skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People who bring up that taxes are collected “by force” are invariably libertarian types that feel any cent that goes to the government is a great injustice, and it’s generally difficult to have any conversation but that when this is the case. If this applies to you, then see my earlier comment; otherwise this is just an fyi for how your comments are being read. Feel free to adjust or clarify as you see appropriate.
I don't really see how. I think it's more like a good way to end up like Dmitry Sklyarov.
Biomolecular archaeology reveals a fuller picture of the nomadic Xiongnu
I've been meaning to dust off my old slide rule for a long time. Learning to use one circa 8th grade made future science so much easier. Had to think of significant figures ahead of time, spend a few moments to plan the computation, and get comfortable with when to approximate and how. Pretty soon I was able to get a sense for what answers ought to be, at least to within a factor of 2-5. Anything outside of that and I knew I'd made a mistake somewhere.

I also loved the old HP calculators of the late 1970s to late 1980s and eventually set the slipstick aside but am ever grateful for what it did for me. And for fellow RPNthusiasts, there is the Museum of HP Calculators at
https://hpmuseum.org/
Greatly simplifying, the most important result in comparability is “the halting problem”, which means we have no way of telling, for any program, if given some input it will halt or run forever.

After that, it’s not surprising there is some BB we can’t solve, and it’s interesting to investigate which we can, and can’t, solve.
There is a more readable state table but each underscore separates a group of transitions for one symbol, writen as groups of 3 characters for each symbol. These are the symbol to write, new state and direction to move. The --- state halts.
I'll take C&C barracks (a basic Quonset Hut) at this point, as long as I can own it and it's legally habitable. I don't care about aesthetics. In fact, something like that would be ideal as I could customize it completely.

Unfortunately those sorts of structures are banned by most municipalities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quonset_hut
They are not being pushed for vendor lock in purposes. They are being pushed because passwords are a completely terrible user experience and terrible security story for 99.99% of users on the internet.
IPv4 Fraud: 5 Years in Federal Prison for Defrauding ARIN
StackOverflow, how do I do X?

SO: "You don't need to do X."

ChatGPT, how do I do X?

GPT: "Simply type 'import x' "

SO will not be missed
Ok, I looked again, and I was fairly widely off.

Small footprint trucks (s-10) do have a very high mpg target for a truck, but it's still less than a car of the same footprint. Not far enough lower to encourage their production, of course.

Large 'small trucks' like the current Ranger have a target that's lower than a car of similar footprint (which is the largest footprint listed for cars); and larger trucks have even lower targets.
I was simply unbalanced because of the capital letters on the website which looked aesthetically in unrest, but that is propably a well thought of feature.

I can promise people who "please attempt to leave a message above. Others think they are ok and to owe you support." instead of me who is somehow tired because I could work all night long.
The point behind a cyber defense system that is incorruptible is that it needs to find ways to represent learning mechanisms in an unsupervised manner. The only thing that is really unsupervised (as of state today) is an evolutionary concept, that is why I stuck with ES/HyperNEAT in the past. NEAT as a concept allows to implement flexible adapters for all kinds of things, while also allowing to have a time aware strategy planning neural network (the CPPN) if it's e.g. based on an unfolding LSTM layer(s). The reason why NEAT fits so nicely for this use case is the predictability of results of given tasks, and the possibility to change the neural layer structures based on the tasks and agents, too. So in our case we built e.g. LSTM layers for data structures that need time awareness, while e.g. a bayesian layer makes sense to represent an index map that refers to linked knowledge tree branches.

The previous implementation also featured a custom kademlia DHT which was implemented in a shrinkable and fast-forwardable manner so that the generation of "already outdated solutions to identical problems" could be just skipped ahead directly to the leaves of the knowledge tree to save redundant computation time.

And the only swarm intelligence that is well researched enough to represent a delegated learning mechanism based on bayesian/statistical truths are bee swarms [1] :)

In case you are interested in a project like this, that's basically what we are building @ tholian.network

[1] Check out Honeybee Democracy by Thomas Seeley
So if Detroit's economic collapse is the fault of local Democrats (and not, say, the death of large parts of the US auto industry), then does that mean we also have to credit local Democrats for Detroit's rapid economic recovery[0][1][2] over the past decade or so?

[0]https://detroitmi.gov/news/u-m-economic-forecast-shows-detro...

[1]https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2023/02/08/michig...

[2]https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/chicago-fed-letter/2...
(Disclaimer: I don't know that much about video codecs or editing.)
I'm surprised they don't just break the video at key frames and insert the ads that way. From my little use of open-source video editing tools, it seems like this is pretty low-CPU to do, and if (like YouTube) you don't care about a good user experience and are happy to just insert ads at seemingly-random places instead of between natural breaks in the program (as with TV shows), it should work.
> I’m not really sure what the purpose of publishing something like this is

He wants crypto to be cool
Read more closely: Jeff Bezos isn't mentioned. A pseudonymous X account known for gonzo tech/AI optimism, @BasedBeffJezos, is.
Probably more accurate to say that BB(3, 3) looks hard; that is, it encodes a Collatz-type problem, and many Collatz-type problems are very hard to solve (including, of course, the classic Collatz conjecture).

However, this instance might not necessarily be hard. For one, the behaviour seems to be heavily biased; for another, we only have to consider a single trajectory instead of the trajectories for all integers (as with the classic Collatz problem).
Thanks for the info. I'm been delving slowly into this field as part of the lab I'm working with but I come from a purely CS background. So I'm not sure how much chemistry I should be knowing to build decent ML models. For now I've been getting away with xgboost and rdkit. There are so many quirks within this field that I'm not sure how one can apply ML to it. Tautomers being one of them
Surely this is because Elon is there picking up the slack for the missing 80%.
I know companies that exist for years and years and even get inherited. I even work in one.

It exists, just not in SV
In this time period, there are many people who are eager to cause mass suffering, murder, sabotage, and dissolution of civilization. With advances in technological organization, there is an increasing potential for coordinated autonomous attacks against infrastructure, essential services, groups, and individual persons in multiple theaters concurrently.

It would be neigh impossible to defend against 100k flying drones wielding cow-knockers programmed to swarm, loiter, break windows, and kill humans. Such could be dispensed by purpose-built intermodal containers, moved by ordinary freight logistics to attack multiple population centers in a simultaneous attack.

Code and binaries are shipped to 10's of millions of servers by internal configuration management tools. Take Meta, Google, or Microsoft and turn them into AI exploit and worm fabrication at scale. While it may happen for only an hour or 2, there's quite a bit that could happen and the possibility of advanced persistent threats is real.

Target a demographic to alter their filter bubble to persuade them to engage in mass-casualty terrorism.

Hate group applies AI to create a designer virus lethal to particular a demographic.

Subtly disable water treatment facilities with an autonomous, stuxnet-like attack.
That debate format is great, it would be even better if it had some tooling to convert the debates into knowledge graphs.

The Yes/No format is essentially producing a tree of idea nodes, where a branch is created to investigate disagreements. You could colour code the nodes to show agreement/disagreement between parties, and publish graphs to be a starting point for further debate.
Always fun to see a new UAV startup. Did you use an open source autopilot (like ardupilot, PX4, Paparazzi, etc) or build something internally?
They'll use ChatGPT (in spoken-audio form, with speech recognition) and you'll have to tell the agent what the ad was for, and why the product is so great, to prove you watched it and really understood the marketing message.
I'm hoping someone can enlighten me here. My understanding is that there is a turing machine of 748 states [0], which halts iff ZFC is inconsistent (Thm 1). But this machine is a "physical" object, in the sense that we can materialize it on a computer and run it. Though we don't have the computing power for this currently, there is nothing in principle stopping us from running this machine for BB(748) steps: if it halts, we have proven by Thm 1 that ZFC is inconsistent. If not, we have similarly proven that ZFC is consistent.

I want to stress that this is key to my confusion. This is not just some abstract result; this is a computation that we can perform and draw a real value from.

Of course, I'll now fall back on godel's second incompleteness theorem and say that one cannot prove, inside ZFC, that ZFC is consistent. But if the above turing machine halts, then we proved ZFC is consistent - a contradiction!

Where is the mistake here? My current guess is there is a technical detail in the proof of Thm 1 which uses a stronger metatheory than ZFC to show that the 758-state turing machine halts iff ZFC is inconsistent. This is not a contradiction, because yes, we can run the turing machine for BB(748) steps, but that will only show that ZFC+ proves ZFC is consistent, which is already well known - ZFC + there exists an inaccessible cardinal does the job.

However, I haven't looked at the paper in detail to know whether this is the case. Does anybody who has thought deeply about this problem have insight to offer?

[0] https://www.ingo-blechschmidt.eu/assets/bachelor-thesis-unde...
Ask HN: System design interview practice and resources
What resources do you use for system design practice? It seems so subjective. I've been asked a wide breadth of questions. Things like "design a parking lot" and "design Gmail". Many online resources use the same examples of "design Twitter", "design a URL shortener", "design a chat system", etc.

But how do you practice these and get feedback on whether or not what you say/do is good?
Don't want them to get bot traffic, but here you go:

the-eye dot eu slash public
Following the 'White-Hot Fire Inside of You'
You gave me doubt, I just checked and 1080p is available on Firefox in my private Invidious instance.
> They're cool artifacts from the pre-computer world.

I like slide rules, and abaci, and jigs, protractors, T squares, or other nifty tools for measuring and computing from "before" the computer age because they represent something of a unique tool.

Every tool exists to perform some action better than can be done by some other tool or set of tools. And the interesting side of tools for solving math problems or measuring things directly or indirectly is that it's the foundation of abstraction. Breaking down a big problem into a smaller one that can be trivially done with another tool is foundational to how we develop technology.

Like a pump moves water or a lever amplifies force, tools like a slide rule let us do less work but instead of manipulating physical forces they're reducing the amount of working memory and information we need to solve a problem.

It's a level of ingenuity that's worth respecting.
Cloud computing? DevOps?
I have 10 direct reports across 2 teams, with responsibility for a number of actual deliverable work pieces external to these staff.

10 direct reports is about half a week's work at a bare minimum without development, process improvement, etc. 20 is insane and would lead to skill atrophy and team dissatisfaction in short order.
Not in my zone of the international DRM prison system.
Add as vector layers into QGIS:

CVS: https://data.alltheplaces.xyz/runs/2023-10-14-13-31-57/outpu...

Walgreens: https://data.alltheplaces.xyz/runs/2023-10-14-13-31-57/outpu...

Rite Aid: https://data.alltheplaces.xyz/runs/2023-10-14-13-31-57/outpu...

Then you can conduct all sorts of analysis such as k-nearest-neighbour distance analysis between brands, etc.

Sample output of the three brands (green for Walgreens, yellow for CVS and red for Rite Aid): https://github.com/davidhicks/atp_samples/blob/main/us_pharm...
Scollay Square
I don't think there is anything wrong with B2B SaaS. I think that's a red herring.

From my experience, the conformist attitude we see on display these days comes from FANG salarymen ("salarypeople", the reference to the Japanese cultural concept of "salarymen" is instructive). They have treated tech as nothing more than a fancy bourgeois "career path" -- like high finance in the 80s or big law in the 90s. An inoffensive way to make their parents happy and raise families with a good standard of living. Nothing inherently wrong with this, but it does mean the rebellious streak in the culture begins to fade.

As I remember it, the utopian feeling of tech communities of the early tech culture stemmed from cyberpunks homesteading the noosphere (a la Linus) or engineers-turned-accidental-entrepreneurs (a la Woz). A large part of it was the sheer thrill -- the fun -- of creation. It's not B2B SaaS that drained the fun out, plenty of fun B2B products were built in the post-Linus, post-Woz area. What drained the fun out, instead, is the corporatization of the entire industry via Big Tech.

We all used to complain about IBM/Microsoft in the 90s and 00s, rebelling against their industry dominance via open source (e.g. Linux) or engineering+design (e.g. Apple). Now the same sorts of people work for any number of IBM/Microsoft-sized corporations, exerting IBM/Microsoft-style proprietary control over individual lives, in comfortable salaried roles in the 2020s.

I'm not sure what to make of it, myself. On the one hand, "tech won". Heck, even Linux and Apple won, beyond my wildest imagination in the 90s and 00s. On the other hand, so did conformism and stagnation.

(There were other similar victories, I am just using Linux and Apple as easy illustrative examples from the last couple decades.)

Reminds me of this quote by jwz from way back in 1999. He was writing about Netscape but you could say the same thing about the whole tech industry today:

The company stopped innovating. The company got big, and big companies just aren't creative. There exist counterexamples to this, but in general, great things are accomplished by small groups of people who are driven, who have unity of purpose. The more people involved, the slower and stupider their union is.

And there's another factor involved, which is that you can divide our industry into two kinds of people: those who want to go work for a company to make it successful, and those who want to go work for a successful company. Netscape's early success and rapid growth caused us to stop getting the former and start getting the latter.
Simpler is not only less regressive, but also more efficient. Those lawyers and accountants freed up by simplicity can then go on to contribute to the economy in meaningful ways.
I'm very much looking forward to making the switch away from Mint.

The two things blocking me were the inability to disable auto updates on snaps, and the not quite windowslike, seemingly keyboard focused GUI.

It seems like there's a ton of good extensions that are officially packaged, non-hacky things, and you can turn off Snap auto update.

Mint has been wonderful, but now that you're not forced to update, I really want to move to something that gets away from the "Big mess of packages and tangled webs of dependencies" model of traditional Linux.
Your argument falls apart when you realise that grains are not in any way shape or form part of a proper human diet.

All those bellies that are filled with grains may feel full and therefore won't likely cause much trouble for the elites, but they are really just slowly rotting away and dying (and generating even more income streams for big pharma, owned by the... elites).
Most takes on this matter have little appreciation for the underlying complexity.

The border fence was a $1 billion capital investment with sensors, automated machine guns, cameras, etc. that allowed the military to reduce the manpower needed to patrol the border. This is a good thing - patrol duty is mind-numbingly boring work that hurts morale, and there are always associated risks of getting hit by a sniper.

There are reports that Israel was warned. Sure - a handful of signals in an ocean of noise. Finding those signals (and wrangling apart conflicting signals) is why intelligence is necessarily an imprecise art and not a science, and why no defensive posture relies solely on intelligence.

Much ado has been made about judicial reform infighting weakening the Israeli security establishment, but all the public reporting points to issues with reservist volunteers, who are not essential for peacetime operations.

The far more banal explanation is that there was no dead-man's-switch monitoring on the border fence. The New York Times reported rumors that the attack started by Hamas knocking out the cell towers that were used by the remote sensors on the border fence to send monitoring data back to operators. Losing connectivity to so many parts of the fence at once should have immediately triggered high-severity alarms. It sounds like that didn't happen.

Why didn't that happen? Maybe a gross oversight on the part of the architects and contractors of the border fence. Maybe that alarm had fired once-too-many times in the past as a flaky-false-positive and it was disconnected instead of fixed. Maybe the dead-man's-switch component itself was broken somehow. Maybe someone took something offline for maintenance at what turned out to be the worst possible time, and alternative mechanisms (i.e. manned patrols) were not deployed during the maintenance, or maybe it simply didn't get turned back on, and nobody noticed because it's functionality is not used by operators on a day-to-day basis.

When so many people die, everyone wants to look for a scapegoat. But perhaps we should just, I dunno, build better systems instead?
Drastically reduce consumption of meat and dairy. And buy less stuff. Simple, really.
Where are all of these scam manager jobs where I don’t have to do anything other than a little bit of scrum mastering? Sign me up!

For some reason I can only find the heavy workload manager jobs. It’s different work than being an IC (I’ve gone back and forth) but I wouldn’t call being a manager easier.
The only problem is that proving it halts is "easy" - run the program, wait a few million years, it halts. Yey.

Proving it doesn't halt is much harder, since you can run it for TREE(3) steps if you want, that's still not proof it won't halt in TREE(3)+1 steps.

So in a way, it's not possible to "just run it", sadly.
The problem is that this effects higher languages too, because they often build on libc. And on some OSes, they don't have a choice, because the system call interface is unstable and/or undocumented).

For example in rust, multiple time libraries were found to be unsound if `std::env::set_env` was ever called from a multi-threaded program. See:

https://github.com/time-rs/time/issues/293 and https://github.com/chronotope/chrono/issues/499

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27970

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90308
It is kinda funny. I will admit this is the first time I thought about it in that way.
> the city’s property tax will be reduced from 2% for every $1 of assessed value (which is less than market value) to 0.6%. To make up for the revenues lost, land will be taxed at a new rate of 11.8%

This sounds like it's revenue neutral, so it doesn't seem like they're squeezing more. Also, they didn't eliminate all taxes on improvements, but cutting them by two thirds is still pretty good.

If the city is to be believed, most of Detroit's residents and business will actually be unsqueezed.[0]

> The city estimates that the LVT plan would reduce property taxes for 97 percent of Detroit homeowners and 70 percent of small businesses

[0]https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/detroit-considers-shi...
> there is nothing in principle stopping us from running this machine for BB(748) steps

How would we compute the value of BB(748)?
Password manager can generate site-specific keys (and as noted in the comments, they're not stored in the enclave)
Maybe it is time to replace the POSIX base with something that is better suited to a multi-threaded environemnt.
Just a lot of people on this thread who’ve never run a company talking about how many manager you need to run a company.
So… what if BB(748) is uncomputable? Or rather, didn’t you just prove that it is?
Which is one of the things Twitter is used as an authority for (e.g. hash dropping). And even having an option to do so removes this utility
Doesn't it seem to you like ~50 years of decline are too much to erase with one tax law? Have you ever been to Detroit?
That is the definition of faith used by the irreligious -- as hostile a definition as if you asked one political party to explain the beliefs of the other! An insider, and particularly a Christian, would never define faith that way.

Speaking as a Christian myself, I would say faith is belief in motion. And I would say that faith doesn't oppose rationality and evidence, but is rather sort of orthogonal to it.

Let us suppose you believe there is a horrible and dangerous pandemic going on outside your house. You rationally are afraid to go outside. And then as days pass, you gather evidence that the pandemic has subsided and things are safe now. At first you don't trust it. And then you think it might be true. And then probably true. And then virtually certain. That process of gathering evidence and becoming more certain is rationality. Faith... is when you go outside. Belief in motion.

Now, that step out the door can happen at any point. It can happen when you first hear a hint that things are better, and in a reckless rush of hope, you run outside. It can happen long after you are certain certain certain and fear keeps you inside too long. These are both examples of bad faith, unhealthy faith, faith misused. A Christian speaking of faith really means healthy faith - you go out when you should.

Sound faith doesn't imply a lack of evidence, or complete evidence either. It's about deciding the evidence is sufficient and moving forward from there. And it's not only that - it's faith in something. If you step outside because a certain analyst convinced you it was safe, and you later take that same analyst's advice on diet, and on this, and on that, and it keeps working out - you are growing in faith in that analyst. Eventually, you may trust them quite a lot.

This is what I would say faith is: belief in motion, working towards building trust.
He'll likely win this case but I'm not sure what it will accomplish.
*(char*)0 = 0; – What does the C++ programmer intend with this code? [video]
A good "under the hood" presentation of going down the rabbit-hole of layers in a Computer System from Language -> Compiler -> OS -> Hardware.
Heh, no, it definitely doesn't need any litigation of the details at all as the case is pretty clear, your honor.

It is their own making. It is safe to be a Palestinian in Israel, while you probably don't want to be a Jew in Gaza.