skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed. Also less peoples hobbies should try to be a business. It's ok to do something for fun.
Most binary files that people want to store in a VCS are stuff like .psd, .xlsx, .docx, and the like - data that's created by people by hand, but not stored as text.
I would imagine the pilot, like many of us, had the "dedicated emergency number for downed agents" safely stored in a cell phone (i.e. not memorized). Medical shock [from ejection/error] could exacerbate any attempts at recall.
In Subversion at least, you'd do a partial checkout. If you don't need a particular directory you just don't check it out. If you lay out your repo structure well there's no problem. It was incredibly convenient.

I've tried many different SCM over the years and I was happy when git took root, but its poor handling of large files was problematic from the beginning. Git being bad at large files turned into this best practice of not storing large files in git, which was shortened to "don't store large files in SCM." I think that's a huge source of our availability and/or supply chain headache.

I have projects from 20 years ago that I can build because all of the dependencies (minus the compiler -- I'm counting on it being backwards compatible) are stored right in the source code. Meanwhile, I can't do that with Ruby projects from several years ago because gems have been removed. I've seen deployments come to a halt because no startup runs its own package server mirror and those servers go offline or a package may get deleted mid-deploy. The infamous leftpad incident broke a good chunk of the web and that wouldn't have happened if that package was fetched once and then added to an appropriate SCM. Every time we fetch the same package repeatedly from a package server we're counting on it having not changed because no one does any sort of verification any longer.
i am always advocating for getting married early, before we are settled into our habits and expectations. however that is dependent on a supportive society, one that teaches young people what qualities they should look for in a partner, and one that that nurtures these good qualities from childhood.

until then, i would very much agree with you.
A negative reception to putting a product out there is actually a really great outcome. It shows you are doing something right if this happens.

The expected and typical outcome is to be completely ignored - crickets. This is perhaps the main reason you should not fear shipping!

I have a post which elaborates on this if it's interesting for anyone: https://davnicwil.com/negative-feedback-is-positive/
Roughly what you're discussing has been implemented in gcc (behind a flag) for a long time: https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SplitStacks
Linux terminal emulators have the potential of being much faster
> The whole point that git rejects large blobs is primarily because they don't belong in VCS.

Who are you to say that my blobs don't belong in version control? Where does a versioned asset file for a website or a game go, if not in version control? If the answer is "somewhere else referneced by the git commit", then you're accepting that the data belongs in version control but that git can't handle it.

> But for those who need large blobs there is git-lfs as the author mentioned.

git-lfs isn't git, though. It's a bodge on top of git that breaks many of the assumptions about git, requires special handling and setup. If it _were_ a core part of git I would agree, but it's not.

> So I prefer gits Unix philosophy of doing one thing but doing it really well

Git is tightly coupled to a _bunch_ of unix tools, and doesn't work without them. Try running git on windows and see that installs an entire suite of posix tools (msys) just to let you run `git clone`.
It’s not just grain size strengthening, it seems the surprising magic is a particle strengthening effect from dislocation pinning on nanoscale porosity
We learned this from Soviet Russia: it doesn't really matter what you're looking for, if people know they're being watched, they develop pathologies and complexes around that which stunt their development and actualization. Kids are people too.
The problem is that they are trained solely to predict tokens.

The method signature at the end doesn't matter you are right there but what the model is trained to do matters a ton. If it was trained to solve logical problems or to fact check etc, then it is no longer just a token predictor. But as is all the model is trained to do is to predict tokens, and you notice that immediately when you use it because it leads to obvious issues with what the model can do. It is really easy to target sparse parts of its data and get it to say nonsense because it is just trained to predict tokens.
That's building a custom version control on top of the version control you're already using.
I've only used Perforce for two years and it didn't feel slow at all. The company wasn't exactly throwing money at hardware.
They should probably change the name of the compound to prevent confusion.
You’re engaging in some sleight of hand by first saying attention is not payment, and later that it is.

The currencies are different but Google absolutely needs to satisfice two disparate customers.
The docs there hint at how it’s done in go and how it could be done in erlang: the runtime monitors how long a given goroutine has been running without yielding the scheduler, and uses a signal handler to interrupt code that has exceeded a 10ms quota of continuous usage.

https://medium.com/a-journey-with-go/go-asynchronous-preempt...
Git gets its bias from the Linux kernel development.

When you're sharing your source changes with external people, who need to review your code, it just makes sense to present it in a clean, logical progression of changes. To wit, remove unnecessary noise like your development missteps.

And it's only in that context that the emphatic call for history rewriting is born. Meaning, you can use all the power of Git to record all your changes as you proceed through development, and then rebase them into something presentable for the greater world.
I don't have a multi-filament printer, but I'm under the impression that two color printing is quite useful because you can print high-contrast text, e.g. for labels. When I need to iterate a tricky design, I hand-label them "1" "2" ... If I could print better text, It would be nicer to include a version number, dimensions, etc.
> convince themselves that the teenager who was walking around with emerald from his family's mine in his pockets was not a rich privileged kid

Most emeralds (and other precious stones, too, but especially emeralds) that come out of the ground are essentially worthless.

https://www.amazon.com/Gemhub-Quality-Emerald-Natural-Wrappe...

There you go. Now you, too, can "walk around with emeralds in your pocket". 12 bucks.
The big benefit I think is in libraries. I don't want to deal with 10 different ways of doing async in 10 different libraries, nor think about how to co-ordinate between them.
Versioning/distributing tickets is indeed useful; but can't this be "implemented" in git already, by defining a file-based format (think, issue/$YYYYMMDDHHMMSS-$title.md, but the variants are endless), and versioning those files?

A first drawback I can think of is that this would probably require an additional layer for non-tech people. I haven't had the opportunity to use Fossil, so I am clueless regarding the kind of UI they propose, but I wouldn't be surprised that they actually solve this, considering the extensive list of features.
Those advances -- musket to Gatling gun, calculator to CPU -- are great examples of what our laws and customs must adapt to continuously.

In those cases, we could draw on analogy on things that were already possible for organizations - a machine gun is a one man army, a cpu does the work of a room of accountants. We have never had a Gatling gun for cogent paragraphs before, but we have contact centers full of scammers and propagandists.

A productive approach to controlling AI could start with considering our controls for these organizations (and how to make them work), and then address the concentration afforded by AI. Exceptionalism about what AI can do is a distraction.
> What can’t be found in an open source project? AI first layer inspection and lidar?

Not having to fuck around to assemble and use your printer.

I had the spare time and patience to maintain my printer during my university years - but now I really just want something that works out of the box, all the time, every time.

I love open-source hardware, but only in places where having to maintain it myself isn’t burdensome - and unfortunately, I’ve always treated my printer as more of a tool than as a hobby.
i used it years ago. it solved nothing for me despite being cool. i've not seen any interesting developments in that direction.

but then i still consider java, c#, go, rust, haskell pointess badly designed and built clusterfucks, so what do i know?
Reflections on my journey into computer science
Just a blog essay where I reflect on my CS journey when I am now in my mid-developer phase.
It's not a trick. Every information can be represented by sequence of bits or strings. It's not the surprising part. It's just that its a telling sign that through compression understanding of the game emerges because:

1- unlike language where you can make an argument that maybe model had seen this example in the training set and just parroting it back, you can't really memorize the possible states of chess and thus you can be reasonably sure that any game or state it is in, must be OOD.

2- If the system still plays well with OOD examples, it must be gaining understanding of the game itself.

Also check out the Othello paper, where they show the evidence for an LLM encoding the game state in its neurons.
Previous news about electric blue spiders: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37349839
How unlikely is it that some agency already has people in place for these types of jobs, only to have that person plant an inconspicuous backdoor that can be resurfaced several years later. I mean, if they're giving him access to the entire IT infrastructure, I'm sure it can be done in a way where it can't be pinned back.
You can have lots of threads – they are just thread stacks holding execution context – but that doesn't mean they will run well. You also need lots of execution units on which they can run. Even then, if any thread can sleep/wake-up at any random time, you will have a lot of jitter in your thread response latency. So, such large number of threads is anti efficient or predictable performance. It is not about that at all but instead it is about programming style/habits.
Editors are smart enough now that they can format the code for display however you like, independently of tabs vs. spaces.
You're unintentionally arguing against your point.

If you sat someone down who had never played chess before, and taught them the rules, they also can't play chess. They wouldn't remember the allowed moves and would make tons of illegal moves.

The only way a person reaches the state of being able to play chess is to usually have learned the rules and also watched a bunch games. Either games between others, or most frequently games of "almost chess" that they play with a helpful instructor that corrects them every time they make an illegal move.

In that respect both humans and llms learn to play chess the same way - by watching games.

Or for an analogy, think about how many times you've sat down to learn a new board game and after the person who had played it before explains all the rules you still don't really get it. What's next? "Let's just play a practice round and I'll pick it up as we go." Ie learning from seeing the game played.

I think a lot of the skepticism in LLMs is people over estimate / inaccurately remember how people really learn / behave.
> That said, i believe that in the current implementation of virtual threads on the JVM, it is possible that a tight loop that doesn't call any methods will not be rescheduled;

Right now virtual threads that don't enter into any blocking code won't be unscheduled by the JVM.
I wondered the same thing with my comment which was largely quoting clarifying items from the article. I think this is a touchy subject for people who cannot emotionally handle anything challenging their view.
Animal sacrifice and astral tombs: The mysteries still emerging in Saudi deserts
This matches my experience and perception. It's a language with no real core identity - every time some new language feature becomes trendy D tries to find a way to shoehorn it in. When everyone in C++-land got a little too excited about template metaprogramming and Boost, suddenly D became a language fixated on template metaprogramming. When everyone on HN got excited about Haskell, suddenly D went hard on functional programming and enforcing immutability. When Rust started picking up steam, suddenly D began rallying around BetterC, nogc, memory-safety, ownership and borrowing.

Speaking personally: I tend to work best in languages which imply a particular mental schema for expression and structuring. Not that Python is always a poster-child for this, but as the Zen of Python says, "there should be one and preferably only one obvious way to do it". Ironically, by being limited a good language can get out of your way by allowing you to focus on your problem rather than exploring a massive solution space of how best to express it. For me, anyway.

D isn't a language like that; it seemingly operates under the assumption that any feature must be good - if D has all the features of C++ AND D has all the features of Rust AND D has all the features of Java AND D has all the features of Haskell AND...why use all those other languages when you could just use D? It's guaranteed to have what you need! And there's certainly room in this world for languages like that - and there's plenty of them - but they're not for me.
Syphilis is being rewritten by a medieval skeleton
Previously posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37606321
I'd say check out the work of William Shotts at https://linuxcommand.org/ His book, "The Linux Command Line" is free for downloading, and there are lots of references to style guides, good practices, and bash templates in the book.

There is also a shorter, HTML version at the same site: https://linuxcommand.org/lc3_learning_the_shell.php

I'm trying to get a little proficiency in all this, and just yesterday I went through the "Further Reading" sections at the end of each chapter, and captured all the likely URLs for further investigation.

One that looks really good is Dylan Araps' "Pure Bash Bible" ( See https://github.com/dylanaraps/pure-bash-bible ) Confession: I found a PDF copy at Libgen, but don't tell anyone. This and the Shotts book have also been thoroughly discussed on Hacker News in the past. (I.e., search on the two titles and you'll probably get all the opinions that you can stand, plus maybe some more hints.)

Bash is profoundly weird, but if/when you can make it work, it's slick.
This could be useful for objects needing high surface area. Maybe new types of capacitors?
Perhaps you want to interact with more complex command line programs, like kubectl to automate some tasks
So, they think they can stop ransomware attacks by hiring someone willing to work 10 hours shifts 7 days a week? Good luck with that!
Super interesting - this almost sounds like evidence of linguistic determinism / relativism, i.e. the idea that our language influences how we perceive and think. Is that what you’re thinking too?
I always find it weird when someone says this. Does Git do only one thing? Sure, for the appropriate definition of "one thing". But then so does Fossil if you define the "one thing" to be managing a software project.
Dup: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37607387
Profile of Sabine Hossenfelder
Once again with the "human learning and machine learning are the same" .... then why not call them both 'learning'? There are qualitative and quantitative differences that people here are eager to ignore.

But on the main topic, I read the updates to Microsoft's Terms of Use that come into effect 30 September 2023. They are making jailbreaking and reverse engineering their chatbots explicitly against those ToS and granting themselves rights to whatever you generate using their various services - neither of which is unexpected, but now if you ask Bing to revert to Psychotic Sydney, Microsoft has an excuse to lock you out of every Microsoft service you own for breaking their rules.
Long time ago I talked to a friend about cameras in classrooms. I commented about how many problems it prevents. He explained a definition of moral: moral is the non physical limitation that bars you from doing something you want but harms another person even if you won't be punished.

It was then explained to me that children who grow in over surveillance have a tendency of not exercising moral. They will do whatever they want once they are confident that nobody will know. It is the same thing with excess of punishment: if people know something is legal and won't be punished, they won't care about moral.

I tried to ask about the good side of having cameras but he said it was not worth the price of growing a generation of amorals.
in addition, there are ways to share this message that is not belittling. people read "tough it out" as: "be a man, tough it out, haha", but it could also be: "yeah, i am sorry you are in a rough spot. unfortunately, there is no way you can avoid it, so you are going to have to protect yourself in other ways. here are a few things you can do.... don't give up and loose hope, this will go away."
Takes money to buy mines. Whether that was a good/bad investment isn’t the point.
I don’t deny that this behaviour exists, but I don’t understand why it is allowed to exist. I understand it in the context of donating assets with a liquid market, like stocks and bonds, but for illiquid, difficult to value assets like these or art, it seems like a mega opportunity for tax evasion that could easily be cracked down upon.

At least have a “claw back” where if the charity then sells the thing for $100,000 then the donor has to retract the full value of the original deduction.
I pre-date cable TV. There was a debate amongst the adults whether the community should allow cable TV in, given the infrastructure and tax costs involved.
I use D and like it. For me its positives are:

- Much faster than Python (I use it in my day job).

- Not as flexible as Python (not much is) but its so flexible I've yet to be hindered by it.

- GC-based which has let me build complex libraries quickly without being buried in memory management.

- Large standard library with rich documentation.

- It's easy to build libraries and executables (programs are organized in directories).

- Works on macOS, Windows, and Linux.

- Supported by a plugin in IntelliJ IDEA.

- Welcoming, responsive, and active community forums.

- Write low- and high-level code in the same language.

What I don't like:

- The library ecosystem isn't as expansive as you'd find in languages like Python and C#.

- Sometimes feature additions get mired in community discussions.

I started using D after the move to D2 and only heard about the move in HN comments. Day-to-day it has never been an issue.

You can get many of the positives I list in languages like C#, F#, and Go. I think the community in D kept me from going elsewhere.

Edited for formatting.
I picked up a Doogee S55 as my travel phone sometime 2015-2017. It's still my secondary phone today. Battery is on its last legs and the rugged case is as well, but squeezing 6 years of utility out of a ~$200 phone? Hell yeah. Not everything sold on AliExpress is total dogshit.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Doogee-S55-Smartphone-Review.3...

I'll almost certainly pick up another ~$200 rugged Chinese-made phone to replace it....that or some hardware that supports postmarketOS.
> The secret behind the vivid blue coloration of our tarantula lies not in the presence of blue pigments, but rather in the unique structure of their hair, which incorporates nanostructures that manipulate light to create this striking blue appearance

Cool!
From one computer to another? More like from one computer to this guy's server, then from the server to the other computer. Sounds pretty suboptimal if you want to send anything but few kilobyte files.
It could be that what we're making is different today. When I was a teenager, there was no Internet. The thing we made, was the thing we made.

Today, what we're making is the exhibition of the thing we're making. I'm guilty of this, thinking about the blog that I'll write about something, when it doesn't even work.

And is it wrong? I wouldn't enjoy playing music nearly as much if I didn't have a chance to perform in public once in a while.
Well the article does say:

> These additional capabilities are available for Git as 3rd-party add-ons, but with Fossil they are integrated into the design
> If you sat someone down who had never played chess before, and taught them the rules, they also can't play chess. They wouldn't remember the allowed moves and would make tons of illegal moves.

They can recite the rules perfectly, hence they remember them, I didn't say he just saw the rules once, both the LLM and the human has seen the rules enough to recite them perfectly.

Then a typical human can start to play chess based on those rules without having seen anyone play before, humans learn to play games by reading manuals all the time. You trying to argue against it here is absurd.

> think about how many times you've sat down to learn a new board game and after the person who had played it before explains all the rules you still don't really get it

I read the manual before playing board games because I like reading manuals, it is me teaching my friends then. You don't need someone to show you how to play games, reading the manual is enough...
Making something you like, and not some BS trying to triangulate the needs of some hypothetical user, is a very enjoyable way to go about a career in design and engineering. I'm lucky to be in that boat and have the ability to work on something I personally use as well. It makes so many things easy: I can have an insight from using the product myself, build a solution for it, ship it, and in general users share the same insight and appreciate it.

However, as I enjoy this, what often gives me pause about it is thinking about fields like medical device development, or services for the poor, where most people working on the product aren't in the market for that product. I don't think the same ethos applies as well there and it probably means that to accomplish something meaningful in these domains, a hefty dose of cognitive empathy is necessary, as well as checking one's own insights regularly to make sure we're not imagining things.
You could be from Denmark
Typical WSJ hit piece. When capitalist lack critical thinking skills and cry that the rate of their wealth isn’t increasing fast enough, one can be sure WSJ writers will provide soothing words. Even if they are false.
>We're just searching for the prompt that can reliably break these LLMs to show their lack of reasoning

What gives you the idea that there's some universal prompt to "break" LLMs? What does a "broken" LLM even look like to you? Do you just mean that it gives back a wrong answer? It's the only interpretation I can come up with, and they already do that all the time.
Generate iOS PWA splash screens on the fly
Nothing prevents you from doing that, but your martian packets have zero chance of reaching my router.
How do you mean "pinned back." ?
Might as well link to the National Enquirer at this point.
You are right, but evidence of LLMs working well with language is not a sign that they might be memorizing Chess. But rather opposite, infeasability of memorization of chess and yet LLMs still doing well on them might be a sign that LLMs could be doing the same 'thing' with language.
No, everything is compiled.
Jamie Zawinski was an influential programming author 25 years ago.

https://www.jwz.org/doc/tabs-vs-spaces.html