skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If you require independent reproduction for every paper in a field where that's even possible, that's going to mean either you need to double the rate of running experiments in that field (unlikely), or double the number of researchers in that field (also unlikely)

You don't have to quite double the number of researchers or experiments. It typically takes less work to replicate final results than all of the work getting to the point of good results. Presumably a lot of the replication would be outsourced to CROs.

Though since the CROs would be focused on replication of results alone, any theoretical errors or errors in experiment design wouldn't be discovered. Replicating results will mostly catch fabricators. It won't catch nearly all of the far more important to the replication crisis bad experimental design.
If the aircraft were to be named after their first flight date, then it would have made more sense to just name them after the year of that date: A=2006F35, B=2008F35, C=2010F35 or for -6-, -8-, & -10- whether prefixed or postfixed. But they are not and C has been deemed to having further meaning. It makes the military look dysfunctional to not have any consistency and to be careless with naming.
You likely had something called a 'pair gain' installed - which worked much like DSL, by using a high frequency FM carrier over the audio frequencies to provide a second phone line on the same pair. These things were largely gone by the mid 90's - and were not that common in the first place.
It's been heartbreaking to watch this unfold slowly over my lifetime.

The techno optimism I had in the 90s has been crushed by profound despair for the human species, as I watch the salivating sociopaths among us getting accolades as they invent brand new ways to use this technology to subjugate the rest of us. These are our new role models?
Heck, even a simple majority would probably have fine if the vote wasn’t claimed to be non-binding. People vote differently when they are told their votes don’t matter.
I have fond memories of car talk on NPR.
You really threw me for a loop with the conclusion that industrial farming is bad because it made meat bland, rather than because of its profound environmental and humanitarian costs.
This seems fun! Far too few people who are all "your bash scripts shouldn't be 300 lines and have complex logic!" address why people reach for bash scripts in the first place, so kudos for that.
Technically only the not yet functional DMS-10 is digital, everything else is analog. The 3ESS is a stored program, computer controlled analog switch - it uses the same remreed technology the 1AESS used to set up call links.

Out of all of those however, panel is my favorite however, it sounds amazing to listen to, both the equipment and what the line sounds like. A call between a panel and the number 1 xbar sounds amazing, nothing quite sounds like revertive pulse signaling.

Interestingly enough, there were three switches made that used RP internally - Panel, 7A Rotary and 1XBAR - and if you go find video of the 7A Rotary, you'll see it sounds almost exactly like panel, because the unique sounds of the rotary sequence switches both exchanges use.
This is a bit of a rabbit hole. The right way is whatever is agreed, and there are many ways to agree it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_count_convention
> Apparently, the Cockerel makes a noise that signifies the proximity of food in order to entice the hens into the farmyard, so that he can mate with them. In essence, it is genetically bred into the animal kingdom, that the better the liar the chicken is, the more likely it is that his genes will be spread. The ultimate, in many ways for any life forms meaning of existence.

Falling for the deceit is not actually bad, because you want to mate with the liar that gets away with it the best. If the male chicken then grow up to be the best liars, the hen wins.

Interestingly, this probably means it's only a winning strategy if you are good at identifying liars. If you are easily pursuaded by the worst liars, there is no benefit.

Like in investing: I want to invest in a company which can pursuade me, the same way I want them to pursuade the next investor, whom I can sell to. (It also means there is no incentive to expose the best liars, which creates a positive feedback loop of lauding them instead, allowing them to lie to the next person.)
"Pyra Labs launched Blogger on August 23, 1999." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogger_(service)

I think those of us that remember the Internet from 20 years ago think of Blogger as the company and CMS and blogspot.com as merely the hosting domain.
Show HN: Ranking LLMs by Usage over Time
Hey HN,

We've been building a multi-model API for LLMs called OpenRouter since we launched the Window AI extension in April this year [0].

The events of the last week make it clear the LLM landscape is unpredictable, so LLM aggregators are picking up interest. Unlike others, we're making a router on top of a public, explorable dataset.

We recently built a way to rank and visualize this data, including the token counts we see going to and from different models, both open-sourced (like Llama, Mistral, finetunes, and variants) and closed-sourced (OpenAI, Anthropic).

The API supports
- 50+ different models: [0]
- Consolidated payments for all models
- OAuth, so users can pay for usage directly
- Upstream latency/throughput tracking
- Multiple providers per model, for redundancy (downtime happens!)
- Prompt compression, so you don't have to worry as much about context length

Docs: [1]

We support 11 model hosts, including our own, based on vLLM, which we've just open-sourced: [2]

Some users have opted-in to sharing their prompts, which will soon allow us to show which models are best for different tasks.

Let us know your feedback, and if you've worked on a similar problem before!

Alex and Louis

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35481760
[1] https://openrouter/models
[2] https://openrouter.ai/docs
[3] https://github.com/OpenRouterTeam/openrouter-runner
Speaking of, I created an ECS framework for use with Ebitengine:

https://code.rocket9labs.com/tslocum/gohan
I'd assume the National Library of Australia also maintains a few traditional indices and maybe there are even one or two librarians around to help those who never had to find a book (or books on topics) in a library before computers. I'm lucky enough to have been forced to do this for school 30 years ago.
Nobody claims that a Formula 1 car is a warfighting machine. Fighter planes should be not just more reliable but dramatically more reliable than a Formula 1 car.
The US restricts who can have the F-35, among other weaponry. They cancelled Turkey's F-35 purchase after they bought the Russian S-400 air defence system and they refuse to allow a lot technology transfers for it, depending on the country.
Interesting. So the Sopwith code was always out there?

The site mentions Striker. I assume it is this Striker? https://www.mobygames.com/game/33720/striker/screenshots/dos... I also had that game. It claims Striker is a copy of Scramble but the Scramble game I find online is significantly different.

I also recognize Flightmare.

Thanks for the memories!
The A-10 is designed to be able to take hits and keep flying. The F-35 is designed to avoid hits via stealth. If it is going to be close enough to the ground in a CAS role that machine guns are a threat, the F-35's stealth features are useless. How survivable is the F-35 when taking hits? I doubt it is as good as the A-10. :/

That said, unless the military plans to have people fighting on the ground without air superiority, there is no need for CAS aircraft to face interceptors or other things that would shoot them down. They only have to worry about small arms fire.
The rise of undersea aging of champagne
By answering in the form of a question you seem to be implying that the answer is obvious.

But the judge in the SEC v. Ripple case found that exchange-traded XRP tokens are not securities; even if you think she is wrong, the fact that she disagrees with the SEC (and with you) is evidence that the answer is in fact not obvious.

With regards to whether Ethereum is a security, even the SEC is unsure. When asked under oath before Congress, the SEC Chair has repeatedly refused to give a direct answer. The commission has also avoided naming Ethereum as a security in any of its crypto exchange lawsuits, while it does name direct Ethereum competitors. If it were obviously a security, why would they name other tokens but not Ethereum?

And what about Bitcoin? The SEC has said unequivocally that it is not a security, but they refuse to say what specifically distinguishes Bitcoin from other tokens. Bitcoin cannot be one-of-a-kind in this regard—what would it take for another token to fall in the same category as Bitcoin?

Clearly, some tokens are not securities! If you cannot specify clear criteria to distinguish between security tokens and non-security tokens, you don't have a valid definition.
Cajoling ChatGPT to write like Eudora Welty
Hugged to death already

https://web.archive.org/web/20231109133450/https://www.hilob...
I'd be really interested if you could expand on what the point of these bots is? I genuinely don't see the point, why would I need a bit in a normal chat?

If I was managing a large chat group on a topic I could possibly see having a bit welcome new sign ups as beneficial ...

Either way I don't get the point so want to learn.
Granting agencies, whether government or NGO, typically want certain kinds of applied science results. I think "truth" is more assumed than the explicit goal.
EU, Chinese, French regulators seeking info on graphic cards, Nvidia says
Human brains aren't as plastic as you might think
It shouldn't be too difficult to pipe chatgpt output to bard or something equivalent and ask for validation
How generous, with a conflict of interest on who decides the split. Good, most is garbage. One reason I use it rarely.
There wasn't one, but just build instructions don't make a Show HN.
Bounded by a constant does not mean constant lookup time.

Let's say the runtime of some function is (x1n + x2n + x3n), where x1, x2, and x3 represent the L1,L2 l3 cache lookup times.

A function F is called big-oh of function G if there exists a value C such that CF is strictly greater for all sufficiently large values of N

For the above example, let's say I choose the value one billion for C. Is it true that 1 billion times n will be greater than the sum of (x1+x2+x3)n. The answer is yes, thus, f(n) = n is big-oh
(x1+x2+x3)n. In other words, at a certain size of n, we can pick a constant multiple that dominates the other terms. This is in part why asymptotic functions are independent of hardware. Even if L3 cache were actually virtual and fetched over a network, I could still just choose a larger constant. If you can't choose such a constant, then chances are you need a faster growing function like n-squared
One might call it a... Deus Ex Cavator.
Even assuming that is true, I believe that comics could be more successful if they changed their character designs to make them more appealing to look at.
Well, yes, if you substitute the context and actual behavior for the dictionary definition, lobbying does appear to be a reasonable thing.
Boxcars[0], a web-based client for playing backgammon powered by Ebitengine, compiles to a 20MB WASM binary[1], and as long as the server and browser are gzip-enabled, this actual transfer size is reduced to a little under a third of this.

0. https://code.rocketnine.space/tslocum/boxcars

1. https://play.bgammon.org
License fee evasion is one of the top traffic sources in the British court system, the idea that it's done "on the honour system" is mendacious. There are people in prison right now for not paying it. The BBC is at its most foundational level a state-backed company built on state power.

Doctor Who is a children's show and dates from the 50s. There have been reports for years that BBC executives hate it and would love to kill it, prevented only by its popularity [2]. Red Dwarf is a comedy and hasn't been made for decades. It was greenlit only because the BBC had spare budget left over from some other show, not because they actually wanted to do it. As I said: the BBC thinks sci-fi is for children or to laugh at, and barely even that.

> it may be the most popular in your circle, or your mind, but this is demonstrably, obviously untrue

It's a few years ago now but e.g.

https://tbivision.com/2018/04/25/netflix-ordered-more-sci-fi...

"following the success of flagship series like Stranger Things, sci-fi and fantasy was the most popular genre on Netflix"

If you look at the list of the top shows on Netflix then sci-fi, fantasy and horror are consistently amongst the most popular shows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-watched_Netflix_o...

The BBC just doesn't do these, at all.

> what ideology is against sci-fi?

The BBC was fundamentally founded on a deeply classist Reithian ideology and it has never fully discarded this culture. It thinks its primary role is to improve the public and TV/radio production is just a means to that end. Given a choice of making an expensive period drama (what it calls "culture"), an expensive lecture on climate change or an expensive sci-fi/fantasy show they will never pick the latter, it just culturally displeases their executives at a very fundamental level to do so. Netflix also has problems with ideology [1] but it doesn't hold them back to the extent of neglecting whole genres of TV/movie output (with the possible exception of news, but you could argue that combining entertainment and news isn't natural and only an artifact of bandwidth constraints in earlier eras). Netflix's primary mission is just to give people what they want to watch.

[1] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/netflix-blackwashing-parodies

[2] https://www.sfcrowsnest.info/bbc-hates-sci-fi-a-little-less-...
Traditionally, the alternative wasn't "SO answers", which are indeed dangerous in their own way -- it was to develop, and then maintain, a comprehensive and fluent understanding of the tools suitable to your profession.

GPT and SO can help you make a deadline today, and we all may use them now and then, but consistently relying on them steals essential opportunities for professional growth.

A journeyman woodworker who just asked somebody else to perform all his tricky jigsaw cuts is going to have a hard time developing the muscle memory and intuitions that mark mastery of the craft.
What are the requirements?

Single or multiplatform? Which OS?

Will there also be a mobile or web version of an app? Or embedded?

How well does it need to integrate with target platform? How native it must feel? Does it access to native platform features?

Does it need to be lightweight?

Does it need very low latency? Is performance critical?

Does it need many custom widgets or none?

Does it need to have quality implementation of any specific widgets available (like charts, maps etc.)? Big widgets ecosystem?

Does it need heavy widget trees?

Does UI need to be customizable by users?

How important is accessibility?

Programming language preferences and limitations?

How important is developer productivity?

Can framework be proprietary or non-free?

Is it maybe just to learn UI development?
> having the high voltage always on is not possible/allowed.

I am aware of no law requiring that...

Plenty of other high voltage things are always on - for example the outlets in your living room are always live even if you aren't using the room.

The electrical danger of your house would be reduced by turning them off when you weren't in the room, but we decided it wasn't worth the complexity/cost to do so for the tiny benefit.

Electrical contractors in cars are in the same position IMO. It should be energised once in the factory, and then remain energised for the life of the car. Car service garages can have tools to de-energise and re-energise the HV system if necessary - rather like such tools exist to gas and degas aircon systems.
The F-16 has conducted CAS just fine for decades. What made the F-16 terrible at CAS that the A-10 did so much better? I'm tempted to say loiter time, but with conformal fuel tanks and drop tanks I think the F-16 may even be beating the A-10 at that. Both can mount the same targeting pods, so their ability to engage targets on the ground are effectively identical.

The F-22 is a dedicated air superiority fighter. Of course it's going to be better in that specific role. But which is better at operating from aircraft carriers, the F-22 or F-35? The F-35 costs half as much as F-22, too.
Frankly I think you have a very rosy view. If this were to happen I foresee companies would immediately start treating code as if it was a private key, using ridiculous hardware protection mechanism, tivoization, SaaS, and the like as much as possible. The entire reason code is so accessible right now is because companies only care about making it "inconvenient" for home piracy, relying on the threat of legal action for everyone else. Imagine a world where if you don't do it then your competitors can legally use your software. Everyone who isn't already releasing their software under the BSD or PD would stop doing so since just about everyone else could just shamelessly rip it into their next closed as hell & secure boot'd device. Your "AI" would have zero source code to train on. Only the companies with the largest resources would be able to break the latest obfuscation mechanisms, leading to more effective imbalances in power. And on and on..

Mandating open software & open hardware is one thing, but simply removing copyright doesn't led there -- it leads to a even more dystopic world.
The Last Repair Shop
Actually you dont need 5. just boundary conditions or decay.
The airgap option is “everybody agrees to leave lots of money on the table in the name of safety”. The alignment option is “some people invest lots of money to invent technology that everyone can use to safely make lots of money”.

If you solve alignment, the regulatory nudge required for folks to use it is probably not that big; let’s be really pessimistic and say it’s 10x the compute to run all the supervision. It’s probably mostly criminals that want the full-unaligned models, and so most entities can agree to the spend.

In the air gap case, I’m pretty confident that it is many orders of magnitude more profitable to run the “unsafe” / non-airgapped version. The utility of baking AI into everything is massive. Maybe in the best case you can have your airgapped ASI build provably-safe non-AGI tool AIs and capture much of that value, but I’m pretty skeptical it’s safe to transport anything that complex across the airgap.

So the alignment research path is more sustainable since it requires paying a much lower “safety premium”.

But I’m all for pursuing both, I don’t think they interfere with each other, quite the opposite; taking either one seriously reinforces the need for both of them.

Another advantage of the alignment path is we can meaningfully make progress now. It’s really hard to get people to agree ahead of time that they will run their AGI in an airgap.
My understanding from discussions about modems in the mid 1990s was that the bandwidth limit for POTS-to-POTS modems was about 36kbit/s, because the signal has to go DAC (modem) -> ADC (telco) -> DAC (telco) -> ADC (modem), and the modems at either end are not synchronized with the telco’s digital path.

The thing that allowed speeds to increase to 56kbit/s was digital connections at the ISP end: typically the ISP would get a T1 or E1 circuit fed into a box that would act as 24 modems, but purely digital and synchronized with the telco. So the signal now went Ascend MAX (isp) -> T1 (telco) -> DAC (telco) -> ADC (modem), providing much less quantization noise.
Same here, what a nostalgia hit! Immediately got a huge grin on my face the first time I blew myself up by dropping a bomb while upside down - a classic mistake I've done hundreds of times.
updated, what do you think?
This confused the hell out of me the first time I heard it. Taking the garbage out in the middle of the night and hear whirring coming from under a vehicle that hasn't moved in hours.
What does it mean to be an analyst? What do you do day to day?

And how do I find these jobs? Do I simply search for “analyst” in job search engines?

Or is it a job you basically have to convince someone to hire you for rather than submit a resume?
I've used chatGPT(ver 4 through ChATGPT plus) for creating .bat files. Really easy ones, it can churn out quite well. A lil more complicated - it doesn't consider edge cases. Several cases require me to ask it to generate a golang program that gets called by the .bat file.

Several times, I had to spend hours to get a .bat script working. Hopefully, it will get better in the future.
My goto folder name when I don't know what to name it is temp. I have so many temp folders around. Never seem to get around to renaming them something more meaningful.
This is fun! I didn't know that it was possible to play games over IP in 1984.
There's a lot of companies that have a combination of bad hardware and bad software and only small amount of those with either good hardware or software.
It really depended a lot of how clean your pair was, and sometimes even what kind of switch you were homed on.

Like channel banks prior to the D4 and a 1AESS would very likely have a marked difference to your speeds.
No, I was wrong. It has a collection of 30 or so rocks per section and optimizes their placement in the entire section. I’ll still posit the randomness of the geometry requires more rocks than that to find a smooth fitting, and I imagine human wall makers select rocks up front with similar geometries before even beginning out of thousands of rocks then optimizes their placement during construction in a similar but less preside way than the machine.

If you watch the video closer than I did you will see it plans each stone for optimal stability and placement.
I’m talking about prevention not cures.
> An interactive shell can be a login-shell or a non-login-shell.

A shell can be login and non-interactive.

This happens e.g when starting a session from a X session manager. Subsequently a terminal such as Xterm starts non-login interactive sessions, inherits stuff like env vars like PATH from the login shell, and is only concerned with setting up the additional interactive stuff.

Similarly doing ssh <host> <command> starts a non-interactive login shell.

> However, bash behaves like an interactive non-login shell in this case and reads `bashrc`.

IIRC nope: distros such as Debian often have bashrc source bash profile (or the other way around, I can't recall) which has me irate to no end+. They even have some TTY dependent stuff in profile which spits out some error in some cases when no TTY is allocated because heh not interactive.

+ I took great length to have my rc and profile properly separated because it's that much faster not to source the unneeded stuff (at the cost of having to logout to apply login stuff) https://github.com/lloeki/dotfiles
> You want a pretty book with a beautiful Saker falcon illustration on the cover?

I don't really get where the trend of making software books with animals on the cover originates from, but the parodies are fantastic.

https://boyter.org/2016/04/collection-orly-book-covers/
The A-10 is not surviving a SAM or air-to-air-missile. Even a hit by a MANPAAD is a mission kill.

> How survivable is the F-35 when taking hits?

the point of the F-35 is that it is less likely to take these hits (hits which would destroy both planes) in the first place

> there is no need for CAS aircraft to face interceptors or other things that would shoot them down. They only have to worry about small arms fire.

exactly, so in a COIN scenario the super-tucano, which has a tenth of the A-10's operating cost and longer loiter time, is the better choice
Correct, but it's the comparison between a latest-generation warplane with a last-generation warplane. The more technically advance and cutting edge piece of machinery that pushes the envelope is of course going to have more maintenance costs.