skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't know, after having used Elm and seeing the community accused of "hostile attacks" by one of the main contributors (who is the creator of Roc now) [0], I don't feel that it's worth my time to put into learning it, even if it is objectively good; I simply cannot know what the creators will do (or refuse to do, in the case of Elm) in the future, especially in a BDFL governance paradigm. This was in fact why I stopped using Elm after a while, it didn't seem like they wanted to ever address the issues they had, or even to acknowledge them as issues in the first place.

I know in my linked [0] that Feldman has since apologized, if only because the comment was being linked to so often [1], but again, why not use any other language where the creators are not so hostile, some even going so far as to say that they "wouldn't trust anything that Richard Feldman was involved in. He was instrumental in making the Elm community a hostile and unwelcoming place."?

[0] https://github.com/gdotdesign/elm-github-install/issues/62#i... (check the edit history)

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
It's absolutely insane that Copyright can have anything to do with repairs in the first place.

We have structured practically every legal framework in the digital world around the DMCA. What's our answer to fraud? Copyright. What's our answer to privacy violations? Copyright. What's our answer to libel? Copyright. Free software? Copyright.

This system only helps for a handful of corporations; at the expense of the rest of us. It's time to scrap Copyright and start over.
Satya is looking like a genius here. How much has MS stock gone up since that tweet?
The 5-second wait is the issue, not the means it was obtained -- a fixed wait time either wastes the user's time (by making it take longer than necessary) or is prone to bugs (if the awaited task takes >5 seconds, then the end of the timer will likely break). The better question is _why_ a 5-second wait was necessary, and there's almost certainly a better way to handle that need without the fixed wait time.
>"I'm all for 'don't attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence' but I don't believe Google is that incompetent.

They might be that indifferent though. If everyone in an organization knows that there are no repercussions to being incompatible with a particular entity, they will spend no time ensuring such compatibility. Entropy will do the rest.

Sometimes an anticompetitive situation can evolve without anyone taking an assertive action.
Humans don’t add up. At the end of the day, this is a very human saga in all its messiness, contradictions, and selective incompetence. Maybe in the future we’ll let AIs handle this kind of thing.
I love the idea and really hope it happens. I feel like all the political parties are on the same page in needing this. The problem seems to be more practical or the fear of being the first one to follow through on a large scale.
If everything in this article is true, then it sounds like OpenAI is done

- Lost all their key people
- Lost some or all of the handouts Microsoft was giving them, potentially more
- Microsoft has full rights (commercial?) to all of their IP
ActivityPub is basically RSS but more complicated (necessarily, to support its goals). It's "Less Simple Syndication".
But employees are motivated by money and the perspective of more. That kinda casts doubt on the whole angle really. At least in my book.
No, in many cases one needs to set them interactively.

Consider for instance something as simple a implementing a shell. Such a program needs to be able to set the environment based on user interaction and this change needs to show up in /proc/$pid/env.
At Microsoft they call this “doing a Nokia manoeuvre”
I'm pretty sure the last point about the makeup of the board is quite common, its often random people who are former or current executive of similar companies. In this case 3 members recently quit leading to the current majority.
> Most hospitals are nonprofits, yet they still make substantial profits and overcharge customers.

Are you talking about American hospitals?
The most surprising aspect of it all is complete lack of perceptible criticism towards US authorities! We were shown this exciting play as old as world itself— a genius scientist being politically exploited using some good old pride and envy. The brave board of "totally independent" NGO patriots, one of whom is referred to, by insiders, as wielding influence comparable to USAF colonel[1] who brand themselves as new regime that will return OpenAI to its former moral and ethical glory.

The first thing they had to do, of course, was get rid of the greedy capitalist Altman; they were probably going to put in his place their nominal ideological leader Sutzkever, commonly referred to in various public communications as "true believer". What does he believe in? In the coming of literal superpower, and quite particular one at that; in this case we are talking about AGI. There is no denying that this is religious language, despite otherwise modern, technological setting. The belief structure here is remarkably interlinked across a whole network of well-connected and fast-growing startups. You can infer this from side-channel discourse re: adjacent "believers", see [2].

Roughly speaking, and based from my experience, and please give me some leeway as English is not my native language, what I see is all the infallible markers of operative work; I can see security officers, their agents, as well as their methods of work. If you are a hammer, everything around you looks like a nail. If you are an officer in the Clandestine Service or any of the dozens of sections across counterintelligence function overseeing the IT sector, then you clearly understand that all these AI startups are, in fact, developing weapons & pose a direct threat to the strategic interests slash national security of the United States. The American security apparatus has a word they use to describe such elements: "terrorist." I was taught to look up when assessing actions of the Americans, i.e. most often than not we're expecting nothing except the highest level of professionalism, leadership, analytical prowess. I personally struggle to see how running parasitic virtual organisations in the middle of downtown SFO and re-shuffling agent networks in key AI enterprises as blatantly as we had seen over the weekend— is supposed to inspire confidence in US policy-making. Thus, in a tech startup in the middle of San Francisco, where it would seem there shouldn’t be any terrorists, or otherwise ideologues in orange rags, they sit on boards and stage palace coups. Horrible!

I believe that US state-side counterintelligence shouldn't meddle in natural business processes in the US, and instead make their policy on this stuff crystal clear using normal, legal means. Let's put a stop to this soldier mindset where you fear any thing that you can't understand. AI is not a weapon, and AI startups are not some terrorist cells for them to run.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38330819

[2]: https://nitter.net/jeremyphoward/status/1725712220955586899
I have a strange feeling that all of this is about selling OpenAI to Microsoft. I mean is it that unlikely? Everything is pointing in that direction, and maybe there was a loophole that allowed this to happen in a way that doesn't make it seem like Microsoft were the ones doing the push.

We have to be honest with ourselves and realize that these are billion/trillion dollar companies we're talking about here, with some of the "smartest" people at the helm. I totally see how an acquisition could be swiped through the means of saying that these people were inexperienced.

Disclaimer: I'm totally talking out of my butt here, as we all are.
Mysterious Respiratory Illness Affects Dogs in Multiple States