matters of fact only, not matters of law. If the evidence shows that the defendant did not commit the act and the jury convicts anyway, it’ll either be set aside or overturned on appeal.

Of course sometimes people are wrongly convicted and punished of crimes, but that happens in every country and it’s always bad and must be fought against.
Three to five on-site staff to operate a mid-sized DC (10MW/~1K rack yield) is not unusual. This is assuming there are several others on-call.
Show HN: Subsidian – Visualize a Substack archive in Obsidian graph view
We posted almost the same comment. I do disagree with one point. The US is the country with the most global power and is instrumental in driving global change so I really disagree that they do not hold a huge responsibility.

I mean, Germany is trying to lead by example, but their attempt is pathetic. Nobody is going to care what Germany does and they do not have the economic and political power to enforce global change. But the US does.

I am not saying the US can do it alone, but it has to show both initiative and willingness.
What are you even going on about?
Surely any surface with this feature would get covered in a layer of grime and become ineffective within days.
André van Schaik discusses new neuromorphic simulator
Greenfield projects in less popular programming languages and frameworks is a miss, too.

Currently working on an Elixir project with Ash Framework, and I wouldn't trust a single Chat GPT output for either of them.
Then I have not explained myself correctly.

If I take a philosophy class, I can talk to teacher, discuss things,explore questions and Contradictions. And I do :-).

When Plato says "let us all agree there exists a perfect blue independent of any real world blue", I want to argue that no, "blue" is a human construct and dependent on accidental biology. We can't even make sure thay we all experience the same blue and what "blue" is, is purely definitional. There exists no inherent "blue" other than us arbitrarily taking a chunk of EM spectrum and attaching a loose meaning of "blue" to it.

Plato did not know of EM spectrum or cones in our eyes. half the things he starts as "it is obviously true that..." I scream"no it is not! I challenge your key assumptions ".but he's dead and can't argue with me :-). So for me, that's not the whole point of reading Plato - it's the whole frustration.

-----

Edit : you've added "that way you're exposed to Socratic method " which changes the gist of the comment, but I'll still argue it's a horrible way to do so. I understood Socratic method for a decade if not two before I tried Plato. If I tried Plato first, the dubious and implausible arguments would have turned me off completely. Both the teacher's and the student's proposals are frequently at odds with our current understanding, so as a reader I'm not invested in either and the argument feels farcical as opposed to logical.

My point is:

If somebody asks "what is Socratic method", pointing them to Plato is a horrible (and frankly elitist / gatekeeping) way to go. It can rather be explained in a few minutes with excellent, understandable modern examples. You can get working knowledge quickly and effectively. There are circumstances and situations where reading the original is relevant! But if you want to understand the basics, or even intermediate knowledge of actual subject, reading original newton and original Plato are not great ways to start.
I since found this project implementing GPT2 in Fortran https://github.com/certik/fastgpt
I'm not sure if it's due to the size of the TAM, but there are a lot of pickleball players with a lot of money, and some of them are investing that money into making their hobby into a bigger sport. This sort of dynamic is keeping competitive bridge alive right now.
> Do you think it's a nice middle ground?

It is.

The cloud fanbois will tell you until their blue in the face that its not.

I fully accept that the cloud is great for bursty workloads where you're doing nothing and then suddenly half the planet needs your service for a couple of days. That is clear.

But if you've got a reasonably stable baseload running 24x7x365 and a few modest bursts here and there then honestly people need to do the math, because if you look at beyond the short-term figures, the cloud tends to work out much more expensive than colo if you look at for example a three-year period.

Most people don't need the scale the cloud gives. They think they do, but really most people will never grow to FANG scale as much as they may dream it !
I'm outside the US - not sure what you mean.
Why is YouTube needed for this project?

Why not just put all those videos on a webserver?
Shhh, don't bring up global cooling.
You do not need launder for this. Placement new is enough as long as you refer to the newed object via the pointer returned by new.

My understanding is that launder exists if you need to recover the pointer to the allocated object directly from the pool pointer.

Re C, I'm far from expert, but I think that the issue exists primarily if you try to allocated within an existing named object (like in the parent examu). If you carve out your allocations from a larger chunk of anonymous memory it is supposedly conforming

[A lot of "I think", "supposedly"... All object lifetimes and pointer derivation stuff is underspecified in the standards]
“Probably ok” doesn’t seem adequate to cover wildfires, large scale storm flooding in areas which weren’t previously prone to it, tropical diseases becoming endemic, etc. We probably won’t have massive famines but we’re definitely going to have cost increases and reduced availability which a lot of people are going to have a hard time with. People who aren’t rich are going to struggle with all of this at the same time, especially when homeowners insurance starts meaning you can’t get a mortgage (or sell your home to someone who’ll need one).
Does the webpage parsing functionality of wget only come into play when doing something like an entire site backup?
Not sure about us-east-1 specifically but there are frequently fairly large natural disasters in the US - there are always hurricanes and stuff, there was that flooding in new York not so long ago, earthquakes in California in the 90s, wildfires etc. And this is just in the US. Basically, don't put all your servers in NYC or all in SF or whatever, but put half in NYC and half in SF and that random hurricane/wildfire/flood/snowstorm etc won't take out both of your data centers.

.... Of course then you have latency issues to think about, but that is often quite application-specific and potentially a good problem to have if a slightly slow website or database or whatever is the biggest problem you have when the alternative would have been a total shutdown.

There are also occasional fires and stuff that take out a whole building (I think OVH had this in France recently?). Ensure that your failure zones are physically separate places, and not just logically-separate zones in the same physical building, or in a building that is next to the one on fire :)
Your take is right, but a bit extreme. One thing I feel people forget is that speed is a feature. Having used a code editor with excellent AI suggestions for more than a month, I can say that I'm very frustrated when it doesn't work and all of a sudden I have to type the boring boilerplate again and make the innumerable, stupid mistakes that any human manually doing it will make. My prediction is that saving the stupid stuff for the LLM will lead to much increased productivity and ability to concentrate. Will it be 30x throughout? No. But with enough 30x moments in your day, you become maybe 10-20% more effective, and a lot more than that when prototyping (as is the case here). I think we'll look back on the time before LLM with the same puzzlement as people looking at punch cards today.
How do you simply adapt to temperatures which are literally unlivable such as wet bulb temperatures hitting 33C+ in areas such as the Middle East and South Asia? Humans literally cannot survive at such temperatures. Mass migration or mass investment in redoing the building stock and electrical grid to make indoors habitable are the only options, and neither are really viable (tens of millions migrating will cause severe issues up to and including wars, meanwhile most of the countries likely to be impacted simply do not have the money nor governance needed to rebuild everything with AC).
Most people couldn't even handle masking and staying indoors during a plague. At a time when hospitals were rationing oxygen they were folks acting like not being able to go to Applebee's was a human rights violation.

The most likely adaptation is some form of eco-fascism.