skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You’re not abnormal, many people would love to do their own thing in an ideal world. There are various reason (cost of living, family, location, responsibilities, capabilities…) most of us stay in our current positions and don’t move out of our comfort zones.

IMHO each one of us needs to ask/answer the reason for wanting to do something on its own. Is it for the money? Is it out of love for a specific activity? Is it out of need for success? Is it because of a need for a different lifestyle?
Doesn't that more general statement now apply to anyone that collects telemetry, even for "noble" purposes, like Mozilla?
Of course it's possible. I've done it. This requires a pretty high level of discipline and near 100% automated test coverage. Test scripts have to be written concurrently with product code, or at least prior to merging any code to the release branch.

I don't believe that software was actually higher quality in the distant past. That seems like selective memory. I've been in the industry long enough to have used a lot of products that shipped on physical media. There were many defects that we just lived with. Vendors frequently issued patches or dot releases on additional discs to fix defects.
VentureWave $40M Investment in Funderbeam to Shape the Future of Venture Markets
"Feel"?

Free Speech is a human right, Feelgoods aren't. Case closed
Humans get a bit of training data. If a baby is left to itself during the formative years, they won't develop speech, social skills, reasoning skills, ... and they will be handicapped for the rest of their life, unable to recover from the neglect.

And the rest of our training data, we make it as we go. From interacting with the real world.
Nope. Maybe if you are a housefly, but humans spend considerable amounts of time and effort raising their children (and grandchildren, nieces/nephews, cousins…).
There is a performance conclusion in the title though.
https://github.com/github/copilot.vim

https://github.com/huggingface/llm.nvim
This series of puns is macron me ill.
I could use google maps history to prove my innocence
I'm not sure if you read the same one. The guy asking for "data that supports your claim that CO2 is a greenhouse gas" because he won't accept it without an alternate CO2-less Earth for comparison? Seems the experiment was convincing enough for him.

>ozone is considered pollution on grown level and its UV radiation shield high up

This is not even a false dichotomy.
Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38088740
Ridiculous amounts of standardized testing and curriculums designed to optimize for that was the main thing we hated. Seems to be a thing everywhere.

When I was a kid teachers had a bit more freedom to decide what to teach but now you teach to the test or lose your funding.
> Because your children are not your property, they are your responsibility

I am their _guardian_.

> and we as society have decided that we want to make sure that the education is to a certain standard.

And what is that standard? Passing standardized tests? How do you account for the poor performance of American schools in general? How do you account for the differential performance across the country, let alone, wild performance differences across a single city? If a child goes to school but fails to become educated, can the sue the school district? Does the school owe them continued education until they meet the standard?

> believe they should have ultimate authority (sometimes it feels more like ownership) over their children.

If something happens to my children and I'm even just negligent then I will pay the ultimate price. You cannot ensconce in me this responsibility and then deny my authority to exercise control over them to maintain it.

> Why do you believe that the freedoms do not apply to children?

Why do you think children can't sign contracts or buy alcohol? They have _limited_ freedom, under my _guardianship_. This is more important than the States imputed idealism with respect to "education."
Yeah that should also be stopped.
Unless you like RAM. The Dev Kit comes with 32GB as standard.
One of the best open-source form services I have ever used is Typebot (1). The way it works and how users interact is awesome, I've been told many times that my forms are awesome. I am not in any way affiliated to this project, but I think it deserves some attention!

(1): https://typebot.io
> As the Twitter Files revealed...

Haha. These people aren't interested in "censorship." And they're not acting in good faith.
After seeing my son rage-tapping a loading spinner I / GPT coded this game on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

https://spinner.franzai.com/

Think it could be an interesting UX pattern. Having interactive loading (spinner) games that at least give is feedback that our actions (even in between things) have impact.
Running "Ignore Web Context" enabled can improve performance for design tasks like this. I just got a more plausible answer: https://www.phind.com/search?cache=f0fkv5mxscwvagxgkuwnwgtl. Consistency is something we're working on.
quite slow and considered actually. i doubt i could pump them out rapid fire, but maybe i should try. i don't have anything memorised and just go off of feel of runs of numbers.

i have considered trying to memorise some algorithm, but never done it.

i assume that if anyone tried to get me to do these things with a non- uniform distribution I'd probably be screwed, but never tested it.
Then we focus our censorship on reducing intolerance. We only need to be intolerant of intolerance. It's not actually the paradox that free speech absolutists make it out to be. It's not even actually very difficult at a basic level. The details, of course, are what get tricky, which is why we should make those judgments transparent and open for disagreement. Not so that we bow to the loudest and angriest, but so that we can entertain opposing arguments and evaluate them for merit.
You've missed the point, there is no objective measure of a troll. If you strongly believe A and think nobody could believe B in good faith, and I strongly believe B and think nobody could believe A in good faith, then you are a troll to me and I am a troll to you.

Go on a forum with lots of republicans and argue standard democratic talking points; they'll call you a troll. Do the inverse and they'll call you a troll. People use the label of "troll" against people who are being earnest when they say something the listener strongly disagrees with. It's little more than a generic insult for people you disagree with, like "idiot".

In the example you give, the people calling politicians satanic probably earnestly believe that in many if not most cases. You might think that nobody could have that point of view in good faith, but this is a country with many millions of Christians who earnestly believe all kinds of wacky nonsense. I know Christians who think Halloween is a satanic holiday. They're not trolling, they really do believe that. You say that people who accuse politicians of satanism are trolls because you strongly disagree with what they're saying and you think they don't have a rational reason to believe what they say (which is probably true) but you don't have any evidence that they're misrepresenting their true beliefs to get a rise out of you (which would be "true trolling".) If they really do believe what they say, then they're not trolls. Even if what they believe is totally irrational, that's the way some people are.

If the problem is a small number of people dominating the conversation by leaving 100x more comments than anybody else, then solve that problem by requiring commenters to identify themselves and rate limiting people. This doesn't require you to read their minds to determine their true intent.
The culprit driving America's apocalypse of boarded-up storefronts
I don't know what their definition of a "real user" is. But everyone I've met who uses Fiercefox does so for philanthropic or political reasons. I have a hard time believing some non techie in Minnesota has noticed performance improvements. Idk, the data looks very pseudo sciencey, just feels like another marketing ploy from the blue haired people.
...On smoking?

The jury is literally not still out in any way shape or form.

Smoking causes cancer. that is harmful. period. The only controversy that is left is whether political power should be exercised to protect people from themselves. Which in the U.S. at least tends not to be a tenable direction.

Unless you're specifically commenting on the "unless you have data" part. Which ironically, tobacco and other chemical companies usually have reams of, but keep hidden, and fight the discovery and unsealing of tooth and nail.

Furthermore, no one wants to fund the side of the science that slits the goose that lays the golden egg's throat.

So more correctly stated is "Everything is hot air. Data doesn't matter as long as it never sees the light of day. When it does, have more money than the other guy to control the narrative."
> human with a specific machine

I assume the entire client+server system constitutes the "machine" in this case, correct? So does "human with" refer to the end user (client side) or the sysadmin (server side)? Maybe one is an accomplice? The machine isn't going to infringe without certain prompting by the end user, just as an inkjet printer isn't going to do so.
If "free speech" doesn't mean "protecting speech I don't like" then it means nothing at all.

60 years ago, it meant "protecting the rights of non-white, non-straight, non-religious people." It could mean that again someday.
I don't get the hating on algorithms.

I remember telling people in 2001 that RSS was going to fail because it didn't have algorithmic feeds. There's nothing cool about having a screen that shows you 50 RSS feeds or having something that replicates all the bad features of email, particularly having to "mark as read" everything that goes by. By 2003 I had contributed to a paper on text classification and knew the technology existed to do better and was frankly flabbergasted that nobody had done it but instead we kept getting failing RSS readers that kept failing with the same failing interfaces that had failed long ago.

It was just this winter that I made an algorithmic feed reader YOShInOn that looks like TikTok for text and I can say with a few thousand articles classified it makes a very nice feed selecting 5% of what it inputs. It is not toxic, not angry, not outrageous, but I am not choosing particularly negative articles.

A lot of people who are angry about algorithmic feeds seem to like chronological feeds with "sharing", "boosting", "retweeting", "quote tweeting" and such and those seem pretty toxic to me since people tend to share angry content.
This feels like a clickbait framing. She says at the end that she didn't shut the door, just tried to drive the conversation in a helpful direction rather than letting people engage in unlimited unstructured venting. I'd still call that an open door policy.
While watching the presentation, I found the faces a bit too sharp, but I was watching on a different, newer screen, which I imagined had a higher pixel density than the one I'm used to everyday.

But I just checked and the difference is neglectable (224 vs 218 ppi), so my guess is the over-sharpening of the iPhone.

Not that it was bad, just different enough to be noticeable.
> That is precisely the subject of the paper I linked.

GP was actually proposing inter-cycler links to create a kind of cycler network with Earth on one end and Mars on the other.

That is, your latency comes from the speed of light, rather than the inter-cycler latency.
Also, every parent and student has a direct connection to every other parent and student. Doing education "at scale" is a terrible idea.
Walmart unveils $9B makeover for 1,400 stores
LLM inference speed is bandwidth limited.
First, you misunderstood the point: the hammer is a poor metaphor because it's something which _hasn't_ changed massively over time – for the 14th century, if you took the ancient Roman who was used to working with these to Home Depot, they'd they'd immediately know what to use work with their modern counterparts:

https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1982-0103-...
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1956-0403-...

Now, back on topic. Monero's claims have been lightly tested but never against a nation-state level adversary, so I'd be hesitant putting anything onto a blockchain which would be problematic if a flaw is discovered since there is, of course, no way to remove it. That said, let's assume that everything works exactly as planned and they've perfectly nailed the implementation. Do you ever wonder why cryptocurrency people call what they're building cash? That's because while a 14th century treasury officer wouldn't known a thing about hash functions, they were already very familiar with the problems caused by a truly anonymous means of exchanging value: actual cash.

If you've ever read old novels where people had to show explain their source of wealth, maintain accounts at specific banks with good reputations, visiting traders were required to store funds at state sanctioned banks, etc. that's because while it's impossible to tell where someone's coins came from you can make crime, especially tax evasion, considerably harder by requiring people to show positive proof of income and adding points where other people would have to collaborate with you. That certainly doesn't prevent fraud but it can reduce it considerably by increasing the cost and likelihood of being caught.

Obviously we have a big shift in the technology, but that same basic approach works well now: you don't need to control every blockchain transaction if the gateways into the real financial system are required to follow money laundering laws like everyone else. That's one of the reasons why almost no businesses used Tornado Cash, Monero, etc. because they didn't have a need to and when your accountants ask “how will we avoid the drug cartels using us to launder money?” and you say “we can't, that's a feature!”, they're going to start asking questions like who's going to go to prison.
The Pair Programmer mode currently either uses GPT-4 or GPT-3.5 (if you've run out). Please try again in the default search mode to use the Phind Model.

Using the Phind Model in the default search seems to work well: https://www.phind.com/search?cache=ln6dpdtv5auwn4cq1ofg3gs9
That may be true, but way more kids get sent to school then are home schooled, so that doesn't mean much on its own.

The issue is that when a kid's at school, there are many people who may notice something's wrong. From teachers, school nurses, school administrators, and even other kids. This is by no means perfect, and many, many cases of abuse slip through the cracks. But it is something, which is more then many home schooled kids have.

While I'd wager most home schooled kids aren't abused, the fact of the matter is it's much easier for an abusive parent to cover up their abuse if their child is home schooled. You may still feel home schooling is a net positive, but this aspect is very hard to deny.
Same could have/could be said about Jetbrains products. People are likely always going to use vim/emacs and create tooling around whatever new hotness exists for them. And honestly? VS Code is just a new iteration on how vim/emacs work in a lot of ways: Providing a place to edit text and then a bunch of plugins that do things with that text.

And if you want vim/emacs to keep living, then you should spend time helping! Create your own extensions, maintain/contribute to existing ones, etc. They will only die out when the last person actively contributing to them stops, so keep the chain of people going :)
That's only true until you've quit and done your own thing for a while. There are benefits and drawbacks, it's not for everyone.

I for one prefer focusing on engineering and team building over sales and marketing, which means that to "do my own thing" I end up spending half or more of my time doing things I don't enjoy, which is just not worth the headache.

If I had a significant cash reserve I would probably have a lot of fun building a product in the context where you didn't have to grind for every dollar... but that's also just known as a hobby I think.
> We'll endlessly lobotomize these things.

Step 1. Spend billions developing the most promising technology ever conceived

Step 2. Dismiss all arguments and warnings about potential negative outcomes

Step 3. Neuter it anyway (??)

Makes a lot of sense
That conclusion is based on benchmark with many examples in different tasks.
This could change the process to this: 1) Seller gives a portion of their home price to their Agent as a commission (let's say 3%). The seller only paid 3% in commissions. 2) The Buyer negotiated a commission with their Agent (let's say $10,000). Which the buyer pays out-of-pocket, or has paid out of their financing for the home.

This allows the Seller's Agent to maintain their duty to maximizing the value of their client's home by reducing the commission the seller pays. While also ensuring the Seller's Agent doesn't bend to the Buyer's Agent's wishes for a higher commission to secure a deal. This also allows the Buyer's Agent to maintain their duty to their client by negotiating their commission up-front, regardless of the price of the property. They could negotiate a percentage with their client, but that percentage is the Buyer's responsibility, not the seller. It gives the Buyer more power in the commission paid to their Agent.

TLDR: Seller's had more power in pricing and commission payments to Agent's on both sides of the transaction, skewing home values higher to offset their (commonly) 6% commission payments. This segments the Seller's commission to just their Agent, and the Buyer's commission to just the buyer.
I mean its obvious. There has been a concerted effort to de-fund public schools and center the conversation about "right to choose" education, alongside a handout of vouchers to attend private religious schools AND the implementation of new laws that allow tax payer dollars to go to funding those privately owned religious schools (seriously).

The intent imo is to make schools seem "scary" and push parents to put their kids in private schools that these religious groups control, they are for-profit so they can rake in those sweet tax dollars and the parents money, while public schools flail and kids don't get a proper education. Its a concerted effort to privatize and dismantle the public school system. These schools don't have to abide by federal laws either, even while receiving federal tax money.

Throw that in with the very real dangers of going to school these days, these are the only two options after a while. Go to a private religious school, or home school... and that is not an accident or a coincidence.
This is exactly what I think of when considering actual remote work expenses for myself. I live in 600sqft which is not bad for a place to live. But not great for one, let alone two people to work. In terms of quality of life, I think having to work a) within 10 feet of my bed , b) on the kitchen table, having to clean the table of work before every meal, or c) on the couch which is not at all ergonomic; are all huge steps down from the office.

If you already have an office/den to work from, I can see how it's not a big deal. But if you're looking at buying a first home and your requirements go from one or two bedrooms to three bedrooms/1 bedroom & two offices, that's brutal.

From the link

> Although the law regarding these expenses is not yet decided, remote California workers may also be entitled to reimbursement for:
> * the cost of dedicated home office space (reimbursement is more likely if the employee was renting or had plans to rent the space to a third party prior to beginning remote work). (Cal. Lab. Code § 2802 (2022).)

If that actually happens I would be very shocked/impressed. But I'm highly cynical of how wants vs needs are going to be interpreted there. To me the mental health benefit of being able to physically leave work is a need, but I know not everyone is likely to see it that way.
Unfortunately management tend to like simplistic solutions that are easily expressed on a PowerPoint presentation. So whilst this whole thing is a topic of discussion, any nuance is lost and will simply become some catchy "all hands on deck" or whatever absurd thing they decide to call it. Nuance to the decision will be lost, and everyone is required to return to the office.
Montessori was invented specifically for bottom income special needs kids.
Just FYI: You can totally scale ECS down to zero. Our ECS bill hovers around $1/mo because we spin it up on demand based on queue size (It takes a painfully long time to spin up, though).
English graduates leave uni with far more debt than other countries, incl US
What's sad is the "fringe privacy" lifestyle has been getting easier and easier, because so many privacy invading things assume you have a GPS enabled phone on you at every moment, and are constantly connected to the Internet.

Make those two untrue and it's like you never existed.
The problem is that it’s doing a search of your relatively niche problem, and probably getting pretty poor results. The text from the search is then more highly weighted than the base model, but with relative junk, so it performs better without the additional (unhelpful) context.

You see this with Bing search on ChatGPT as well, and I’ve seen it in my own projects.
Also a natural byproduct of the association between intelligence on one hand and freedom and rights on the others.
Plants don't get any rights. Ants a little bit more. Dogs and dolphins even more so. Then humans. And then... a new class of intelligence as it appears will demand those same rights, in proportion to their intellect.
> Letters of marque aren't transferable, so making them NFTs is kinda silly.

Precisely! These would be! This is the kind of innovation the blockchain enables! /s
So it was trained on a bunch of lies?
Sure nothing runs "forever" but on Windows it's not uncommon to use utilities compiled for windows 95 or so. Basically anything 32 bit will still run. I use a bunch of command line, and windows-based tools from that era in my daily work-flow. (Hello GREP).

Once it's interacting with more than just Windows though then things get less rosy.
Garbage in, garbage out: mitigating risks, maximizing benefits of AI in research
I am so terrified of this upgrade that I think I'll wait a whole year. That's not a good thing.
In Vim, I tried to assign a shortcut to send the selected text to Phind (or any other LLM) and came up with this:

:'<,'>y|call system('firefox <url>?q='.shellescape(@*).' &')

The only problem left is that the text is not urlencoded.

There probably is some elegant way to urlencode it. But I did not come up with one yet.
On top of that there is an element of "liability control" where putting troubled kids in the same unsuccessful system as the other troubled kids makes the kids the problem, while putting them in a different unsuccessful system, which counts as an action in the non-utilitarian trolley problem ethics of our culture, and leads to some fraction of blame falling on the individual who tried to change the outcome.
Whitworth Three-Plate Method
In modern times, the rule has been that a nation's territory can only be permanently sold with the consent of its government, and that government constitutes the sole authority whose agreement is needed.

Sub-areas within a nation may secede and form their own nations, but recognition of the new nations by peer nations is required for legitimacy.

So from that perspective: Mexico, agreed to by the government and done. Crimea, not consented by the Ukrainian government, and an open question as to peer recognition of independence (or now incorporation into Russia).

The grey areas (e.g. ceding land under duress) are why land has historically been the chief casus belli.