skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can’t tell what your point is, frankly. That everything is fine until it isn’t, then we’re boned? Or that it will never go wrong, unless we have ‘bigger problems’? (Which are what exactly? alien invasion?)

Lack of power either way certainly won’t help!

If by design nuclear is offline, fossil fuels are offline, and battery capacity (or other storage) is insufficient for known (but infrequent) weather events, then we’re designing an inevitable and destructive catastrophe as we have no Plan B for when realtime production is insufficient.

And that will happen some day, regardless of how much capacity we build. It’s currently the norm on many days.

One that will kill a lot of people, especially the physically weaker ones, and be very destructive economically.

One that will also play out randomly based on weather, and for which we’ll have no real Plan B.

Being flippant about it seems rather macabre.
> A big problem with software dev is the lack of rigor, imo.

It's amazing to me how much more informed you can seem than everyone else if you just read the thing everyone is quoting.
It sounded like they weren't training but they were trying to figure out what gpt-5 structure, tooling, and training data will look like
I'm the developer behind merrysky.net. Just submitted my app: https://store.app/merrysky-net

Great UI at store.app. thx!
Don't upgrade your architecture all at once. First bump yourself to rails 7 (including any other gems you can upgrade), then do any other changes you want.
Samsung have had their own app store for a while, but they'd never collaborate with Huawei on it, in my opinion. Corporations tend to be control freaks. They'd usually rather own 100% of a thing of size X than 50% of a thing of size 5X.

In addition, there's the sanctions angle. Bet this'd put them more in the crosshairs of the US. Can easily see e.g. the US saying you either stop the collaboration with Huawei or we slap tariffs on your phones.
For my home network I do it once a year. My nano pi r4s and tplink access points all run openwrt but the amount of updates they put out is so quick and the update process not seamless that it ends up becoming a pain.

I wonder if ubiquity does this better.
Two thoughts:

1. Interviewing is like any other skill, so practice more interviews. Just apply to more places and go through the phone screen. It's painful, but it helps.

2. Maybe drink more coffee the day of the interview? Might help with the conversations (or not, you know you).
You're confusing 2 terms: Fluorescence and Bio-Luminescence.

The title as written is accurate; what's confusing is other articles sometimes conflate these two things, and so some people also mix the two terms up.

Bananas fluoresce; squid bio-illuminate.
I really disagree strongly with the take on bash. The best solution is not to add tooling on top of bash or memorize its idiosyncrasies. It is to not use bash. That is the only way to escape its pitfalls.
Pentester/red teamer here, this point from the article is the key:

"Properly trained, staffed, and funded network security teams can implement the known mitigations for these weaknesses."

You need someone who actually understands networking tech at a deep level to accomplish anything beyond what expensive tooling/devices will offer you. Otherwise, you're always going to be limited by whatever vendor you're using and the capabilities they build in, assuming you're using the solutions to their full capability.
If a hedge fund returns a bit under SP500 on average but is more predictable and always has a positive return, it will definitely be desirable.
The main argument for work stealing is that it’s hard to achieve uniformity of work loads across all threads. The main argument for a single-threaded thread per core design is that it’s easier to code AND performs/scales way better than work stealing (including average and tail latencies, TPS etc).

IMHO it’s a misconception that this is somehow tied to CPU or IO bound work. Take for example databases. You’d think that that’s the prime “I/O bound” use case. Except it’s not. There’s a talk about a DB researcher that analyzed that Postgres spends 70% of its time book keeping things within the database. And that makes sense. I/O is done in bulk with the cost amortized over a lot of transactions. That book keeping work? Extremely expensive because you have to acquire locks all over the place, do atomics, memory allocations etc.

Atomics and memory allocations are extremely expensive in certain contexts and atomics also have a negative in that your scaling with number of CPUs is sub linear due to hard to remove false sharing of cache lines and CPU stalls to handle the synchronization.

On the other hand, a shared nothing approach where you’re not allocating memory in your hot path is very hard to achieve and not suitable for all problems. Nor does everyone need that performance. So the work stealing approach is better in those use cases as it provides reasonable performance and the programming model is simpler in some ways since you don’t have to think about the data path as careful since everything has an Arc / Mutex in there.
That's an oversimplification because it requires the utility of the device to be maintained over it's operational life. Routinely the utility of the device changes as new features are added or removed during OS upgrades, support for software, and eventually hardware support is dropped entirely. It doesn't matter if the hardware is still functional.

This isn't even necessarily in the vendor's control. For example, Google Chrome just stopped loading TLS encrypted sites on my partner's MacBook this past week and displays a lovely pink banner over every tab saying the OS is no longer supported.

Companies are not held to any standards for support and the amount of support they give varies based on the product. Apple has provided decades of support for some products but considerably less for others because they shared an architecture or platform that was eventually dropped. Google is notorious for just dropped support for products on a whim.

And subscriptions won't fix this problem.
> I of course don't ever see it going to someone fighting against the American regime itself

Martin Luther King Jr got one.
You perfectly illustrated the point: that there are no maxims like the grandparent comment made. Myself, I work on very small teams, usually building applications that are backend-heavy web apps or filled with tons of async background processing on the server. Applications that are funded by revenue, not VC. Applications where I typically have a high degree of autonomy and responsibility as to maintainability, with usually no insulation between me and stakeholders.

Given different parameters, I'm sure the decisions would be different as well.
I don't see it as "smarmy". Of course, HN commenters are largely putting themselves into the property-owner's shoes. Look at it from the other side: A wannabe landlord tried to rent out an illegal unit without knowing tenant/landlord law, and made a huge, costly mistake. The smart tenant is exercising her legal rights and acting out of incentives that are [edit: LIKELY (since the matter has not been resolved)] supported by law. The landlord is acting mad because he didn't understand or follow the law.

Where there is money to be made, you're always going to find people who carefully read and understand the rules, and follow them to the letter to gain an advantage. Especially in the fierce housing market. The landlord was foolish and did not follow the rules, and it's costing him.

Is it "smarmy" to do a backdoor Roth IRA[1] contribution? You're getting favored tax treatment but doing it in a "weird" roundabout way, seemingly counter to the intent of the Roth's income limits, but supported by law. Is it a "loophole"?

1: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/backdoor-roth-ira.asp
NSA has both "defensive" (protect US info) and "offensive" (gain foreign intel) departments. This could be written by the former.
Wow I was wondering what was causing ads for 'MaxAi.me' to pop up in every google search result as a 'promoted' ad even though I have adblock on. Well good riddance and turning off extension autoupdate.
I don’t think you need to remember what you’ve produced in the past to create a representative sample. There’s no global counter of male/female babies making sure we have a balanced population either.

Wouldn’t something like isMale*P(male=.66) work fine?
Paging Dr Pangloss, paging Dr Pangloss...
Right, so in summary, "Bitcoin makes it easier to launder ill-gotten funds to USD", got it.
I now get why they got hacked.
The true story here is "AI reflects the same bias as traditional media." Not that surprising as traditional media is the training set.
If your average user buys a new version every 5 years and the Pro version costs $250, they could charge $50/yr. $10/yr would be quite generous, unless they think they can get lots of people to stop pirating the OS. $10/month seems like an unlikely price point.
no show…
Yes, the recent popularity stems from Bostrom's simulation argument trilemma. But everyone always jumps over that, takes it as granted that we live in a simulation, and proposes some wild ideas how we could find evidence or what might be hints of the simulation. This is what I wanted to address, that this is a relatively hopeless endeavour and I do have the impression that most people talking about living in a simulation are not aware of this. Despite, as you point out, it being a variation of solipsism about which people have pondered for centuries.

To address the actual trilemma, I think the solution is that there are or will be no simulations. Generally the most compact representation of a thing is the thing itself. If you want to simulate something faithfully, then the simulator will need more resources than what you simulate. You are not going to build an electron simulator that needs less than one electron to simulate one electron. You are not going to simulate a computer with a gigabyte of memory on a computer with a gigabyte of memory. That might work under special conditions, when the simulated memory is mostly zeros and you can compress it, but it will not work in general.

You can simulate the weather on earth well enough for the whether forecast to be useful if you throw away enough details, but you are not going to simulate it in full detail with a computer much smaller than earth's atmosphere. Simulating a cubic meter of universe faithfully will generally require at least a cubic meter of computer. I do not see us building galaxy-size computers. The other option would be to go the way of the weather forecast, make the simulation as simple as possible, simulate entire humans but not cells or atoms to make the problem tractable. That seems much more plausible.

In both cases it seems unlikely to me that you could deeply nest simulations. If you have a faithful simulation and simulating a cubic meter of universe requires two cubic meters of computer, then you could at best simulate a universe half the size of the real universe if you turned the entire universe into a computer. The people in that simulated universe could at best build a simulation half the size of their universe and so on. The simulated volume would exponentially approach zero with increasing nesting level.

If you go the other way, if you simulate entire humans and not cells or atoms, then it is not even clear how the simulated people would go about creating their own simulator as simulating arbitrary machines is not part of the simulation. So you are forced to move towards a more faithful simulation mechanism if you want to enable nested simulations which, as said, will probably shrink the simulation volume rather quickly.
Different archtiecture is utterly irrelevant. No one is developing watch apps on a watch, all development is cross develooment, even if the architectures are similar.

There is no actual technical limit here, only a typically inconsiderate policy one.

Any architecture may produce any collection of bits for any other, and even run them and test them. Every m1 user sees this every day when they continue to run intel apps.
but they're using the 'same' obsolete philosophy as the founding father used when writing those things

so it's correct that they do this, else they would change the meaning behind those words.

what is needed is that congress approves new philosophy so they can use it to make better (meaning up to date) laws which are appropriate for this technological epoch

and what is needed for that is that the academic community comes up with new philosophy

and what is needed for that I do not know
I dropped ~100 records from a join table thinking I was connected to the dev db.

"No worries, we have backups", I thought. Turns out those were more like replication, copying over every change immediately (including deletes).

In the end, fixed with a short script that cross-referenced tables and checked for missing relationships, but terrifying nonetheless.
How much from hydro-electric dams? There are a lot of them in Canada. The Canadian province of Quebec is almost entirely powered by them.
The bias is in the input data! That is the very problem. AI takes human bias and perpetuates it.

Look at the issue of predictive policing via AI: police are biased, therefore the data is biased, and thus the model is biased.
The posts on the site are the original posts. To seed the site so it wouldn't look like a wasteland, I emailed a few high value HN posters who had email addresses shown on their HN profiles and begged them to post a tip.

A few of them graciously obliged, and some of those probably told a colleague/acquaintance to post a tip as well.

It's why I love HN, there's more of a sense of community here.
https://www.networkideas.org/news-analysis/2005/06/index-of-...

Using the Heritage Foundation's ranking is quite misleading.
If you look at the papers from the list, some of the authors respond to the comment which asks for clarifications on ChatGPT usage (for those who didn't read TFA, this is detected mostly because they cut & pasted ChatGPT's response without removing extraneous parts like "Regenerate response" from the UI! So not only do they rely on ChatGPT, they also don't know how to use it well).

What's interesting is that even when they reply, authors don't seem to respond to the ethics/standards issue of actually using ChatGPT. Well, some do ("I will not do it again" is basically what one of the authors says, which reads like a childish response to me), but many claim it was a "mistake" -- the mistake being... forgetting to remove the boilerplate and "regenerate response" garbage! Uh-oh.

I think an acceptable use of AI would be in translation, basically a better Google Translate. But is this what's happening here?
setjmp isn't a function so it's not comparable.

Here's a better analogy. The equivalent just works if we use C++ exception handling instead of setjmp. You can change variables after a try, and those values will be reliably observed in the catch.

setjmp and longjmp are a module that you can write in a small amount of assembly language, without changing anything in the compiler to support them. (Provided it has a bona fide volatile.)

Exception handling is a fairly complex feature requiring supporting in the compiler, with various strategies that have different performance trade-offs.
MitM attacks are easier to avoid with psql/Postgres 16
I am responsible for negotiating a cyberinsurance policy for a fintech, and the marketplace is drying up due to risk repricing. If it was my money, I wouldn't be backstopping anyone getting underwritten unless I can plug directly into their controls and observability systems to confirm their risk posture, as well as have an internal (to the insurer) IR team. I'd probably also require quarterly IR tabletops and red teaming without prior notification required. Less around process and attestation, more about real world validation.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/insurance/as-cyber-insurance-d...

(I have also provided comments to the US Treasury on backstopping cyberinsurance and perverse incentives around doing so)
Dang it looks like you can't. It's soldered into the main module? And they don't sell replacement parts for it. You can only send it back to the company. Which I guess is better than nothing.

But also can't seem to figure out how to buy it lol
Job boards are terrible so you built a job board?

Not sure if you really are trying to have a discussion or are just fishing for people to say "show us your board!" as a means to launch a side project. And if it is the latter, just post it as a 'Show HN' - such things are welcome.
I'm getting duplicate emails about my app being verified. Might want to check that on your side.

5 emails with subject "Your domain has been verified"
Oh interesting; given USD and Euro relative parity nowadays, I assumed they would be 200-300 Euro as well
Seeing David Cutler mentioned brought back memories: Back in the late 1980s I wrote a patent (now long expired) for DEC in which Cutler was one of two co-inventors: "Radix-16 divider using overlapped quotient bit selection and concurrent quotient rounding and correction." [0] I've always faintly regretted that I never got to interact directly with Cutler — although the lead inventor, Dr. Ted Kehl (RIP) [1], was great to work with.

[0] https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloa...

[1] https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/seattletimes/name/theod...
Decoding Dialogue Models
Yes, CPUs are still the main workhorse for many scientific workloads. Sometimes just because the code hasn’t been ported, sometimes because it’s just not something that a GPU can do well.
> You feel the spaceship we're on.

That sounds wonderful.

> People would have noticed the extra light cast on the ground and would have walked out of their homes to see what is going on. Everyone would have been talking about it.

Absolutely. But that is not the question. The question is if the Hohokam petroglyph is depicting that phenomenon. And the evidence for that is simply weak. See more in this article: https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/did-ancient-ameri...
If we're going to blame crypto, then you also need to blame the NSA first, EternalBlue being leaked was the starting point for most of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EternalBlue
Oh, wow. I remember when it came out. My multi-configs were epic. At that time I was actually an OS/2 programmer but we also had a DOS product so some time reluctantly spent in DOS.
$1/year is entirely unreasonable. They build a product, they sell it to you, transaction ends there. They should sell you a product that works. Bug fixes are part of making the thing you bought closer to what was advertised, so it's part of the initial purchase. An OS is not a SaaS, and nobody considered doing it until it became popular, because it's a fad.
New York rolls out free public transportation pilot project on five bus lines
very weird, i like it.
My understanding is that they are not chemically the same: you can't smoke cocaine or amphetamine salts; they'll burn instead of vaporizing. You need to first swap what stabilizer the active component is bound to. i.e. perform some reaction to convert to crack/meth. The point of doing that conversion is to be able to smoke it. My understanding is it's also not just fast acting, but quite a bit more intense. So e.g. more likely to trigger psychosis instead of just making you talk a lot, clean the house, get good grades, etc.
Interesting that a lot of the updates were actually licensed software.

Deciding to (re)build a system level disk compression system the month before a major release, in an era when distribution of patches was done through floppies, was a balsy move.

It also somewhat explanatory of the reputation regarding bugs of MS back then.
This is a great description of things that seem like they shouldn't be so difficult but can have many complications. The SQL part seems to double-down on a conceptual failure rather than demystifying it though.

A query's logic is declarative which defines the output. It's the query plan that has any sense of execution order or procedural nature to it. That's the first thing to learn. Then one can learn the fuzzy areas like dependent subqueries etc. But being able to see the equivalence between not-exists and an anti-join enables understanding and reasoning.

Using an analogy such as procedurally understanding of written queries only kicks the can further down the road, then when you're really stuck on something more complicated have no way to unravel the white lies.
Ask GPT-4

(this is real advice)
Yes in the early days, less so now:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_fund#Etymology

"Early hedge funds sought to hedge specific investments against general market fluctuations by shorting the market, hence the name.

Nowadays, however, many different investment strategies are used, many of which do not "hedge" risk."
Are you referring to people not having the desire or time to learn how to set up these types of things, but want to use them?

The solution is... centralization, on a smaller scale. Maybe that's a home network admin, or a whole street, neighborhood, city, community. I don't really know.

It's not reasonable to think everyone needs or wants to manage their network and services, of course. The cost to ensure everyone has this specialized knowledge is terribly high, it will waste what else they could have known instead.

Now to provide these kinds of services as a city or community is certainly not free, even if the software is free. It costs people's time, experience, and knowledge. It requires powerful enough servers to handle requests and storage for everything.

Another thing to mention is that these open source services are probably full of very critical and damaging exploits, but they are not seen or cared about yet because these services are not mainstream popular or often not public facing at all. Popular open source services have had many of their high level exploits discovered, and closed source things are scrutinized differently.
this isn't going to be a product, this is going to be for internal use only...
one move here is to use reputation and geographic reach to find edge candidates who are both skilled and also disadvantaged personally. This is part of "skills arbitrage" and is happily embraced as game rules, yet, with internet and database enabling access across economies and jurisdictions, one could argue that is can easily tip against the individual applicants over time, due to power imbalances.

One edge case for deeply-imbalanced power relationships is expressed in the writings of classical Italian advisor Machiavelli, and more recently in the US in the book "48 Laws of Power" by Robert Greene.
I'm just referring back to my earlier point: people say not doing work stealing would be both easier and faster. My claim is that its one or the other, because to get share-nothing to be faster you need to architect your code in a way that is not easier than making a shared-state architecture thread-safe. There is a parallel sentence with "slower" in the next paragraph.

I don't think people who struggle to get parallel & concurrent Rust to compile are morons, though I don't like when they act like the APIs we built for them are ruining their lives.
...why? Products are better when you can control the whole stack.
If AI had been invented in Galileo’s time it would have been “aligned” to espouse the wonders of the Catholic Church, and would happily assert the virtues of creationism.

We have similar religion-like dogma today, it has just evolved.
Google Faces Grilling over Alleged Unfair Ad Practices in Antitrust Trial
The guy who was "grilled," Adam Juda, was actually the business manager for the Advertiser Experiments project I talked about here:

https://albertcory50.substack.com/i/88658669/advertiser-expe...

I actually never dealt with auctions. That code was in the "high intellectual property" section of the code, that was restricted even for engineers. In particular, they couldn't see it in China.
This is my surprised face. I am surprised by this. /s