skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Clearly, we can't have users with uses you don't approve of [/s]

https://xkcd.com/129/
> So it is rationale/fair for the states to inherit what they originally had paid for.

Much like in a divorce, if it's something that has clearly stayed separate the whole time then perhaps, but if it's something the combined state has shared and maintained then probably not.
I currently work through this list https://press.princeton.edu/series/the-princeton-economic-hi... quite some books on dept eg. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691173771/le... or https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691168357/fr...
I can't even understand how can people use cryptocurrencies without mixing. Don't unmixed crypto let veryone know precisely what, where and when do you buy? Imagine Visa/MasterCard would openly post a realtime-updated, anonymously-accessible list of every transaction made with any card, showing the card number, place, time and the bill value. Wouldn't this cause a global outrage?
C/C++ can't even interoperate with itself due to varying text encodings, integer sizes, different file system capabilities, fork and stuff like that.
https://nitter.net/jason_kint/status/1718830641016414657
> Stroustrup is correct when he says the way forward is evolutionary. In evolution you never cut things, they're always phased out. Vestigial structures stick around.

That hasn't worked in the past for C++. Why would you expect that approach to start working in the future?

I also think that it's a bad idea to have the language's direction set by what the existing (and attritioning) developers want, and not by what it would take to get new devs. A policy like that is almost guaranteed to result in death by attrition.

> Incremental change is ultimately going to be more successful, causing schisms and splitting the language community is not going to be success.

Two things:

1. I think we're defining success differently here. I'm defining it as market-share.[1]

2. You're looking at the way C++ has always done things, which has failed (IMO, anyway) to keep the language mainstream. You're predicting a future where this approach that has failed in the past, will succeed in your predictions.

BTW, I'm not predicting anything; I'm saying that the C++ approach has resulted in a dismal failure for the languages popularity, causing it to lose some ground against every single competitor in that space: Rust, Nim, Zig and more are all eating away at what's left of the C++ developer base after Java and C# took a shark-sized bite from it in the early 00's to late 00's.

All that's left for C++ is gamedev. If we want to avoid that, C++ needs to be more accessible. In order to get to that, it needs to remove anything that can be removed.

[1] Python is an incredible success, having gained marketshare since 3 was released and people started the "slow and costly" migration which only took 10 years for Python 3 to be the most-used language now.

C++, by comparison, has been losing marketshare with each new evolutionary and incremental change that never discards anything.

C++ has been doing what you say is the correct way, and it has been losing its status as a mainstream language with each new standard. Python did it the way you say is incorrect, and is still solid in it's use-case against newer and better languages.
Probaly Lex Fridman himself, and then he paid a lot of marketing specialists to get that done.
Microsoft will happily sell you a fully certified controller breakout box [1] into which you can plug whatever you want, including your cheating device of choice. Sure, devices like Xim might be cheaper and more convenient, but cheaters are clearly not the main target of this move.

[1] https://www.xbox.com/en-US/accessories/controllers/xbox-adap...
I think the original comment's point is that would violate the presumed easement permitting a right of access.
nymag article is really embarrassing. Reminded me of this: https://www.mediaite.com/online/the-twenty-seven-most-embarr...

Zero quotes from Taibbi's article. Zero accurate paraphrasing of any Taibbi argument or claim. Zero claim of factual error with details. Zero links to the original. Zero mention of Shellenberger or /any/ of the other journalists involved. Just so appallingly bad!

It's like Aunt June reporting to you what her sewing circle thinks about what they say is being said in Shelbyville and why they are so wrong to hate Jebediah Springfield.

How did you go reading just /one/ of the original articles with its source docs? Did you try it? Did /you/ find a problem in the reporting Taibbi actually /did/ in that article or indeed any other? Did you find it a very different experience reading it to reading about it places like "nymag?" I really did.

And first amendment violations are a story and not nothing.
To save everyone a click: He's the CEO. "Patrick is Chairman, President, and CEO of SiFive".
It doesn't tell you which Atlassian or Google products are used. Could be as simple as wanting access to Google Search Console, formerly Webmaster Tools, or wanting to publish an app to the Atlassian Marketplace. It doesn't mean they use Gmail or Jira.
The Navy doesn't extract profits from public areas the government tossed to them, cannibalizing and selling off the commonwealth to private interests.
The author of that left Remedy in 2017 so I wouldn’t be surprised if they replaced the D code by now. They have at Facebook while I was there.
Thanks, I was looking for something to do with early work and saccades, didn't find that, but found this;

"The most influential of these early discussions was probably the 1943 paper of Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts in which activity in neuronal* networks was identified with the operations of the propositional calculus. Actual simulations of recognition automata based on networks were carried out by Frank Rosenblatt
before 1958 but the theoretical limitations of his "perceptrons" were soon pointed out by Marvin Minsky and Seymour Papert"

excerpt from a 1998 paper, "Real Brains and Artificial Intelligence" (https://www.jstor.org/stable/20025142)

"Walter Harry Pitts, Jr. (23 April 1923 – 14 May 1969) was an American logician who worked in the field of computational neuroscience.[1]"

'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Pitts'
Show HN: I have built a ToDo with Firebase
Please give me a feedback
It's extremely relevant, it doesn't matter who owns it or if it's a public right of way or not. Ultimately in the UK you can walk wherever you like whether the property is private or not. This is clearly a public area, right of way or not, where there is no expectation of privacy and therefore, legally, you can photograph anything you like, nobody can enforce otherwise.
Large chunks of Vanguard and Blackrock are in index funds. So no amount of realisation about toxicity or heartfelt revelations on the part of Vanguard and Blackrock are going to change what those chunks are invested in.
Because these people are bad businessmen. There is not a single reason yet another uptime monitoring business needs to exist. They have no chance at succeeding the likes of Datadog, New Relic.

Conclusion: promising builders being bad at startups
You seem to think that the 2pi is injected into the definition of e^ix somewhere, but actually it's the other way round, 2pi comes out as a theorem. I'll give the rough outline.

exp(x) for complex x is simply defined to be the infinite sum from k = 0 to infinity of x^k/k!. That is, exp(x) = 1 + x + x^2/2 + x^3/6 + x^4/24 + x^5/120 ...

(BTW, the motivation for this definition is that exp'(x) = exp(x), which shouldn't be too hard to see because it's already a Tailor series.)

Purely from this you can prove that exp(ix) with real x is periodic with period 6.28...

It just so happens that this number is also the circumference of the unit circle.
Seriously this is the worst book ever in the textbook history. People always laugh for stuff like "tensor is stuff that works like a tensor", but this book is literally doing that in every page.
> a smaller % need to upgrade to keep you afloat

Until yet another free competitor comes along. Then you're out of business
It's very funny to me, as in the 90s when console FPSes first started coming out there were always debates on PC vs Console in school, and whether mouse and keyboard was better than joypad, I guess now everyone knows the answer
> Prior to the atomic bombs being dropped the US had already carpet bombed 72 other cities, including Tokyo, and they had a list of future targets to destroy.

Sure. People focus excessively on the nuclear bombs rather than the general practice of bombing civilian cities (very much equally a war crime). Nevertheless, they're a particularly striking example, and criticising them as such is not invalid.

> The neccessity to use bombs developed to counter possible German atomic weapons on a rapidly dwindling Japan now that Germany had been defeated was a kind of military necessity .. the window for live field testing was rapidly closing given the approach of Russians from the north and relative lack of untouched targets.

That can hardly be a justification.
The certificate process at Microsoft is an absolute hell designed for their "authorized" sales people to generate money out of thin air.

As a result – most people now skip the "SmartScreen" warning at the level of habit. This warning just adds to the noise from the Windows system which you want to skip as fast as possible.

Tons of good software simply can't afford it or won't bother getting such a non-portable thing as hardware FIPS. Classic Microsoft "just shove it up your throat" practices for the sole purpose of revenue
Leave that up to the game devs. Expose a platform API call with all relevant information about the accessories currently plugged into the console.

That way a game can check that API whenever cheating matters for that particular game - which may mean different things: playing with strangers, playing certain 'competitive' modes, getting achievements or high scores, etc.
Tupolev Tu-4 – Soviet Copy of the B-29
I call BS on this. Apple’s strategy is not battery tech. It’s personal computing devices. Always has been. Always will. Wearables, services, AI-capable hardware, is where Apple wins. Wearables beyond the watch and the vision pro. Meta and Ray-Ban teamed up for some Google Glass-like shades. Apple will come out with Shade (TM) if they choose to go into that market.

The point is, Apple has had a strategy for a while now. It’s not going to win against Android in the phone wars. It’s going to win in the AR/XR space if they can manage to get a decent wearable out and provide cores within cores within cores for AI NN’s.
By that logic any violation of the rules of war is justified, as long as you win afterwards.
Yeah, they usually compile fine. And if not, its not that hard to port them most of the time. Now try something reverse, like using modern language on old Unix. Good luck :)
Definitely agree that it’s a breath of fresh air to just write HTML and it look good.

For more complex projects it’s normally Tailwind
False dichotomy fallacy, C++ and python are not the only languages.
Show HN: I made a site to automate CRM product details and packshot photos
Hey HN,

As a developer bored with his 9 to 5 job, I was watching my wife build prestashop and wooCommerce sites for small local artisans and then realized that most of them were struggling to fill their product details page and thus missing out on SEO and sales opportunities.

So I decided to create depikt, an almost automatic tool for online store owners and managers. It uses AI (mainly Stable Diffusion and OpenAI) to generate product details and photos from a single product photo.

How does it work?

- Upload a product photo to depikt.
- AI generates product details.
- Get a product photo.

Objective: to simplify the product listing process and improve the efficiency of the online store by giving the user ready-to-use details such as title, keywords or meta-descriptions and a visually appealing photo of their product.

I'd love to hear your comments - that would be great!

Dany
> Serial obsessive fixation seems a problem right there in itself. There's a deep need that isn't being satisfied. What is it?

I do feel that the author has some interesting personality trait - but I'm not sure if he's in the minority.

After writing my comment I have realised that maybe it's why I never understood the appeal of Twitter. I have never had any "gurus" or "authorities" that I'd universally respect. I could never understand why would I follow some individual on twitter - why would I care? When I read that the author says he follows that "person" so deeply, watching their videos for hours, I completely can not relate. Neither on logical nor emotional level.

I might dig into a topic, let's say, siege of Berlin during II WW, but I'd be focusing on the topic and the source / author will be completely irrelevant. I'll even probably select various ones, as I enjoy challenging my own perspective.
I’m seeing a lot advice to just only listen. But when I’m just there silently listening my counterpart they would just angry why I only there in silence.
China's Soviet Shadow
I miss stage6.
It does look nifty. Altho getting up to speed is non-trivial. I don't suppose you have any working examples in the Go language ?
C++ did a lot to improve safety over the decades, but it seems to have ended up in a local maximum. I doubt you can break out of that local maximum by doing all the things you did before. Something needs to change, backward compatibility would be the one thing with the biggest overall benefit -- but also with the biggest cost.
Possibly, but it may also be that we're training them wrong.

"Book smart, not street smart"
(to use a catchphrase) would apply perfectly to GPT models: brain the size of a rodent's, with 50,000 year's experience of reading Reddit, Wikipedia, and StackOverflow, but no "real life" experiences of its own.
I have a similar effect with TV series, getting excited at a new premise at first, but then often losing interest midways once the pattern-matching kicks in and I get a grasp on what their shtick is. The magic is usually only in the beginnings.
Ok, well what would you do for someone in crisis then? How would you help someone?
The US rushes to swap Chinese tech with US Tech

China rushes to swap US tech with Chinese tech

Wait a minute, looks like they copy each other, but did they really start now? they built the foundation decades ago, the plan was already laid
> This is really the secret sauce of AWS, industry leading operations/stability/backward compatibility.

After working there for >5 years (premium support at AWS, then EC2), I've found myself missing Amazon's operations culture and observability stack (as well as CI/CD toolchain) at every other job. Carnaval in particular is hugely missed.
This has an AI smell to me. I mean, sure, companies have been able to produce large amount of insubstantial nonsense but this is ... new.
EmbLua: Lua for Microcontrollers
New development cannot generally remove public rights of way. They may divert them, but even this is difficult, subject to public consultation, and should be scrutinised by local councils. It's very difficult to remove a public right of way completely in the UK. It does happen occasionally, but it's very unlikely that's what's happening in London.

What's more likely is you are taking advantage of new access opened up by developments that were previously dockyards or something that could never be traversed by the public. Landowners are very careful to make it clear they are not public rights of way lest they actually do become public rights of way, which could have an impact on the value of the land.

As a member of the public, you should campaign for these de facto ways to get made into public rights of way. That is something that can, and should, happen.
Still better than "Oops, something went wrong" that most webapps do though.
Umm, do these companies factor average tenure to tweak vesting schedule and finetune how much stock they fork over to employees?
>because about a day after whatever change they make, software (that runs on my computer against my data) will catch up.

Exactly: it just takes one bored or determined hacker to investigate their changes and update the ad-blocking software, and suddenly everyone is able to see the videos and block the ads again. The ad-blockers don't seem to have trouble keeping people around to do this work.
The thing is - there are so many predictions made and a lot that don't come through, it's hard to find which are the "real" ones.

I also read somewhere that there are several different scenarios available for the IPCC climate models and a lot of the more "scary" predictions are based on the least likely model.

Finally - we saw the limitations of modelling in COVID in the UK, with adverse consequences.
a design patent that is.
I love the idea. The world needs more kind apps. There's another app I'm using called derive which just pins a random place on a map within 10km of me and I have to go there. That's it. No extra bells or whistles. The interface is super minimal and it's made by one person as a hobby. It encourages exploration.
Biden to Use Emergency Powers to Mitigate AI Risks
> If you use Google takeout to export your photos you get a lossy version of the original.

I'm fairly sure that, unless something has changed recently, this is incorrect.

Last year I went through the process of figuring out how to re-create my photos from a takeout archive. It is frustrating to a level that is almost cruel - mangled/truncated filenames, arbitrarily stripped metadata, unnecessarily ambiguous naming - but the photos themselves always seemed to be original quality.

I've recently started using the filters and tools that come with a Google One subscription and I suspect that they're not fully compatible with whatever the storage schema is that takeout is exposing. The relationship between an original image and one edited uaing the filters seems to get lost. I need to dig into this before my next semi-annual photo exfiltration is due.

Actually, I just need to stop using google photos...
I don’t think anyone ever thought joypad was better for first person shooter accuracy. Especially in the 90s when console FPSs barely involved aiming.
Some time around mid 1995 until basically now, it became out of fashion to explain your motivations of some new modeling as inspired from biology, as that was often handwaving with only little understanding of the actual neuroscience. So that is why people stopped writing that in papers. Just let the actual performance numbers speak for themselves. Either you get good performance, then it doesn't really matter where this was inspired from, or it does not work well, then it also does not matter where this was inspired from. In machine learning, it mostly matters whether it works well or not.
Yeah I don't understand who the target audience is for this. Who would read this and be reassured the company is in tremendous shape? It seems way too far removed from reality
I remember The Hutchinson Educational Encylopedia on CD ROM. https://archive.org/details/the_hutchinson_educational_encyl...
yes! Q can go and sue them!
I guess radians are “magic” in that sin and cos can be defined by infinite series that look nice (and feel canonical). You have to manipulate those series to get 360 or even just revolutions.
Biden to issue first regulations on artificial intelligence systems
See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38056476
Bro I know this feel. Even books teaching algorithms being written by mathematicians are error everywhere.

They never state the type, class, no comment, no explanation, read exceed the last index... This list can go endlessly. When they say "lets declare an empty set for variable T", you don't know whether the thing is a list, set, tuple, ndarray, placeholder for a scalar, or a graph.

Some even provide actual code, however, never actually run the code to verify their correctness.
Maybe an "appeal to authority" type situation which is guiding an anxious brain? e.g. Rogan has a massive following, therefore you wonder: "why does this person have such a massive following? It must be because they have important things to say. I had better listen too."
As a post semi professional photographer, I want to go on a divergent path here for a moment.

As far as backing up photos, most of you have too many photos. To make your life easier before downloading all these photos go through them with the critical eye, and ask yourself if people would be interested in seeing this photo 50 years from now.

Second, never ever ever use any cloud based back up unless you are just using it for a back up of your multiple hard drive backups. In essence, if she only be a back up of your back ups. And never a back up of your daily workflow.

In my opinion, we are heading for a time of fiscal turmoil that will either make these cloud backups too expensive or obsolete.
We need a grouping to make it clear that some fields produce theories and others produce theorems.

We need theory-producers to be more humble and provisional in their statements. We need theory-producers to forever remain open for their theories to be falsified or refined (whilst not being paralysed by doubt about theories that have stood the test of time). In other words, we need a slightly different culture.

But we also need a way to rebut someone who says "OK, but can you prove we're not living in a perfect simulation of reality with a fabricated history that was created yesterday?". In science, the rebuttal is "No, I can't prove that, science depends falsification rather than proof. Can you suggest a way I could falsify it? If not, then I'm going to get on with my work because it doesn't make a difference to my field either way"
To play the devil's advocate, this is likely an artifact of how they store the images. Embedded EXIF does not make for an efficient filesize and separating EXIF from image data means they can have different image sizes with a single source of EXIF data.
> You see someone make sense of a complex topic, be able to cut through bullshit and appearances, you can use that as a "character witness". Maybe that person has solid thought processes and may get other complex issues right too. There are a few people who I see to be often proven right.

But do they really cut through bullshit and appearances? The individuals that the author has mentioned are mostly oversimplifying the world.

> Maybe that person has solid thought processes and may get other complex issues right too.

That's the issue here - treating real world issues as a though experiment. It creates solutions that are very appealing to people who perceive themselves as thinkers. The ideas are usually simple, round, fair, based on some fairness coming from nature or math, but they completely discard the complexity of the problem. As soon as you start adding corner cases it solution fails.

You can see that as well in software engineering - if only we could simplify the problem we're trying to solve, the solution would be so clean!
> Maybe I'm not the intended audience, maybe I'm not from a culture that understands posts like this, but this all seems so hollow and tone-deaf.

This is written for other c-suite level people and board members, and sadly this hollow pointless communication is the norm for the c-suite and board members. They are not smart people, they don't use language to communicate important information, they don't make choices based on what is best for shareholders, employees, customers or society, they have no useful skill or insight. They are worse than politicians, they hurt shareholders, customers, employees and society. The only people they help are the politically connected Ivy League class, and they are a blight on society.