skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I was primarily reacting to your assertions that the author doesn’t deserve recognition due to intrinsic motivations and the direct claim that they have as of yet not contributed.

What you’ve listed here are procedural issues that are easily corrected and have no bearing on whether or not contribution actually occurred, and no relation to those broader claims.

Zooming out a bit, maybe what you’re describing is indeed the status quo, and what the author described is a perfectly normal experience. If so, then the author’s piece should be seen as shining a light on kafkaesque bureaucratic bullshit that threatens the spirit of FOSS and thus FOSS itself.

Maybe “kernel contributor” needs to be better defined, and maybe it requires more than one contribution. Maybe there needs to be something more than “reported by” but less than “kernel contributor”.

But again, at no point is it fair to claim that the author did not contribute.

> I don't think we're going to see eye to eye on this one, in my experience nothing out of the ordinary happened here

Frankly, you’re shifting the goalposts so this isn't about seeing eye to eye. “Ordinary” is quite often very problematic, and each person is free to choose their own battles. You don’t have to agree that this was the right hill, but that is unrelated to a reasonable definition of “contribution”, and irrelevant to author’s choice to make some noise about their own personal experience.

Noise is a first step towards improving a situation. Change has to start somewhere. And FOSS maintainers need to be aware of the harm they bring to the projects they’ve been entrusted to steward when they forget about the human factors involved.
The numberpad needs abcdef and : to be IPv6 ready.
“Over-prescribed” is an overused phrase that is usually tantamount to little more than “things are different than they were before”

It’s hard to quantify meaningful over-prescribing.
It seems like the majority of people are in support of lowering the barrier to entry for most forms of medicine. Especially those that are non-drug therapies like sleep apnea machines.

The counter point over-prescribing is the idea that restricting these kinds of therapies very likely cause a significant amount of people to have a demonstrably worse quality of life.

Just because something is more common now does not necessarily mean it is overprescribed. It can just as easily be seen as a mistake in the past to under-prescribe, or the cost of treatment was too high, or access to treatment was inadequate
That's not non-sensical at all. It's completely plausible. In any task, fatigue results in diminishing marginal productivity, to the point where taking time to rest and recover will sometimes boost total productivity more than spending that time working. Evidence, not blanket dismissal, is required to determine if that's true for Fridays.
I've been taught that lesson many times. But it's just too easy for an introvert to be in a relationship and not have to socialise any more.

Over years I've given up on trying to be a social person and I just need to be honest about it: I hate socialising and will only do it when there's a clear and direct reason for doing so. The biggest reason is sex. Once that's not needed the reasons for doing so are very few and far between.
I feel like I just took a peak into some debate that is happening somewhere else? Seems silly to worry about the exact abilities of people so many years ago. What is at stake here? And why do we have to take the position that teachers and editors are not, in general, considered a fine practitioner of what they are teaching/editing? Are they the pinnacle? Almost certainly not, but that will be true of most any particular example.

More I'd wager that the editor of the higher performers is better at whatever the topic is than a large enough portion of the rest of the crowd, that folks probably do hold them in some esteem at the topic?
Not a water expert here but surely all tap water is not desalinated.. That would be just outrageous expensive with current pricing and technologies.
Americans are smart enough and strong enough to not have to hide behind a 'powerful union'. Unions are nothing more than legalized mob. The are worthless for productivity and a disaster for those who are eager to work.
In cities things are more balanced like you’ve mentioned but our suburb design is so crushingly isolating. The suburbs that get built now are almost designed to be lonely: here’s 100+ houses all right next to each other so there are no real communal spaces for socialization. We’ve zoned it in a way so that if someone wants to open a pub or salon or whatever they will be refused from the start. If you want that experience you will almost inherently have to drive because the suburbs are often so large that walking is impractical. You either make friends with your neighbors, which most adults only do casually at best, or you just be lonely.

This gets into the concept of “third space” or community space, which we often critically lack outside of cities. Living near friends is great if you have them but if you don’t you need some place to make them. Culturally we are in a weird spot for a lot of people. There are church related communities but that’s not helpful if you’re not religious. There’s the bar and club scene but that can be more focus on sex, can be expensive, and is also not for everyone (especially if you don’t drink alcohol). There’s niche interest groups like d&d and board game clubs, figure drawing classes, etc, but these can be hard to socialize in because of things like the group is already tight knit and not accepting of new faces, the class is focused and there’s not much time for socializing thus requiring another social space (eg let’s get drinks after class) which you may not have time for, etc

It’s tough, I guess. The articl is a good suggestion but an oversimplification that glosses over these big systemic issues (especially the lack of community spaces that don’t constantly drain us of cash or expect us to be intoxicated). If you can live near your friends you should. But at the same time that’s way tougher than it sounds most of the time. I’d love to live near my friends but we’re all pushing 40 now. Everyone’s everywhere. We were once all in the same city but work took us all over the place and now we live all over the country. It’s hard enough to just stay in touch.
> You could literally do nothing every Friday and you would not be less productive than a 4 day work week.

This would be an accurate statement for most work places. People are often creating negative value in the modern workplace in the form on tech debt, new bugs, unwanted features, meetings that drain the rest of the staff...

5 days isn't productive for knowledge and creative work, it leaves people in a state of perpetual burn out and greatly lowers the quality of output.
They actually have zero documentation I can find for using DenoKV outside of the Deno Deploy environment. It may be possible, or you can always use Deno without using DenoKV, but I think the statement "you have to use their hosted service" isn't inaccurate.
There are some liabilities that cannot be assumed. For example, if law enforcement decides that a death in an accident is manslaughter, all the insurance in the world will not prevent you from being prosecuted and potentially jailed.
Plugging Justine gets downvoted? What in the what?
It's safe to say 32 hours of work does not produce more than 40 hours.

The gray area is the point at which there are diminishing returns. Is that between 32 and 40 hours, or more? And how much do they diminish?
> How does Gecko (the engine used in Firefox) fare on being embedded? I thought it wasn't as easy or simple, and hence one of the reasons why Chromium dominated in things like Electron.

I haven't checked for a while, but it's pretty painful, especially because Mozilla kept changing their mind about how they wanted it to be embedded.
Is there something that such unions in your area do to ensure that a worker's skill and ability matter far more than, say, who their relatives happen to be?
>I mean, yes? Housing prices have continued to shoot up in many western cities despite large increases in housing supply.

Well yes, because we have decades of undersupply to correct! Of course a small step in the right direction doesn't magically fix everything. We need to build WAAAAYYY more, like to a vast overabundance, which capitalism unaided can never do because a builder will never start building a hundred rooms if that makes the market go down because that would ruin their profits elsewhere.

I would be surprised if, after there is enough supply, there is an "induced demand" effect for housing. Humans take like 20 years to go from born to needing a house, and most people don't choose to have children when they otherwise wouldn't because of cheap housing.
Nice looking site and design - kudos. I don't think there is anything wrong with the idea but you do have to compete with easier alternatives (e.g. credit cards, gofundme, craigslist). You can't just be different than the alternatives to effectively compete, you have to be better - especially for the creator who in your scenario needs money to make ends meet.

As others have mentioned your biggest challenge is the two-sided marketplace, it is unfortunately just about the hardest thing to pick for a startup. You won't get creators until there is a large enough volume of supporters for it to be worth it to them (why set up a campaign if no one responds). You won't get supporters until you have enough creators to match services they might want.

Many marketplaces like this start with at least one of two things - they either already control one side of the market via relationships (they have access to a large amount of supply, for example), or they have a lot of capital they can use to fund the concept until it gains traction (by funding creators for example). Ideally you have both.

My advice, given the time you have already invested, is to figure out how you can niche down very narrowly to start. Pick one geographic area, and perhaps one service type, and then grind it out manually to match supply to demand. Maybe you're matching creators who tutor on the side, to students in Seattle (or whatever). You want to be narrow because it's too hard to build supply and demand if you're broad, especially by yourself without funding. You'll have to try lots of hacks to see what works to get initial users - it will be manual, you will have to talk to a lot of people, it won't "scale" but that is ok to start. If it works you can grow into other markets later (example: Facebook started only for Harvard, Uber was only black limos in SF).

Also consider looking for a charitable benefactor who will fund creators (even if they don't use the services) to get a bit of energy into the marketplace. If you can find someone, or a company that wants to do this for a bit of good will and press you'll have some capital to fund the initial creators.

Good luck!
Spotify uses AI to clone and translate podcaster voices in new pilot program
Why are there so many comparisons between Rust and Go? They don't seem to be particularly similar languages, either in use-case or style, but it often feels like the community wants there to be a competition between the two, which doesn't seem appropriate to me.

Go should be compared to other high-level garbage collected languages: Java, Python, C# -- that kind of thing.

Rust should be compared to C++ and C, but I'd also love to see it compared to other languages with advanced type systems, or contrasted with languages with more traditional or simple type systems.
I liked the article but I have a nit with the Deployment section:

First, Go has other deployment options other than Docker or providers that support docker containers. For example, Google App Engine (GAE) has a command line interface very similar to Shuttle that enables deployment and hosting of your Go application. This is probably the best 'apples' to 'apples' comparison.

Go and Rust are very similar in this way because both can be compiled to a statically linked binary with zero runtime dependencies[1]. This is important because both Javascript and Python are interpreted, frequently with run-time dependencies in addition to the interpreter, that can make hosting and deployment more difficult.

Since both languages compile to a statically linked binary, they can be hosted virtually anywhere. Any old linux box or VCS with a modern os should work just fine. Optionally, one can serve from behind Nginx or Caddy for extra functionality.

I've chosen this approach on a side project. It deploys with a simple `make deploy` command that runs tests, creates the static binary, and deploys the build asset over SSH and cycles the systemd service. It can be rolled back with `make rollback` which reverts by simply changing the symlink and restarting the service.

[1] Assumes a modern OS.
That was our early alpha cooperation with NVIDIA. We've learned a lot since then. Not to mention, the AI ecosystem has grown up a bunch. But you are correct: this is something we've been planning for for a loooooooong time.
Agreed. It's great that they're model available under a permissive license. But without more information about the training data and methodology, it isn't exactly "open source".
If this engine could manage all of htmx and most of tailwind it could be a very attractive local application platform.
Deno is compatible with web code to a much deeper level than Node.js is. As the Deno website puts it: "Built with web standard APIs". This might not make a difference to most. Personally though, as someone who strives really hard to share code between frontend and backend, I'm excited for it. This is pretty much the only reason I see Deno eventually winning out over Node.js (in the long run).

I don't have the time to try to port any of my meaningful projects to it right now, but I look forward to the day when I can do so.
Onake Obavva
I'm currently using Deno deploy and found it to be fantastically performant and dumb simple for my lone wolf project. I'm experienced in AWS development in larger teams and it is nice to see a move away from complexity for a change where you can easily set something up without having to think about setting it up at all. The DNS stuff was just dead simple as well and automatic ssl certs was super nice. I have 0 complaints for what this is trying to be and am excited for the road map.
The AI isn't creating a new recipe on its own. If a language model spits something out it was already available and indexable on the internet, and you could already search for it. Having a different interface for it doesn't change much.
So essentially the modern framing of the luddite movement is a giant strawman argument mischaracterizing labor as being against technology when in reality they were just trying to figure out how to survive in a world where their work and livelihoods were made redundant practically overnight.

The same will happen to modern wage labor due to AI. Automation will not be a sudden an obvious moment (eg. Google deciding to lay off every software engineer), rather it will be a slow hemorrhaging of the working class where vast swaths of workers will be laid off, and unable to find work of similar pay and stability ever again. The job market will continue to get exponentially more and more competitive, and the illusion of stability will collapse. This same trend has already been playing out over the last few decades, but the pace at which it's playing out is now accelerating exponentially.

Because jobs will still exist, the status quo "just re-train them" optimists will remain ignorant and in denial, clinging to old models of the past. They'll say ridiculous things like "we can re-train the bus drivers by teaching them how to code", or "just teach illustrators how to prompt".

Of course advancing technology should be a good thing, and with the modern technology we have now we already could afford a society of leisure and abundance. But our current capitalist system drains most people of the time/energy for big picture thinking (unrelated to making a buck), and our representative democracy (compared to direct or delegative democracy) further discourages political participation from regular people who aren't wealthy enough to have the abundance of leisure and financial security required to think about anything other than money.

The result is that governments only serve the interests of the wealthy, while providing only an illusion of representing the masses. The rigidity and inflexibility of government systems means that nothing will change short of a revolution.

The easiest and simplest policy change that can be made to alleviate job loss + destitution from AI and to reframe AI automation from a game with winners + losers to a game where everyone wins is to implement a Universal Basic Income (UBI).

Think we can't afford a UBI? Fine. Start small, and peg it to the revenues of something specific like a Land Value Tax (Henry George's "citizen's dividend"). Watch society not collapse and everyone be happier (eg. like when COVID forced employers to allow more remote work) as society collectively moves up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The increasing abundance of leisure will start the flywheel towards increasing political participation and representation of the people, systemic political reform towards delegative democracy (liquid democracy), and the next evolution of the human species in the "AI Age".

Until then, the only way to safeguard yourself from the AI automation wave is to achieve financial independence and to fully embrace AI, since workers who know how to leverage the latest AI tools will displace those who don't.
Isn't the whole point of their design that they aren't producing neutrons? What's the point of picking an aneutronic reaction if they are going to be having D-D and D-T fusion going on anyway?
Show HN: TrickAI – Uncovering AI Blindspots
During a hackathon last week, my team built TrickAI - a project exploring AI's limitations in problem-solving compared to humans.

The core question is this - using puzzles / context clues, could humans send information to other humans without ChatGPT learning the information?

You can try to solve puzzles created by other humans that ChatGPT failed to solve.
You can also create a puzzle, and if it fools ChatGPT, it'll become available for humans to try.

The leaderboard shows which puzzles (1) fooled ChatGPT, and (2) did not fool humans.

Our project aims to compile a dataset of AI blindspots. This dataset will be freely available to anyone working on AGI alignment, helping to enhance the understanding of AI limitations and improve alignment efforts.

Would love to hear any feedback/advice anyone has and see if I should invest a bit more in this. Thanks!
KNX for new buildings. But it's quite expensive, like $25 per portand there's a maximum on 64 devices on a twisted pair line. You can have up to 15 lines on a backbone with line repeates (= area) and then max 15 areas with area couplers. There are also KNX to IP routers.

https://www.knx.org/knx-en/for-your-home/
Unions are working to fight the two tier wage structure you speak of; are you aware? UPS/Teamsters is one such example.
For some reason I was compelled to click on your profile and noted that this your first comment after 7 years of inactivity. Welcome back
I'm looking for a programmable (ZMK/QMK) split ergo ortholinear keyboard that uses low travel macbook-style keys and can be custom tented. Any suggestions?
I'm struggling quite a bit with market positioning and that's why I need people to give me some feedback. Thanks man!
Hmmm… that’s a very interesting take an article that suggests the hubris of the CEO ended up destroying the company he was hired to lead.
Excellent production quality, but I would have appreciated a bit more skepticism on the part of the host of Real Engineering.

In particular, adding tritium to a fusing deuterium plasma does not just make all of the fusion a-neutronic. It just makes some percentage of the fusion events a-neutronic. So you're "just" adding a fuel additive that "just" changes the emissions somewhat

Plus, apparently D-T fusion tends to release gamma rays -- I'm sure that will also be tricky to either convert into useful energy or shield against.

I'm all in favor of trying, and I wish them luck, but it all smacked of a last minute publicity event to try to reassure investors that they were just one last upgrade away from producing power.

I would suggest the (longer, dryer) fusion master class series by Dr. Matthew Moynihan

https://youtu.be/BGu0cxrWWCA?si=lozD5-5MT1d-WEp9
As jerf says, not really easily, no. But code review is a perfectly reasonable mechanism for catching this kind of thing.
My take is that this all refers to another doc with that ITEM 7 in it. I think these are interface tweaks to Chrome that will drive more search volume, but negatively impact Chrome UX. Chrome team is pushing back, b/c they don’t want their app to suck, but Ruth needs to hit her number.
The internet is already being ruined with access to chatGPT, the spammers haven’t even figured out how to use LLama for the most part.

So really, wrong tree to bark up to- the problem is that our existing way of doing things can’t survive AI and you can’t regulate that away as you couldn’t make gunpowder disappear to avoid your city walls no longer working
> A lot of these maintainers are already overworked and don't have time to tutor every single person that wants to put kernel contributor on their resume.

This seems like a very cynical view of what happened here, and completely unfounded.

Obviously these big open-source projects need gatekeepers, but if the gatekeepers often make aspiring contributors feel violated and humiliated rather than offering feedback to get their initial contributions across the finish line, general interest and enthusiasm for contributing are going to dry up. Maybe that's by design, but it doesn't feel sustainable in the long term.
> I just got beaten up in HN for asking how the hell sql injection is still a problem.

It's possible for developers to think they're actually doing the right thing, but it turns out they're not.

https://www.npmjs.com/package/mysql#escaping-query-values

> This looks similar to prepared statements in MySQL, however it really just uses the same connection.escape() method internally.

And depending on how the MySQL server is configured, connection.escape() can be bypassed.
I think the basic issue stems from the fact that LKML sees patches as 'proposals' unless they can be included as is without further work. And any would-be contributor would be (heh) able to see that for themselves by looking at the many years of documented interaction between maintainers and the general public.

These long running projects all have their own styles and conventions for interaction (LKML itself being one of those) and the onus is on newcomers to familiarize themselves with that. Authorship, especially in the context of a project of this magnitude and with so many different people maintaining different parts of it is always going to be somewhat nebulous, because after all, you're changing a tiny little bit in a huge machine and anything worthy of copyright is usually expected to stand alone as a 'work'. That's definitely not the case here. And so the sign-off becomes a critical bit, if you omit that then you've just created a problem for the maintainer. Personally, I would never expect to be named author of a patch sent to the kernel mailing list, but if I wrote a sizeable subsystem then I would definitely expect that kind of recognition.

For patches like this your pay-off is the fact that they are taken into consideration at all.
Thanks so much for the reply!

Looking forward to hearing about a new ecomm lib :)

I'm also rolling my own as it's built for a specific use case. Not sure I will ever open source, that isn't on my mind at this point.