skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Sorry, but many localities make it illegal for bicycle on the sidewalk (where they should be doing it).

No, they shouldn't. The sidewalk is for pedestrian traffic; that's what the "walk" in the name signifies.

> Laws making that illegal are extra stupid since it's relatively hard to kill a pedestrian with a bicycle

Sidewalks can't handle much bike traffic, are suboptimal for it (which is why purpose-built separated bicycle trails are built like roads, not sidewalks), and are in many places less safe for bicyclists, crossing driveways with less visibility for drivers and bicyclists than is the case with the road proper.
https://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/index2.php?rev_t=999999999...

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/Googl...
> Normal objects' "speed" changes when they curve

The fact that you put "speed" in scare-quotes shows that, even if you don't realize it, you intuitively grasp that the concept you are trying to use doesn't work the way you are saying it does.

Normal objects in free fall, i.e., moving only under the influence of "gravity", move on straight lines in spacetime, just like light does. (They are different straight lines because normal objects have mass while light is massless. But they're still straight lines in both cases.) The apparent "curvature" comes from the curvature of spacetime, not any change in the behavior of the objects. The objects have no way of telling locally whether the spacetime they are in is flat or curved.

> the speed of light in vaccume locally at that point won't be affected?

No. You can't tell anything about spacetime curvature or gravity by local measurements of the speed of light in vacuum.
Hell, plain old linear regression is still going strong. The implication in the title of OP (that classical ML techniques are dying) is incorrect, though the body (that unsupervised learning is taking over from supervised learning) is spot-on.
Evolution isn't perfectly deterministic. It is perfectly fine and allowed for any individual organism to not participate in passing its genes forward. It will have any number of near siblings passing its genes along. Evolution doesn't require 100% compliance.
My experience as well. My two are so different it’s hard to even parent at times as they need different kinds of attention. You can’t really give yourself in different ways at the same time. We recognize that one - being born in the lockdown environment - is likely different in meaningful ways than our first. Our first is helpful in she almost recognizes a difference.
I mean you intentionally chose the most basic of the queries and translated them into different git gui commands.

SELECT name, COUNT(name) AS commit_num FROM commits GROUP BY name ORDER BY commit_num DESC LIMIT 10

something like that is more complex and less easily gleaned by the git gui. or something else that's dead simple to remember how to do in sql vs probably having to open up the git manpages or cobble some script together to do:

SELECT name, commit_count FROM branches WHERE commit_count BETWEEN 0 .. 10
I wish they mentioned how long a full deployment takes Meta using this method, that seems like an important detail to omit.

> So, if you’d rather not have downtime with your servers, data centers, and clouds, follow Meta’s example and use live patching. You’ll be glad you did.

Maybe if you're working at Meta's scale it makes sense... But I think most well designed services and applications should be able to get by just fine with a full reboot of any single server. I can't really fathom the complexity of managing millions of servers though.
Email Variables of the Modern Age
The word hyperscale afaik was coined by Wall St people as a collective noun for FB, Google, MS, et al, in the context of their in-house data center operations.
Tell that to /r/datahoarders. Always amazed by what people are archive in that sub reddit
Yeah it seems to me like a human bias against ignorance. We have this notion that if people that don't know the knowledge that we know they must be dumb because, "everybody knows ____".

Kids are literally just the definition of inexperienced.
You can't escape this problem if you're using Google. Try another search engine that doesn't do censoring and targeted advertising. I like DuckDuckGo, but there are others.
I can tell you that's not exactly what I want.
Database systems have been able to deal with concurrent updates for quite some time now, so I don't think doing this is technically difficult with the current state of the art. Individual dev teams might not be well versed in the current state of the art, but the correct business response to that is not to restrict your business rules but to get developers who are well versed in the current state of the art.
This was quite entertaining and not the direction I thought it was going. Thanks for sharing.
There is also KernelCare from tuxcare https://tuxcare.com/enterprise-live-patching-services/kernel... for kernel livepatching. It supports most linux distros.
A heapsort is designed to take a variable number of items at runtime for given code. The n is fixed at compile time in the multiplication examples and is invariant at comptime (in zig).
I'm not responding to anyone else's argument, so it can't be a strawman; it's a comment de novo.
A somewhat related question: let's assume that a super duper ChemGPT has discovered new, heretofore unknown, molecules.

What happens next?

Is there lots of work still to be done before the molecules are "built"? How would a lab determine the properties of truly novel compounds? How would you even figure out how to synthesize a new molecule?
They won’t cease to exist unless something happens to challenge them and render them unenforceable.
A CRDT column type in a relational DB would be amazing for some things I’ve built. I’m really happy to see what you’re doing here!
I'm going to say no, he didn't know. But I don't think I can properly articulate why which just get me into trouble with an even more nuanced variant of that question.
A friend of mine crashed a 911 pretty badly, he rolled out of a parking garage and got hit by a bus that had zero time to brake. He walked away from that without a scratch and I'm still amazed by it two decades later, by rights he should have been hamburger. That chassis is impressive, to say the least.
I didn't see him explicitly suggest retraction in that thread, although he's certainly very upset at how bad the study is and thinks it should never have been published.
Yes, we've let global warming be so much of a problem that existing nuclear power plant designs are now struggling to get cool enough to operate. But heat engines aren't the only way to convert fissile energy into electricty. We should 100% be researching direct capture so that the ability to generate electricty is not bounded by our ability to cool the reactor. And yet even with all that, most of the electricity generated still remains fossil free.

> nuclear generation is a money pit - French government had to bail out EDF at the start of this year - taking on 65B euro of debt.

Power generation is a money pit period. California has to constantly bail out PG&E here too because of all the lawsuits about fires & I see this happen frequently all over the world. Pretending like large scale power generation isn't a substantial government problem and the free market can solve it by itself AFAICT is a complete pipe dream. Hell in California there's a massive fight now because California is having to alter the rules to support grid solar installations by making roof top solar less attractive & this is a common problem facing all grid operators. And honestly, 65B euro is a pittance to have such a major reduction in fossil fuels for the year. Think about it this way - would you add a $300B line item to the US budget to bail out nuclear if it meant that only 10% of grid energy would be generated by fossil fuels? Like that seems like a laughably small number. France has 56 nuclear reactors and the US has 96 spread across 60 plants despite being 5x the size. In France, fossil fuels have seen 0 growth in terms of TWh produced since the 80s & in fact a small dip. Nowhere else in the world is that true including Germany which invested in renewables early & by a lot.
> Imo the world needs to find a way past the absurd notion of intellectual property.

Do you work for free?
This is absolutely a problem that interacts with scale. With 1M servers you’re almost certainly dealing with hundreds of service owners, and some of those are going to need additional features you don’t have to worry about with 100 servers. Some examples are databases with graceful failover, long running AI model training jobs, or distributed databases like etc where you have to be mindful about how many can be down at a time.

It’s not 10,000x harder to patch that 10,000x more machines, but it’s not 1x either. Easily 10-20x harder, if not more.
Message to the World Auto Industry:

I've been customer of yours for decades. For all that time, one of my main concerns was ease of maintenance, and for that I regard a pillar to be SIMPLICITY. This article is an extreme example of why I don't like your electronics in your cars -- an exception for the fuel injection and ignition system and, sure, a radio.

Otherwise, for ANY electronics, I don't want it. Get rid of it. To me a car with more electronics is MUCH less desirable and valuable. I'll work HARD to find used cars that have no such electronics. None.

E.g., my favorite car was a 1986 Chevy S-10 Blazer with a V-6 engine, electronic fuel and ignition, and NO more electronics. I'd still have it except winter road salt caused too much rust, e.g.,actually rusted through the oil pan.

Another car I liked was a 1971 Chevy Nova -- Chevy small block, 350 cubic inch displacement, V-8, automatic transmission. Sure, electronic fuel and ignition would have helped some.

Bluntly, in fact, no doubt, I'd take that 1986 Blazer over any and all your current cars with electronics. No joke or exaggeration.

To improve on the Blazer? Sure, do a LOT to resist corrosion.

Yes, I know, your electronics engineers have a long list of various aids, assists, reminders, monitors, etc. that can be done with electronics and are eager to include in the new cars. Get them jobs doing something else, maybe using electronics to automate parts of your manufacturing, maybe making toy cars for kids.

Just keep those engineers far away from any cars you want me to buy.

E.g., WWII movies show a Jeep. Okay, I'd prefer it to any of your electronic cars.

Are you getting the message -- I don't want electronics in my car? And why? Because just as in the article, it is a reliability and maintenance problem. The electronics cost a lot more and makes the car much less desirable, useful, and valuable. MUCH less.

For more, follow the famous, KISS principle -- "Keep it simple, ..." E.g., for headlights, just use the old, common, standard, cheap, really good, readily available "sealed beam" headlights. Use 4 of them, 2 low beam and 2 high beam -- get LOTS of good light, cheap, reliable, rugged, easy to maintain. For your stylists eager to create some stylish, high-fashion, dashing, sweeping, space age, new ..." artistic, emotional expression, send them off with the electronics engineers. Just use those sealed beam headlights.

I'm not joking -- for me, that WWII Jeep beats all your present work. It was simple, likely cheap, rugged, reliable, easy to maintain -- to me, that's a dream car, better than anything you are trying to sell. Yes, for that Jeep, rear wheel drive only would make it still better. The Nova and Blazer were much better still. The Blazer would have been still better with rear wheel drive only.

No joke, to summarize, get rid of the electronics and other junk that is expensive to buy and maintain but delicate and not rugged or reliable.
The "H" in ADHD stands for "hyperactivity". This implies _significantly_ more activity than the norm to a point where they really stand out.

In sci-fi a spaceship travelling at "hyperspeed" was perceived to be so much faster than anything known to man that it would be difficult to comprehend.

The performance and cost of a hypercar compared to the average family car is sometimes difficult to understand too. The average person would have to work (potentially) hundreds of years to afford a €10M hypercar.

"Hyperscale" is so large that even us working in tech have difficulty grasping it because we have nothing tangible to compare it to. A million servers is bind boggling to me even with the "cattle not pets" mindset
Seems to have missed the strings.Cut* family added to go 1.18
It makes liability for failure more complicated and customers might link their proprietary items to toxic licenses. They don’t want to be involved.

Also, just to be frank, if you’re using a solution like this, open source does not meet your requirements.
I have opened ticket with them for couple months about this now. I am pissed. To be honest, the fix is to switch the user agent to Chrome on Linux, but still.

Even their Edge does not work, just Chromium. If possible, avoid MS login (or all their products in general)
I'm holding out for the cycle of planet formation to repeat
> My understanding is that rust provides safety guarantees that no other language matches, but at the cost of pretty much everything else. In that regard, the "linked list" example is a pretty good (although maybe over-pathological) example of the hard parts of the language.

The build system is easier to use than any other language I know of. Integrating third-party libraries into a project is night-and-day between C++ and Rust, and the Rust ecosystem benefits tremendously from it.

Energy efficiency is also extremely good, as is performance.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/sustainability-with-...

And as far as code confidence, I don't know of any other language that compares, either. You can dodge memory safety errors in Java or C# thanks to the GC, but exceptions keep flow control from being as explicit as Rust since your function can be silently pre-empted.

I see Java or C# as paying a small (and in many cases fully justified) cost to smooth things over so there's less friction to development. Go additionally adopts an extreme focus on keeping the language small and simple so it's easy to learn.

Rust declines to pay that runtime cost, but requires you to explicitly address those friction points, while C++ lets you hang yourself.

Rust also has a carefully curated standard library and idiomatic patterns, while C++ has addressed the problem of lessons learned by continually adding to the standard library without keeping different features compatible or consistent with each other.

So, yes, Rust will have a steeper learning curve, but it levels off long before C++'s does. In addition, the compiler messages are far more helpful in Rust, and the default tooling is far better than C++.
What do you mean what difference does it make? Isn’t it clear that you cannot attribute tinnitus to the covid vaccine, if the covid virus (or any virus, or any vaccine) causes tinnitus as much or more often than the vaccine does?

If the per-capita rate of onset tinnitus symptoms when getting the vaccine is lower than the rate of onset tinnitus when catching covid, then the vaccine isn’t just not implicated, it’s effectively helpful at reducing tinnitus, as a byproduct of reducing cases and/or severity of covid illness.
I hesitate to say this, but I believe at the time Web developers just weren't really developers. Attempts to bring grown-up development approaches to the Web had to fail because they pushed beyond the capabilities of most. Ironically, the longer-term result was JavaScript of great complexity, so that much of computer science has been reinvented -- but in JavaScript, and Web development has become astoundingly complicated.
Mmm. Suitability claims seem premature. Is this brown liquid I have "well suited" as a condiment, toilet cleaner, beverage and engine coolant? Maybe, but I think I should try at least some of these uses in anger before I make such bold claims for it. Reckon I'll check it's a good beverage first.

Hare is from the same era as various "C++ Successor Languages" announced in 2022. It has a few years yet before we might sensibly write it off as never going anywhere, but it also hasn't done very much with its time so far. Its "draft specification" document still has a 2022 copyright for example.

Its authors acknowledged and fixed a bug that I found in their "example" of why they don't need generics, but of course that kind of misses the point - using generics wouldn't incur this global risk, fix it once and fix it everywhere, hand roll it each time, bugs every single time.
The linked paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06734-w) in the quoted tweet appears to be from the Ceder Group at UC Berkeley, not DeepMind. Is there a different link I'm missing?
But if you look at limits you get "0" and "diverges".

And decimal "...999999" is an infinity, which should immediately set off red flags and tell you that you need to be extra careful when analyzing it.

In computers your series of 1s is not infinite, there's a modulus that steps in. And this analysis depends on the modulus being an exact power of the base. But you could make a system that's decimal but has a modulus of 999853, for example, and then "-1" would be 999852.
JavaScript bindings for Ghidra (Reverse Engineering framework)
Hey everyone!

I've just created an extension for Ghidra that integrates Node.js into it, including REPL, the ability to use standard Node.js libraries, and, of course, access to the Ghidra API and Java ecosystem in general. If you're a JavaScript developer like me who enjoys reverse engineering, or if you're a user of Frida, you might find this useful. Hope it helps someone out there!
> Unfortunately, there was still a problem–the city couldn’t overlook the building codes. But Casagrande found a loophole: He declared that since the houses had been handmade, they were a form of art. “The city commissioned me to make a public artwork, and Treasure Hill is the artwork. That’s where [people] live now,” he said. “That’s how they rationalized it.”

That ignores the purpose of the building codes even artists can die in fires (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Ship_warehouse_fire). This is especially worse when you have families and children living there.

This city of the future sounds like nothing I want a part of.
I can confirm pcmcia ne2k work on the Amiga.
I like your phrase “adverbial authority”
$6B to $18B in the last few years cannot be explained by inflation.
> the American Dream is defined ...

Thanks for the definition. As a non-American I've always wondered what that idiom really ment, and I didn't even imagine that it had a definition. I honestly assumed it was just referring to the opportunities for the few to get ultra-rich. Not as something for the masses.
Mozilla Lets Folks Turn AI LLMs into Single-File Executables
LLMs (Large Language Models) for local use are usually distributed as a set of weights in a multi-gigabyte file. These cannot be directly used on their own, which generally makes them harder to distribute and run compared to other software. A given model can also have undergone changes and tweaks, leading to different results if different versions are used.

To help with that, Mozilla’s innovation group have released llamafile, an open source method of turning a set of weights into a single binary that runs on six different OSes (macOS, Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD) without needing to be installed. This makes it dramatically easier to distribute and run LLMs, as well as ensuring that a particular version of LLM remains consistent and reproducible, forever.

This wouldn’t be possible without the work of [Justine Tunney], creator of Cosmopolitan, a build-once-run-anywhere framework. The other main part is llama.cpp, and we’ve covered why it is such a big deal when it comes to running self-hosted LLMs.

There are some sample binaries available using the Mistral-7B, WizardCoder-Python-13B, and LLaVA 1.5 LLMs. Just keep in mind that if you’re on a Windows platform, only the LLaVA 1.5 will run, because it’s the only one that squeaks under the 4 GB limit on executable files that Windows has. If you run into issues, check out the gotchas list for troubleshooting tips.
I always wonder if people making these kind of comments know of the risks. Is your dad happy about you giving this info away? Does it make you a target to get to him? Do the state actors have all of this info anyway? Are you fake and in fact a honeypot?
I had no idea where it was going all the way until the end.
> Why Do We Still Believe JFK Assassination Conspiracy Theories?

Kennedy and Khrushchev demonstrated they could work together to defuse the Cold War. Both were cancelled (one rather more permanently than the other) soon after. Both these cancellations were no doubt accidental, but these accidents did happen to benefit hardliners in both the 1st and 2nd worlds.
> This only works if you can trust the people doing the counts, though. If person B says "wow, I heard person A saw FIFTY HAWKS" then that information will spread without any recourse for A to say "er, no, I only saw one." These kind of security and sharing situations seems to be open questions in the field.

I was just about to say something, before I read the rest of the sentence.

> I guess you could sign values,

Yep! :D

> but that'd add a lot of overhead in any decently-sized document. Tricky!

Depends on the number of “things” that need to be signed.

A very big document with a few very big “parts”, requiring only a few signatures is not too bad. A big document consisting of a huge number of very small “parts” on the other hand, would have a lot of overhead in size. But in some cases it might be worth it. I started making such a system a while back for fun. I’ve not made it public yet, as plenty of work remains to be done first. But yeah, in my case I am doing exactly that. Using signatures and verifying the signatures before accepting data from others into my local state.

I even have some logic penalizing remote nodes for providing invalid data.
You should read the paper because they claim to have done it already with robots mixing powdered forms of these chemicals.

From the paper (but read it, there's even pictures):

> Researchers initialized the A-Lab by proposing 58 target materials, which were successfully realized at a rate of >2 new materials per day with minimal human intervention
I don't agree with everything but I certainly relate to the comment.

> That's the tell-tale sign of LLM content: zero substance and boring prose.

This is absolutely true. With the right constraints you can get some good answers (and many more parlor tricks as mentioned). Left to their own devices like answering vague questions or on longer answers, llms including GPT4 generate empty substanceless drivel. Doesn't make it worthless, definitely makes it overhyped.