skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Charging a subscription for hardware and software already built into the car, and not dependent on any external servers or anything is just plain anti-consumer.

What's the principle here? That because it already exists, consumers don't have to pay for it? How far can we stretch this? Suppose there's a streaming service (eg. netflix or spotify) that supports downloads, does that it's "anti-consumer" to deny them access to the audio/video files because it's already on their device, and the cost to produce it has already been paid for?

Moreover, is there anything fundamentally different between paying $2000 (one time) for a heated seat upgrade, and $200/year for 10 years (or whatever the expected life of a car is)?
Really excited about Mojo, but not very excited about being fully closed source. I understand not going OSS right now if there's still a lot of churn expected, but I think that can be worked around:

1. Just because something is OSS doesn't mean the public is entitled to defining the roadmap or design decisions. If you set working norms up front and make it clear who has decision-making power and why, people will decide for themselves if they want to engage or not. A lot of frustration in OSS comes from lack of clear boundaries around how and why something evolves the way it does.

2. You can meet in the middle and be source-open. Don't use an OSI license, don't guarantee that you'll look at a community contribution, and don't guarantee that you'll engage on a particular issue. People can still benefit from seeing the source and deciding on if it's the right tool for them.

I know a lot of folks rag on "corporate controlled OSS", but there's a lot of examples of that motion working really well for products. I hope Mojo does this eventually.
Large defense contractors are almost never exclusive to one country. For instance, the F35 is being procured by 17 different NATO and non-NATO countries. Similarly, Anduril has a number of European customers.
They’d have to pay more if they have to layoff people (WARN related expenses). That’s probably what OP meant.
> The standard practice for achieving fast inference is to rewrite the entire model inference loop in C++, as in FasterTransformer, and call out to special fused kernels in CUDA. But this means that any changes to the model require painfully reimplementing every feature twice: once in Python / PyTorch in the training code and again in C++ in the inference codebase. We found this process too cumbersome and error prone to iterate quickly on the model.

I am an AI novice but why can't they automated this with AI? I thought the whole point of these tools was to automated tasks that are error prone and require lots of attention to details. Computers are great at that kind of stuff so it's surprising they haven't applied AI techniques to automate parts of the AI pipeline like converting code from Python to C++.
Your account seems to be shadow banned (or not enough karma?). I vouched for this comment and your other comment so other people can read it.
Is what they have achieved really that ... magical, that it needs to be a closed source project? I don't know much about python, but I suspect if someone watches the demo the methodology behind what they're doing is probably clear no? I don't understand the purpose of close sourcing it unless there really is some kind of moat.
Dude, just admit you were wrong. This is just painful - especially as other people are pointing out that this is a hard number to beat.
Right, that's 1823, about the time of Frederick William III. Beethoven might have dedicated a symphony to you.
Ethereum is a completely separate codebase that won't have the same bugs as Bitcoin (it will have different bugs). The many Bitcoin forks might be vulnerable to this though.
iOS 16.6.1 fixes two vulnerabilities known to be actively exploited in the wild
Right, I had seen that 4-7 was scrolling, but that's still not describing which of the numbers greater than 7 will map to the back/forward buttons.
I just upgraded to 10GbE service from Ziply Fiber in the Seattle area:

Speedtest.net - ~9.3Gbps symmetric

iperf to Denver: ~9.3Gbps symmetric (~8 threads)

iperf to Minneapolis: ~9.3Gbps symmetric

AWS S3 Download with small files: 1.3Gbps

Usenet download: 7-9.5Gbps

Mounting my ZFS pool to an AWS instance via SMBv3 in us-west-2: 3Gbps (not clear what the limit was here)

GitHub (400MB): 1 thread 400Mbps, 16 threads: 3.3Gbps

Fedora ISO from local mirror: 1 thread: 1.4Gbps, 16 threads: 4Gbps

Will try to test Steam and such.
For the end user it does not matters though it's kind of a detail of implementation.
It's just a liability and risk. Imagine you have some mission-critical system written in such language, the vendor goes bankrupt or creates absolutely unacceptable terms. Then you have a problem.

Sure if something similar happened to an open-source project, you would still have to either hire engineers to work on the compiler/tooling/language or to rewrite it in a more supported language, but I would consider it a little less riskier as you aren't dependent on one vendor
I'm not sure about unnerving. Psychologically, I know I'm looking at a recording. But when they're not looking at the viewer, it looks like they've got better things to do.
I see this being used all the time recently, including on large productions. I assumed it's meant to convey the feeling of talking with someone who may also be talking to others. But it gives me hives (for which I'm losing points, but what can I say).
"Additionally, we have traced every single one of these smurf accounts back to its main account. Going forward, a main account found associated with a smurf account could result in a wide range of punishments, from temporary adjustments to behavior scores to permanent account bans."

I wonder if they did this by simply checking ip's or mac addresses, or using more sophisticated techniques like analyzing in-game play style.
That isn't what they said the threat was; they were sent a document that exploited a 0-day in whatever program reads it.
> silencing people with whom you disagree is free speech

If the local Amtrak goes by while you're preaching your Totally Free Speech Announcement™, you don't reserve the right to sue them for "silencing" your free speech. You chose a poor venue that you cannot control, the constitution does not obligate the people around you to give you the verbal right-of-way. You are spreading pure federal fiction.
Presumably, the extension binaries plug into the FOSS Apache licensed product using some kind of API and therefore might better be shipped and sold separately. This, for instance works with proprietary httpd Apache Webserver modules (shared objects linked against webserver headers). In that case there would be no reason to use the commercial bundled version as the core would be essentially identical to the FOSS version that's included in (almost) any Linux distro.

If such separation is not possible, the commercial version spells trouble. For one license wise, but on a technical level it's probably a fork. A fork might have its own security flaws and bugs, but will also need to maintain updates and backports from upstream / main branch. The commercial entity is responsible for this, whether they intend to or not.

In theory, this could lead to a better commercial product, but in practice I would recommend sticking with the FOSS version.
Ah is this still going, i tried it i think like 10y ago, was only 1,4mb then and quite impressive fot that size!
Almost certainly, simply because they both strongly correlate with being geeks. And SF geeks in particular. And the very particular sort of hard SF geek who feels right at home at Shock Level 4 [1].

[1] http://sl4.org/shocklevels.html and literally on http://sl4.org/
No surprise. The more power is concentrated, the higher the chance of corruption. This is a weakness of centralizing anything
Masters of Crowds: The Rise of Mass Social Engineering (2022)
Honestly my ISP is to incompetent to run anything, DNS, billing, provisioning, you name it. I know because because we used to do consulting for them. I am confident that there is no way that they'd be able to monitor my traffic, they can't even tell if an entire town lose connectivity.
> the threat actors sent a malicious file that contained at least one 0-day in a popular software package

i.e. not executables
Man who tried to cross ocean in human hamster wheel banned from sea
So, the issue with nerdfonts is the project, itself, is broken and flawed.

They use the nerdfont patcher, which mainly mutilates fonts, and often breaks them trying to add the nerdfont glyphs. The nerdfonts project also distributes these broken fonts while ignoring the font licenses, and also ignoring the fact that fonts update and then nerdfonts refuses to patch and distribute the new version.

Many projects distribute both OTF and TTF versions, while nerdfonts only distributes the patched OTF version (as you, indeed, have noticed).

The upside is, since the patcher exists, you can just run it on your own fonts and do whatever you want.

I highly recommend avoiding nerdfonts altogether, disable it in any program you find it in, and also consider filing bugs with those projects to entice them to remove support entirely.

Unicode exists for a reason, and fonts should strive to cover as much of it as possible. Corporate logos and custom icons should not be enshrined into any font, not even as something niche like nerdfonts, even if nerdfonts lives entirely in the Unicode private use area (PUA).
Political narrative? Can we get even more vague? That's what I was getting at: People complain about movies and their "political narratives" and "political objectives" but nobody wants to mention specific narratives or objectives, and why they object to them. I don't recall anything overtly political in most modern movies. There was no campaign speech to elect Biden in the latest Captain America. So what exact "narratives" is everyone complaining about? Be specific.

EDIT: Ugh, looks like replier reached for personal attacks, so this thread has sadly derailed into flamewar :( Hitting the eject button.
What if you only run the 1% of the year that you think is most likely to require spare capacity?

(hopefully they have safeguards against that?)
Crying here with my 200 Mbps fiber. Paying $600 a month even though we have 24-port fiber coming in the premise.

Spectrum sucks
Why Fast?
This practice is now called “Search Engine Optimization.” Right?
Just an honest point from a human that's reading what you're saying, mentioning you're using a LLM tool every time you write something is just annoying. I wouldn't fault you for a typo, nor do I fault you for using an LLM.

However, I don't think this is even a response to my comment at all. :( I didn't ask a question about job requirements in machine learning, I asked a question about if you personally have any red lines about jobs you are setting but not mentioning.

If knowledge of a specific programming language is a red line you won't cross, let me be the first person to tell you: it's easy to learn a programming language, especially for a grad of computational biology.
Yeah is it becoming clear enough to some people yet that you can't replace software engineers, let alone really help them, with AI? This is only going to get worse, not better.

Copilot is such a flawed product from the start. It's not even a matter of its ability to write "good" code. The concept is just dumb.

Code is necessarily consumed by people first before it's executed by a computer in a production environment. There are many ways to get a computer to do something, but the approval process by experienced humans is vastly more important than the drafting of it. Software dev is already incredibly cheap and the last place to cut costs.

There is no AI threat other than the one posed by grifters trying to convince you that there is.
Self-fulfilling prophecies usually are, for all the wrong reasons.
That's fine though. If building roads and paying for them with meters, even if not fully, helps cities generate significant economic activity, that could easily be worth it from the taxes and other benefits generated. There's a reason every city does it.

There's so much propaganda on all sides when it comes to automobiles in the US that it's hard to tease out reality, but I'd wager anything states and cities have hard numbers behind what they do.

When it comes to things like that, where solid data isn't public I just assume the world is not run by idiots who don't know more about their area of expertise than me. I feel reasonably certain that urban parking subsidization is done at least to a large extent because it makes money.
what really gets me, is when the CPUC proposes plans to punish energy savers by increasing the base billing rate and then reducing the per KW charge. It's the exact opposite of what we need to encourage for reduced power consumption. Also, the ANTI solar campaigns that the CPUC has launched are really egregious. I'm surprised CA would allow such a thing as the new NET 3.0 crap.
Cost of Living: Oxford lecturer commutes from Dublin
Oh wow, I'd never even considered that.
You're right of course, but reading a review takes time and learning which reviewers have tastes aligned with your own takes even more time. The entire premise of Rotten Tomatoes is to give people a simple number they can read in a second.

Personally I disregard both RT and published reviews (I've never found a reviewer who aligns with me) and go off word-of-mouth from my circle of friends and family. But I think that doesn't work for everybody either.
Not only the critic reviews, but the audience reviews are botted too.
What is the financial upside Microsoft is seeing to this that no one else seems to see?
Why are people so enthused about Python syntax?

Some problems off the top of my head:

- The lack of new variable declaration keyword makes scopes less explicit. nonlocal is not simpler in the large than `let x = ...`

- The lack of multi-line lambdas is very limiting for anyone coming from JS, C#, Rust, Kotlin... heck even Java

- The ternary operator (... if ... else ...) is needlessly different for other mainstream languages
Well, "the money" already went to the city, and has been spent. Whether it has been on "publicly beneficial cause" or not is for Chicago voters to decide, but the investors already put the money in, and Chicago already spent it. What the parking meters doing now is returning what Chicago has borrowed to the investors. While I'd argue that the model of borrowing massive amounts of money for long terms and hoping the next guy will deal with it is not exactly the healthy financial strategy, it is pretty common for various governments (including the US Federal Government as the most prolific offender) and it's not the investors' fault that Chicago city government chose to do so.
Under this methodology, the best film in history was Avatar.
You are a little bit blinded by FAANGs/VCs aura.

1) FAANGs won't exist forever, software/hardware development will continue even after FAANGS will be disassembled by antitrust, go in bankruptcy or stop investing for any other cause.

2) Linux and a lot of other complex software was developed when collaboration was not so easy as today, when GitHub didn't exist and most of the people have very slow internet connection compared to today.
Maybe less in the review scene but Amazon through IMDB also bought BoxOfficeMojo which was such a nice and easy UI to see how movies were performing box office wise...
A good guesser should realize that "no" is always a possibility.
Fascinating. Thanks again!
I'm trying to wrap my head around this project too, since it does seem interesting. Similar to what OP wrote, the sense I got from poking around (and of course from reading the bit in the README that basically says exactly this) was that there are two distinct pieces here, the first being a nice, clean library for working directly with LLMs that refreshingly lacks the assumptions and brittle abstractions found in many current LLM frameworks, and the second being everything related to automatic optimization of prompts. The second half is the part I'm trying to better understand - more specifically, I understand that it uses a process to generate and select examples that are then added to the prompt, but am unclear if it's also doing any prompt transformations other than these example-related improvements. I guess to put it another way, if one were to reframe the second half as a library for automatic n-shot example generation and optimization, made possible via the various cool things this project has implemented like the spec language/syntax, is there anything lost or not covered by the new framing?

As more of an aside, I gave the paper a quick skim and plan on circling back to it when I have more time - are the ideas in the paper an accurate/complete representation of the under-the-hood workings, and general type of optimizations being performed, of the current state of the project?

As another related aside, I vaguely remember coming across this a month or two ago and coming away with a different impression/understanding of it at the time - has the framing of or documentation for the project changed substantially recently, or perhaps the scope of the project itself? I seem to recall focusing mostly on the LM and RM steps and reading up a bit on retrieval model options afterwards. I could very well be mixing up projects or just had focused on the wrong things the first time around of course.
I live in the US and I see something similar when shopping at Aldi. They charge like 5 or 10 cents per bag, but it's enough that most people will bring their own or not use bags at all. It's a small fee, but it has a significant impact, and it's great that you can still get bags if you need them.

I'd much prefer cities and states impose a small tax like this instead of a ban. It would reduce usage without risking harmful, unintended consequences like we see in California.
I always include a comment with the SO URL (though I haven't copied any code from SO in quite some time—it's not nearly as useful as it used to be).
The government doesn't pay for anything.

It's whether you want to pay through it via tax dollars or directly.
>i don't think one country can do it all by itself

Decades ago US basically wholey dominated semi and it was strategic lapse in judgement that industry has globalized so much, away from US control, something they're looking to regain and technically could if semi wasn't so entangled into US east asian security architecture. Current western semi industry is basically US+JP+DE+NL+SKR+TW. Aggregated effort of ~700M, where US is half that. And in US it's not well compensated job where industry had/has first dibs on talent. Nor extremely high industrial policy except in East Asia, but in general it hasn't gotten strategic priority until recently.

At the end of the day, PRC large enough that talent generation can match/exceed in terms of quantity. In terms of talent quality, TW, SKR, JP all have rote education which was still enough for them excel in different aspects of the supply chain, from equipment, to production, to inputs. Meanwhile even Chaebol and Zaibatsu culture was enough to produce absolute electronic giants. How much of Steve Job's vision was built by East Asian talent? Statistics alone will create outlier Steve Jobs, the hard part is building large pool of technical talent. Looking at current trends PRC pretty much only actor on trend to address semi/IC industry shortage by end of decade (most countries above projected to 100-300k shortage). PRC currently pumping about 30k IC graduates a year, still 200k short, 520k/720k out of # of IC talent 2018 white paper identified PRC would need for complete indigenous supply chain. Semi is a hard and large sector (like aviation), but (IMO) "do it yourself" is likely viable with talent base and proper industrial/talent policy. For reference US aerospace has about 700k jobs. They're currently the only major "do it yourself" aerospace power - they have the bodies to do it all essentially indigenously, vs next competitor, EU who has to work as a bloc.
I bet they have this for internal users.
Attributing cybercrime is never a slam dunk unless you have physical evidence: devices, people, etc. /var/log/*/access.conf is not that.

Virtually everything on the wire can be spoofed. Someone in Kansas could own an elaborate network that includes DPRK IPs. And that would be a desirable red herring for any independent criminal.

WikiLeaks taught us that the CIA has tools for spoofing their payloads as Russian, Chinese, Iranian, etc.

It very well could be a DPRK actor, but let's please not kill perfectly valid discussion around attribution.
Somehow my ISP can see what I’m downloading even though I use https etc and has sent nastygrams a few times when they didn’t like what they saw.
Sklearn Paired Cosine Distance Issue
I hate the guy as much as anyone, but using commercial sats for warfare could make them legitimate targets. What’s a corporations obligations? Will the US reimburse Starlink? Will the Space Force protect them?

What happens when an errant bomb guided by Starlink kills a bunch of kids? Is it Elon’s fault? Seems like someone should draw up Codes of War for commercial orgs if you want them fighting them.
I don't know if giving developers more skin in the game is the appropriate response to this. I do think they should have skin in the game for their work but I just think it's unrelated to this thesis. Most developers don't really have a material impact on the success/failure of the project. And that's because my inclination is that most software projects fail not because of some technical reason, but because it couldn't find product market fit. That's not something that's really on the developer.

In fact, I'm not sure it's on anyone. There's inherent risk in every project, and the team's job is to maximize the probability of success. At least that's the way a process-first person would probably think about it.

Results-first folks might argue that a great team will find a way to succeed. And then definitely, having more skin in the game will help with motivation. But I still think even the best team is just maximizing probability of success, and still they're more likely than not going to fail, because getting PMF is hard.
Is there an actual standard for mice at that point? I.e. have mice manufacturers ever written down what signals are backwards/forwards? The Logitech G600 has 20 extra buttons, and no backwards/forwards button.

I think it's more convention, as the applications are ultimately what are deciding to do with the mouse button. There's nothing to say that they could not put a context menu on the left click.
I would expect to pay $40 at most for a nightstand, and a quick look at Amazon confirms my guess. I would also expect it to last decades, and if it failed, to fail in one of a few very predictable ways(Mostly fasteners stripping out of sawdustboard) which can be both repaired, and avoided at the design stage for not much extra money.

I've never really experienced this "bad furniture" phenomena. Maybe because I have more thrift store than new cheap furniture, but I also wonder if style doesn't have to do with it.

I mostly go for the fake rustic look, but I suspect more minimalist or Bauhaus stuff has more issues, since those styles are almost specifically meant to say "Look at the great material we use, this thing would totally fall apart if we took shortcuts".

I also tend to go for the really cheap stuff, which I suspect might be more reliable than what is sold as mid range now. I have some drawers in the front room that are literally nonwoven fabric drawers, in a metal frame. I'm not sure what the failure mode would be other than directly taking a hard hit, it doesn't really have any of the weak points I'm used to seeing.