skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll reference the binary parsing example I've showed in another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37425640

Let's first think about how we would write that second example in an imperative language (loosely modeled after Java but don't yell at me if it doesn't compile):

Header parseHeader(ByteInputStream bytes) {
int size = bytes.readWord8().toInt();
Word16[] fields = new Array();
for (i : (1...size)) {
fields.add(bytes.readWord16le());
}
return new Header(fields);
}

but that's no good in FP, since we're modifying state on a byte input stream, so let's try to make it more functional (let's make some syntax allowances for that, so it will look less like Java):

Header parseHeader(ByteArray bytes) {
val (size, rest) = bytes.nextWord8();

val (_, allFields) = (1...size).fold((rest, [])) { _, (currentRest, fields) ->
val (field, nextRest) = currentRest.nextWord16le();
(nextRest, fields.append(field))
}

return Header(allFields);
}

Now we avoid mutation, so the FP gods are happy, but we have to thread the state through the computation (look at how many variables we used) and it will quickly get out of hand if the structure becomes more complicated. Plus because so many of these variables have the same type, it's easy to accidentally introduce errors.

The example with the "Get Header" monad has the advantage of being as simple to read as the imperative example, but purely functional. That works because the Get monad builds up a description of steps to perform, so is purely declarative. It is only executed when I later call it on some actual byte string (e.g. by "runGet parseHeader myBytes"). As an added benefit, this means that I can define the parsing logic without actually calling it. I could also write additional code that takes this representation and does other things on it instead of just running it (e.g. running it with extra logging, or doing some kind of dry-run, etc.)
I recently found out the “price” is now at or below $100m per plane now which was a real surprise to me.

I also found out (afraid I don’t have a source to hand) that re-engineering the A10 (is that right?), the darling of F35 criticisers would cost more to retrofit up to modern requirements.
Maybe, but probably not.

They have regular security releases that often patch critical vulnerabilities such as https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2023-08-01

The bigger issue with Android IMO is you might not get the patches right away depending on your device and it’s age.
yeah, well that is the typical comparison one would make as a human..

you are a human, right?
This is awesome. Long time I wanted to pre-train a language model in Brazilian Portuguese and just got a 24GB 3090. This is the perfect timing. Thank you for sharing your notebook.
I’m sure this is true, but “buying one less f35” to me sounds like shorthand for “don’t spend such a stupid amount on the next boondoggle military project”. I assumed it was a given that money had already been spent.
I tried sending a message to https://www.cpsc.gov/About-CPSC/Contact-Information/Commissi... about standardized CO detector modules, but I don't think it worked:

/!\ Unable to send email. Contact the site administrator if the problem persists.
Is there any evidence it is?
While there's a big difference between a CVE and a CVE, Android has had 939 CVEs in 2023 alone [0]. I wouldn't necessarily hold my breath on this one.

[0] https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-1224...
Markey and Cassidy's COPPA 2.0: Protecting Kids' Online Privacy
> ... if the reader happens to be familiar with the niche language "jq".

Eh. Linux/Unix has always had an affinity for DSLs and mini-languages. If you're willing to work with bash, sed, awk, perl, lex, yacc, bc/dc etc. jq doesn't seem like it should cause too much consternation.
Yeah, the whole way that the jailbreaks installed was scary enough for me to never want to go near them.
This is the frustrating part: that is cool from a technical perspective but terrifying when you think about this stuff being used to target journalists, activists, etc. Maybe not everyone gets the bone saw but some will - and from the sounds of it it’s people standing up to abusive people:

> Last week, while checking the device of an individual employed by a Washington DC-based civil society organization with international offices, Citizen Lab found an actively exploited zero-click vulnerability being used to deliver NSO Group’s Pegasus mercenary spyware.
i'd be curious to hear your experiences trying to contribute or learn about nixos with respect to this. what you're describing here i've never seen on the nixos PR or issue trackers, nor in the Matrix rooms. i don't spend much time on the nixos discourse though: are you having your threads derailed by ideological debate over there?
"suffer the consequences" ? You're acting like it's a foregone conclusion that these systems will fail. In reality, they largely will be fine and may add marginal cost to each system.

You could make the same argument for many, many safety related things (seatbelts, air bags, house related code requirements for electrical, etc). It's just the burden we all have agreed to bare.
Based on Starship’s partial-success in its very first test flight, as well as how routine rocket landing and recovery is becoming for SpaceX, I think Starship will fly, it’s only a matter of when not if.

The fact that SLS isn’t designed for reusability, making its per-launch cost something like $4billion, means it’s effectively already outclassed, outcompeted, and obsolete.
Sorry about the title change, HN said the original one was too long.
How on Earth do you not see how those are related?
Yes, Julian Jaynes also expands on this point in his book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" and the section on "Divination." He posits that forms of divination, augury, sortilege, etc... were invented as attempts by newly "post-bicameral" man to once more hear the "voices of the gods" that would give them authorization or assurance that their course of action was correct; an attempt to recapture the bicameral era, when "free will" as a concept did not even exist, and all of one's actions were in fact orchestrated by the gods (where Jaynes presupposes that what were referred to as "gods" were actually psychological phenomena).
A surprisingly large number of sites will let you register without requiring an email verification.

I continually get a lot of emails, sometimes with private information to first name.lastname@gmail.com where people with my same name just use that without caring that it is not their email address. You probably aren't getting that job offer and you probably aren't getting that bank load approved without being able to see the emails.

For a while I tried to notify the senders but they rarely reacted or even provided a way to contact them. Now I worry about it becoming a scam vector so I just delete them.
Let's use a less contentious topic: FOSS vs proprietary software. There is a common sentiment I've seen on HN that FOSS is superior to proprietary software, and all else being equal, I agree with that sentiment. However, in reality, not all else is equal. Some proprietary software is just better at solving certain problems than FOSS equivalents – maybe the proprietary software is more reliable or has a better UX or is more regularly maintained or has more features a user wants or differs along a host of other dimensions. Thus, if someone makes a categorical claim that all FOSS software is superior to similar proprietary software, we would regard that comment as propaganda. This doesn't mean that FOSS software is bad or that good FOSS software can't be created or that no one should try to create excellent FOSS software.

This is an analogy or what I mean by "political correctness" (or related concepts like "wokeness" and "social justice warrior"). Great art communicates truth about the human condition in a beautiful way. This is, of course, open to interpretation, yet somehow many people agree that, for example, The Godfather is a great film. Why? I believe the film shows us some truth about the human condition (particularly our ability to descend into evil) through a gripping story with excellent characters, visuals, dialogue, plotting, etc.

When we substitute an arbitrary checklist of criteria a film must meet that have nothing to do with communicating truth about the human condition in a beautiful way, we are engaging in "political correctness," and we have ceased to value art but instead propaganda. For instance, if we were to use the new Academy standards for Oscar-nominated movies, the Godfather would fail – the cast is almost all white, has no LGBT and IIRC includes the n-word. Amadeus, another excellent film (one of the most praised in Oscar history) would certainly fail, since the cast is all white and almost entirely male, as we would expect from a film set in 18th century Vienna. This does not mean great art cannot have diverse casts, LGBT characters or a lack of "problematic" content. For a recent example, the excellent show Andor ticks almost all of the DEI checkboxes – LGBT character(s), diverse cast –, but it also has smart writing, interesting characters, sensible plots, beautiful visuals and a compelling story. As long as the former are subordinated to the latter, a work remains art and not "politically correct" propaganda. At the same time, Oppenheimer ticks almost none of the DEI checkboxes and yet is arguably one of the best films of this century.

> So instead of using a meaningless euphemism, OP should articulate what exact themes, stories, or characters they think lead to a good critic score?

I think this comment betrays exactly what I'm critiquing. Great art can't be shoved in a box like this. Mediocre art has identifiable flaws - maybe it's visually bland or maybe the dialogue is poor or the characters act in inexplicable ways. These all detract from the beauty and truth of the work.
Fair enough, I certainly find it interesting. I guess I have no complaint, it was just a bit out-of-place seeming.

HN didn't seem like the kind of crowd to be into superstitous practices, but I obviously read the room wrong. Third or fourth occult-related posted I've seen this week. Stuff is interesting but also really popular with paranoid schitzophrenics, q-anons, and such, so I wonder if it's a bit unhealthy for the mind.
There are hundreds of laws specifically to compel idiots to not kill themselves and the people around them. Stuff like seat belts, helmet laws, air worthiness regulations, laws against cliff diving, against base jumping, trespassing near live electrical equipment...

I'm sure if you think about it a little more you will realize the concept isn't new to yourself either.
At a savings of USD 80 million or more per engine, I'd say it is well worth it to push deadlines or whatever we need to do to consider the cheaper options.

Right now it looks and smells like corruption.
> It's super funny to see people defend curly based languages.

Well, that's because they're not really "strictly worse" in every way. I find curly braces helpful for readability and cursor navigation. The latter is only possible with Python by completely parsing the code. Also I don't like reading vertically dense code, so having (almost) empty lines inbetween is fine. All subjective of course, but that's the case for every aspect of language syntax.

> Using curlies but not indenting properly is almost always a sign of a bug

I don't think anyone criticising Python's syntax cares about the freedom to have inconsistent indentation, that's not the point.
> Laws protect the broad population interest.

No, they don't, they "protect" the irresponsible at the expense of everyone else.

> Your inconvenience is someone else surviving.

That's the wrong way to describe the situation. First, it might be more than an inconvenience to me: the CO detector or automatic shutoff might break when my power is out, and now my generator, which would have worked perfectly fine without this stupid regulation, is gone in the middle of an outage when I was depending on it working. And that can have serious consequences.

Second, you don't know for sure that the irresponsible will survive even with this regulation. As someone else upthread pointed out, someone irresponsible enough to run their generator indoors will still do it even with these protective devices (in fact they'll be more likely to because they are stupid enough to think that the devices make it safe, which it isn't), and that could still kill them.

> So it goes.

Indeed, that's how it's been going for decades in the US. And as a result our society is a mess. When people no longer have an incentive to not be stupid, you will get more and more stupid people. Not a good recipe for a functioning society.
And the US barely has an inherent interest in Saudi Arabia. Israel is credited for helping the US "fight terrorism in the Middle East" or maintain those puppets, but really they're just helping us help them. When it comes to things that don't directly benefit Israel, they don't care. Israel has never even fought ISIS for example, the largest recent terrorist threat in the region. And they're allowed to maintain some neutrality in situations like Russia's attack on Ukraine. You might even call them neutral wrt ISIS since they aren't in this mostly symbolic list: https://www.state.gov/the-global-coalition-to-defeat-isis-pa...

For all the things Israel has done against the US's wishes (like West Bank settlement), the US has struggled to do just one thing Israel doesn't like: the Iran nuclear deal. But at least one of our major parties is somewhat willing to push it. I think they're also somewhat annoyed with our focus on Ukraine.
Just have to convince your teammates to install SonarLint or convince management to pay for SonarQube.

I’ve been successful at neither.
I find freebsd pleasant for server use. But using it for desktop, probably would not enjoy.
As for slackware, yes :^)
I'm glad you're having fun. But I think most people would give up at the lack of good package management before getting into further shortcomings.
I imagine it also impacts all the other infra (eg, what reagents dou need to store at the launchpad, what do you need to store nearby, do you need cryogenic cooling, etc
The docker container fails installing flash-attn… but honestly a giant API container on top of a custom model generation framework loses all the benefits of Torch’s standard interfaces. It doesn’t really matter how optimized your model runtime is if it’s cemented into a synchronous monolith. The metric that should be optimized is time to first decoded token, because that is how speed is perceived by humans reading the output.
It’s also very common for a small team (or individual) at a large company to use a tool, and the tool can plaster that logo on their homepage even if the use case was insignificant.

For a lot of companies, logos on homepages is more of an “ask for forgiveness later” type of thing. Not uncommon to do it without permission.

It’s also very common for TOS to include the rights to use your company logo for marketing purposes by default.
The problem is that the people giving the rank probably never saw Sopranos in the first place, or are idiots whose taste changes on a whim.
Curly braces are very helpful during development, because you can scope code without having to reindent it. It's quite similar to being able to comment out a block of code, which Python happens to also make somewhat frustrating.
It tries to show you the type information on the source itself, instead of on the IR.
I think it’s safe to assume that most people know that’s the only other common choice.
Do we have to wait? Falcon Heavy already has ~75% of SLS Block 1's payload capacity (to LEO). For the $11.2 Billion that's earmarked for the next 4 years of SLS, you could buy 112 Falcon Heavy launces--one every ~17 days for four years. In contrast, the wiki lists a single planned flight for SLS during that period.
Depending on who you ask that variance is 0.1-0.4% which is extremely tiny, so I'm not sure what you mean by "huge genetic variance in humanity".
Ah, I misunderstood, thanks.
Besides chatgpt, you’re expected to do your own research before asking. Stable communities may be unwelcoming to this because newbie questions are repetitive and tedious to answer thoroughly, even assuming no diligence issues. For example, if you google your cycling question as is, there’s a whole results page on that matter. There’s a lot of detailed youtube videos for the same query. It’s hard to even imagine a question today that could be low-informed and at the same time unanswered. And personally I always hated waiting and also the mockery you described. The latter is a bad manner, but the ones who respond first also tend to be the “less busy”, so adjust your expectations here.

Basically before chatgpt the answer was “web search”.
> That is: at this price, why can't they deliver while private commercial entities can for cheaper?

The contractors making the SLS are private commercial entities. That's the mad thing about it.
Wrong. Everyone with yet another safety feature failing when it's needed will complain. There's no reason the idiocy of a few should cost everyone else. The BS safety 'features' are unwelcome everywhere, on all products.
> Our review of the account named in your report has concluded. We have determined that one or more violations of GitHub’s Terms of Service have occurred and have taken appropriate action in response.
> A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton.

I'm reminded of a scene from Family Guy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0z4vUU6bUo
In the end it's why Google insists on "vendoring" (checking in) third party dependencies and only having one version of a dependency for the entire (massive) mono repo and designated maintainers. You want a new version? Put a ring on it. Test it, and maintain it.

At first I thought it was insanity. Now, buried in a maze of transitive third party and first party dependencies scattered across multiple git repositories and crates, I really really miss it.

Of course like many other things there it depends on having lots of well-paid staff, without deadline guns to their head, committed to code quality and infrastructure.
Bingo - also in the case of astrology, you had a way for someone who’s smart enough to do astronomical and calendrical calculations for practical purposes to advise in a low-personal-stakes way.
Yes. I found it to be about 2x as fast on a real world project when I kicked the tires 6 months ago or so. I’m sure it varies quite a bit based on the project internals.
Fun story I heard recently: apparently a bunch of pigs were placed on various small islands in the pacific in the 19th century so in case sailors were running out of food, they would have a known self-sustaining backup option.

Many of those pigs were completely isolated for over a hundred years and entirely missed out on the globalization of tons of infectious diseases.

A while ago a group of them were picked up and brought to a special protected refuge in New Zealand, where they are being used for artificial organ research (https://nzeno.nz/) basically for the reasons you highlight.
Yes, adding safety features to cars does make people more likely to engage in risky behavior, and as a result the accident rate goes up. Look up "moral hazard".
>The principle is the seller appropriating for themselves a value-driver that was previously part of the consumer surplus

Were heated seats previously free? I don't shop luxury cars, but heated seats on regular cars are definitely a premium trim feature.
> I grew up guess culture so I understand it, but ask culture is so much clearer/concise/kinder in my opinion. Less likely to be misunderstood and build resentment, etc.

Second that. Just asking takes out the guesswork, and helps to avoid misunderstandings. Feels like a more efficient way to communicate.

But I do prefer to minimize annoying others. For example by learning some of the culture of people you're dealing with, context of the subject matter, etc. Most people will appreciate if you show to 'have done your homework'.

Kind of like RTFM before asking on a forum. You're more likely to get a helpful response if they see you read the relevant section of the manual, and tried x or y, but something remains unclear. Versus "I'm lazy & need this fixed, plz help".

But I think it depends on how well you're tuned into the culture of some group (call it the in-crowd).

If you're like a Zen master of that group's way of doing things, and many exchanges have been made between members of that group & yourself, then with a request you know who to ask, how to ask, and likely meet willingness from the other side.

But if you're clueless.. then better give a hint to that fact, and ask explicit questions that don't leave room for misunderstanding.

"Those who ask may be a fool for one day. But those who don't ask, may remain a fool forever".
There is already a lens called the non commercial web or something that I suspect overlaps to some degree,but I don't think they are equal and I don't know if I am right.
I'm curious: When updating packages, say NPM packages, what are your practices?

For us, we audit every update of every package. We read the changelog or release notes for every version from the current version to the new version (some packages make this very cumbersome, looking at you Vercel). Then, we use our judgement about the order in which to update packages; usually we apply all patch-level updates, run our tests; then minor updates, re-run our tests; and then we apply major updates one-by-one and re-run tests after each of them.

We've found plenty of semver violations in this process, to the point where we don't really trust the semver of NPM packages at all.

Is this a common approach, or do you just blindly update everything at once and fix things if they break?
> Not sure what the answer is for existing memory-unsafe code.

It's an engineering approach that involves writing "A buffer overflow issue was addressed with improved memory handling" an awful lot. Hopefully one day they will finish improving the memory handling!
reminds me of this old joke

> I saw a book entitled "Die GNU Autotools" and I thought "My feelings exactly". Turns out the book was in German.

https://twitter.com/timmartin2/status/23365017839599616

gnu autotools i suppose works for some projects, but wow does it seem to be completely annoying to use.
Here's more detailed breakdown of the original concession deal

https://reason.org/commentary/setting-the-record-straight-on...

The deal is lot more complex than just a lump sum in exchange for 75yr lease.

By the stated face-value, the $1.16b for 75 years splits to some $16m/yr. Previously, the city was reported to be making some $19m/yr from the parking fees. However, it seems that in present value terms such revenue stream should have been compounded to a larger present amount.

Reasonably, Chicago could choose to just raise the parking fees at any future point (with some political repercussions). This also would have changed the deal calculations. The fact that CPM raised the prices and the residents have no choice but pay them only proves this.

The deal is quite involved with some limit terms, infra expenditures, and other provisions. Each piece was likely evaluated in dollars to present it to both sides as fair value.

Is it really a fair deal to city residents? It seems that the popular sentiment is that it is not, even after so many years since it was signed.

I guess, no one has reasonably presented to the public an alternative to not having the deal. Or perhaps, other municipal fees like more speed cameras, zoning, and good old property tax increases have further muddied the fairness outlook.
> Sometimes the cost of a project goes up when a 3rd party group comes in and intervenes with "can't we do this cheaper?!" lol.

What if we made this third party (I'm guessing blue origin/space x) bear the cost until we have a proven result so they put their money where their mouth is...

They promise USD 1M per engine, they have to deliver at USD 1M per engine. Not a cent more.