skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I willingly gave them my DNA. I want to support research and better drug development, and gave broad consent towards that end.

(disclosure: also interviewed there over a decade ago and declined the offer only because of lacking comp, don’t recall the name of their CTO around Jan 2011 but was a cool dude)
Why don't people like you just spend exactly 2 minutes to create a bogus gmail (or etc) account for yourself that you put down when you don't want to put your own email in? I just cannot fathom any reason for you doing this that isn't just malice. Surely nobody is just so _lazy_ that they intend to screw over their friends over a minute or two process making an account.
Autism is not something you have - it's something you are. It's not an illness, it's just a set of characteristics that mean you understand and interact with the world in a way that's not the most common.
Hi, thanks for sharing!

OSM got vandalized recently [0][1] and apparently the community is having a hard time restoring the data / reverting the edits.

Would using KartProject enable storing edits as commits which could then get easily reverted? Also localized commits?

[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/32.09438/34.77448

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/32.0914/34.7746&layers...
Stigler in particular (and transaction cost economics in general) point out that it's mainly industries with sunk resources (esp. immovable assets) that are incentivized to regulate market entry.

The tech sector has wildly moving resources (AI this year, crypto last year, big-data the year before...), even to the point where many skills are transferable; further, their markets include anything that can be digitized ("software will eat the world"), so investment can be quickly retooled as opportunities arise. As a result, tech virtually never seeks regulation (and can hide behind contract-law fictions to disclaim liability in software licenses and impose arbitration clauses for services). So it's not an instance of capture, and certainly not for the usual economic reasons.

Biden wants tech on his side. Tech wants to escape further blows to its goodwill like FaceBook/Google ad tracking, because every consumer tech application involves users trusting tech. So they cut a deal to put themselves on the right side of history, long on symbolism and short on real impact.

In AI, resources matter only to the extent you believe that larger LLM's can (a) not be replicated, (b) provide significant advantages, or (c) can impose a winner-take-all world where operations lead to more operations. In AI more than most markets, the little guy still has a chance at changing the world.
By upstream support, do you mean the relevant device trees and drivers have been contributed to the kernel already? (I'm asking because there are some listed here https://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#Linux_6.5.ARM but they seem to be a different model)
Just stop, people want dogs leashed in public for safety. This isn't some social order of insensitive assholes, this is because people actually get maimed by dogs and it's easier to have a blanket rule that all dogs (or all animals) must be leashed.

There is no magical effect of some cadre of people trying to enforce some silliness onto the general public, there's a reason behind these laws.
A pessimistic corollary to this is that intervention is often followed by social punishment if it impinges on anyone else's interests or even just makes the bystanders look bad.
No because every interaction is different. And yes if that’s your mindset, every time.
Any details on CodeModService? I’m curious cause I was just reading about Rosie from google.

There’s not really much public info on large scale code mod tools.
Capitalist disclaims any desire to be regulated and preaches the free market.

Colour me surprised.

The danger is the socialisation of outcomes. The AGI danger is fanciful because AGI is fanciful. There's plenty of risk in misplaced belief in what AI methods promote as outcomes from their inputs.

If he's complaining, I tend to think there's some merit in what's being proposed.

Contrast this with the regulations coming over e2e cryptography. I see mainly marginal players trying to defend things here, big tech is pretty ok with its risk profile: It has billions (trillions?) of assets which could be seized, and so is going to jump into line with regulation because hey: there's no downside. It will secure a defense from lawsuit, it will be able to monetize the service of scanning content, and it's pretty sure it can't win the fight anyway.
Both can be true at the same time. Big AI companies can be trying for regulatory capture while there may be real dangers, both short-term as well as long term, perhaps even existential dangers.

Why do people seem to think evidence for one of these is counter evidence for the other?
Let's face it - you made all of that up.
> we’ll enforce a clear spam rate threshold that senders must stay under

I hope they make it really strict. I'm sick of companies that send you spam ("newsletters") just because you interacted with them once, then when you unsubscribe, you get unsubscribed from that one list, so they keep spamming you just with a slightly different newsletter type. (Edit: Also, everything requiring a notification - by e-mail if they couldn't get me to install their app - just to get me to engage with their site.)

Once such behavior has the potential of landing your entire domain in the spam folder, maybe they'll be more careful.

Edit: For example, I can't imagine LinkedIn being able to pull of their "phish people, steal their address book, spam each contact three times with no opt-out" bullshit for so long if strict spam thresholds were in place.
that NEVER happens anymore. and I've only ever heard stories of it, no one I've ever spoken to has ever gotten anything like this.

when I have made large improvements like the article/blog describes, I am pulled off of that and put on something far worse, immediately, except without the autonomy. "why can't you succeed here?"
I use them in my home lab. The company is too cheap to provide me with a real lab but $1000, ebay and some creativity I can pretty much do whatever I need to do on my own.
I think the $200k-300k Bezos got was also most of this parent’s life savings. It was their retirement fund they gambled on their son’s company.

The rest of the money (excluding his own savings) he got the old fashion way, begging VCs and other investors.
With regular multiplication, the numbers are the "real" thing you are interested in.

In a vector space, the fundemantal object is the vector. Writing it as a sequence of numbers with an assumed basis is a notational convience.

If you want to define a function for vectors, then you need that function to give the same result regardless of the basis you use to represent the vectors. When you here mathaticians talk about proving that a function is "well defined" this is what they are talking about.

Of course, you might be working with some spefic structure where component wise multiplication is meaningfull and well define. That structure might happen to also be a vector space, and the notation used to write it might happen to coincide with vector notation under the "obvious" choice of basis.

Other specific vector spaces have their own quirky notion of multiplication. For instance polynomials can be viewed as a vector space, with an obvious basis of { x^n }, but polynomial multiplication looks very different from component wise multiplication.
> If an elected official is using a private channel as a means of 'public' information dissemination things get messy.

That sounds more like an problem of issuing public information only through private channels.
At 100 bar (minimum) that’s no joke if something ruptures.
I ripped a lot of DVDs in the 2000s, even had a few pre-release. One of our group committed suicide, I forget how we found out, someone outside the group knew him IRL i think. There is an NFO with a tribute out there somewhere.

Writing some tools for doing releases got me into Python.
It depends on the marriage. :)
If doing that means more well supported, useful and fun computers, that is fine with me.

I have few complaints and fins the devices useful, affordable and fun.
IIRC, wasnt this their stated intention from the beginning, along with a plan to virtually test against DNA?
If any of my family members are secretly killers, I would not feel bad about them getting caught...

But I would feel bad if, e.g., insurance premiums were to go up because I had inherited risk factors for some costly diseases.
Who is actually making max contributions? $19k per year is out of reach for most. If someone makes the max 401k and IRA contributions over a 35 year career, they would be set.
That's not at all what the poster said.

Water is good for you yet too much water will kill you. This is what the poster meant.
First Republic. I would never have sought out something like that, but they wrote my mortgage so I had to use their checking account. But it was pretty cool to have a guy who I could email directly, instead of a 1-800 number phone tree.
Yeah, most outgoing sales people these days reach out using gmail. No unsubscribe links in any of them.
Hmm, maybe it's a common mistake on both sides of the pond? Here's an article discussing the same pronunciation in American English: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/22/most-commonly-mispronounced-...

I think I just happened to learn that phrase in grade school, from a Dungeons and Dragons rulebook lol[1], while I was learning French and witnessing the horror that was "foie gras". So the "de gras" part just never made sense to me, coincidentally.

[1] It's an automatic crit against a helpless opponent (https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/3e_SRD:Helpless_Defenders). Was really useful in Neverwinter Nights when you could paralyze or sleep an enemy then have the melee guy finish 'em off :) Who said games weren't educational?!
The GDPR way (in spirit) is quite good IMHO. The user needs to know at least roughly who, how and why their personal information is used. If it's obviously needed to provide the service the user wants, no explicit consent is usually needed. E.g. asking for an address without explicit consent is fine if you are sending them a package they have ordered. Asking for the address to sell it to someone sending mail ads is not.

It's not about the data itself, it's about how it's used.

Of course very few actually want their information to be used like e.g. ad companies use it, so the "consent" is tricked with dark patterns. And this trickery (and lack of enforcement) makes the law look bad.
Framerate and Human Eye [thread]
Will take a look at Surgeon. Thanks for sharing your experience. The syntax is very interesting.
Just like letting people store your phone number in their contacts list... the only way to actually stay away from some of the most invasive companies is to live in isolation.
You can with uBlock Origin and Fanboy's Anti-Facebook Filters: https://www.fanboy.co.nz/
GitHub will offer Arm-based runners in 2024
Most dogs that don't mean harm won't actually break skin, for them it's a warning rather than violence.

This is not what people mean when they talk about people getting bitten by dogs.
i made a small robot with realtime video, spent many hours on all these acronyms and webRTC stuff, wound up using simple jmuxer and python websockify. everything else was so complicated i could never figure it out. there is just so much jargon and layers on layers on layers.
Indeed. That description of 8-bit/16-bit is applicable to the 8080/8085/Z80 family.
This is a great question, and one of the first things we had to answer before deciding to build Kart. These are my top 3:

1. We found Geogig hard to get running. I'm a software engineer but I struggled to get Geogig installed correctly. Typical GIS people are technical, but maybe not in command lines or building software. Kart is designed to be 'batteries included', installs easily on Windows, Mac and Linux.

2. Geogig was "inspired by" git, but isn't built "on top of" git. That meant rebuilding a lot of things that git is already _really_ good at. Kart teaches git how to work with spatial data, so we're getting all of the benefits of many thousands of human-hours in optimizations in git. It also means a lot of git tooling works with kart today, leaving us free to focus on GIS-specific enhancements. There are a few specific examples of later additions to git, like git filters, that have made critical features possible (e.g. spatially filtered clones).

3. Geogig was a great project largely sponsored by Boundless Geo before they got bought by Planet, and it more-or-less died at that point. Ultimately, these projects have a big bootstrapping problem. You need data, the tool, and willing users. Kart is sponsored by Koordinates.com - a platform that's been doing GIS data delivery for over 10 years. We have a lot of data that we're been 'mirroring' into Repos and will make avaiable soon, we have a lot of users with specific use cases (fetching updates to large, regularly updated datasets) who are already using it, and we're making a long term committement to Kart as an OS project.
Faiss GPU author here. Vector binarization via LSH for dense vector, high-dimensional (say 30 - 2000ish dimensions) tends to have poor recall and quality of results. As the Annoy author implied here as well, there's a lot of literature on LSH but that's because it is easier to analyze mathematically and prove theorems regarding it, not that it produces good quality results compared to graph-based (HNSW etc) or different geometric cell probe-based (IVF etc) methods. LSH is not typically used in industrial scale settings for these reasons.

However, for extremely high dimensional sparse vectors (think tens of thousands to millions of dimensions), LSH does remain the only practical approximate technique to my knowledge. Online settings (where you need to insert vectors quickly into the database) may prefer LSH as well as the overhead is smaller than updating a graph or finding the IVF cell in which to place the vector.

Below ~30 dimensions, exact non-brute force methods (like k-D trees or binary space partitioning methods) work ok, but they have high overheads above that because your true nearest neighbor is still highly likely to lie on either side of any dividing hyperplane (it doesn't partition the dataset well; everything is usually "near" everything else in practice in high dimensions).
I've never been shot, clearly shootings don't happen.
https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/byprrngynpe/...

The dismissal of Deviant was inappropriate given that the case hasn't reached discovery yet. The dismissal was granted based on a substantive evaluation of the Defendant's assertions which is inappropriate at this early procedural stage of the case. (see e.g. page 10 where the judge evaluates the "plausibility" of alleged facts, and page 12 where he says "I am not convinced" about the plaintiff's theory, even though in a MTD this is not a determination he is supposed to make pre-discovery).

Moreover, even if plaintiff's language was "unclear", the appropriate procedure is to require them to amend their claim and dismiss Deviant if the plaintiff does not amend, not to dismiss a defendant and give the plaintiff leave to amend their claims.

With respect to Midjourney, the Plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient factual allegations to support their claim, so that dismissal was appropriate. (Pre-discovery, it's okay for the alleged/pleaded "facts" to be wrong, you just need to allege sufficient "facts" that you have a legal basis for a court case. Note that "facts" in the MTD context doesn't mean real world facts, it is a legal term of art that actually refers to an allegation of a fact that will later be determined to be true or false at the actual legal proceeding on the merits.)
So you can of course multiply some vectors- the real numbers are a vectorspace, and they have a perfectly nice product. Even R^2 can have a nice multiplication- (a,b)(c,d) = (ac - bd, bc + ad), the product of the complex numbers. However, it's much trickier to define a multiplication on an arbitrary vectorspace V such that

1) For any vectors u,v in V, the product u*v is in V. (this rules out the dot product as a general product)

2) For u,v in V, u*v = v*u

3) For u,v,w in V, v*(u+w) = (v*u) + (v*w)

4) For u,v in V and s in F (the field V is a vectorspace over), s(u*v) = (su)*v = s*(uv)

Under these restrictions you can still cook up products, but fewer and sadder ones. In general you will not have a multiplicative inverse, for instance.
Hey, thanks for your interest in checking out the app :) Weird that you don't see the Pricing info on that page - did you tap "Pricing" at the top bar, and then tap the first question "How much does BoldVoice cost?"
Either way, the app costs $150/year or $25/month (or your local equivalent). We have a free 7-day trial so you can try it before you commit.
That depends on what the customer does, no?

> However, z/OS also implements 64-bit Java, C, C++, and UNIX (Single UNIX Specification) APIs and applications through UNIX System Services – The Open Group certifies z/OS as a compliant UNIX operating system – with UNIX/Linux-style hierarchical HFS[NB 3][NB 4] and zFS file systems. These compatibilities make z/OS capable of running a range of commercial and open source software.[3] z/OS can communicate directly via TCP/IP, including IPv6,[4] and includes standard HTTP servers (one from Lotus, the other Apache-derived) along with other common services such as SSH, FTP, NFS, and CIFS/SMB.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z/OS

Although I like the argument that having an OS that does not require use of C is an interesting feature. Then it's really about the quality software platform, more than about the magic hardware.
They aren't exactly evil... They are what happens when you maximize capitalism, and some people do consider that evil.
There is such a thing as a well-behaved dog. I don't see the social benefit of enforcing every last little law on the books all the time.

I think laws (the kind we're talking about, anyway) are best seen as a tool for maintaining public order. If police encounter something dangerous or immediately disorderly, they can express their reasons for intervening in terms of laws. If you run open headers on your car and cause an actual disturbance, you can be cited. When that relationship between order and law is inverted, the result is cops nickle-and-diming the populace when there was no actual underlying problem.

The real application of law requires, you know ... nuance, discretion and situational awareness. That's the standard we should hold police to, not throwing every single page of the book at people all the time.
You can look through posters' comment history, you know. Come back when you've found one person who's actually making both of those arguments instead of fighting this strawman.
Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of AI
Complexity still very bad.
> I'm also not selling anything, so no grift here.

You're selling the mass conception that cryptoshit has value.
Same with Blackhat. You can provide a different e-mail on your profile... and then they'll still happily pass both that and your original sign-up address to any vendor you interacted with, and it will be resold so you end up with spam from vendors that weren't even there.
> Maths as written did seem pretty sloppy and not at all like a programming language whose expressions I could parse as I expected.

Look at Lean's mathlib: that's what fully formal mathematics looks like. It's far too verbose to be suitable for communicating with other people; you might as well try to teach an algorithms course transistor by transistor.
> why did he do that in the first place?

Cocaine is a helluva drug.
When I started at Apple in late 1995 there was still plenty of 68K assembly in the code base. Sometime when the push to PowerPC began the color picker code landed in my lap. While mostly in C, the RGB and HSB "wheels" were rendered using hand-coded assembly. (This allowed the user on a lowly Macintosh II to real-time drag the slider to adjust brightness or what have you and get a responsive color wheel updating.)

Having never written assembly it was fun pulling down a book on 68K assembly and determining how to do each instruction in straight C.

I remember one odd instruction — some kind of mask-and-shift-bit instruction — that I was unable to find documentation for in the book (pre-StackOverflow obv). Fortunately someone had a Motorola 68020 manual and the instruction I was looking for was there. It had not occurred to me that there were newer instructions for the '020 and that the color picker might use one. (After the fact it occurred to me that in the Macintosh line an '020 or better was the minimum CPU for color support).
But a river would be both, extract the heat with a heatpump, cool down the exhaust using that river. Assuming you can pump more heat and extract more electricity from that heat than it cost to run the heatpump, you'd have a positive energy extraction.
Also they’re in very different positions.

Apple made perfectly good choices but history did not come out in their favor. So they had to keep switching and 3rd parties had to follow (if they wanted to stay on the Mac).

Microsoft ended up on what became the dominant CPU that just happened to continue to rocket up in performance for decades. So although Windows is capable of running on other processors, it was never much of a market and most of the software never came along.
> But let us not extrapolate luck and personal anecdotes to solutions for systems

We can certainly extrapolate if we look at the last 13-14 years.
The vast majority of people alive centuries ago were subsistence farmers. They were malnourished, overworked, underpaid, illiterate, had virtually no access to effective healthcare, and had no civil rights. Also, no color TV. By virtually any measure the quality of life in modern society globally is orders of magnitude better than it was centuries ago.
Regulatory capture for AI is here?

Looking at Bill Gurley's 2,851 Mile talk (https://12mv2.com/2023/10/05/2851-miles-bill-gurley-transcri...)
Ugh. You’re one of those types that demand performative efforts and strict conformity. These things are actively harmful in so many ways. Consider the fact that people can hear you perfectly fine with them in and your opinion of their appearance is something you should keep to yourself as it is only marginally less offensive than asking women to smile.