skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As someone who was old enough on 9/11 to be able to follow the events in real time (watching CNN while also following discussions on news aggregator websites at the time - yeah, those already were a thing): 9/11 did not justify the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, nor the erosion of American civil liberties, nor the mass surveillance against its own allies later uncovered by Snowden.

That the evidence used to justify the invasion of Iraq was fabricated was blatantly obvious at the time and foreign heads of state's statements on it were based more on diplomacy than credibility. The invasion of Afghanistan was easier to justify due to the presence of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan at the time and the cooperation of the Taliban with Al Qaeda but it was widely understood as being motivated by retaliation against Islamism more broadly rather than an attempt to take out the group that orchestrated the attacks. Neither invasion was justified by international law, not that this matters given that the US is not party to the International Criminal Court and has previously pledged to take military action against anyone attempting to extradite US citizens to the Hague.

9/11 was a horrible loss of civilian life and the collapse of the towers itself was a horrific mass death event even without taking any of the planes into account. But the US's invasions and occupation in Afghanistan and Iraq had a civilian death count far exceeding 9/11 and the US deliberately arrested "enemy combatants" and held and tortured them with no legal recourse, often for years without trial. Not to mention the state of the entire region during and after the occupation leading to the rise of ISIS and the return of the Taliban to power after the toothless puppet regime in Afghanistan collapsed.

That Al Qaeda was the Bad Guy doesn't make the US the Good Guy. At best the US is the Less Bad Guy. Preferable but not to be celebrated.

A lot of people born after 9/11 also have no recollection of the levels of racism and jingoism that followed the event: Muslims being ostracized and openly attacked, brown people in general being mistreated on suspicion of being Muslim, the lengths American corporations went to to spite the French for voicing concern when the US announced its intend to enter war in the Middle East.

And a lot of people think they are seeing exactly the same play out in Israel and Gaza since the Oct 7th attacks, except Israel didn't even take time to mourn the victims (or track the hostages) before engaging in a month-long retaliatory bombing campaign with a mind-boggling death toll.
do you assume that goods purchased online are carefully stored in pristine, sterile environments, of course until the one you ordered is individually accompanied to your doorstep?
> How about something more complicated?

This is still very early days and nobody thinks this is as good as it's going to get.

It's nuts how quickly something magic becomes mundane.
You still need to host it somewhere, deploy new features and then keep it running, generating code isn't enough and besides, back end is higher risk, so there needs to be a human there for insurance purposes to verify that access controls are properly defined and to rectify any urgent issues that arise. Same reason they still want human pilots inside planes even though most of the flight is automated.
I think a lot of these demos aren't necessarily trying to push forward a no-code purist approach, but rather showing how you can get basically a live wireframe going in no time at all. I think tools like canva, figma, etc will be all over this stuff and really improve high-fidelity wireframes/demos
Much like cockroaches JS will survive a nuclear explosion
ByteDance testing content paywall on TikTok's sister app Douyin
>I miss curating local files

You can just do that then. I have files in my library I encoded in the 90's. foobar2000 has been continuously developed for over 20 years and is very good at playing and managing a library. And runs well under Wine. Still, I pray for an actual Linux port. Dev is wasting his time on a Mac version.
Thank you for sharing! Creator of Open-Meteo here. It's been an incredible experience dedicating a more than a full year to this open-source project.

My goal is to make weather data easily accessible, providing information from the past 80 years or forecasts for up to one month. All the data is sourced from reputable national weather services and is based on open-data. While I offer commercial subscriptions to support Open-Meteo's servers, my primary focus is on open-data and open-access. For this commitment, I'm actively working on redistributing the entire Open-Meteo weather dataset as open-data through an AWS Open Data Sponsorship.

In the coming months, my plans include integrating seasonal weather forecasts spanning up to 8 months, incorporating more historical ocean wave data, and improving integrations in Python, Swift, Kotlin, Typescript, and other programming languages.

Let me know if you have any questions!
> People thought they were having intelligent conversations with Eliza

Sure, but who has had a good conversation with a clock?

> people even have satisfying emotional conversations with teddy bears.

No they don't. Kids know very well that they're pretending to have conversations. The people who actually hear teddy bears speak also know that that's not normal, and we all know that this is a cognitive distortion.
Be really, really careful about installation. I recommend something like this:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B087FRRDN9/?ie=UTF8&th=1

I have one and it's rock solid.
Algorithms are NOT good at detecting AI, and every attempt so far has been laughably terrible. For example the internet is already filling up with students complaining about teachers failing their school work for false positives on AI text generation.

And there's the reality of the Survivorship Bias when it comes to examples: the only times you see AI art are the times it didn't fool you, not the full set of all AI images you saw. Similarly, if the algorithm can find the easy ones but miss the same better ones, is it really that useful? Or is it just training more realistic AI to evade both you and the algorithms detection?

The idea that people will fundamentally be able to differentiate AI and human works is nonsensical from a future perspective and is an aberration of AI quality for the next few years at most. If you're not preparing for fully indistinguishable AI text/image/video/audio, then you're not preparing for the future.
Introducing Stressless — a fresh new addition to the Pest family that brings the power of stress testing to the PHP ecosystem.

Full details here: https://youtu.be/SaMoPZwdOCY.
Usually things naturally get mature and stop changing so much (e.g. some software reaches such maturity level that it starts offering LTS releases).

This doesn't seem to be the case with UI toolkits. Is that because we still don't understand things well enough to design a decent foundation?
It’s funny how it’s okay to call those things evil if you’re a conservative Christian group but we cling onto the same words as one of the justifications to kill and attack another group
It's a criticism basically all recent Nolan movies share, not just Oppenheimer.
Does the user care?
The Mirai Confessions: Three Young Hackers Who Built a Web-Killing Monster
> the same people prefering stackoverflow over rtfm will gravitate towards this way, and more power to them.

Oh! I'd forgotten how big a productivity boost over manpages/offical docsites SO was.
to be fair though, most apps are just over complicated CRUD apps that shouldn't be much more complex than a todo app
I miss OiNK, Waffles, and What so dearly. Music has never been the same for me since.
That was my initial gut reaction, this will be an utter nightmare to customize and integrate. Wonderful for prototyping though.
I feel the same about my AirPod Max. Overpriced but it works so damn well, especially with other Apple products.
A missing element to the conversation is another interpretation of DOD, that is, domain-oriented design. My favorite writing on the matter is "Programming as if the Domain (and Performance) Mattered" (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B59Tysg-nEQZSXRqVjJmQjZyVXc...)

When OOP has bad performance, or is otherwise another instance of ball of mud architecture, it often stems from not modeling the domain correctly. Only using or being forced to use an inferior conception of OOP (i.e. OOP as merely fancy structs + function pointers) doesn't help either, and ends up encouraging the sorts of patterns found in GOF even preemptively before they can maybe earn their keep. And what's especially insidious about Kingdom of Nouns style OOP is that just because you have named something, or created a type hierarchy, does not actually make it a particularly good model of anything. If you interview enough people, you'll find some thinking it's entirely reasonable to do the equivalent of making a Car a subclass of a Garage just because garages contain cars. When bad modeling infects production code, it's difficult to remove, especially when it's so overgrown that a bunch of other code is created not to fix the modeling but to try and wrangle a bit of sanity into localized corners (often at the further expense of performance -- frequently from a lot of data copying and revalidating).

On the other hand, modeling things too close to the hardware, or (as the linked paper goes through) too close to one ideal of functional programming purity (where you want to just express everything with map and reduce on sequences of numbers if you can, in theory giving high performance too), can severely get in the way of changing things later, because again you're not actually modeling the domain very correctly, just implementing one clever and specific mapping to raw numbers. When the domain changes, if your mapping was too coupled to the hardware, or too coupled to a nice map/reduce scheme, the change throws a big wrench in things. Sometimes, of course, such direct hardware and code exploitation is necessary, but we live in a fat world of excess and most business software isn't so constrained. An interesting example from the past could be Wolfenstein 3D, where its doors and especially its secret push walls are handled as special cases by the raycaster. Carmack initially refused to add push wall functionality to his engine, it seemed like it would be too big of a hack and possibly hinder performance too much. Big special cases as ifs down in the fors usually suck. After much needling and thinking though, and realizing the game really did need such a feature, he eventually got it done, surprising everyone when at a final attempt at convincing him to add them, he revealed he already did it.
A nerd can dream…I can stay in the command line, work on the fun hard stuff, just explain the UI to a transformer and then push straight to production, sight unseen.
Some people won't want to use an app, but the bigger problem is each charging company requires its own app. I don't think most people will mind setting an app once. They sure will mind setting an app every time they go to a charger and manage 10 accounts.
The site requires an OpenAI Key and describes doing this as "risky but cool" ... What data would be exposed by sharing my key?
Wow. Smart drugs just increase time spent working. N=40
> he's not wrong. I heard they cut entire episodes of community

Did you mean "continuity"?
Counterpoint: kids have generally trended towards music that expresses strong youth-centric viewpoints (rock, punk, rap, etc).

Even with AI generation, I expect the most popular music will still have a human viewpoint behind it.
It’s like autotune.

Artisans who can sing on key will continue to make very interesting things.

But also in parallel a whole new wave of people that couldn’t or didn’t want to learn to sing on key will make entirely new genres of music and also pop for the masses with far less effort.

Even the artisans will use it sparingly to enhance and perfect and speed up some of their workflows
Yeah, but maybe the client didn't want you to expose his data to ChatGPT.
OK but if it's that common it shouldn't take more time to create the final result than the time it took to draw it and render it. We don't want to spend time at such a low level abstraction, we want to be describing higher-level behavior.
Not only it's not taken seriously, but afaik the political opinions basically range from "closer ties to China" to "closer ties to the rest", with "union" and "official declaration of independence" being at the fringe of both. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Taiwanese_presidential_el...
Microsoft have outdone themselves on New Outlook where the transition animations actually delay state change.

For example, where I'm used to clearing a folder by pressing CTRL+A followed by Del, it's now necessary to wait after the first step because selecting all messages takes a while to animate.
So, what I am hearing is that it doesn't matter what you do, you're screwed, which is exactly what I said.
It means they'll be competing directly with Tesla since non-Tesla won't be a captive market anymore and so they'll have to up their game or die.
Lay down some yolks
What immediately jumps out to me about this is that if 3.5-turbo is scoring within one percentage point of GPT-4 on accuracy, your assessment just isn’t tough enough.
Mark is one of the world's top experts on practical MySQL performance at scale, having spent a huge amount of time optimizing MySQL at Google and Facebook. There's a question in this thread about whether this has real world impact... yes, if Mark noticed it, yes, yes it does. This will materially improve many common workloads for InnoDB.
Something that isn't mentioned in the article is the rise of movements like antiwork.

People aren't super into collaboration now because they feel robbed of their wages by their employers, being laid off when they unionize or when the "economic landscape shifts" even if companies are posting record profits for their shareholders.

I'm not really sure how working harder and justifying your remote status fixes these issues.
Have you seen the stuff he "works on" lately? What a pretentious use of pseudo-scientific jargon that means absolutely nothing. If someone piles on layers upon layers of concepts over many years, but nobody else uses those concepts, this is not science, not even a "new kind" of science.
> For errors, it's easy enough to show a friendly error message at the top with more technical details underneath if it could be useful.

What exactly is the point of an error message being "friendly"?

Does a sad cartoon face with an "Oops" in a speech bubble make users feel better? No. Not really. Because the user wants the thing to function, and if it doesn't, the user may want someone to help him, and if all that someone gets to work with is a little cartoon picture, that's not going to result in a happier user.

If there is an error´ in my app, I make it EASY for the user to see, copy and send it. Yes, I have written apps where an exception results in the stacktrace to be displayed in the actual app.

You know what these "unfriendly" errors caused? Countless very happy users, whos problems were quickly solved by knowledgable stuff who got actual error messages and stacktraces to work with.

> People would be confused about if single or double-click would do something different and when to do which

And did double clicks go away as a result? No. No they did not.

And btw. neither did Menu bars. We still have them. Only now, we have them IN COMBINATION with ribbons etc. and they are sometimes themselves hidden behin dsome element.
Not just simple, it's a thing I'd never even ask a coder to do anymore. I'd pay for Hubspot or some kind of form-management SaaS tool.
Anecdote regarding 'smart drugs': The most interesting thing I observed in starting treatment of my ADHD as an adult is that it I think that it stimulated my brain such that I was better able to recognise my tiredness. I remember taking dexamphetamine while I was titrating in the afternoon and pulling over an hour later while driving because I felt I was too tired to safely drive. This was after what I had considered a 'normal' amount of sleep in the past.

When I spoke to people who took these drugs in university (almost all w/o ADHD) sleepiness or calmness never reported by them as a side effect. I avoided coffee and 'energy' drinks in the past because I had this effect, and didn't really understand how people took caffeine to keep themselves awake - I thought it was kind of a meme and I wouldn't understand why my coworkers would drink it during night shifts.

I don't think dehydration adequately explains these to me, as I do take care to try to stay hydrated.
I just don't know how to think about what to build anymore.

Not to detract at all from this (and thanks for making the source available!) but we now have entire classes of problems that seem relatively straightforward to solve now, so I pretty much feel like *why bother?*

I need to recalibrate my brain quickly to frame problems differently. Both in terms of what is worth solving, and how to solve.
In some circles they are called Y'all Qaeda
WireGuard -based scalable remote access platform
Your points are valid. However, I think it's important that we have standard frameworks for evaluating the impact of new interventions that aim to improve wellbeing (lifestyle changes, pills, neuromodulation)

The number of years a person has lived is a good metric but that means if we're trying something new now, we need to wait for X years before saying this has an effect. X in your example being someone reaching 120years.

We can't wait that long :)
The software world is much more flexible than the real world (yeah , I know, you're taking to Sherlock here).

Go to a civil engineer and ask to create a building that tilts extremely on one side and requires concrete reinforcement with titanium whatever... they will laugh at you.

Do the equivalent to a software engineer or product manager and they will hurry to invent yet another framework to satisfy your request, without giving a second thought about long-term consequences.

My point is that the real world has the laws of physics keeping things in check. With software, we don't have such obvious hard limits and each situation is case-by-case with lots of variables... it gets messy.
Yeah, let's see about the long run.

Right now with the increased productivity, it leads to customer engagements that previously wouldn't have been possible for me. E.g. now it's feasible from a cost standpoint to let me as a freelancer build internal tooling that previously would have been to expensive in total. It's also easier to deliver initial MVP milestones for projects for a price that's in a much more comfortable range for smaller companies.

Yeah, that advantage may go away, but just like good "googling" was/is a skill that can set you apart from your peers, proper usage of LLMs is a skill as well that needs to be learned (and that many won't).
Which ones would those be, though?

As far as I can tell, Itanium hardware is boring. It's PCI-X, DDR RAM, Ethernet, SCSI, USB. Stuff that's very common out there.

And software mostly appears to be ports of software available on AMD64.

If you do have some machine running custom built software to operate a factory or something then you wouldn't want to touch it. You'll just keep on replacing parts until it's time to redo it.
BitWarden (and possibly other password managers) has a mechanism where you can specify people that can take over and view your credentials in the event of your untimely demise. Probably isn’t an immediate process or anything, but gives me a lot of peace of mind.
I haven't made one yet, but the idea of a [0]Death Book is one way to deal with that.

[0] https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119346
A huge part of the problem with LLM based no code is that the output is non-deterministic, so you can only check in the output to version control.

Imagine what happens when you have dozens of barely technical people all adding features by sketching them and clicking “make it real”. Each one is producing hundreds of lines of code. At the end of the day someone is responsible for understanding the output because since the output is non-deterministic, that’s all we have.
I think there are more categories than just that--e.g., kids videos.
Nowadays I don't trust SaaS and other hip cloud stuff anymore. I learned that lesson with exactly this topic. I was relatively young and naïve and left my ripped and pirated collection behind when Spotify rolled around. Partly because it was easier, partly because it felt better to pay for the service than piracy did. Back then the interface was dedicated to the desktop [0].

I still have a CD collection. Piracy feels risky (not in the least due to increased legal liability and the possibility of getting caught) so I think I'll just start ripping again.

[0] https://www.download3k.com/article_images/0/212/full_1_3991e...
> While on a drug, participants made a poorer, more random first attempt at filling a knapsack than they did after taking the placebo, and this had an especially negative impact on the subsequent performance of those who’d been above average in the placebo condition, explaining why they dropped below the mean. Overall, the results suggest that the participants’ approach to solving the knapsack task became less systematic while they were on each of the three drugs, the researchers write.

I can't help but think that since the knapsack problem is NP-complete, any attempt to fill the sack could subjectively appear "more random." Certainly the participants could use certain heuristics, but since in general there is no known way to systematically solve the problem, this study seems to enable some confirmation bias on the part of the experimenters.
> Shift logic to the application level to reduce database load.

I’m not convinced by this. What type of logic are we talking about?
I agree with your aesthetic principles. I think the difficulties and reservations, for me at least, arise when you consider the economic framework and the possible shifts that will happen. I can't see adoption of these tools doing anything other than giving these giant conglomerates yet more capital, yet more power.
The authors of the paper seem to have misinterpreted why many cognitively healthy students take ritalin/adderall. It's not to make you smarter or more able to solve complex problems, it's to let you focus and cram on large workloads for far longer than you otherwise would be able to. Basically, quantity over quality.

A much better test would have been to give all the study participants some new material requiring multiple hours of study to memorize & learn, then give them a test. The knapsack problem is fine to test some measure of "intelligence", but a bad choice to simulate academics.
I remember reading his blog article by article for hours as a kid. I had always wanted to do procgen and other game dev stuff, but never felt like it was accessible enough to approach until I found his step by step series detailing how he built his games and experiments. And all of the thoughts about what makes a game fun or what makes a game a game, the idea that games could be made better by taking a critical look at their stories and their systems and the way those interact, left a deep mark on me and the way I think about experiencing and making games too.

I haven't read his blog in years but to find out he's gone is crushing.
Great! It's only been five minutes and I'm addicted to Dune II again.

I'll never understand what it was about that game that made me play it for hours on end as a kid. I suppose if I had learned more about, even rudimentary, real-time strategy games I may have ended up more of a gamer.
New paper argues that the Universe began with two Big Bangs