skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not opposed. In addition.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39664212.amp

The reason governments finally have gone hardball on crypto was the realization that it created an incentive for people to bet against and ultimately attack the shared economic system.

Silicon Valley bank run triggered by investors with well known crypto exposure was only the final straw
The compounds and molecules involved in giving cannabis its unique scent
You could, but I'm positive that statisticians much smarter than me have devised a test tunable to any sensitivity one desires. The real question is, "What's our threshold of sensitivity, and what are the FPR and FNRs are we willing to endure?"
Real estate sort of has insider trading laws, but in the opposite direction. If you know your building has a defect, you have to disclose it to any potential buyers. It's not exactly the same as a ban on insider trading, but it basically prevents the sort of insider trading where you know something bad is going to happen and so you dump the stock. Also there's a technical point: "insider" has a specific meaning (ie. an employee having material non public information). For real estate, commodities or crypto, it basically doesn't exist.
> I'm also unsure why you think whichever human is "replacing" Woz in this hypothetical is going to up the level of diversity.

My "all kinds" cite wasn't meant to be about diversity per se, but about new people.
Additionally, youth brings with it a native understanding that age (barring possible global amnesia) can't.

> I'm not Steve Wozniak so if I did want him to be immortal I'm pretty sure that would not be selfishness.

I'm not trying to pull the Nazi card here, it's just the first parallel I can think of: Hitler wasn't blonde haired nor particularly tall, yet his desire for a race of tall, blonde, blue-eyed Aryans was still egocentric.

> Intelligent life is not zero-sum

No, for many other sentient terrestrial species, and even non-sentient ones, human life is negative sum.

Regardless, human society would have to fragment quite a bit for older folks in this hypothetical world of immortality to not dominate opportunities for the younger folks. I hope this happens, but am skeptical enough I assume it's more likely that domineering paternalism is more likely to grow.
I thought I saw dang comment once that they wrote a script to find those mentions.
Completely wrong, unfortunately. My lawyers will happily go after any other for-profit shysters who abuse flawed data collected improperly.
yes, as opposed to the stock market; if i go buy AAPL calls, i can’t expect to manipulate apple’s share price by, say, buying a bunch of iphones.

conversely, i can’t buy puts, hoping that my stock sell off will effect them being in the money at expiry.

something something market forces and what not, but the long and short of it (no pun intended) is that.. if it were profitable, people would be doing it.

insider trading is illegal for numerous reasons, “abuse of trust” isn’t wrong, it’s just wholly incomplete.
> Musicians are largely struggling while a few giant corps take all the money.

But that’s the way it has always been.
Ever heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verne_Global ?
Yeah probably not individually.

They could put investment money in like an independent index fund maybe...? Although honestly there should probably be a "Congressional Investment Fund" that they have to put any stock investment money into that invests equally across all publicly traded companies or something.
That would be a very reasonable restriction. Anyone who works on Wall Street can only own broad index mutual funds.
Goodhart's Law for those who don't remember: any measure used as a performance target ceases to become a good measure.

Or put another way: when people can maximize their profit by manipulating the measurement or market at least some of them will attempt to do so.

Stock markets are more difficult (but far from impossible) to control. To make Target's numbers come in low you'd have to suppress their retail sales or their supply chain. Whereas who wins X Race is a singular event that only requires one person (in the most optimistic case) to participate thereby controlling the outcome. In a sense a lot of what prediction markets make book on amounts to penny stocks and are just as risky. If you want to make such markets widely available you need regulation on what kind of events allow bets and strict rules against insider trading (eg sports participants and their families must be prohibited from participating).
I think it is likely that they are trying to see if the watch you returned was counterfeit before they refunded you. This is probably a difficult process as the counterfeits of Apple products have gotten really good.

When you pushed them, they bumped yours to the front of the line.
If the 'other investing approach' is a broad market index like the S&P 500, where is the 'appearance if insider trading'?

GP's point is that they could be almost entirely in the S&P500, with some minor innocuous deviation (tracking error, frankly!) and it would look the same. So this isn't really suspicious at all.

Sure it's a US-focussed index, but isn't that you want from your politicians? (Outsider perspective here fwiw.) It'd be worse if they were some foreign country's politicians where the markets at home had done poorly and they'd basically tracked much better performing US index.
Soulseek is still around
I’ve recently made the same move with a similar experience. Out of curiosity though did you try turning off volume normalization in Spotify?
The difference is that you can bet on real life events (or anything, really) rather than being limited to financial instruments.
I cherrypicked a day in May 2022 from here that gave something like 14% growth (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC?p=%5EGSPC), and IIRC the dividends is like 2% annually

Edit: tweaking your link to May 11 gets it up to 14.8%, and I'm not sure if it's just using the opening price or the lowest of the day
Yeah, I'm sure there are a ton of programmers over 50.
I feel we're entering a 2nd great renaissance of media piracy and torrent sites. Fair streaming services were a great solution. But for a variety of reasons that all has slowly been corrupted and become obtrusive. I've recently cancelled my Netflix account after subscribing for over 12 years. Private torrent sites are reporting a significant increases in active users.
You could say it doesn't matter and they need to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, and I would agree. However, it seems clear that the entire point of this particular trading bot and the project is in fact whether politicians did better than another investing approach.
Nvidia had a solution like this several years ago. Something something studio.
Not sure... Look, even ChatGPT is still only used by an overwhelming minority of users.

100% (or close enough) of the entire market is still up for the taking, in pretty much every vertical.

Technical differentiation is only a small piece of the pie ; I think the game is about reach first.

It's a race to a billion users (or for B2B like us, maybe a race to a million), and a race to the best value (problem solved + UX) ; not a race to the best tech specs.
This feels like a disingenuous take on TFA's in-passing reference.

Spotify spending USD$100-$200 million on, say, that particular angertainment professional got a lot of people riled up because a) he's actively, demonstrably harmful, b) they had zero interest in patronising him, let along listening to him, but mostly c) their subscription costs had gone up to cover this indefensible payment.

Like TFA, I get my podcasts elsewhere, partly because the spotify app is unwieldy for music, but just plain user hostile for podcasts - but I'd appreciate a multi-tiered service offering from Spotify where I don't use, and therefore don't pay for, any podcast content from them.

Similar to the different package options for TV services, where live sports were expensive but you could opt out of them.
I bet LLMs help them pitch their MBS CDOs to shadow banks, though.
The context window IS longer, but it's less powerful. Obviously, they can't afford to have full transformer context over the entire context. That would be an impossibly large amount of ram. They're using some combination of sliding window/cyclical/or some other adjusted attention mechanism likely with some degree of summarization in some manner.
> what tradeoffs does this approach have?

From playing around with it a bit locally, LCM is much, much faster, but generally the detail is much lower using the latest SDXL model.

If your prompt is very simple, such as "a boy looking at the moon in a forest" it does pretty well. If your prompt is much more complex and asks for a lot more detail or uses other LoRas, it doesn't do nearly as well as other samplers and generates lower quality, worse matching images. These other samplers take 30-40 steps so it's several times slower.

From what I've seen though, if you use control net, or passing some guideline images in and rely on a simple prompt, like an existing video that you're trying to change the style of, LCM can generate images in near real time like the OP on an RTX4090 and maybe slower cards on smaller/older models

Another benefit is the decreased experimental time. So you can more quickly iterate over seeds to find output you like, and then maybe you can spend some time with other samplers/upscalers with that seed to make the result higher quality
The stock market is quite similar to a prediction market (on the future valuation of companies), and it's made plenty of people wealthy and powerful.
First one I clicked into, Amazon’s own AI generated review summary says “…it takes days to transfer anything, and has only 64 GB of usable space. Customers also dislike the data.”

People in my world goggle at me when I say I don’t shop on Amazon, but whenever I do go on there I couldn’t be happier not to be paying for the privilege of combing through all of that garbage. (Amazon Visa rewards card holder since 2007 and had Prime 2010-2019)
Did you know beforehand what the adjective "contingent" meant? If you did, then that's enough to understand the gist of what was said (as the generally meaning of the technical term is basically the same as what the adjective + noun indicate). If you didn't, then that's what a dictionary is for.

And again, US publisher of US information, where the term has entered into the common parlance a bit more thanks to such use by journalists over the past almost 40 years (with a pronounced peak in the late 90s): https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=%22contingent+...
I don’t have anything to gain either from my position.

The issue with the articles (I can find more from earlier years) is that they’ve been saying the same thing using a variety short term rationale for decades.

imo The EU in general and even internally within Germany itself has fears of a resurgent Germany given its past, which makes sense

https://carnegieeurope.eu/2014/03/14/foundations-of-german-p...

I think I got the main idea from Peter Zeihan, but I can’t seem to find anything with Google. Need a better search engine
I use Nix to manage python environments, and it’s quite revealing.

For instance, a few months ago I was working on an environment for playing around with some libraries that you’d think would commonly go together. But within the community there are very popular libraries that cannot be used together (at recent enough commits to contain features I want) due to version conflicts.

But as I’m a nix person I obviously try to solve that by going rogue. This was my process before I decided to pack it in and wait for the community to sort their shit out:

1. Pull projects at their latest commit instead. This is the “hope the communities already have their shit sorted out” method. nope, no luck.

2. Write a patch that changes the older requirement. Maybe it is API compatible? LOL no such luck.

3. Write a patch that changes the outdated dependency name to some random name, then add an expression to map the outdated dependency to that name instead. Ugh no, there are version incompatibility with its own dependencies too.

4. Write a patch to update the lib with the outdated dependency to use the new API instead - success! On its own. Now use it together with the other libraries… uh oh.

It has a C++ backend that requires a GLIBC version that is incompatible with that used by the other libraries. It needs this because it needs to be built with a specific CUDA-enabled compiler that is quite outdated now, and if you compile it on a newer version it fails to build because the author hardcoded the compatibility matrix into the codebase with c macros.

So yeah there comes a point where you think “hey I want to try out using some fun tools I’ve heard about” and, before you know it, you’re writing a patch for a dependency that allows you to use a patched version of another dependency that allows you to use a patched version of a dependency that you want to add to your project alongside something else, and at some point you’ve just got to quit and hope that in a few weeks there will be version parity.
i think thats the point?

better than favoring just a few stocks you have insider info on...
Binary options seem pretty straightforward to me. How are people being "fooled"?
Should have gotton the corporate death penalty for this.
I don't understand the logic of the GP's armchair speculation. VPNs would lose business if they did shady shit such as data modification.

While torrents are hashed but not signed, in-flight modification of torrent files and torrent data themselves would require a level sophistication but, again, there wouldn't be any motivation for VPN providers to do this.
That is plenty to weld with if the current is available. Even a 12 V car battery is serious business.
Open-label placebo treatment does not enhance cognitive abilities in healthy ppl
As a non-American, I always read that 'dang' as the moderator, and then it takes a second.

Relatedly, I was here many years before I realised (via that NYT or WSJ or whatever it was profile) that it's 'Dan G'!
To be fair, Windows 1.0 was unusable. Windows 2.1 was "almost there," as was Windows/286. I think we should list the "birth of windows" as happening somewhere around 1990 when Windows 3.0 escaped from Redmond.

I will give MSFT credit. With the exception of ME, Vista and Windows 8, every version of Windows was a noticeable improvement upon the last.

Even as a Unix(tm) admin, I would even argue Server 2008 was not crap.
>The SCOTUS has no business in drawing these lines.

What's interesting about the US Constitution is that SCOTUS is the final arbiter of the limit and extent of the powers of the three branches of government. The words of the constitution (or statute) might say: 'SCOTUS has no business in drawing these lines' and SCOTUS can simply decide: "Those words do not really mean what they appear to say. We hereby rule that SCOTUS does have the right to draw these lines and hereby do so." (or any other issue you want to imagine).

And there isn't much the other branches of government (or the American people) can do about it other than:
1. impeach enough members of SCOTUS to alter the unfavorable decision;
2. increase the size of SCOTUS and appoint enough members to alter the unfavorable decision; or
3. declare a revolutionary war (and win) and create a new government

SCOTUS is the one branch of government with virtually unlimited and unchecked power; is appointed for life; and is not elected. Although the scope of its power has increased immensely over the past ~225 years, what is amazing is that it has remained in relative "check". IMO there is zero reason to expect that to continue to be true for another 200 years.
Thanks for the info, it's been a long while since I looked at bitcoin, and it's good to see something introduced to safe guard typical hardware snafu which makes owning bitcoin a little bit safer - for those who have to little to rely on as a means to work around certain people / authorities who are determined to set what is safe and good for mere public - services they would like to use and products they'd like have which might be legit in the US, but not in their country.

Still though a 12 word phrase in a couple years might be a reality to crack by determined and interested third parties who access to processing well past the average norm.
Connections Returns with Original Host
It doesn't need to compete with smartphones IMO.

The best use case i can see for a device like this a hands free recording and support for law enforcement, rescue and emergency teams.

Imagine a paramedic recording all the info about the victim of a car accident and being able to project relevant information or questions on the asphalt or any other surface at night. The rescue crew would have both hands free to stabilize the victim, maybe even get the victim's medical history without having to stop everything to type on a smartphone or tablet.
The author is way too enamored of "I need" or "The trash needs" constructions that are passive-aggressive. I would go nuts if my manager talked to me that way. This is all very subjective, but at a minimum be direct, and polite. There's a lot of confusion here between directness and harshness, and it's missing perspective on lots of elements of human communication.
Buffet has a long resume.
Random example from today - we have a new product being deployed from a prominent vendor, and they started running into a ton of "out of socket" errors. This product was important to one of our telemetry organizations Q4 OKRs, and they weren't getting traction with the vendor, so they started reaching out internally. I got tagged as someone with a background in networking (though this was clearly not a networking issue) - and started poking around. The first thing that comes to mind of course, is file descriptions, but ulimit -n returned a massive number and "ss -a" showed there were a tiny number of sockets opened (like, 1300 - we have lots of nodes with 500K+ sockets opened - so this really didn't feel like a node or docker container issue).

So - I just reached out to Chat, and we started going back and forth, starting with "In linux, how many open sockets can there be at a time?". What's nice, about that wide open question, is you don't get a single answer, instead you get a briefing on Linux Sockets. File Descriptors, sure, but also memory, port range, TCP/IP stack limits, etc... It starts to lay out a roadmap towards solving the issue, answering the question you were interested in, rather than the one you asked.

I do a bit of back and forth on some scenarios, asking about /proc, and ss, etc.. seeing if I can track anything else out. And then, after spending about 5 minutes, and building context, I ask it "Is there anything else that can cause an error regarding too many sockets with low socket use" - at which point it lays out a number of scenarios, one of which is FD_SETSIZE.

So - we dig into FD_SETSIZE, and immediately that looks interesting - it's the limit that you can use with a select() call, and, even better, I get recommendations to use POLL or EPOLL (which anyone who has ever straced has seen a ton of).

I ask it how to determine FD_SETSIZE, discover it's 1024 on the client, which matches our low socket count, confirm that we should never increase the size of FD_SETSIZE, check the vendor code, see they've got it hard configured to talk with select() instead of poll - we recommend they give us a new build with poll() defined - and voila - problem goes away.

On to the next issue.

Where Chat excels is not in solving or completing anything, or, in fact, even being correct 100% of the time (it clearly isn't) - but it's an endlessly enthusiastic savant intern - frequently wrong in hilarious ways, but always willing to dig in and pull on technical threads and come up with things that I can try with a bunch of rapid iterations, and close off an issue. It's willingness to write code that is 90% correct just reduces the time, and cognitive load of constantly having to do it all yourself.
What's with people in this thread spouting absolutes as if they aren't obviously full of obvious mistakes and rebuttals?

"Power" also seeks competence. There's no one aspect that is sought is enough to to drown out all the others when hiring, at least not without an outside force requiring it.

Do employers want employees that are easy to deal with? Obviously. Is that more important then skill and ability? It depends not only on the employer, but also probably the job being hired for, but nobody wants to hire an unqualified candidate over a qualified one.
>The tumor, which contained two deformed teeth and likely produced pain and swelling, appeared as a bony mass about the size of a large grape during the excavation of the woman’s pelvis.
They are not supposed to jump through hoops. They created these positions, did not advertise them externally like other jobs the solicit for nor accept electronic submissions. You know those job notices in some random “break room” stapled to the notification board? That’s what this is and why they got nailed.
Canada did that. Obliterated their white collar job market. Worked out well for every one but the canadian born worker.
You basically can't. It's a "contact sales" kind of sale. It's for businesses.
I mean insolation at sea level is on the order of several hundred watts/square meter depending on your latitude and the time of day. Sunlight is very bright compared to almost every artificial light source so I'm still surprised that a window designed to bake in direct sunlight for hours was damaged by these film lights.
Not necessarily. If my strategy is "pick 500 big companies, and buy shares weighted based on market cap" and it ends up mirroring the S&P500, I haven't done anything interesting.
This is a really great point! The big tech companies are partly banks of human capital that can be deployed when an investment opportunity arises. Unlike money, the human capital actually cares about whether it's sitting idle or is efficiently deployed.
I'm no expert, but I assume the difference is the underlying asset that you're betting on. Stock vs commodity price at given time vs "event coming to pass or not".
House: https://disclosures-clerk.house.gov/FinancialDisclosure
Senate: https://efdsearch.senate.gov/search/home/
While the game-ability of prediction markets is a major concern, I believe that the potential of prediction markets to further exacerbate inequalities may be a greater threat. It is important to keep in mind that while markets optimize for total value, it doesn't guarantee that it will optimize for things we as individuals want.

Free markets tend to lead to a positive feedback loop. Someone who has a lot of money will be able to predict the market better than someone who has less. Their advantage generates more wealth which helps them to predict the market better. Wealth generates more wealth.

In theory, this is offset by the notion that the market is not a zero sum game. The person may be generating new, previously unavailable, wealth. But while stock performance is tied to the success of a company (which can generate new wealth), prediction markets are tied to transient questions (where intrinsic value diminishes the closer you get to expiry). In this sense, how "predictions" might generate "new value" is unclear.
I, too, don’t want Jezebel to exist.
The English plan to colonise Russia
What do you mean by "immediate family"? That usually means spouse, parents, children, and siblings. Sometimes also grandparents and grandchildren.

If you mean something like that then your proposal seems overly restrictive. I don't see any point in say the USGS not being able to hire a seismologist they want to hire because the seismologist can't convince his brother to sell his Microsoft stock and his adult daughter to get rid of her Apple stock. Nothing that seismologist would be able to working at USGS is going to influence those stocks, nor is his work going to provide him with any inside information.