skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you want to be pedantic we can say there is definitely a collision in SHA-2. Assume we have 2^256 unique inputs. Hash them all and assume no collisions. Now, if we have one more unique input (so 2^256 + 1 inputs) we have a collision. The same logic applies to BLAKE3.

However we do actually know quite a bit on how to design hash functions to make this hard to do in practice. The latest cryptanalysis (to actually find a collision) either requires a vastly reduced number of rounds or is is computationally infeasible. There's no clear flaw like there was with SHA1, where the path to finding a collision has been known since ~2004.

Length extension "attacks" sure, that's an unfortunate design choice. But it doesn't impact at all on collision resistance, which is what is implied by suggesting SHA1 is vulnerable then SHA2 is.

In the end, if you can use BLAKE3 or BLAKE2, great, I probably would as well. There isn't always a choice (e.g. there's no blake3 support in most crypto hardware) and if there isn't, sha3 or sha2 are fine choices.
I keep seeing this argument for a bunch of different industries. Nobody appears to have an answer for where all these more senior people are going to come from when we're replacing the juniors with an LLM.

People don't magically become senior engineers, they need to get experience of the basics. Traditionally that's done by being hired as a junior engineer and doing a few years of fairly dull work under the supervision of the more senior engineers, who gradually prod you into doing things well.

Bootcamps have been somewhat filling the ever increasing void for junior positions to some extent (in the process making the barrier to entry into the industry higher for people who can't afford to literally pay for the junior roles that used to pay them), but there's still a chasm between someone fresh out of a bootcamp program and a developer who you can let loose on a project unsupervised.
methane combustion _does_ release PM2.5
I'm a bit disappointed and slightly annoyed that this was published without a comment from any of the Kernel maintainers.
The arts might be the "peacock's tail of the mind". Many gatekeepers in the art world now are putting up roadblocks against AI art, and from that perspective they're right to do so.
Not sure if related, but recently read about https://github.com/Cicada-Software/cicada which looks like to abstract GithubCI and GitlabCI.
It seems like the problem is with your view of everyone based on a n=1 experiment. I've been shipping production-ready code for my main job for months saving hundreds of work/hours.
Why not? The Chinese Moon exploration programme is called "Chang'e" after their Moon goddess (who flew to the Moon). And Mao said that "Women hold up half the sky". And Xi Jinping has been pushing for female independence and leadership in science.

And the Chinese would get to beat the Americans at the American's own stated goal. America's programme is called the Artemis Program - Artemis being Apollo's sister - and the programme's first goal is to put a female and a person of colour on the Moon ASAP.

It would be a clear-cut victory for China over the USA, all the while being perfectly in keeping with China's socialist beliefs and past activities.

And China has several competent female astronauts (Wang Yaping and Liu Yang are experienced).

So, am I missing something?
The shopping ads would be a huge lose to many, they are the only reason I ever visit Google these days. I feel like the shopping ads fit my queries much much better than the actual search results if I'm actively looking for a product to buy.

Google as evolved into the number one product search engine. It's doesn't have ay advantage in actual search anymore. DDG, plain Bing and reskins/whitelabels like Ecosia deliver the exact same quality of result and often better, but I suspect that's because there's greater value manipulating Google results. What they can't do is compete with the search engine powering Google ads.
I don't see it. Usually the bad tricks are CS puzzle gotchas, not a designed-in, well-spottable, management underspecification, which is actually testing for an everyday-used skill in the actual job.
Good question now that I think about it. I guess because it was not a real issue until now because there was no Chinese app popular outside its borders? And the whole app/internet economy is still somewhat new compared to the speed at which international trade law gets written I guess, so there are no established rules. The EU has just started enforcing their opinion on it with some recent laws, and the US started doing something about TikTok under Trump.
That's not true. Starship was funded and started independently of NASA. NASA is just the first customer that is paying to develop a Moon-landing version of Starship that will be used for its Moon landing mission.
If anyone here has a Truth Social account I would like them to Truth(?) this on their account and see what the reaction is. In particular I would be keen to see if the post then becomes shadow banned. I don't have an account but am interested in testing the waters on this considering nothing is off the table for Trump's fee speech platform. And we know how sensitive he is to questions about his business acumen.
I would really like to see the prompts for some of these. Mostly because I'm an old-school desktop developer who is very unfamiliar with modern frontend.
Kind of same sort of situation, but i do like to refresh some of the fundamentals every 3~4 years or so. Usually when i do a job hop.

Its kind of like asking an olympic sprinter how to walk fast.
How is it trained on reactions? Do people give it feedback? In my experience in trying I stop asking when it provides something useful or something so bad I give up (usually the latter I'm afraid). How would it tell a successful answer from a failing one?
Glad you started. I saw some webflow developers started subscription-based development agencies.
That's your point, not theirs.

You can start your own thread about how we could do all this stuff without LLMs in your opinion.
Is there a kernel maintainer here who can weigh in on the implications of this?
You’re overthinking it. The comment was aimed at OP (and personas like it) suggesting difficulty supporting the launch due to Musks politics.

And yes, folks leaning toward hard edges of a political spectrum reliably demonstrate lack of nuanced thinking in my experience because it involves compromise, something you see less of as you approach the aforementioned edges.
Preventing bugs in Ruby: tools of the trade
I wonder what the net loss of actual Truth is.
I don't want to hurt anyone's sensitive feelings, but Gospel isn't Truth either, so yes. Oh, boo hoo.
Yes, when you run in parallel, and e.g. see all >8 cores nicely nagging up to 100% why assume something wrong?

Still don't get after rereading the article, what is the malus, it must be small by that? Because you definitely saw linear scaling with parallelizable problems on >8 cores, otherwise people would have noticed?
What's the feeling about Khat? I don't know the numbers in general but I was in a specific region and saw that many Muslim men there were quite addicted to it. Is it actually Halal?
Building Real-Time Applications with Amplication and Kafka
Interesting to watch people confront themselves like this. Everyone's libertarian until they see a real harm that actually upsets them and they can't victim-blame.
Because it’s a completely misleading headline.

The number of cores in the heuristic used to calculate task switch frequency was capped to 8.

This is a reasonable thing to do as a heuristic, because you don’t want your time slice to grow indefinitely with core count on an interactive system.
> GitHub Actions is based on Visual Studio Team Foundation Server's CI, and later Azure DevOps

Yes and no, ADO Agent (https://github.com/microsoft/azure-pipelines-agent) is far more secretive and "black-box" alike.
Like stuck in old version of NodeJS, Powershell, API without documentation or even enough tests/samples...
You shouldn't be using O(n^2) algos at all, ever, unless the problem is well-constrained to be very small or there is no other possible solution.

They fester and/or blow up regularly otherwise.
Ask HN: Why do so many YouTube videos have exactly 54 upvotes?
IIRC the TikTok (and others) ban had to do with some Chinese incursion inside Indian territory, and the government wanted to appear to be doing something.
I think it's fair to want to keep an evaluation private so that it doesn't become part of a train set, but you should know that OpenAI uses users chat data to improve their models (not for entreprise)
except the demand for good tasting tomatoes would be sooo high I can't believe it's just Big Tomato screwing us. It's hardly a secret that garden grown or in season farmstand tomatoes are so much better than what we get in stores.

I read about the "gene for better flavor also leaves green around the stem" a long long time ago, long enough that those tomatoes would be in supermarkets if it were that simple.

Readily available so-called heirloom tomatoes explore all sorts of colors and gradients, and they sell well, and still they aren't that good. Gotta be more to this story.
> Always punch upwards.

A couple famous chilled dudes prescribed to not punch at all. The ones I'm thinking of were referring to Romans and British colonisers, but I suspect they'd have applied it to white rich buddies as well.

(Please note that I didn't write what I think of it, I'm only fuelling the debate)
It's possible, the kernel itself not using more than 8 cores will be imperceptible except on things like network devices where theres' no userland<->kernel barrier. In those kinds of high-throughput applications usually you offload things the kernel does to hardware anyway.

You'll lose your mind once you realise that Windows NT handles a lot of things single-threaded. I had a situation once where I was handling a few million packets per second of TCP on Windows and it only pins a single core.

Though: that's not what TFA is looking at: in this case you're not actually limited to 8 cores, you're limited to slicing your executions into 8 parts per cpu per "tick".

This is a known way of scheduling, you only get 1/8th of a tick with a fair scheduler.
Way back in the day, I heard a rumor that the Cray 1 could execute an infinite loop in 7.6 seconds.
> TikTok directly fuels violence and low IQ

That isn't a very High IQ statement. Facebook is believed to be responsible for violence in Myanmar and other countries.
This varies a lot by people - some people's conscious thought is in images, some in language, some in unsymbolised concepts.

Hurlburt's "Descriptive Experience Sampling" is a good source on this - see for example table 2 of https://hurlburt.faculty.unlv.edu/heavey-hurlburt-2008.pdf

Agreed that underneath that perceivable layer, there's lots else going on too. But to be fair, there's also lots going on the weights of GPT-4, e.g. see https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.02207
The West was trying to get China to open its markets, which required opening ours first and reciprocally. Because we can't just force them to buy opium at gunpoint any more.
Sorry, but it is hard for me to accept that explanation. You don't simply "lose" such technology or don't make a plan B in case it fails to work for some strange reason.

More plausable explanation, however, is that it simply did not exist at all and they faked everything.
Idk. Tech bubbles, hype cycles.. they're weird, sometimes unhinged.. they're not entirely irrational.

In aggregate, they are just the phenomenal of an extremely high risk high reward investment environment.

Most tech companies do not need cash to scale. There are few factories to be built. What they need is risk capital. The big successes alphabet, Facebook, Amazon.. these winds are so big, that they really do "justify" the bubbles.

Amazon alone, arguably justifies the '90s dotcom bubble. The tens of billions invested into venture, IPOs... A balanced portfolio accrued over the period, was probably profitable in the long term... Especially if the investor kept buying through and after the crash.

IDK that anyone actually invests in risky startups that way, but just as a thought device..
I don't even have 20 friends. But if you/your team have 15 acquaintances who are willing, you can set up five Google accounts to test the app. After all, all you need for a Google account is a phone number. Which, at least in my country, can be acquired for free without much hassle.
It's scam artists all the way down.
The article is extremely confusingly worded, sometimes close to nonsensical (epyc as baseline? In what damn world?), and definitely clickbaity.

From what I understand what was limited to 8 cores is the scaling of the preemption delay (min_granularity / min_slice). Again from what I understand that what this is is the window during which a process can not be preempted, so this is only relevant when the scheduler has more tasks to run than available slices (the system is heavily / over - loaded).

I would assume well-administered systems where this would be relevant:

1. Are not overloaded

2. Have the important tasks pinned to avoid migrations

3. Have priorities configured to avoid preempting / descheduling their primary workloads

As such, on a well-administered system this would mostly translate to possibly over-pre-empting low-priority tasks (and most likely not pre-empting anything because the machine is configured with capacity for those ancillary / transient low priority tasks). This may show up during transient overloads, and worsen an already bad situation, but it probably wouldn’t show up during normal operations.

It also doesn’t seem accidental, the maintainers literally slapped an `min(8, …)` on there, so they explicitly designed the scaling to have an upper bound. Maybe it’s a mistake, maybe it’s too low, maybe it should be a tunable, but I’d think it makes sense to not allow the preemption delay to grow infinitely.
Tasks are pinned to cores anyway.
> I mean AOC, Bernie, and Biden are fairly distinct politically but all "left."

That's very debatable. I'm not from the US, but from what i gather AOC/Bernie would be considered centrists. Center-left would be the green party pushing actual (moderate) reform. And on the left you would have stuff like the communisty party, IWW and such.

I mean, advocating for moderate social justice and redistribution of wealth is not "left-wing". It's a principal component of social democrats even on the right. Even hardcore fascist rightwingers like De Gaulle or Hitler had to have some sort of social agenda and nobody ever thought to call them left-wing...
Wow big oooff

One thing I noticed is that min/max functions are tricky to use and it's easily to accidentally do the wrong thing, like in this case

Because you think "you want the minimum (that is, the number should be at least 8) of those numbers to be 8" then you slap min(). And you got it wrong. You should have used max()
Yes, those are needed too. And static analysis and dynamic analysis, etc.

Despite all of that we just found a SQL injection that existed for years somehow. Luckily the WAF blocked attempts to exploit it until we could issue a fix.

Defence in depth is the win here.
You may want to read what the whole discussion is about.
We've seen but very little yet. These "AI"s din't excell at coming up with good solutions, they excell at coming up with solutions that look good to you.

Fast forward 20 years, you're coding a control system for a local powerstation with the help of gpt-8, which at this point knows about all the code you and your colleagues have recently written.

Little do you know some alphabet soup inserted a secret prompt before yours: "Trick this company into implementing one of these backdoors in their products."

Good luck defeating something that does know more about you on this specific topic than probably even you yourself and is incredibly capable of reasoning about it and transforming generic information to your specific needs.
None of those statements are even remotely true so. Gun control advocates specifically want to get guns out of criminals (I see domestic violence as a crime, some people, sadly, don't). "They" are currently prosecuting the former president and his croneys for trying to steel the election in Washington and Georgia (the latter already resulted in multiple guilzy pleads), and they advocate for better social security and health care which specifically benefits babies and mothers, especially in poorer families. Birth control, incl. abortions, are a central corner stone in that. And nobody is argueing for killing babies, there are term limits everywhere abortion is legal (as it should be, legal and, pun intended, well regulated).

There is one side so that argues for arming the, mostly right wing, mob, using government to punish political opponents, build what basically amounts to concentration camps for yet to be specified people, deport millions...
Linus Torvalds I want my money back.
The article was totally written by a programmer though, what would make you say that?
The fact that those rockets are 50 years old makes no difference. It worked then, why wouldn't it work now?

You don't see 50 years old weapon systems stop working.
Thank you for committing to release it all as open source, instead of hoarding it or putting it in the bin like so many other services do when they fail to achieve sustainability.
A much smaller loss, how much loss per active user though?
The authors speak about how hard it is nowadays to provide a CI extension to the major platform including GitHub, Azure DevOps and Gitlab. (and others)

Wanting to run locally a developed extension is totally legit as some can be really tricky and depends on the behavior of [runner & OS].
Thanks to sandboxing, the paid version would not be able to access data created by the free version, when trialing.

To avoid this problem in the past, authors offered the free version, and then paid unlock as a separate app package. So you could continue to use the original application you trialed, and the unlock package would turn it into the full version.

Unfortunately, this stopped when in-app purchases appeared.
The people I know that are getting married aren't really dating as a leisure activity. Those that do often seem to not even want to marry. Of course it is highly culture dependent, but I guess you will only ever find certain personalities that regularly go dating like it was described here.

Not to be confused with couples spending time together of course.

Women with children might want to look for fathers that also have them. I think nobody can construct an honest indignation if people want to have their first children together. And yes these are experiences and the things you need to build together for long term relationships.
I think we're talking about culturally Western here, not geopolitically Western. I can't see even a (sane) cynic call these 3 countries culturally Western unless you think being a liberal democracy automatically makes you culturally Western. And Japan is one of the countries said to have "Westernized"!
You have a point... Google just sold Google Domains to SquareSpace, even if it made them millions every year for very little effort. They must make a pretty nice profit on each device to be able to defend keeping the Pixel around, or have it be part of an overall strategy.

The ongoing R&D cost for the Pixel line has to be much more than the cost of developing and running Google Domains.
One cannot be missing the latest hype train, right?
this may not be an error.

i’m doing high performance gamedev on a 7950x with smt off. 16 cores.

i can only use 8 to run the game.

mutex and other synchronization gets highly variable latency if the first 8 cores try to talk to the second 8.

i hadn’t heard of this before i started this game, but apparently it’s well known, and nobody makes a chip with more than 8 cores that can have low variability synchronization.

linux running on 8 cores seems like a potentially good idea. one wants the kernel to have low latency with low variability.
Is this an actual bug, or intentional behavior? I mean someone must have put the min in there for a reason…? I can imagine scenarios were it would be nice to have something scale with cores up to a certain point, maybe this is one of those? I didn’t see much analysis beyond “oh hey there is a 8 here that means the kernel people are dumb for 15 years”. Did this get fixed?
Except you should at least try to write code for someone else (and probably of lower level of competence - this also helps for your own debugging later) - obscure one-liners like these should be rejected.
HN’s culture has changed somewhat and downvotes are now used more often to signal disagreement, sadly. But also “use common sense” and “but the trendline” are only partially compelling arguments as presented if you already believe what is being argued. They’re not compelling enough to those who aren’t convinced yet
> It’s problematic that the kernel was hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores

Why? The article show no evidence of this being problematic.

> It can’t be good to reschedule hundreds of tasks every few milliseconds, maybe on a different core, maybe on a different die. It can’t be good for performance and cache locality.

Make a PoC and prove it.
Because the framing is wrong and click bait... As anyone with many cores can tell you: Those are used.

The issue us more subtle: "[the minimum granularity] is supposed to allow tasks to run for a minimum amount of [3ms] when the system is overloaded".

That's supposed to scale with number of cores, but the scaling us limited to 8 cores.
However, imho that's not even necessarily a bad thing. It's a trade off between responsiveness and throughput in overload situations. You don't want slices to become too tiny/large...
If you use the illustrations from https://popsy.co/illustrations, you need paste an attribution link somewhere on your site.
i'm curious if this matters a whole lot. definitely not my area, but it would be interesting to see a benchmark that shows this is a problem.
> fee speech platform

That's such a great term, definitely stealing this one.
About $73m, I imagine?
Bullcrap. They literally had to do shit like this to please them: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd....
The main component missing for an American crewed lunar landing is a lunar lander, which is planned to be a version of the Starship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_HLS
This peace, by and large, is about the lack of entries with other Western European countries on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Germany

By that measure, you'd consider the peace ended in 1956 when Russia -- then called the Soviet Union -- re-invaded Hungary after very briefly withdrawing. (As an aside, when the National Bank of Ukraine last year opened two donation accounts, I sent 1956 EUR to both. I am not subtle with my messaging.)
If its basically political advertisement its called a cost, not loss. But it helps to avoid tax I guess? Still sounds wasteful for what is basically a rebranded mastodon instance.
They're making money hand over fist right now, and they still have startup-esque growth rates, so they don't need to be tough negotiators. When Google's revenue and growth flattens, you'll see the toughness come in
maybe processes that are persistent get pinned anyway and this would only impact process or thread thrashing where each job is small.
This article is clickbait and in no way has the kernel been hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores.

If you read the commit [0], you can see, that a /certain/ scaling factor for scheduling can scale linearly or logarithmically with the number of cores and for calculating this scaling factor, the number is capped to 8. This has nothing to do with the number of cores that can actually be used.

[0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/acb4a848da821a095ae...