skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah a lot of these government programs do bear the hallmarks of 40 years of management dependent on people sworn to defund, dismantle and obstruct any efforts to improve or reform them, who promised their constituency they were dysfunctional and whose (re)election campaigns depend on failing programs to hold up and point at.

Would you invest in a company where half of the board was filled by people who swore that the very existence of companies like that was immoral bordering on tyranny, and that they were going to shrink the corporation down to the size where we could drown it in a bathtub? That sounds like a stock with a pretty poor long term outlook.

The religion right now kind of goes the other way: Government by democratically elected representatives is evil. Government by autocratic CEOs beholden only to an elite group of investors is good.

It's weird seeing so many (former? ostensibly?) freedom loving people suddenly swearing things like the country is going to die unless we take the right to vote away from people and give it to property (landowners).
Your theory is that Elon Musk is unintelligent? That's a pretty wild take.
Now "totiēns valedīxit" is quite a bit shorter than the English original.

I was hoping our friends on StackExchange could have found a Latin equivalent that fits the number of syllables of the English version, or it won't help if the original translation request was motivated by an upcoming Latin karaoke... not that machine translation was any better.

Dixit Google Translatum:

Tam altus eram, non agnovi
Ignis ardens in oculis eius
Chaos gubernans mentem meam
Vale quod illa surrexit in planum susurrabant
Numquam iterum redi, sed semper in corde meo, heu
Hic amor accepit portorium in me
Dixit etiam multis temporibus ante vale
Et cor eius breakin 'in conspectu oculorum meorum
Et non optio
'Fac tibi non vale ultra dicere'
Whoa?
Whoa?
Whoa?
Conatus sum optimum appetitum pascere
Serva eam omni nocte venire
Tam difficile est ut ei satisfiat, oh
Tenentur ludens amore sicut erat sicut ludus
Simulans idem
Deinde conversus et iterum discede, sed uh-oh
Hic amor accepit portorium in me
Dixit etiam multis temporibus ante vale
Et cor eius breakin 'in conspectu oculorum meorum
Et non optio
'Fac tibi non vale ultra dicere'
Whoa?
Whoa?
Whoa?
Fracta haec figam, alis fractis reparabo tuis
Et fac omnia recte (saxum est, ita bene)
Premuntur coxis tuis, ego digitos deprimo
Omnis inch ex vobis
Quia scio quod vis ut faciam
Hic amor accepit portorium in me
Dixit etiam multis temporibus ante vale
Her breakin cor 'in conspectu oculorum meorum
Et non optio
'Fac tibi non vale ultra dicere'
Hic amor accepit portorium in me
Dixit etiam multis temporibus ante vale
Et cor meum est breakin 'in conspectu oculorum meorum
Et illa etiam pluries ante vale dixit
Hic amor accepit portorium in me
Dixit etiam multis temporibus ante vale
Et cor eius breakin 'in conspectu oculorum meorum
Et non optio
'Fac tibi non vale ultra dicere'

EDIT: this automatic translation has so many errors, my late Latin teacher must just have turned in his grave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPpTgCho5ZA
Yes I'm also against cartels who coordinate their purchasing of labor.
Midori would be cool to see as well
I mean, it'd be relevant to anyone doing the heckling too who is subsequently punished by such a government institution and who wants to counter that their being punished constitutes an illegal restraint of their speech, etc.

But anyways, I think, if it's a normative argument, you're going to have to try persuade those of who disagree that we should change our minds. I personally would never really even bother to protest or heckle anyone, but I also don't find the speakers who tend to get heckled or their "ideas" as meriting sympathy.
No computer could ever be creative enough to prove that a computer can never be truly creative.
You seem quite knowledgeable in this domain. Have you authored any blog posts to expand on this topic? I would welcome the chance to learn more from you.
US considering long-range fires for Ukraine, State Dept. official says
Ah, yes I know so many devs that struggle to type G. Shift+g is so hard these days.
"What would a native speaker of [target language]
say if they found themselves in the same situation?".

It gets even trickier if you are translating fiction. If you are translating, say, Japanese anime/manga with a Japanese setting for an English-speaking audience you don't necessarily want the characters to sound like Americans or Brits or Canadians or what have you.

So you may have to use language that Americans understand, but still make them sound Japanese. Somehow.
People forget hard-learned lessons all the time. Doesn't mean the lessons aren't true, or that people didn't learn them at the time, just that we're bad at remembering things when it's convenient to forget them.
i forgot about craiglist >:( darn, which reminds me dont books have user interface too? like the table of contents?
We will be running it on a non-NixOS Kubernetes cluster, all you need is a nix daemon running as a systemd service.

I have tested with EKS, and you should be able to use nix-snapshotter with GKE too. May be able to put together some docs for that later.

In the meantime, see this for running a different snapshotter on EKS: https://blog.realvarez.com/using-estargz-to-reduce-container...
The cliché part is due to its enormous popularity. As the article points out, after the cartoon was published, the phrase became part of the common lexicon. Hence, your view of it being cliché.
Would you be able to argue in favor of you not having intentionality or qualia?

Considering qualia self-evident is not equivalent to starting an inquiry with a predetermined conclusion. Rather, it is acknowledging a foundational aspect of existence that is necessary for any further inquiry to take place.

Although I agree that intersectionality could be inquired, qualia is the only thing that is literally self-evident. Qualia, by definition, refer to individual instances of subjective, conscious experience. This experience is immediately known to the experiencer and is, therefore, self-evident in a very basic sense.
The author doesnt seem to be a traditional "military" historian, her CV lists books related to war, but more focusing on mobilization and civilians. So that makes sense.

https://www.rachelchrastil.com/
Not saying you’re wrong, but a bit more substance and less vitriol might be illuminating.

I can’t recall hearing anything about him good or bad (This comment aside…).
Is not X protected under section 230?
Many of my friends in Germany have Telegram as well and I think that it’s mainly because it has by far the best multi device (esp. Desktop / Notebook) UX. Switching devices with Telegram and using it on several devices concurrently has always been super easy.
There exists plenty of options for fume extractors but the bosses don't ever buy them.
That massive underclass existed long before capitalism. Agrarian societies have had poor people going back longer than recorded history, they also generally had slaves and or some form of serfdom.

Humans also caused massive environmental devastation going back to the Stone Age and across all economic systems. In the Americas only 1 in 6 mega fauna species alive 50k years ago survived to 10k years ago. In Australia it was 1 in 8.

Things have gotten worse but that’s less that individual humans have become more destructive, it’s mostly the simple fact there are more humans.
No, it becomes a disagreement.
‘Droplet battery’ could pave the way for miniature bio-integrated devices
oh, flexport is hiring!
If everyone agreed who the bad people were and who the good people were, what is just and what is injust, the world would be a simple place.

The reality is that nobody agrees on where the line is or what even is good and bad.

And while i agree that you can in theory respectfully take punative action against someone, if they don't deserve the punative action you are still a bad person no matter how respectfully you punish the undeserving victim.
This is not business, it’s loyalty and empire building, at the expense of the business.
No that's a specific action done by individuals.
This is what I always go back to, if it's so good for people, just do it voluntarily. Organizational problems only get worse at scale. And if people can't be convinced to take part in doing it voluntarily, rather than forcing others to take part, then how is it even going to work out anyway?
This is misleading. Adam Smith presented this as a possible solution to an economic paradox at the time. But later philosophers came up with much better solutions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_value

There's no reason to believe that Smith wouldn't have latched onto the much better solution. So being hell-bent on the incomplete answer from the 1700s is a unique peculiarity of Marxist theory.
The argument is essentially that artificial consciousness is impossible by definition. Because consciousness is only a subjective experience, there is nothing in the physical realm that can prove that something is conscious or not.

Discussing about the relative merits of neurons and transistors will get you nowhere. It is a philosophical, possibly religious question, outside the real of natural science.
Mindscape Ask Me Anything, Sean Carroll – September 2023 [video]
A broad discussion of topics including quantum mechanics and AI
I'm not saying janitorial work isn't an honest profession, I'm saying nobody prefers janitorial work. Nobody in their childhood dreams of growing up and becoming a janitor. Your grandfathers can at the same time be someone who found dignity in that work and made the best of the hand they were dealt, and at the same time be someone who would prefer a different career path had a genuine choice been offered to them.
-20C is simply not that common in most populated areas (it’s lower than the average daily winter temp even in somewhere like Novosibirsk) and you can plan around it.
They said its technically unfeasible right now. A backdoor key is really not feasible for E2E Encryption. So, that would mean it would only become technically feasible when they ask companies to send over all encrypted packets and break the encryption themselves.

Maybe that's why they want to keep a provision for it in the law, but develop the technology to break (current) public-key encryption schemes themselves?

But then they'll always be chasing, as the world moves to post-quantum encryption and they won't be able to break it anymore. So it'll always remain technically unfeasible.

Its likely that from a political standpoint, it was easier to deem the bill as technically unfeasible now rather than kill it completely.
These maths are quite theoretical! In reality in a 1:32 PON you'll typically use somewhere between 14 and 30 ports (because typically you want to leave at least one spare port). In rural areas the lower side of that is more likely as your splitter placement will be governed by how far apart properties are.
864f cable which is the biggest you'd realistically blow is about 11mm diameter, and costs around £9/metre. If in the PON situation you're blowing say 72f for £1/metre then your costs are honestly not that much higher, considering you don't need to have lots of splitters all over the place (often you have actual passive splitter cabinets, as putting them in chambers is not always possible) you may need a bigger splice joint but not really much bigger because you're now using ribbon fibre. The number of splice operations would be similar too. Obviously this doesn't scale super well, but we are discussing rural subsidised fibre here, not low cost competitive urban deployments. The likelihood is 864f is more than enough for a whole village, or even several. If not add a second.
>you're transmitting at most tens of bits per second before error correction.

You can get in the kb/s range over a couple of kilometres. You don't have to drop to tens of bits per second until you're trying to transmit over many nautical miles.

Examples: https://geo-matching.com/uploads/default/b/e/benthos-modem-p...
Is there a reason why they couldn't split the load across multiple HSM? For something so sensitive I would've expected a design where one or more root/master keys (held in HSM) are periodically used to sign certificates for temporary keys (which are also held in HSM). The HSMs with the temporary keys would handle the production traffic. As long as the verification process can validate a certificate chain, then this design should allow them to scale to as many HSMs as are needed to handle the load...
It's basically like "let's sell the Great Lakes because they're just sitting there" or "the grand canyon would make a great place to sell, it's not making a profit the way it is"
Why? If they were futzing with the wording of a powerpoint for months that is indeed bad. If they worked hard on getting answers to questions nobody else can answer that can be reasonable.

After all one can describe a phd defense as “a presentation which took years to prepare.”
I suspect talking yourself through a problem (e.g. rubber-duck debugging) works because (A) the forced encode+decode loop causes additional re-checking and re-interpretation, and (B) it recruits more brain-areas that would otherwise be bypassed by the faster/cheaper internal information path.
I’m instead worried we will think air and armor are mostly impervious in consideration to a near-peer conflict with eastern enemies.
> I'm in the camp that the most likely outcome is that artificial neural networks can be conscious and have real experiences, but the toy networks we have today don't have nearly the right topology to achieve such states.

I'm in the camp that says this question is unanswerable. We know we individually are conscious because we experience it. We accept that other people are conscious because they are so similar to us and they say they are, so by Occam's Razor they aren't zombies and they aren't lying. We haven't proven they are conscious, but we accept it. It seems reasonable. But if our test is just that it seems reasonable, there will be no convincing someone that a very dissimilar thing isn't just lying or faking it.

We say some things are not conscious not because we have evidence of this, but because the test is whether we ourselves say "Yes, this is conscious."

Furthermore, we hold onto this distinction as important because it has ethical consequence. We can do what we want to things that aren't conscious, so it's important that as many things as possible not be conscious. Is that thing conscious? It depends. Does it taste good?

One more thing: we say we are unconscious under anesthesia or when we are asleep. Why? Because we don't don't have any memory of what it was like to be in these states. But this is a test of memory, not consciousness. I don't have memories from when I was one year old, but I'm fairly certain I was conscious then.
Every llm I ask what date it is today, to get a reference for how old at least it thinks the data is. It said September 2021, so like gpt.
Asked it the classic llm question too, who is the monarch of the uk. The answer says it all.
While that might work as a personal moral code, i don't see how you can extrapolate something like that to govern a society at large, which is the topic at hand.
please submit original sources <https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37408776
You can still rent out your spare bedroom of the unit that you're living in, but you can't rent out the entire unit while you live somewhere else. This remains in the spirit of the original bed and breakfast sharing economy idea.
I consider your comment in support of censorship to be hate speech, and it's not creating a welcoming space for people like me who support freedom of speech. Will you support HN deplatforming this abhorrent content?

Or is it that Harvard is censoring your ideological enemies, and you don't care?
> I do all of my work on local C:\ paths and copy files to SharePoint or OneDrive only if forced to collaborate with colleagues.

This is an option I considered, but it's harder for non-power users to deal with the file management. It's very likely some users would copy files instead of moving them and it would quickly devolve into trampling each other's changes.

That Dropbox article was great, so thanks. If I had to summarize my issue now, I'd say it feels like the backup solutions have a poorly implemented sync engine. I'm guessing they simply get a stream of changes from SharePoint though and I wonder if it would even be plausible to think they could misapply those changes.
DVD-RAM: The Disc that Behaved like a Flash Drive (2019) [video]
I'm probably the outlier in this regard, but I'd rather pedophiles and child molesters use AI rather than go out and endanger real kids. (Or endanger by proxy.)

It's like countries like the Australia, Canada or the UK banning Japanese manga artwork to "protect the children." It's got precisely dick to do with protecting kids, it's just about thought policing.*

The reason CSAM/CSEM is illegal is because a child had to be abused/exploited in order to create it, not because it's disgusting or immoral.

*"There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." -Ayn Rand
What gets called capitalism are basically imperfect, socially evolved things that have survived and worked well enough to survive. There are definitely rent-seeking parasites out there, but some of them are like the Kim family in NK.
Akai ASQ-10 Sequencer
Unless you're doing math (and are willing to take first order logic as a priori true) you need to start with something. Learning about the world requires data, data requires identifying a data source, and identifying a data source requires knowing at least one thing about the world.

As foundations go, it's hard to see how you could go any deeper than "I am having an experience".
As the sibling reply notes I am proposing the insurer refuse to write new policies or renew existing policies unless the homes are upgraded to meet much more stringent standards. Some examples:

In CA, require an engineer's report on earthquake risk. This could be done by issuing a standard form for the engineer to review with various areas of concern to avoid the need to have a bespoke report for each case. We managed to do lots of amazing things (invent computers, land on the moon)... I'm sure we could streamline this process. A lot of it is a decision tree: Is this slab, half-wall, or pier/beam construction? Half-wall: are the half-walls braced with plywood? Slab? Are shear walls built to X standard present along all major axis of the structure? Is any soft-story/garage area reinforced with footings and a beam meeting X standard?

In Hurricane-prone areas: require storm shutters on windows, cat-5 rated doors, and cat-5 rated roofing materials. Also require the home be a certain height above the relevant water level. Yes this means a home built on the beach or on a river bank would need to be raised if they want a policy (which is not as impossible or expensive as it sounds). Sucks that the original builder made bad decisions but requiring corrective action would dramatically reduce (if not eliminate) the risk of water damage.

Anytime a home doesn't meet these standards the premium should jump dramatically. If the state won't allow that then you don't write the policy until the structure is retrofitted to meet the standard. This would reward people who invest in renovations to make their homes safer, more accurately price risk, and avoid pulling out of the market entirely - instead sending accurate price/risk signals (where regulations allow such accurate pricing).
Yup. If you also deploy the Nix packages to bare-metal, then creating containers is at almost zero cost because the container image component is just JSON.
That's not the same question though. I've answered those questions for myself, but I couldn't tell you what consciousness is or isn't, because that requires language, and language cannot suffice to communicate our personal experiences.
I just did a return to Amazon where I bought a pair of GFCI adapters for power cords, and got a children’s book of Christian devotionals instead. Doubly useless because both my wife and I are childless and effectively atheist.

But that return was completely free of charge. We’re in Canada, if that counts, and my own history of returns may have also helped: I average only one every two years at the minimum. I can probably count less than five returns in the last decade and a half of using Amazon.
geez allowing the .zip tld was such a bad idea
The comment was trying to convey a false positive in the targeting system that would result in many casualties. Given we have already seen AI mis-identify subjects and that we don't understand how an AI can "dream"/other edge cases, it doesn't seem much of a stretch to imagine some xk-class/mass casualty scenario.
The Chinese room thought experiment proved nothing, except that people are willing to latch on to bad philosophy. This author hasn't nailed down consciousness, and so is teetering on the edge of a dualist, vitalist cliff.

Consciousness is just a log file. It's our mind's representation of itself. Suppose we decide to eat something because we're hungry. What actually happens is a vast array of calculations in our meat computer considering many inputs and possibilities. However, once the "eat" action is selected, it summarizes all the calculations into "I was hungry so I decided to eat" and feeds it back into the meat computer as input for the next round of calculation.

Therefore, the only "proof" we have of no consciousness in the current LLM zoo is that they're all once-through.
The entire desktop metaphor is still basically perfect for systems that have a mouse. I can't really think of anything I would change about the Windows/Cinnamon/KDE experience.

Proboards type forums are also pretty much perfect. Section/Thread/Post, no further levels, full size posts with signatures, pagination for everything.

Excel has the distinction of being basically the only way a normal person might ever consider writing a program. In that, I consider it one of the coolest technologies out there. Not only that, but they had reactivity like what, 20 years before web dev commonly used it? In an alternate universe, somewhere millions of people are making programs with Excel 12.0, which lets you make pages that are actually Vue templates referencing your data.

Most editors have solved their editing domain pretty well. If you go back to 2000 or so, any most editor will be fine aside from lack of nondestructive stuff. They added over time but the core model is the same in new vs old Photoshop, gimp, DAWs, video editors, etc.

I like Android's UI, but lately touch devices have been getting so heavily gesture based and I constantly accidentally switch tabs or refresh pages.

The vast majority of UIs from 1990-2005 seem to have held up just fine. I think UIs that don't hold up are because they're trying to model something inherently hard and make it easy(Like anything 3D) or they're working with limited hardware and don't have full size screen and a mouse. Without a mouse you have to encode things in timing that would otherwise be encoded in the different button presses.

There's no separate hover and click, no right click, no middle click.

I wonder why there isn't more phones with touch sensors on the back that can actually as a mouse, or why GBoard doesn't have a laptop touchpad type interface for dealing with legacy non mobile sites.
Did Mr Johnson provide his WhatsApp message history to the government?
> Capitalism will make people stop working and be less productive?

\aside: Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations has a story about men who worked themselves into the ground, because they were paid by-the-piece (not per hour). They needed to be protected from themselves. (The psychological mechanism wasn't speculated, but I suspect maybe competition rather than greed.)