skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know if I have ever read a more generic, boilerplate quasi-condolence paragraph than this one:

This isn’t a decision the leadership team came to quickly; it was the result
of extensive considerations and road mapping for our future. We are proud of
the work the teams have been doing, pushing into new areas with weekly content
on Crown Channel, and finding more ways to help publishers reach new audiences
with Game Growth. But after further evaluation of our businesses, it became
clear that we need focus our resources and efforts to deliver great games to
players now and in the future.”
I can't tell if people who champion web components don't understand why the React model took off, or purposefully pretend to not know why since web components don't really solve most of the things people using React care about, and thus look bad in comparison.

This article is a good example of this. For starters, the "one shell component" thing is kind of a red herring. There's plenty of React components that interact with children, and you can clearly make web components that also "hide all the details". So this seems to be more of a "general" good practice they want to encourage, than anything specifically tied to React or Web Components in particular.

Critically however, the whole idea of "hey, web components still look good before JavaScript!" is either intentionally obtuse or really misses the point of React -- React can have a better non-JavaScript initial render, thanks to SSR, which is significantly harder to do with Web Components. I don't really care if <user-avatar><img></user-avatar> "falls back" to some lame Web 1.0 rendering if my SSR-ed UserAvatar looks identical to the fully "active" component on first paint before any JavaScript runs. That is one of the main selling points of React and React-like systems today. You can't just ignore that completely and expect to convince anyone who's currently using that sort of system. But I understand why they don't address it, since the only real answers involve using some sort of build system with Web Components, which they've also decided to say are the worst thing ever. So their only choice is to compare non-SSR Web Components to non-SSR React Components. And, I dunno, maybe they're better than the way we did things 8 years ago when that was the case? I'd have to think hard about that purely academic question.

The funny thing is that these are often the same people that would push for as little JavaScript as possible, and yet Web Components are fundamentally tied to JavaScript. Whereas React-style components can actually generate fully static JavaScript-free pages if you want to. This sort of situation springs up a lot: Web Components go on and on about not being "shells single components", and yet React-style components make it so much easier to deal with children. You aren't forced into the ugly slot system which immediately removes the "illusion" of it being a "real" HTML component, and is easier to deal with in the catch-all case too. Not to get into another huge differentiation, but I also personally prefer a more "functional" approach of writing a single render function vs. dealing with a bunch of lifetime callbacks to track the changing states of attributes and children.
The North American forests existed for at least 100,000 years, many times longer than recorded history. Is that not long enough for you?

If we were to reforest those areas that were cut down ("new" forests), that's an extremely effective long term carbon sink.
> or attempted compilation

This specifically is a solvable problem with grammar constraints on the token output. You can give LLM no other option than syntactically correct C code, chess moves or whatever with the right grammar restriction.

Its one of the (IMO) biggest revolutions in the LLM space that precisely no one uses.
From Google's point of view - this is a worthwhile origination fee. If you lose the entire "default" iOS population, you could lose a generation of minds in a key market (US mobile users).

The more people dissociate "search" with "google it", the less Google makes on their larger non-iOS search revenue.
> “We’ve listened to our customers and we know delivering free games every month is what they want most"

There is a lot to unpack in this statement. I for one don't really want monthly free shit clicker games.
I used the Flash version of this when I was in university to make some funky art installations. Funny to see it pop up over a decade later.
If they want to not have to log back in, why would they log out?
Reproducibility becomes even more important. We must appreciate redoing scientific experiments, even if it's at the cost of novelty.
3D Structures Challenge Wire Bond Inspection
You can make just about any claim and say "because climate change" and people will believe it
Apple is not going into search any time soon. It could mean they take a greater interest in DDG, Bing, etc.
That too. But more that it doesn’t necessarily mean anything.
Know any other fun short cuts like that?
Volcanic Eruptions Caused Climate Cooling over the Past 2k Years
I've always had the sense that Google was really bad at negotiating.
No, because this solution to environmental problems is "our impact on the environment is going to cause a global depression and catastrophe due to changing climate! we must try to stop this by causing a global depression and catastrophe ourselves by drastically reducing consumption!"

Consumption that dumps carbon in the air needs to be replaced by consumption that doesn't. Power needs to be solar/wind/nuclear, cars need to be electric, things which are done cheaply with hydrocarbon sources need to be replaced with more expensive things with sustainable sources.

Trying to make people significantly lower their standard of living with fear of future consequences will not work. It just won't. In two ways... one: a lot of what's happened has already happened and is inevitable, there's no turning back from a few degrees of warming, oceans rising, and climate patterns changing; two: people won't do it.

Trying to chase the line of solving environmental problems with consumption reduction is pissing into the wind. You have to try to do things which will actually have effects instead of trying the impossible.
Used it for some short videos and must say it’s amazing!
Thanks for let us test it
I have no asker, and I must scream.
So watching cat videos is somehow akin to serfdom now.

I swear the over-intellectualism of the left makes them sound dumber and dumber. Why do they have to make everything so idiotically complex? Is it an occult/esoteric thing in order to signal authority to the masses?
Can someone explain to me what happens when there is a destructive update on one side while the other side is still relying on some old version?

Can this even be reconciliated?

Or is it append only?i.e. No delete operation.

UIs have delete operations in general.
This model isn't especially helpful. "Text prediction" is correct, but glosses right over the fact that it's closer to "concept prediction", where a token is just a forced choice given the model's conceptual representation. Given the way the embedding layer learns, various tokens are likely to be chosen even if they've never been seen in the data in that sequence. This isn't a minor detail.
(I'm reading the original comment a couple times and I'm wondering if I'm being trolled.)

Mortgages frequently get bundled up and sold as securities. That's just how it works. Blackrock is one institutional buyer. A mortgage is someone's liability and another's security.

Nothing about "mortgage securities" implies poor lending practices or overleveraging.
> It is an obvious example of growth hacking gone out of control, and while some PM can now demonstrate higher retention numbers on their way to a promotion, users are stuck with a more convoluted and insecure experience on the site.

I'm not actually following; how does any of this benefit MS? It's not like having a few extra cookies makes you more likely to use the site.
> Ubuntu Pro is available for free for personal use, but it requires you to attach a unique license key to your Ubuntu installation, which will be tracked by Canonical.

Let the enshittification commence...
Web components are only useful IMO in the case of a large enterprise which wants to systematically and consistently style a large number of applications written by different divisions in different frameworks in different languages targeting different clients.
LinkedIn email unsubscribes are a masterclass in dark patterns. Ambiguous-state toggles, need to change options individually, tons of notifications types with individual sub-modals for every class of notification...

Some dark patterns you can reasonably chalk up to incompetence. LinkedIn notifications has too many of these perfectly integrated to come to any conclusion other than some PM spent enough effort on it that Kafka himself would proudly hand them a promotion.
How did you even find that out ? :)
Algorithms (2019)
> Arguing that it's okay because you will never be found out isn't relevant.

I didn't argue this at all, and in a reply to another comment below, 3 hours before your comment, I made it clear that all I was saying was that it's a bit farfetched to say someone is going to be embarrassed in front of her friends because of the ring.
My mistake, they're farther than I thought. These are a few very bold ones in Cancun, Mexico: https://space-invaders.com/world/cancun/
>AI is trained on the body of work of others.

Not all AI. AlphaGo for example became superhumanly good at go by playing itself. The only information it got about go from humans is how to tell when a game is over and which player won.
The ONE Thing: The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results, by Gary Keller

Randomly heard about it on a podcast. Just started reading, not sure if I'll like it or not
> But my sense was that it's not that you actually have to sell immediately but more like someone can offer to buy at $X and then you either have to sell or $X becomes the new declared value for future tax payments.

That can easily be maliciously abused too, using it to drive someone's taxes up until they're forced to sell.
All plant biomass is equivalent to 45 years of global carbon dioxide emissions at current levels. You have to plant a lot of trees to make a noticeable dent.
Since you seem to have done a fair bit of research in this area, do you have any opinions or thoughts about the Multihash format?

https://multiformats.io/multihash/

It fills in some of the blanks in your "prefixing the hash with the value of the enum for the hash" step.
Is this really news? That's about one one hundredth of a percent.
If you are like me and actually prefer the substantial feeling of a heavy ring, you can get a nice tungsten ring for under $100, too!
What do you mean by "weak" and "strong", here?
Your mantra is sort of hilarious because with current technology SECDEC is the worst ECC you can buy. If that's what you are getting on a DDR5 server today, the most likely reason is your integrator has made a mistake.
I've heard talks of the toll tag companies wanting to be able to detect occupants in a car so they can properly charge the correct amount of fees when the occupancy changes the amount. I never looked into how that might happen, but I'm guessing Bluetooth would not be a solve here as it's too easy to circumvent if passengers disable bluetooth
Very chat gtp
“Google sees nearly 3x ROI from paying to be the default search engine on Safari”
So in other words, it's just closing the tab? Lmao
Is a shader really needed just to get the correct color palette? That should be a simple LUT
> The big difference is we can logically reason what sequence of words come next.

A lot of our language skills, especially in our first language, are implicitly defined and we are not consciously aware of the rules until someone points the rules out to us.

https://www.gingersoftware.com/content/grammar-rules/adjecti...

> seems like bootstrapping logical reasoning onto next token prediction and is not always guaranteed to work

The most fascinating philosophy class I took was in logical thinking, where we had to use predicate logic to diagram out English sentences.

The tl;dr of it is that towards the end of class we went over political speeches and diagrammed them out to see what was really being said/implied. In a lot of cases the speeches, some of which demonstrated an excellent and eloquent use of the English language, said literally, absolutely nothing at all. Listeners could easily find a lot of meaning in the words (by design!) but in fact no meaning was present at all.

The key here is that listeners would apply logic to the words, even where no logic existed.

I'm not saying GPT4 has human intelligence, but I am saying that we shouldn't think our brains, which are full of ugly hacks and work arounds, are operating on some higher plain of existence. Intelligence barely works, and it is trivial to bypass, trick, and lead astray the "thoughtful" part of the human brain.

Saying "GPT hallucinates facts" isn't saying much. The way memory retrieval works for people is literally "get a sketch of things that happened and use past experiences to fill in the details."
To be honest, I wish the authors hadn't framed their idea on property taxes because there are a lot of obvious practical and political issues with doing it. And I don't personally think this would be a good way to do property taxes on owner-occupied housing. I only brought it up originally because I think a lot of issues with it are irrelevant when applied in the domain of intangible economic assets like patents. In that particular domain I think the overriding principle of intellectual property law should be to maximize economic efficiency.
Unless we mean in different places, I'm pretty sure it's bad for industry too;, ex. a part only having a single supplier is a risk to every downstream consumer of that part.
Not sure, but I remember clearly this Simon Wardley (of Wardley mapping) blogpost from 2016, which thinks Amazon's Lumberyard will kill Unity and Unreal (amongst others) by doing their normal Amazon play for game development.

https://blog.gardeviance.org/2016/02/what-to-do-about-amazon...

That didn't happen - these predictions and strategies don't always work.
Simard showed that birch trees favor a more benign fungus in the soil over a pathogenic cousin. When you cut the birches, within a few years the balance shifts and other trees start to succumb.

I wonder if the pinyon is working like that or if it’s polyphenols of some sort being exchanged through the food web.
https://hnhiring.com/trends

wow the job market sucks right now
Show HN: Best curation of resources for math, physics, computers, persuasion+
I'm sure many of you are familiar with what Naval Ravikant wrote in his famous “How to Get Rich” thread on Twitter/X back in 2018. In it, he recommended learning these subjects: math, physics, computers, microeconomics, game theory, and persuasion.

I spent the last few years curating the best resources for myself, and now I would like to share these materials with everyone. You can find it at the url I provided.

I hope the community here finds it useful, and if you have any recommendations for resources to add I would greatly appreciate it.
The person in that photo has a very Moss-esque esthetic ;)

The m68881 and m68882 are very good FPUs, and m68882s have continued to be made all the way through at least 2012, apparently. I recently bought one that was made in 2012 with Motorola, not Freescale, markings.
LinkedIn's search drives me nuts. If I search for something specific like "Vulkan", I get flooded with "promoted" job postings that don't contain the word I searched for.
> For example, one very important difference is that DNA can be edited and lose history, unlike blockchain, but an intact fossil record could be used to infer how those edits came in over time and space, kind of like an incomplete distributed ledger.

That is a very good point.

It is true that editing blockchain completely destroys the chain, and editing DNA in very specific ways does not. I was thinking (when I wrote it) that because of the way the genes interact it can be completely destructive to take only a single piece of DNA. But, as you correctly point out, we do that all the time. So, yes, the blockchain analogy only partially fits.

Thank you.
Well, I'm from here, but I do think about retiring abroad. I'm not sure about navigating another culture and language, but I suppose I could learn.
DDG is Bing. They use their API
Prime Gaming was primarily providing in-game content for Prime members in games like GTA 5, as well as monthly free games. There were efforts to turn it in to a publishing arm like Netflix is doing but as far as I know they have been shuttered.
It also completely ignores the personal aspect of value. If I lived next door to my sister that is value for me since she can watch the kids if I need to run out for something but she won't do that for anyone else. Likewise sentimental value, a 4th generation home can influence people's price a lot.
Rideshares (aka carpooling, not a separate paid-for service) for long distances, and bicycles for short distances are great ways to drastically increase mobility for cheap.

The only time you don't get a "viable solution for lower income residents of most cities" is when you try to place a residence stupidly far from work.
This is also the work that introduced the idea of the game theoretical focal point, aka Schelling point

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory)
My concern is that large corporations will slowly start pushing for taxes and restrictions putting limitations on natural proteins like meat so they can then sell their patented meat sources
> they're suggesting this because it would be easier to deploy (in places that have a SHA-2 implementation but not SHA-3), not for reasons related to security

That’s a bit absurd, right? Sure, the NSA didn’t overtly say, “we propose you use SHA-2 because we can break it.” That doesn’t mean it’s secure against them.

We can’t look at their stated justification for supporting one algorithm over another because the NSA lies. Their very _purpose_ as an organization is to defeat encryption, and one tactic is to encourage the industry to use something they can defeat while reassuring people it’s secure. We need to look at their recommendations with a lot of suspicion and assume an ulterior motive.
Except this is not exactly what LLMs do. This is quickly crossing into an anthropomorphism fallacy.

The thing that matters most is how accurate (or not) the LLM is, regardless of how it arrived at its output.

A human doing improv bears some surface level resemblance to an LLM processing text, but neither the context nor the mechanics are actually similar, nor are the theoretical limits of computing power.

The broader point is that this mental model doesn’t help us better understand LLMs, and as LLMs continue to improve, any resemblance to “improv” will be less and less relevant (not to mention inaccurate).
Seems like a decent incentive for them to continue investing in Android
This comment is becoming a bit of a meme on these layoff threads. This paragraph actually seems less bullshit than many of the corporate messages around layoffs. “This was not a decision we take lightly, and we’re proud of the work these teams have accomplished, but we believe that if we are to succeed we need to take the business in a different direction.”

How would you improve it?
I agree, it is not a contradiction. But usually those who bring up doing next-token prediction imply that it is a contradiction.

Also, there is often some confusion between consciousness and understanding. LLMs clearly understand on some level, within certain intrinsic and extrinsic constraints, but of course there is no consciousness there.
See https://archive.is/r1O38
> Every other kind of software regularly gets vulnerabilities; are LLMs worse?

This makes it sound like all software sees vulnerabilities at some equivalent rate. But that's not the case. Tools and practices can be more formal and verifiable or less so, and this can effect the frequency of vulnerabilities as well as the scope of failure when vulnerabilities are exposed.

At this point, the central architecture of LLM's may be about the farthest from "formal and verifiable" as we've ever seen a practical software technology.

They have one channel of input for data and commands (because commands are data), a big black box of weights, and then one channel of output. It turns out you can produce amazing things with that, but both the lack of channel segregation on the edges, and the big black box in the middle, make it very hard for us to use any of the established methods for securing and verifying things.

It may be more like pharmaceutical research than traditional engineering, with us finding that effective use needs restricted access, constant monitoring for side effects, allowances for occasional catastrophic failures, etc -- still extremely useful, but not universally so.
Thanks, Dolt it awesome. I think it's probably the only DBS with branching/merging capabilities as of now.

Sirix from the ground up was built having (bi)temporality and easy audits / append-only paradigm in mind.

The other very similar DBS in this regard seems to be Datomic (as it also uses a persistent index structure), but it doesn't version the pages itself.
That's not even close to the actual meaning of return on investment.
Quite a few comments imply that asking for something in writing is mark of distrust. I ask for things in writing because I often forget. Run into manager in kitchen and he or she asks a question. It's not like I had nothing to do, I was probably taking a break from another task I needed to finish. By the time I am done with task I was working on the corridor conversation is now blurred. So I need it in writing as a reminder. I could also meet two managers on my walk to get coffee and get to vague requests. I am that employee, if you want something from me put it in writing.
This is a whole different tangent, but I could go on about

1: That psychiatrists can give you a lifetime diagnosis, without your consent to doing so, or agreement as to the diagnosis, with demonstrably negative social and legal consequences, without your consent or ability to remove the diagnosis from your medical history (barring exceptional circumstances). Being gay/trans already had to be removed as mental health conditions due to psychiatrists admitting they were only hurting them by labelling them mentally ill, but they fixed this by deeming these things as NOT mental health problems, but still not actually giving people the ability to refuse to consent to a diagnosis which would have prevented much of the harm to begin with.

This is then reinforced by scheduling and denying access to useful medicines like amphetamines and insurance coverage UNLESS you accept a legally and socially consequential label of being mentally disordered first, so even if people had the choice not to be labelled as disordered, they may not take it anyways because they will live a lower quality of life if they do not accept that label. I have NO idea how to solve this issue.

2: the whole involuntary hold thing. This I won’t get into that much, because it’s one thing to come up with a morally self-righteous take on this issue, and it’s another to deal with the reality that some people if left to their own devices WILL hurt themselves. Also there really is a lot of due process around this matter, the problems are really around the details and implementation. I have NO idea how to solve this issue.
Not an issue, just invert each recorded gesture and add it to the same symbol.