skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is at least one aspect where they may be a serious competitive problem: their enormous size enables them to buy up a huge share of the world's most advanced chip supply from TSMC. Their scale and the profit that goes with it makes that possible. They can very effectively limit competition globally through that mechanism.

You're a smaller company with a hot new phone? You need a large supply of 3nm chips from TSMC to compete? You can't get them because Apple is buying them all.

And their leverage on TSMC (with TSMC eating the cost of defective supply), which is very remarkable unto itself, may also be a serious problem.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/08/report-apple-is-savi...
Wind is due to Earth's rotation much in the same way that airflow through ducts is due to the ducts.

Earth's rotation directs the energy imbued by the Sun, much as ductwork directs airflow through a structure imbued by blower motors.

But neither wind, nor ducted airflow, originate from, are driven by, or otherwise exhaust the Earth's rotation, or the containing ductwork, respectively.

(Yes, there are frictional forces of the atmosphere against the Earth's surface. On balance these probably net out, as atmospheric flows at large scale are balanced, else we'd end up with a zone of vacuum and one of infinite pressure on the Earth's surface.)

The original question was "How much [wind] is due to earth's rotation?", in the context of whether or not wind is a renewable energy resource. Given that wind is fundamentally driven by solar flux, wind is renewable, and it is not driven (vs. directed or influenced) in any meaningful way by Earth's rotation.
This might be a controversial take but by that reasoning, I don't think America is a particularly free country. Most people need to work whatever shitty job they can get and class mobility is relatively difficult even with things like higher education and the like
I gotta admit, perhaps a bit naive of me, that the concept of "tech charlatans" didn't click for me until now. It's true, they are out there, and I see it now. I mean, I know there are phone scammers, but they probably been there before tech. I know there are hackers writing viruses and exploits, but those are oftentimes talented people doing bad things. However, this comment, and a couple recent experiences really drove "tech charlatans" home.

One experience was a trip to a crypto conference. Many booths were making unsubstantiated, impossible claims. If you tried to ask how, they couldn't answer. Like, someone would say they made transactions instantaneous, and when I asked how they solved the problems of unpredictable networks, they'd have no answer. It got pretty frustrating. I had to dig through a few claims like these only to be convinced that they're selling snake oil.

Another (less recent) experience was looking through a spreadsheet of government approved innovation/research grants. I couldn't believe what I was reading. Many of the entries seemed to make absolutely no sense, purposefully using buzzwords to sound smart, but having no meaning when unpacked. Buzzword salads. These are funded projects. And to get more money on round 2, all the "innovators" had to do is show any activity, which is very easy to fake.

So yes, tech charlatans. I'm a bit on the old school side of tech, and this gives me cognitive dissonance. I'm used to thinking of software devs/engineers as honest/creative/driven, but I guess this was always inevitable. Our field is very exploitable, because many people put their livelihood in tech, while knowing very little about it.
I think I understand now. Thanks for taking the time to explain it. Like I said it was never my intention to flamebait.
I think they mean join a company within 3 months of its founding, to max out shares/options.
I always wondered what would have happened to Bird/Lime if COVID hadn't hit. I love those things
We know many animals (and even plants) communicate without language. There is no reason to suspect that whales even use language.
Haha I remember that joke.
Writing your own compiler

- demystifies compilers, interpreters, linkers/loaders and related systems software, which you now understand. This understanding will no doubt one day help in your debugging efforts;

- elevates you to become a higher level developer: you are now a tool smith who can make their own language if needed (e.g. to create domain specific languages embedded in larger systems you architect).

So congratulations, on top of other forms of abstraction, you have mastered meta-linguistic abstraction (see the latter part of Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, preferably the 1st or 2nd ed.).
In Praise of Heroic Masculinity
Well I suppose that's the difference between thoughtful systems and process and zero systems and process, and also poor problem definition. There is some nuance between "ship literally anything to end users" and "ship an improvement" or something else to end users, or to a beta that roles out to end users and isolates the possible regression to a smaller surface area. It also seems like those developers might either suck (possible, but uncharitable), or that the system rewards the wrong things.

But much of the time, better or worse laters of bureaucracy in the system come about from these mistakes which will eventually happen, so it's a very valid point, and I do think a lot of the time it's companies building up scar tissue and not being capable of getting the necessary surgery to fix it.
The biggest problem with being an audiophile is that your ears' high-frequency response diminishes rapidly with age.

The old joke that an AM radio is plenty good enough for 70-year olds is true!

A set of hearing aids can help, but it's not the same as being 20 again.
I used to dislike it mainly because we received so many CVs in .wks format and they were a complete pain to work with.
Are they upsampling - whatever that means in the context of datasets?

AFAIU slim pajama is about 627B tokens, and Starcoder:

> approximately 250 Billion tokens.

Ed: I see TFA says:

> Combined Dataset Size - Around 950B tokens

> Total Tokens During Training - 3 trillion (slightly more than 3 epochs/1430k steps)

... but I'm not seeing how one becomes three?
That's more like 1 trillion than 3 trillion tokens?
As someone who dabbles in electronics, it was eye-opening to go to DigiKey and PCBWay and price up a modern x86 motherboard.

Obviously DigiKey doesn't have the chipset ICs, but at quantities of 100 just the connectors, VRMs, passives and the big 8-layer PCB to house it was so much higher.

Like I knew it would be higher, but this exercise really put industrialized manufacturing and economy of scale into perspective.
You're essentially just asking them to destroy the company and each of those products. I'm really not sure how you're going to go about this when all of these operate within the walled garden. I mean it 100% won't happen, but further I don't see how this would benefit the consumer in any way.
Look up Engineering Explorer Post for high schools students. Each month the attend a presentation on an engineering discipline, and the a site tour. My kid got to visit a nuclear reactor, food packaging manufacturer, biomedical device development, aircraft maintenance depot, etc.
Only if you use their definition of monopoly at minimum they form an Oligopoly in phones. (They repeatedly have claimed in court that all computing devices are the market they compete in with iPhone)

If you are an Apple user what real choice do you have? The cost of switching is massive for established users as everything Apple only supports Apple.

Sure an unaffiliated user can choose but once you are in one camp it requires a massive change to switch.

They utilize this to raise their prices holding the difficulty to switch against their users.

On a similar note they use heavy vertical integration to avoid options for users. You want their OS you need to buy their hardware.

"Doesn't have a monopoly" only makes sense in a make believe world where you have 95% market share or enough competition.
International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)
Robots pouring drinks in Vegas: As AI grows, the city's workers brace for change
> Teenagers, young adults, pregnant women, drivers and mentally ill people

one of these things is not like the other ones.
The original report reads like it was heavily influenced by Apple's marketing team. There are asides that are just ad copy for Apple's other products, for example,

> Users can find thousands of apps on the App Store to help them adopt healthier lifestyles. Many of these apps take advantage of Apple’s HealthKit API, which allows the use of sophisticated sensors on iPhone and Apple Watch, while ensuring that user data is safe according to Apple’s rigorous privacy and data security protocols.

The actual 1.1T number comes mostly (81%) from goods and services purchases (mostly retail) made in mobile apps on Apple devices. The methodology?

> We estimate the share of each app category’s sales that occur via mobile apps, within each geography, using information collected from marketing surveys or data on usage patterns. Finally, we apportion usage to Apple platforms based on the overall iOS share market share.

So it's an estimate; not hard data.

I don't want to discount the conclusion, because it's always difficult to understand Apple from outside the company, and the point really is just that people make a lot of purchases on Apple devices.

(Conflict of interest: I'm an Apple shareholder.)
I feel like it's worth linking here to the big report from a few years ago: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/97690/MIT-CSA...

Probably the most relevant part from the summary is:

> Third, exceptional access would create concentrated targets that could attract bad actors. Security credentials that unlock the data would have to be retained by the platform provider, law enforcement agencies, or some other trusted third party. If law enforcement’s keys guaranteed access to everything, an attacker who gained access to these keys would enjoy the same privilege. Moreover, law enforcement’s stated need for rapid access to data would make it impractical to store keys offline or split keys among multiple keyholders, as security engineers would normally do with extremely high-value credentials. Recent attacks on the United States Government Office of Personnel Management (OPM) show how much harm can arise when many organizations rely on a single institution that itself has security vulnerabilities. In the case of OPM, numerous federal agencies lost sensitive data because OPM had insecure infrastructure. If service providers implement exceptional access requirements incorrectly, the security of all of their users will be at risk.
I haven't seen compelling critiques of it[0]. Curious to read them.

Their findings:

On medical/surgical vs. nothing:

"Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence)"

On N95/P2 respirators vs. medical/surgical:

"The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; 5 trials, 8407 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence)."

[0] https://www.cochranelibrary.com/web/cochrane/content?templat...
I might have read it wrong, but I read OP as saying something like "people want to do agile, but wait until the project is perfect, thereby negating the whole point".
And Apple has basically said the 150-200 billion in cash that has accumulated, parked in tax havens, selling their veblen goods, they cant find a single thing on the planet worth investing it in. So its just growing like a nice fat pointless tumor.

Think about that for 2 seconds. What does it mean?

It shows us in 2023, corporate robots can design a highly optimized runaway process of cash extraction from the chimp troupe, for no reason other than it being possible. There is no purpose to these processes.

When a corporate robot finds a scaling rule it keeps scaling. Scale always needs purpose. Otherwise we end up like Apple. And only fools think the Apple story of mindless scaling is going well or going to end well.
> Apple components available on the open market would be the kick for Intel to finally do something. Competition would be working again. (BTW, I'm an Apple user myself, but the way that Apple gouges you on storage and memory is beyond ridiculous)

There is plenty of competition but for making ARM chips - Qualcomm, Microsoft, Amazon, Samsung and Google all make ARM offshoots and none of them are exactly little companies. Whose fault is it that they can’t compete?

You chose to buy a MacBook unlike 80%+ of the PC buying population. Apple must have had something that you valued to make it worth the price.
> Doesn’t topspin reduce bounce height, and backspin increase it?

No, it's the opposite.
I love serious eats. One of my favorite food blogs. Have yet to have a bad recipe from them.
Market share doesn't determine anti-trust action, it's merely one factor that tends to play a role in the ability of a company to harm consumers.

I don't know why this myth about % market share and anti-trust refuses to die.

Harm to consumers is the primary consideration. Apple has that ability through locking up component supply in an aggressively exclusionary manner that restricts competition, which then harms consumers. If Apple perpetually uses their very elevated profit margins to lock up that supply, you can bet they're plainly raising the average cost of a smartphone by limiting how many other lower cost competing devices there are eg at TSMC 3nm.
> couldn't make sense of their product strategy. But maybe that's a me problem

Well, you drove a Bambino on a 60 miles each way commute over a huge hill, so there's something questionable going on there :p

I can't see much wrong with the "start with microcontrollers, work your way up to single-issue Linux-capable, then dual-issue in-order, then small then bigger and bigger OoO" strategy.

What else can you do? Try to take on Xeon day #1?

On the other hand, sure, you can ask a lot of questions about how you take that to the market, and who the customers will be.

SiFive early on obviously thought there were a lot of people out there who really wanted to make little custom chips for this and that but didn't have the skills, and SiFive (via buying OpenSilicon) could provide a one stop shop. And even provide a lot of automation around that, in the SiFive Chip Designer -- there used to be a web page (similar to SiFive Core Designer) but it's long gone, but see e.g. this Yunsup's presentation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxd93jb1OAk

It seems no one really wanted to do that -- or at least SiFive didn't find them. So they got rid of OpenSilicon again (at a HUGE profit) and seem to be just selling CPU core IP to people who were already making chips, had all the people and knowledge to do that, but just wanted to change away from Arm or Tensilica or 8051 or whatever.

> what they're doing with 175m in Series F funding. Where do you go from there?

That's still absolute chickenfeed compared to what Intel or AMD or probably Arm spend on designing a single core.
They are no more optimized for 3D images than taste or smells.

Try and describe your chair or oddly shaped rock as a 3D object without referring to it by classification and ask yourself how many people would have used the same sounds in the same order. There’s no direct mapping between 3D objects and the sounds used to describe them,
Chemical energy. Like the plants, they take sun energy and store it as chemical energy.
We could do the same, take CO2 and water and make CH4 and oxygen (electrolysis + Sabatier reaction) and make plastic. Or take ore, aluminum oxide and iron oxide, and "unburn" them releasing again oxygen (we already do that) etc...

We mostly use energy to manufacture things.

Life takes energy and lowers the entropy of the planet. Why shouldn't humans able to do the same? Any technical reason?
What's wrong is that it adds extra layers of abstraction just to satisfy k8s. Extra layers aren't free.
Jailbreaking ChatGPT via Prompt Engineering: An Empirical Study
It’s hard even to imagine how other humans, from another time or culture think. While we have similar sensory apparatus we the world we experience is constructed within our own consciousness, with all kinds of emotions and memories mixed in with the senses. If you think about your own mammalian physiological and emotional .. affective experience .. how it feels to run fast, be surprised, see something you want to eat.. then I think we can start to appreciate what it is like to think like a whale or a bat. Even though their sensory input is vastly different to use, they still construct their world with the same kind of equipment that we do
Faith No More fan?
Indeed, have subscribed. It's good but still, I miss the old format and team.
Am on DnD, will try Underunderstood, thanks!
Resource Control in TiDB – Stable Workload Consolidation of Transactional Apps
The tire story has not been confirmed, someone took the satellite image and added a "zoomed in panel of the tires"

Quite likely it's just misinformation or propaganda, the more likely explanation is paint experiments to affect visual perception. We've seen this on Russian aviation in higher quality images, and it has been used throughout history, some cool examples out there
Your first sentence makes no sense. Perhaps you meant to say: "Wholesale scanning of private data is unacceptable therefore everyone should be distrusting any platform by default." That's a statement I would agree with.

I reject the claim of "mental gymnastics" as a meme bereft of substance, and specifically in this instance, as an unproven hypothesis. But even if I granted the inference, I don't see how overly elaborate argumentation could have any explanatory power for the trustworthiness (or otherwise) of major platforms.

I'm curious, why do you think I'm advocating trust in any platform? And I'm curious why you think that I have any concern one way or another for an "exodus" from any platform?

Really, I'm just replying to say that while I think I understand the gist of the tone of your reply, I don't actually understand anything you wrote. And my hope is that you can clarify, because — and I say this with all sincerity — I really am genuinely curious.
You could get the dump from the other side. You only need the tcpdump program, the port doesn't even need to be open
The article that this entire thread is about says they've confirmed it.
go's experimental memory arenas feature could lessen the pain of gc in a lot of cases
What Europe needs is a reform of whatever it is that is stopping European startups from competing. It took Apple 40+ years to get where they are; they're _were_ European companies competing with them.
I don't know if this will be insightful, but I'll answer because it will be fun for me to remember a few years from now when day-to-day life has slowed down...
6:00 Wake up to my alarm.
6:15 Run 3 or 4 miles through my neighborhood.
6:50 Eat my breakfast (usually frozen waffles, oatmeal, or donuts) while looking at the Defense News Early Bird Brief.
7:00 Get myself and my 2YO and 4YO kids dressed.
7:15 Make breakfast for my 2YO and 4YO kids, and make coffee with their "help."
7:20 Bring coffee and medications to my wife, and tell my 6YO and 8YO kids to get up and get dressed.
7:30 Make breakfast for my 6YO and 8YO kids, and make their lunches if they are going to school in-person, or start giving them directions if it's a day of school work at home for them. And make my wife a smoothie for breakfast.
8:30 Leave the house with my 6YO and 8YO if I'm taking them to school. If not, gradually transition to my own work from home as the kids get busy and my wife takes over, hopefully by 9:00.
That's pretty naive. If we are talking about individual developers, big companies like Microsoft can blatantly use your GPL code in their proprietary code and you will have no money to fight them in court anyways. If it's big company deliberately choosing MIT/BSD for their open source project, they don't need your lecture. They have their own lawyers to tell them what license benefit the most.
> I think that would be such an advantage.

It reduces reach, which is a disadvantage, and most pro players have sufficient swing power on the forehand that the second hand would be superfluous.

Of course Monica Seles utilized the two-handed forehand to great effectiveness.

On the men's side, Fabrice Santoro was probably the most famous and successful two-hander.

It's just different angles and motions and muscles from the forehand and backhand. Physiologically, it's easier to generate pace from the forehand, especially using the rest of your body. On the backhand, the second hand can give you a little extra to make up for the "awkwardness" of the stroke.
> This boiling temperature conclusion makes the assumption that we continue using thermal power (steam engines, etc...), where waste heat is around 60%.

No, it doesn't. The waste heat, at the very end of the day, is always rather close to 100%. I.e. we use all that electric energy we generate to power computer, fridges, and many other machines, all of which – sooner or later – convert that electric energy to heat. (And, well, maybe a bit of chemical binding energy, depending on the application. But then, a few decades later, those products of our work will usually fall apart and/or are being burnt or torn down.)

> you could have non thermal fusion like Helion's

No, you can't. As the author says:

> this statement is independent of technology. Even if we don’t have a name for the energy source yet, as long as it obeys thermodynamics, we cook ourselves with perpetual energy increase.

Free free to have a look at his other article (the one he links in the paragraph above) for some more details -> https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy/
What book would be relevant today for a high school student?
That's probably more because of RLHF though, they've optimised for certain kind of responses rather than simple model loss on internet text.
It's not just testing on them. If any of your customers have bought an Apple mobile device, your only feasible way to distribute apps to them is through Apple.

It's like having Comcast and Time Warner and they each want to charge 30% of revenue to any service traversing their network. Not only is it unreasonable to say that they compete with each other because if you're not satisfied with Comcast you can just sign up with Time Warner -- because one of them is in California and the other is in New York and you'd have to move -- but it's not even you who would have to move. The customer of the App Store, the one who pays the fee, is the developer. It's your customers who would have to move -- every single one of them, or Apple still has a monopoly on each one who doesn't.

Notice how this differs from an ordinary retailer. Your customer can easily go across the street to Target or Walmart, or shop in both stores on the same day. They don't have to "move" -- buy a new device for hundreds of dollars and transition all of their other apps and services to an incompatible platform.
Impressive pace!
No, I want all mail that doesn’t use the email address I chose, which is “fred.flintstone@gmail” to be blocked as it would be on any other mail platform. I want gmail to act like any other mail provider, no dot innovation because I don’t want it. I’ve had this address since 2005. That’s a long time to learn about the benefits and costs.

Rule: for any email address variant that is not what the user selected, reply with “550 no such user here”.

Instant reduction in both spam and mistyped emails. Instant feedback to sender.
Yeah, when I visit a place for only a few days I always go straight the hop-on-hop-off buses.