skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What you say is true, however in this case, there's no communication of benefits. AI is not a benefit, it's an attention-grabbing buzzword.

I lament that people fall for buzzwords, hollow words that all mean the same thing to a fool - "Oh it's got <BUZZWORD>, that means GOOD! Just take my money!".

But I don't lament for long, and when I'm done lamenting, that's when I start selling.

“The characteristic feature of the loser is to bemoan, in general terms, mankind’s flaws, biases, contradictions, and irrationality—without exploiting them for fun and profit.”

- Nassim Taleb, The Bed of Procrustes
Thierry Breton, the author of the letter, appears to have a personal grudge against Elon Musk, and has directed several aggressive ultimatums towards him such as, "In Europe, the bird will fly by our rules," "You can run but you can't hide" and "Our teams will be ready for enforcement."

Breton is set to be the next EU Commissioner, succeeding Ursula Van Der Leyden.
EVs don't use brakes as much as ICE vehicles because of automatic regenerative braking. This converts your forward momentum back into electricity. ICE vehicles use engine braking or brake pads. Both of those are much worse in more ways than one.

You might want to cross that off your list of things to complain about when talking about EVs.
What you see on twitter is virtually never coming from first sources. Telegram would be a much better place to look at, and twitter isn't the internet archive.

The problem isn't even the propaganda or the aftermath videos themselves, it's the fake ones and the misattributed ones
Not a language, but I have seen some recent editor integration with LSP stuff that will visually display that as

foo(bake: true, batches: 1, boxes:1, frosting: null, type: “cupcakes”)
Dear EU: I disagree about "hosting illegal content". What we're seeing is uncomfortable and [more] unfiltered by governments. Rather than covering up what a tragedy war is, how about we work to avoid it?
Read the letter. It has nothing to do with the algorithm. The EU Commission couldn't care less about the algorithm.

It's about moderation procedures. It's about the absence of moderation, and the hellscape that fills that void.
Thank you :)

No I have not, it is likely not possible to do that anyway. MotionCam works fairly well because smartphones these days are very fast and have very fast storage. I imagine dedicated cameras are mostly made up of specialized hardware that is fairly restricted.
The finest bullshitter I knew had serious skill and brainpower; and he BS'd about stuff he was expert in. It was really a sort of party trick - he could leave his peer experts speechless (more likely, rolling on the floor laughing).

His output was indeed word-salad, but he was eloquent. His bullshit wasn't fallacious reasoning; it didn't even have the appearance of reasoning at all. He was just stringing together words and concepts that sound plausible. It was funny, because his audience knew (and were supposed to know) that it was nonsense.

LLMs are the same, except they're supposed to pretend that it isn't nonsense.
It seems everybody is following their defense council recommendations. Except for SBF
AIUI, one of the most notable limitations of the first version of this model was that it couldn't Fill In The Middle (FIM), it could only provide completion.[0]

This blog post doesn't mention FIM either, so I guess that's still missing? The demos I've seen of Replit Ghostwriter indicate that it is still possible to get good results without FIM, as long as you have good enough software around the model, but I think FIM could still improve things further.

The much smaller Refact-1.6B model supports FIM[1], and Refact-1.6B worked pretty well when I tested it a few weeks ago.

People (like the most upvoted comment in this thread) who are expecting any of these small models to write entire programs for them based on a simple prompt seem to misunderstand the purpose of these smaller models, which is to be a smarter alternative for code completion. Writing entire functions or programs is better suited to much larger (and slower) instruct/chat-tuned models.

[0]: https://huggingface.co/replit/replit-code-v1-3b/discussions/...

[1]: https://refact.ai/blog/2023/introducing-refact-code-llm/
> I'd wager a non-trivial number of Rust developers don't feel comfortable in C.

https://img.ifunny.co/images/5dd3adca9d0da5310faa752ddd53565...
The advantage is that no other accounts including root can get chatty without my knowledge. i.e. telemetry of an OS gets added without my knowledge at least not leaking out of service accounts or root. I can also log when such things are added and notify the internet.

My account can still talk out so I have to firejail the browser and limit what directories, files and devices it can access. Those violations are also logged and I can tell the internet if the browser has been compromised. I can also log what applications are talking from my account beyond that of the browser. It is also easier to spot when something is talking and I did not request it to. watch+ss, iftop, etc... There are tools that get more granular such as OpenSnitch but I don't bother unless I start to see shenanigans. Firejail also removes network access for most applications that need not talk to the network and addresses most things that malware would try to access should it be able to run in the browser.

To stay off the janky sites I just mirror them with archive.org and archive.is so that others may take advantage of the de-fanged javascript snapshot.

All of that said this is not bullet-proof or idiot-proof but it's the maximum risk I accept for my browsing habits. I can always ratchet things down such as changing options in arkenfox custom user.js to further restrict browser capabilities. For now it's sufficient for my needs.
Did you by any chance read Aldous Huxley's "The Island"?
The moral is that a utopia where tolerance for plurality is permitted is ideologically incapable of defending itself from external threats.
Or you can be a saint and call it program but you would sort of grandstanding just for the heck of it.
True, but that's where the difference in intended usage is problematic. In the sky, autopilot can't accidentally hit another plane or barrier because it got confused about the road paint or construction signs. The stakes are a lot higher on the ground, even though it technically controls less of the vehicle than autopilot in a plane does (acceleration, braking, and steering compared to elevator, trim, roll, pitch, throttle, vector) since cars don't have to worry about 3 dimensional movement much while airplanes do.
> There are things we used to call AI, like inference engines, that were and are phenomenally successful (not to mention easier to implement). Type inference in modern programming languages, for instance, still uses the GOFAI technique of unification to solve for unspecified types of variables in a program.

Okay. I don't see how these application domains have anything to do with “AI” in the sense of something that resembles human reasoning in any given subarea (like pattern recognition, language).
Tbf I think the most prevalent issue with USB was from people plugging them in where they cannot see the port properly, ie the back of a computer tower (most often) or back of TV/console etc.

Not really sure that that's USB's fault so much as a lack of front USB ports. I think in those cases the consumer can chose to get some sort of hub that's easier to access/can be pulled out from behind their setup.

Now that C exists though, idk if we really need to go much further. Connector much smaller than it is now will become fragile.

I've always thought they could add a single fiber core to USB cables for some "ultra high speed" standard, since USB4 is predicted to top out at 80GBps, but we could get 50Tbps or so over a single fiber if we really needed to.

But after owning several fiber cables, for networking and HDMI fiber based cables...yeah they're far, far too weak to replace copper. Just look at 'em wrong and they snap/break.

Plus tbf if we get 80gbps from usb4...the problem then becomes that we don't reaaaally have a use case for that speed. Maybe network adaptors, but beyond that...I mean a modern SSD will saturate that with a sequential read I suppose, but still.
Is that really something people do? Really seems insincere and inappropriate to me. Is it a cultural thing?
Modern Pascal is still in the race (2022)
Maybe some sort of distance-dependent taxation on cars may be a more viable option, so that people can enjoy private commutes when they absolutely need it, while still pushing people towards public transport.
I'm pleased to report that after turning off backups and auto-save files over a decade ago, nothing bad has ever happened.
>I don’t know what’s wrong with the medical system that has created such apathy toward pain

I think it's that they are harassed 24-7 by addicts seeking drugs. A callous forms. If you are the legit rarity then so sorry.

It's a problem with government policy that demonizes addicts and makes drugs hard to get. It's a problem with a pharmaceutical industry that seems to be playing games with supply and manufacturing. It's a problem with a medical industry that maximizes profits by hiring the smallest medical staff possible and running them ragged.

It's a dog's dinner all around. In a better world we'd probably hang the bastards. But realistically, I guess what we need is more black-market drug manufacturers. Basement percocet labs. Backyard opium farms.
https://geology.com/usgs/oil-shale/estonia-sweden-oil-shale....
Same argument for guns, right? Or a less baity example, antibiotics.
What we get when it is on arxiv first before being peer reviewed.
Raku [1] deserves a honorable mention where it has named anonymous parameters, written as `$^x` and ordered lexicographically.

In my taste as a PL enthusiast, the biggest problem with this kind of anonymous parameters is a conflict with nested blocks. Suppose that our fictitious language is expression-oriented, `{ |x| ... }` denotes an explicit closure, `{ ... }` denotes an implicit closure and `$1`..`$n` are anonymous parameters in them. Consider the following examples:

{ $1 + $2 } // Yeah, that would be `{ |x, y| x + y }`
{} // Is this a zero argument function?
{ $100 } // Does this have 100 arguments???
{ |x| $1 + $2 } // Maybe this should be invalid...
{ { |x| $1 + $2 } } // But maybe this should be okay??
{ { |x| $1 + x }($2) } // And same to this???
{ { |x| $1 }($2) } // Uh...
{ { $1 }($2) } // Should be same to above, but...
{ { $2 }($1) } // Not this (and will fail)!

The problem is much worse when you don't even have an explicit boundary like `{ ... }`. A limited form of automatic function, say `_ + _` without no parentheses, might work, but anything beyond that quickly devolves into a mess.

[1] https://docs.raku.org/language/variables#Variables
Post should really be called "Historical emacs defaults". Most of them were products of an era where those defaults were, in fact, the best defaults. Versioned backups were lifesavers before version control systems were ubiquitous and easy to use.

I'll also note that folks have been going back and forth about ^H & DEL at least since the 80s.
Why is regulation important?
The one issue with this is for things like markdown where a code block is space-indented - if you want an empty line as part of the code block rather than two code blocks then you need a line that contains -only- the indentation.

I would expect that emacs being emacs it's trivial to configure such lines to be left alone when relevant, but it's worth remembering that the edge case exists.
> Just wanted to question why these elements (namely intelligence and reasoning) strike the nerve that they do.

“Just asking questions” is a meme of the unscrupulous.

I think you are unfairly lumping those who believe in human exceptionalism with those cynical of the economics of such claims.

It’s okay, to me, for people to be ignorant of what llms are. What a dismally bland existence if everyone were just llm experts.

What strikes a nerve with me is the people financially incentivized to do so are leveraging the terror, both the awe and fear interpretations, of those ignorant of the tech.

> The anthropomorphism argument is case in point, really. It poses the accusation that the other side is imparting human qualities to a machine, without needing to touch on what makes those qualities human or why that matters in the first place.

This reads as circular reasoning. Those claiming the opposite are also failing to define what those qualities are.

Anthropomorphism is a real thing. I can flinch in pain for the sake of my couch when a friend jumps onto it, but that hardly provides, without me needing to define human pain explicitly, an opportunity for said friend to respond with the absurd claim that human pain is in fact couch based.
Aesthetically, yes, I agree (subjectively) that "_1" is uglier than "|u|".

However, saying that the latter is "more readable" lacks foundation imo... both are conventions, both are simple to understand, and you can adapt to either quickly. I'd argue this is a case of "familiarity"/"readability" confusion.

A more practical argument is that "|u|" is more widely known by inexperienced ruby devs, and hence has an advantage on larger teams, especially those with turnover. With that said, I agree with author's position.
What if EVs (actually, any cars) were programmed for geofencing where acceleration is limited in pedestrian-focused areas based on municipal ordinances? Braking wouldn't be limited (so this is more directly reducing tire particles than brake dust) but I think a lot of city braking would naturally fall off a cliff without excessive acceleration.
What about restricting publishing of false videos of world changing events? Because that's what the EU is railing about...
Scalar, an open source modern alternative to redocly and swagger
> centrifugal force is fictitious

It is not. It exists if you change your point of reference.
In other words, "Successful predictive models create a feedback loop".
Vulkan represents a low-level way of talking to the GPU more or less on the GPU's terms. As opposed to OpenGL which is a way of talking to the GPU on boomer CAD programmers' terms.

As for whether Vulkan is going to replace OpenGL... yes and no. Over the next 10 or so years we may see OpenGL drivers for GPUs get replaced with Vulkan drivers plus an OpenGL layer based on Vulkan. But you will still be able to develop to OpenGL.

Ad for what you should start with... what do you plan on doing? If you're looking to write a game, use a widely available engine like Unreal or Godot that abstracts the graphics library details. If you're looking to write your own engine... seriously, seriously reconsider.

If you're still interested in programming immediate-mode graphics below the engine layer, start with DirectX 11 and 12. They're much more tractable than OpenGL and Vulkan and have unbeatable tooling support from Microsoft. Even if you're targeting Linux, you will have much more binary compatibility across distros by shipping it as a Windows program and running it under Wine.
Also a plane's autopilot has situations where it will yell at you to take over; and have situations where it's expected that the pilot recognizes problems and overrides the autopilot.

It's a good analogy from a technical standpoint, with the "minor" difference that in most situations pilots have a lot more time to react than the driver of a car. Which makes it very different from a consumer standpoint
It is to me, testing arbitrary tree of components in live browsers can be invaluable, espcially for things like a design system, where snapshot testing can actually be really valuable[0].

RTL is great, but jsdom and similar solutions have limitations, being able to run similar tests in live browsers is really validating, in many cases allows us to cut down on writing somewhat more brittle E2E tests

The biggest win with playwright its like writing vitest / jest tests, it uses a similar `expect` function (I believe its a modified version of Jest expect but that may have changed) and I like their Pages API

The only thing I haven't used Playwright for yet is API testing

[0]: as you get more than just a DOM tree snapshot, you get the styles too. Great for catching regressions
A searchable, browseable meta-index of all my disparate cloud and local, mounted and unmounted file repositories is certainly interesting and has been a bit of a holy grail for some time.

Digital Asset Management is nothing new, but it is not a category currently flush with options. Things like Portfolio and <waves hands> Adobe’s tangle of things offer a lot of this, with less emphasis on cloud repositories and more emphasis on workflow and metadata.

These days I would have to consider yet another cloud-dependent service very carefully. Self-hosted/on-premises could be an absolute requirement, considering the potential sensitivity of “all files, including local and offline.” If accounts are required, I would want integration with existing identity management through OIDC or SAML (which, you know, does what this does but for accounts). I would also be looking at continuity facilities… if I build workflows around this and it becomes an essential single pane of glass over all my files, I’ll want to be confident in its availability.

Keep at it. Nobody has solved all this yet. Good luck!
I've said you don't need a car all of my life, but after moving out of capital cities it's actually reality that you do need a car, it's just not practical otherwise regardless of how good public transport infrastructure is.
> almost in the opposite direction

I think you're mixing up OOTFs and EOTFs here. sRGB or HLG can refer to either the stored gamma, but more often means the EOTF "reversed" gamma that is used to display an image. When we refer to "log", this is almost always means a camera gamma - an OOTF. So the reason it's "in the opposite direction" is that it's designed to efficiently utilize bits for storing image data, whereas the EOTF is designed to reverse this storage gamma for display purposes.

As you can see from the graph in [1], Sony's S-Log does indeed allocate more bits to dark areas than bright areas. (Though the shape of the curve becomes more complicated if you take into account the non-linear behavior of light in human vision.)

[1] https://www.enriquepacheco.com/blog/s-log-tutorial
American possibly. I've only seen them from American candidates.
In the UK people move into catchment areas for better schools. How did you measure this equivalent quality of the schools you've assessed?
> large-scale strip-mining and fossil-fuel-burning effort to convert all cars to electric

What about the large-scale strip-mining, fossil-fuel-burning, and other absolutely nasty environmental efforts of continuing to use oil? And how much of that oil pulled from the ground is actually recyclable and reusable?

> lithium is also a fossil fuel

Lithium is by definition not a fossil fuel, as it isn't from the remains of long dead living organisms. Fossil fuels are all organic chemistry! Lithium is inorganic!

> you're just replacing one fossil fuel with another.

A significant percentage of the electricity from my wall socket does not come from fossil fuels. And even then, the EV is massively more efficient per mile than an equivalent gas car and the natural gas power plant supplying the non-renewable part is also massively more efficient and less emission producing per watt of power than a car's motor. The break even, even if 100% of the electricity was natural gas, is still like 30,000mi.
if you care to see twitter replaced you would regularly go to twitter and make sure it doesn't have unique, value-add content and migrate that content to a platform you deem more worthy.

finger wagging and boycotting a free-to-use website seems like nothing more than virtue signalling.
Start with WebGPU, DirectX11 or OpenGL. Do learnopengl, try to write a gITF model viewer in it. Then rewrite the gITF renderer in DirectX12, Vulkan or Metal.
"Programmers often put in speed hacks based on performance knowledge which is outdated or inapplicable to the target platform. Separating cases lets the programmer supply their high-level knowledge about what values are likely to be encountered, which the compiler can optimize to the platform based on its low-level information."

But if our performance knowledge is outdated, how do we know which cases to separate the code into? Using the toy example here, how do we know that multiplying by 2 is a special case we should add a branch for? What about multiplying by 3 or 4 or 5? It seems like you still need to use up-to-date performance knowledge for this technique to work, and in that case just write the left shift into your code so that when this code gets read later it will be more clear why it's there.
Over 25 years as a programmer, I've only seen some very jr developers (no industry experience), do this. It's unlikely to help you in getting the position, which is why it's rare.
> One is tempted to ask here: what would be conditions/language changes so we could’ve just written this?

> serialize :salary, format: -> csv_currency(_1)

> I didn’t analyze this deeply, but “intuitively” this seems enough syntax for the interpreter to understand “the next code is one-statement lambda’s body.”

I believe that Swift has an @autoclosure attribute which allows this?
i really feel that the first sentence in that quote is an apt way to sum up a part of how learning and attention work for us as humans.

personally i've spent some time thinking about how in my life it is very easy for me to pay attention as hard as i can manage and still miss so many things. i feel like things like code review are a great way to work on this sort of thing (attention training, global and contextual awareness, etc.). for example, there is this place that i've been walking by regularly for a couple of years and someone maintains a nice flowerbed there and i pause to take a glance at it and have been doing so for about a year since i first noticed it. but a couple months ago i noticed that there is a companion flowerbed a few feet away that i just had never noticed because i was so focused on the first one. was that companion flowerbed there all along? i suspect that it was! but i have no idea because i didn't even know it existed.

i have tried to extrapolate this to knowledge across humanity in general. i suspect sometimes it takes just one person to notice something, to make an observation that informs their behavior, and it begins to disseminate to us all. sometimes it takes several tries and a long time to happen. and i wonder how much low-hanging fruit there is out there that just none of us have noticed yet. and i think about how integrating a simple, fundamental set of best practices already established by others who have been paying attention can improve the low-bar for us all.

i think that julia evans touched on this in https://jvns.ca/blog/2023/10/06/new-talk--making-hard-things... which was discussed here recently and so did dan luu in his https://danluu.com/p95-skill/ which has also been discussed here somewhere.

and, to conclude, i too have a lot of gratitude for stenberg and all the folks who've worked on curl, and many other parts of our internet infrastructure that i usually take for granted every day.
And just how much money are tzey making of that? Oil nation money?
The language specification covers the semantics and correctness of the code. Excepting some very specific things such as tail call elimination that also touch on semantics, optimizations do not belong in the language specification.

If we did have a principle saying that you can't get clever with optimization or take advantage of your language's optimizer, that would imply that the past 15-20 years of growth of Web technology was based on an invalid foundation: the v8 JavaScript engine and people's efforts to learn how to use it effectively and push what's possible in a browser.

You'd also have much less impressive video games, and your smartphone would have worse battery life.