skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If your mom says "there is milk in the fridge", do you think she believes there is milk in the fridge and wants you to know that, or do you think she just parrots something she heard about milk and fridges on the radio or somewhere with no intent or basis in reality? Not sure what your argument is really.
Writing on the wall for a while, eg https://www.theinformation.com/articles/meta-platforms-is-st... (2022)
As always the statistic is useless without the human comparison. If it improves on human coders, no amount of gnashing and wailing will stop the layoffs.
As far as I understand, it's not true; and it can't be more useful in that case, right?
A lot of countries have both nationalized care and the fast track. Many people buy private insurance to cover what the national system does not.

Maybe it's not the best of both worlds, but it's at least a far better safety net than the US provides, and that's the most critical piece. Both for the most affected individuals, and society as a whole (even in terms of cost! An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and all that.)
Still using a pixel 3 I bought used for <150 3 years ago. Works totally fine, never slow, no issues with battery life. Before that had a p1 that worked for a long time too.

Maybe I've just been lucky but I've had very good experiences with pixel phones.
> But I think there’s pretty strong evidence the opposite is generally true

I could not find good research that will decisively settle this dispute about static vs dynamic. So when you say "strong evidence" what are the sources for this strong evidence? Not asking to push against, I am gathering a list of articles and papers about this topic.
There are two scenarios:

1. Each car costs $33k more to make than it sells for. Marginal cost > marginal revenue. Selling more cars will hurt the business. Quite dramatic, basically nothing can be done.

2. Each car costs less than it sells for. Marginal cost < marginal revenue. But the business overall is making a loss, equivalent to $33k times cars sold due to fixed costs. Selling more cars helps the business. Less dramatic, business as usual for a company that can only be profitable at scale, nothing new.

Headline says #1, but I really doubt it’s #1.
Awesome! I'm always happy to hear people are interested in SVE :)

(And yeah, creating technical documentation that a large company should have created themselves has somehow become a hobby of mine.)
Those are both excellent points. And I know I’m guilty of being somewhat anti-LLM just because it’s the new hotness and I’m kind of a contrarian by nature. Which is an example of bias right there! And being in academia when it blew up - I do worry about our future cohorts of computer scientists jf academia doesn’t adapt. Which it almost surely won’t. But that’s not a problem inherent to LLMs.
> nothing faster than 300k

That is exactly one of the misunderstandings I’m trying to warn that you are missing.

I’m certain that your switching transition times are massively faster than the 300k period (each rise and fall time).

You can have split grounds, but you don’t have traces under your grounds so in many cases you aren’t even effectively using them. You are grounding a portion of every signal inside every other signal trace.

“The rest doesn’t matter much”… my man, I can’t explain in this form just how wrong you are.

It’s one thing to be wrong on a design from years ago. My old designs were worse. But it’s another thing to willfully ignore all the ways in which someone who knows better is trying to help you with.

Everything you think about that circuit is wrong in ways you aren’t getting - yet.

Try Phil’s lab videos for EMI.
It’s the same as Airbnb and Uber and Netflix and literally everything else… they throw in hidden fees and play psychology (eg foot in the door technique) to get us to pay more and more without us realizing it. They preach convenience, but unfortunately use that to their advantage to get our guard down. You pay $X to not have to worry about something/get a service, but when you’re not paying attention they jack up prices.

I looked the other day and it’s like $19/month for Spotify Family now… when did that happen? It was like $14 when I signed up. But all my playlists are set up on Spotify… what’s more, all the fam’s are too. Huge PITA to move to Apple Music.
> Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity may not agree with each other but they both have destroyed mountains of attempts to disprove them.

I agree. Unfortunately for all of us the rest of published literature is nowhere near as battle test as these two theories, nor would they survive such testing.

> Not saying you are saying that but some posters are.

I didn’t mean to imply that you were. But the it doesn’t sound like the personally you replied to was on the side of “all science is bad” either.

I am closer to the “much ‘science’ is junk”. There is much good work a being done, but the garbage is very much there, more so in some fields than others.

The null hypothesis at this point for most new papers one reads is certain fields (looking at you nutrition & health) is “this won’t replicate”. It’s certainly also true for much work primarily involving modelling; the null hypothesis as a read should be “if this doesn’t have code, I won’t be able to reproduce/replicate it”.

We should not throw the baby out with the bath water, but we should be frank about the current state of things.
>Why aren’t America’s students showing up?

Thye probably just don't want to be there.

>The pandemic showed students that adults treat them and other adults as chattel.

Exactly more than ever.

>draining education in order to have lower property taxes.

Not exactly this. There is no lower property taxes. They are trying, not very successfully, to keep property taxes from increasing as exorbitantly as they would otherwise.
Alternative beliefs in psychedelic drug users
If there’s a massive power outage, regular business rules change fast.
I swear I've seen the same video(s). I couldn't find after a brief search either but there's something like this he did.
Wait until they figure out what some of this stuff is really good for!
"Hallucinate" predates LLMs.

For instance, before transformers, when we finetuned ESRGAN for specific styles/functions, we used to say it would "hallucinate" in detail that couldn't possibly be in the original image pixels. GenAI wasn't much of a thing back then, and we never thought of the small GAN models as "remembering" things even though thats common language in transformer models. It felt more like we were teaching the GAN a job or style, not encoding memory.

And I think it fit! "Hallucinating" detail into a blurry pixel blob feels like a more accurate analogy to the human condition, and we weren't at the point where it was "confabulating" and generating big objects out of the blue like a diffusion model can.
MagSafe is simply Apple’s brand name for chargers that “plug in” via a magnet. It used to just be the ones that charged laptops, but now that iPhones have the magnetic ring on the back for specifically this purpose, there are MagSafe iPhone chargers out there too.
> That they aren't even interested in that model is because they're in a Faustian bargain with cellular carriers to drive device renewals and post-paid plans.

I like your idea but in the US at least most mobile carriers actually don't encourage yearly upgrades as they force you into a multiyear contract for your phone to get "the best deal". In fact, currently both verizon and AT&T have 30+ month payment plans for phones so you're locked into at least 2.5 years. consequently, most people hold on to their phone for 3 years now.
Funnily enough, India did something similar to that - they overnight made 500 & 1000 rupee bills (the two highest value denomination - approx ~8 & 16USD at the time) illegitimate. There were ways to convert those to the new bills, slowly, and capped at a certain amount iirc.

The goal was to "make illegal money" (i.e. tax evasion / sourced from corruption) useless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Indian_banknote_demonetis...
It seems undeniable they were stealing from people and she knew and was part of the operation. She is likely going to get a minimal sentence by cooperating with the prosecution. The only ethical person in the room resigned as soon as he realized what FTX and Alameda were doing according to his testimony in court today. SBF managing to give his girlfriend much less compensation in stolen money than his father seems like a minor lapse compared to all the other actual criminal acts going on here.
Cracking the code == overbuilding renewables??
It's ok, the AIs will just end up talking to the doctors' AIs, who will tell them GFY. /s?
With humans too
Yeah, yeah. You got me.
But I was kinda going for an unspoken point. Which man is sicker: One who needs to classify friendships as either pleasure or utility? Or one who admits a certain utility to pleasure, and a certain pleasure to utility?

And saying it was accidental in either case is quite a sophisticated little excuse...
Since we can't accomplish what we need to accomplish without 100% participation. You're deluding yourself if you think we have any hope of a reasonable climate future without universal participation.

And, yes, it is the 25%'s fault when they're just willing to say "no" to anything because it hurts someone they want hurt, even if it also hurts them in the process.
The Video Game History Foundation is working to "get expanded exemptions for libraries and organizations preserving video games, which are currently far more limited than their ability to preserve books, movies, audio, etc."

They recently did a study to counter the industry's claims to the copyright office that they're already doing enough to preserve its history. Turns out 87% of classic (ie old) games are unavailable.

See https://gamehistory.org/87percent/.
It's almost as if were going back to hieroglyphs.
How else is someone supposed to learn about your work experience, other than directly asking about it? How much research are they supposed to do ahead of time? Not everyone's code is publicly available on GitHub, and no sane interviewer has time to sit around reading every single line of code that each of their candidates has written. Summarizing each of your major professional projects of your career in a few minutes is really not a whole lot to ask.

I really don't get this extreme aversion of software engineers to answering any sort of question in an interview that requires a marginal amount of thinking. This attitude comes off as extremely disingenuous, and at the very least indicates that they have something to hide about their experience. If they took tests in school the same way they answer interview questions, they would have flunked out of first semester.
I'm a science dude.

"In which field?"

What kind of science would you like?
> What if, instead, the conscious intelligence that differentiates humans from other animals is an emergent quality of language learning, specifically

Sure, you can argue that you have solved the human exclusive part of intelligence, that is a possibility. But we have not yet solved the monkey part of intelligence, the part that all mammals possess that lets them act intelligently in this world. Without such animal intelligence I believe it is impossible for the model to not make really stupid mistakes no human would make, because it lacks the intuitive understanding of the world all animals has.

I don't think training on text will ever produce that level of understanding, no matter how hard you try, text just isn't the right medium to build an intuitive understanding of reality like a dog has.
The hedge funds just ravaged an industry to get a better bottom line and reduce cost
What about friends that you love? Friends that might as well be family or even might be better than family, because you chose each other? A platonic love.
FYI for those that haven't read it before http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
Except that isn't true at all: the history of animal research is one of us assigning all human behavior as "uniquely human, requiring great human intelligence" and then discovering it's either replicated in detail in other "lower" animals, or replicated by animals which don't have nearly the apparent cognitive capacity for it[1].

We have an enormous history of vastly over-estimating the intelligence needed for some behaviors to manifest, with the more accurate conclusion being that actually we simply don't understand the nature of intelligence very well.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5394149/
Would this have affected any authoritative DNS served by them (eg and also taking 1.1.1.1 out of the equation..)

Thinking not correct?
IDK how Pokémon is still so popular 20 years later, and with people I played Pokémon with in elementary school, too. I played Pokémon Red and one of the DS sequels and felt like I was just playing the exact same game again. When NFT "art" and generative art came out it, the spammy and uninspired nature of it reminded me of one specific thing: the hundreds of Pokémon released after the original 150.
Ah yes of course, describing people as parasites has a long history of leading to positive social change/movements.

I can honestly only assume you are trolling me at this point if you're bouncing between calling people "Devine" (do you mean "Divine"?) and parasites and thinking you have anything worthwhile to say.
It’s a single click on the search icon in the omnibar. Can’t get easier than that.
Unreal Engine Pricing Changes
It’s loads wayyy faster. I cannot understand how you haven’t experienced that. What about the fact the service hasn’t gone down practically once? Don’t you remember twitter going down for 9-10 hour stretches every 2-3 months before under new ownership? what about begging for new features and never getting anything except a new font? Elon’s twitter ships constantly (not all improvements per say) but aren’t you happy at least their shipping something?

I have been on since 2010 - you need to constantly (and always had too be) pruning your followings to remove the duds. The ‘following’ tab is only as good as your personal filter. That counts for before or after Elon
You can request to change your primary care doctor. There is an online list of Kaiser doctors who have capacity and you can choose to change to them... the list is accurate and you can do it online, though, unlike those described in the article. You can also make appointments with other Kaiser primary care doctors, either because you want to see someone else or your doctor doesn't have availability.

You don't always have a choice to see a different specialist if you live in a smaller town, but in larger cities you can request a different one.

In general you can't make direct appointments with specialists on your own, you need to be referred by your primary care doc. Once you have seen a specialist, though, you can make direct appointments with them.

You can also call and tell them why you think you need to bypass the normal system. They have staff who are there to help navigate those situations. I have never had to do it personally, so I can't vouch for how accommodating they are.

I will say, though, that in my experience I have a lot more say over my care than my wife does with her traditional insurance provider. She has had to fight to get things paid for and been rejected way too many times.

Sure, she could make an appointment with any specialist she wants... but will insurance pay for it? In your example, if you have another doctor who has said the problem is just anxiety, will insurance pay for your second opinion?

If insurance isn't going to pay for it anyway, it doesn't really matter if you have Kaiser or a traditional insurance provider. Both of us can make any appointment we want if you are going to pay it yourself.
Hell yes, I would definitely switch to Linux (and engage my students to do so) if serious alternatives to Adobe were available.

+ real-time collaborative version
At least I used to think that, but LLMs are basically a very unexpected (to me, at least) counterexample to that theory:

Formulating plausible sounding sentences seems to be possible without having a much deeper world model.

> What if, instead, the conscious intelligence that differentiates humans from other animals is an emergent quality of language learning, specifically?

There’s various linguistic theses claiming similar things (“human minds are wired for language”, i.e. Chomsky’s universal grammar, and conversely “language shapes general cognition”, i.e. Sapir-Whorf).

At least in the light of LLMs (if not long before), I think neither are actually still serious possibilities/useful models of the relationship between language and cognition.
I suppose if the wheels were large enough cylinders then they could provide lift as well, although they would need to be spinning in the opposite direction.

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/cyl.html
I'm impressed by the pixel art generation, will definitely try it.
Humanity can swallow the bitter pill now and have a shot at saving civilization, or it can poison itself slowly and die on the vine. We (you and I) are literally talking about how the end of civilization is more palatable than the end of capitalism.

Well, I say "fuck that." If supposedly rational people can't handle having their belief systems challenged, we have no hope of a future anyway.
It's really hard, even with Go there are so many more differences than just types.

e.g. in Python/Ruby I had a REPL and used it a lot. Go doesn't really have a good REPL, so I tend to not use it so much. I probably pay some in productivity for that?

On the other hand, I type code like:

name:=fun("foo","bar");if name=="foo"{fmt.Println(name)}

And write and let gofmt sort it out. You can kind of do that in Ruby in theory (not sure if good formatters exist), but Python is more tricky (and I also think the auto-formatters for Python are bad and often make code worse).

The flexibility of things like Active{Record,Model} in Rails are great, and hard to emulate with Go. People have tried, and it just doesn't fit with the language very well.

Go's simple "just compile to a statically linked binary" distribution model probably saves me time, especially for distributing it to other people.

Probably other differences I can't think of right now.

So between all of that, how do you split out the productivity of "types" vs. anything else?

That's also my problem with the research on this, because you just can't, not really. What you need to do is compare e.g. Python with Mypy vs. without. I don't think anyone has done that(?) And even then you run in to the problems with differences in tasks, differences in programmer experience and ability, etc. which matter because for a lot of these studies n tends to be small.
The code was convincing renewable energy companies to finance the upfront cost of building renewables. It's pretty much just seeking loans in a way that doesn't inflate their national debt.
There are many reasons to attend classes (roughly in order of importance)

1. Real life lecturer that can be asked questions

2. Peers that you can meet and discuss both study-related and unrelated topics.

3. Language. Not relevant for intros, but advanced topics can be explained in more than one way, and as a student you not necessarily will be able to map between them.

4. Schedule. Self-pacing 6 different classes for 12 weeks may be harder than it looks. Instead, you can just attend classes.

5. Advanced topics. Online resources, especially videos become scarcer as you advance in your studies, more so if you are not in hot topic (e.g., CS). I still have some notes from classes I took as undergrad as a best source for the learned topics. Good luck finding video lectures about diagrammatic approach to real time dynamics of open spin systems.

Same goes the other way around, sometimes attending class is just not worth it, even without tons of online courses. I learned my E&M by just reading the official book during the lecture time (see 4.).
These tools should ideally chosen a simple, known syntax like S-expressions or XML.
I'm quite confused. Japanese people practiced pollarding, and then later developed a more complex and refined variant of it known as daisugi.

That's the original comment's claim, and you seem to making that exact same claim here, but phrasing it as if you are right and the original commenter is wrong.
Write down your answer to that question. If the project was particularly complex, or you were on it for a long time, the answer might be several paragraphs long. Read it out loud, and time how long it takes. The goal is to come up with two versions - one that is 90 seconds long ("elevator pitch"), and another that is 2-3 minutes long. That way you have two options depending on how much time you have to answer the question.

Anticipate questions a listener might have about your project. Write down your answers. Read them out loud. Try to prune those answers to 30-60 seconds.

I can relate a little bit to your last point. Writing in a journal (and writing coherently on HN) seems to help.
That is not how an RCD works. It doesn't even look at ground.

An RCD will trip when the difference between the current going down the live and neutral conductors exceeds a certain value -- in normal operation they are opposite and cancel each other out.

If it operated how you describe, it could never detect someone touching a live conductor, because the current would not return through the ground prong.
I'm not on enough drugs right now to be able to imagine that happening.
We do know how to describe their behaviour. It's in terms of plausibility. The central dogma of LLM-as-chatbot-assistant is that at sufficient scale, plausibility converges towards accuracy, and becomes a proxy for utility.

This is not proven, but that is incidental to the deeper issue.

The deep issue is that when a "conversation" kicks off with the LLM being confidently incorrect, the most plausible continuation to take from human literature, and from a good deal of human interaction, is that they continue to be wrong.
> as opposed to meaningful improvement upon the existing design or introduction of a new hardware feature

I just wish they kept the pixel 4 design and only improved the battery life. I would pay more for it than this new design.
A "you" can, and many individual "you"s presumably did that, to general satisfaction. But the implicit assumption you made is that eyeballing and cutting is easy, while triangles are hard, even though it's the other way around, especially with stone age tools.

But we're talking about groups of people, "they", who all build a lot. Such groups tend to have a few people who make these observations, and then the observations proliferate, because they are both way easier to use than the alternative hack-work, and yield much more aesthetically pleasing results. Especially in the stone age when you nornally don't have easy access to anything at all with a right angle (unlike in modern construction) and you build stuff out of clay bricks, where minor inaccuracies inevitably add up and make your life much harder down the road. Tying together three pieces of string with prescribed ratios, pull it tight was a very easy way to get a right angle compared to anything that came before.

It's necessary in the sense that stone age construction is so much easier if you know about it, and so much harder if you don't. Those who didn't come up with it didn't do such construction, because doing difficult things is harder than doing easy things.
Project IDX: An experimental web-based development workspace from Google
Apple allows movies from other sources (ahem) to be shared across devices seamlessly. It's called something similar to "home sharing" "home library" etc. There is a separate app in Apple TV which lists shows and movies from all devices on the home network.