skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not to mention that large fish kills aren't unheard of, and are increasing in frequency and scope as warming waters, pollution and over-fishing damage the oceans and everything that lives in them. Look at what's left of coral reefs in places like Australia, and a bunch of dead sardines feels downright understandable.
It's a requirement. "Line don't go up" if there aren't new buyers out there to buy out your bags, so you're forced to try and hype thing or lose your whole investment.
Not a new page, from back in July I think
I played it on 3DS via emulator. The "redux" romhack vastly improves the experience (e.g. remove the intolerably frequent help messages). Not sure if the official Nintendo offerings have ever tweaked old games this way.
Email service using encrypted SQLite mailboxes
that discussion is wild... just install a few of the most popular editors and be done with it. default to whatever the smallest, simplest one is—nano or similar? support setting $EDITOR or whatever the fuck the Windows equivalent should be and you're done.
Organic Maps has a low resolution world view, so it answers the question.
Single digit percentages are noise in moore-units. Layout has a bigger effect. So many "optimizations" in our tech culture are around removing the headlights and brakes so that the car can go slightly faster in the dark, on hills.
That would depend upon what you are aiming to find.

- The Lomekwi site shows stone tools that around 3 million years old.

- Jericho is over 10 thousand years old.

- Gobekli Tepe is at least 11 thousand years old with some nearby sites being at least 12 thousand years old.

- The Cactus Hill site is at least 16 thousand years old.

- Tel al-Qaramel is at least 12 thousand years old.

- Theopetra is around 135 thousand years old.

Obviously, some of these are more important than others. Theopetra just shows that some people built a wall (most likely to block wind) at a cave entrance, while Qaramel shows people having built large burial mounds. Jericho and the various sites at and near Gobekli show people having built cities. Importantly, the flooding of low coastal areas during glacial melt explains the rather "sudden" appearance of complex construction at both Jericho and Gobekli (and slightly later Sumerian and Indus Valley) sites. People would have fled those now under water areas quickly, and they'd have taken the story of the flood and devastation with them along with their knowledge of construction. Accordingly, we have a flood myth in Semitic culture and a super old city. We do not know the myths and legends of Gobekli, but it doesn't make sense for "primitive" hunter gatherers to have suddenly invented construction, sculpture, city planning, logistics, and so on. It makes far more sense that they'd have fled an older site that was flooded by glacial melt.
lyrics translator translated lyrics on the fly when listening to (chinese) music

rejected by Apple but exceedingly useful for myself
I didn't notice this but thinking back, you are right. Still an amazing remake though. 100% faithful yet has great graphical upgrades and adds a bit (but not too much) extra content to play through.
AFAIK, it was available in nightly. You could curate your own add on list which you could then install on Firefox for Android Nightly, and I'm fairly certain you can still do that if you want something that isn't in this new, expanded list.
I've only ever had an official QA team in one job, at a Fortune 1000. When I started we didn't have anyone yet, but eventually they hired an mid-manager from India and brought him over (as in relocated his whole family). He then brought on a QA person he had worked with previously.

I did not work well with the mid-manager, who was both my new boss and the QA person's (not too relevant here). However, I do give him credit for the person he hired.

That QA person, a young Indian woman with some experience, was actually phenomenal at her job, catching many mistakes of ours both in the frontend and in the APIs.

She not only did a bunch of manual testing (and thus discovered many user-facing edge cases the devs missed), she wrote all the test cases (exhaustively documented them in Excel, etc. for the higher-ups), AND the unit tests in Jest, AND all the end-to-end tests with Playwright. It drastically improved our coverage and added way more polish to our frontend than we otherwise would've had.

Did she know everything? No, there was some stuff she wasn't yet familiar with (namely DOM/CSS selectors and Xpath), and it took some back-and-forth to figure out a system of test IDs that worked well enough for everyone. She also wasn't super fluent with the many nuances of Javascript (but really, who is). There was also a bit of a language barrier (not bad, but noticeable). Overall, though, I thought she was incredible at her job, very bright, and ridiculously hard-working. I would often stay a little late, but she would usually be there for hours after the end of the day. She had to juggle both the technical dev/test tasks, the cultural barriers, and managing both up and across (as in producing useless test case reports in Excel for the higher ups, even though she was also writing the actual tests in code), dealing with complex inter-team dynamics, etc.

I would work with her again any day, and if I were in management, I'd have promoted the heck out of her, trained her in whatever systems/languages she was interested in learning, or at least given her a raise if she wanted to stay in QA. To my knowledge the company didn't have a defined promotion system though, so for as long as I was there, she remained QA :( I think it was still better than the opportunities she would've had in India, but man, she deserved so much more... if she had the opportunities I did as an American man, she'd probably be a CTO by now.
If history is any guide, Ballmer would dismiss it as communism or something random like that, and then go on the Today Show and yuk it up, and then, inexplicably, he would still have a job when he got back to Redmond.
This is Hacker News - if you don't want things that are interesting, even primarily, to power users, this is a terrible forum to frequent.
I'll be sticking with Postscript until this PDF newcomer gains some traction ...
We had no dedicated QA, but would consistently poach "Customer Success" team members for critical QA work for the exact reasons your listed. Worked quite well for us.

Especially for complex products that are based on users chaining many building blocks together to create something useful, devs generally have no visibility into how users work and how to test.
You just said yourself that doing them frame perfect yields a better version of the move. The input is difficult because of the potential reward. It's like doing perfect EWGFs in Tekken. I played Ivy in SoulCalibur II, and could do the Summon Suffering input pretty consistently if I buffered it during another attack. It led to a fun mixup since the other player would hear my joystick switches actuating as I did the motion, and crouch to avoid the throw. Instead of finishing the input, I'd hit them with her 2 A+B overhead instead. God, I love SCII. It's a shame the sequels kept trying to reinvent the wheel with the gameplay.
I don't know if this is the case or not, but surely this should not hinder legal action on anything that happened before the TOS changed right?
The Rifters trilogy (quadrilogy?) is kind of rough. They were his first published novels, and there's a kind of awkward gear-shift between the previously published material (much of the first novel was a fixup of "A Niche" and other short stories) to newly written content.

There's some interesting stuff in there -- if you've previously read the Firefall novels you'll recognize some early versions of ideas and motifs which he develops more fully in the later series -- but ultimately I'd describe it as skippable.
In other words, “LLM writes a computer program that generates new examples which improve the lower bound for the n=8 case of a problem.”

I’d like to see how novel the program it generated was, rather than just being a brute force random search or a standard genetic algorithm. I have a suspicion that the bug result here is simply that it saved them coding time.
I understand that is similar to any chemotherapy no? But your body will rebuild it after ˜30days.
This kind of prediction has obvious limitations - for example it cannot reverse the behavior of chaotic systems
LTE and IoT – How We Got Here
They're going to raise rates no matter what.

It's difficult to know how much this will impact what they raise rates by.
I think it happened after they closed down and reopened, they probably adjusted the recipe after that.
I am currently working with a startup that spends a lot of time on building tests that need to be refactored every sprint because it's early stage and the assumptions change. I am shocked at the amount of developer-hours spent on tests that need to be disabled / deleted instead of just hiring 1 - 2 super cheap manual testers that just go through the flows days in and out.

For me it's a no brainer, if I were CEO / CTO, until product-market-fit is achieved and exponential growth is visible, I'd just outsource Q&A and that's that.
It will get a Cease & Desist for sure.
As someone who had extremely poor handwriting as a child (it is still not great...), it makes a lot of sense to me that they'd land here.

Over the years, being regularly mocked/embarrassed/reprimanded over my handwriting and often forced to re-write assignments led me to develop a weird print ~hybrid casing that substituted a fair number of uppercase forms anywhere my lowercase forms caused trouble.

(This is mostly a fallback when someone can't read my cursive, or for official forms, package labels, etc. For the same reason I also adopted a smaller number of uppercase print capitals in my cursive.)

When it isn't socially appropriate to use ALLCAPS or come across as a sTRANgE pERsoN, I have to be fairly careful/attentive when writing in print to avoid dropping into mixed case.

(I'm not a monster; I'll scale these more like smallcaps when I write them.)
Idk if this work really bears on that argument. I can imagine Bender reacting to this by observing that this is a clever way of finding the needle (a good heuristic algorithm for an NP hard problem) in a haystack (millions of other heuristic algorithms that are bad, very bad, or maybe not even syntactically well-formed), and then saying that the fact that the model still produced so much garbage is proof that the LLM still doesn't really know how to reason or access meaning.

And I think that'd be a good argument. OTOH, this system is not just an LLM, but an LLM and a bunch of additional components on top of it, and there might be different things to say about this system considered as a whole.
Doing every quality activity "after the fact" I agree is the issue. That's the root of the problem you're seeing, not that there was a separate quality team.
PDF has been an ISO standard for a long time (Adobe never would have gotten as much buy in for PDF if it wasn't.) Normally you have to pay 133 CHF for an ISO standard document (... like the technical report I wrote that disappeared somewhere between the committee and the editors ...) but you can download the spec for free here

https://opensource.adobe.com/dc-acrobat-sdk-docs/pdfstandard...

There are all kinds of open source implementations

https://opensource.com/alternatives/adobe-acrobat
No, people go after the devs too. I was specific about distinguishing Firefox and Mozilla in my post. Firefox in too often caught in the political/flame crossfire.
So does Apple Maps.
Here's a demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdmODVYPDLA

Didn't realize this before watching, but it's interesting that there's an incredibly complicated board state but the game state / actions are deterministic, e.g. the players don't have any choices about what to do once the machine is set up.
Hello. I am QA that writes tests for engineering. Technically, my title is a Software Development Engineer in Test (SDET). Not only do I write "test plans", I work on the test framework, infrastructure and the automation of those test plans.

Every company is different on how they implement the QA function. Whether it be left to customer, developers, customer support, manual only QA, or SDET. It really comes down to how much leadership values quality or how leadership perceives QA.

If a company has a QA team, I think the most success comes when QA get involved early in the process. If it is a good QA team, they should be finding bugs before any code is written. The later they are involved, the later you find bugs (whether the bugs are just "noise" or not) and then the tighter they get squeezed between "code complete" and release. I think that the QA team should have automation skills so more time is spent on new test cases instead of re-executing manual test cases.

Anyways, from my vantage point, the article really hits hard. QA are sometimes treated as second class citizens and left out of many discussions that can give them the context to actually do their job well. And it gets worse as the good ones leave for development or product management. So the downward spiral is real.
That's only your personal experience because our QE team at Red Hat spend a very large amount of their time coding new tests or automating existing ones. They use this framework: https://avocado-vt.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Introduction.htm...
There's a modern clone of it now: https://fsv.sourceforge.net/
I've linked one (iSH) in my comment. It really does run most completely unmodified x86 binaries for Linux, including CPython and Java.

aShell [1] is very similar. It takes another approach – it compiles POSIX C source code to WASM and runs that using iOS's JIT-enabled web engine, which gives it much better performance than x86 software emulation. There's another one that uses lldb to interpret LLVM IR. In other words, if Apple doesn't want that type of app, they sure have been explicitly enabling the use case for a long time now.

> And the restrictions are mostly in place; otherwise, for example, there would be apps that allowed you to download torrents, or do other forbidden activities.

App store reviews don't exist to "prevent forbidden activities" in the legal sense; they are there to maintain their walled garden ecosystem financially, as well as protect their platform and products from reputational or legal harm.

The issue of legality and passing the App Store review process are largely orthogonal: Just like you can already do plenty of illegal things using stock iOS (e.g. writing threatening emails, downloading copyrighted material using WebTorrent etc.), you can do infinitely many legal things using Turing-complete computing as enabled by first and third party apps on iOS.

Now if you start offering an app that features a big button labeled "click here to dynamically load software facilitating copyright infringement", and Apple distributes it in their App Store after having reviewed it, that could get them into a tricky situation; offering a full-featured browser or OS emulator very likely doesn't, given that Google has been allowing these types of apps in their Play Store for more than a decade now.

[1] https://holzschu.github.io/a-Shell_iOS/
I remember Steve Maguire saying this in Writing Solid Code (that they're both necessary, and both types of testing complement the other). He criticized Microsoft employees who relied on QA to find their bugs. He compared QA testing to a psychologist sitting down with a person and judging whether the person is insane after a conversation. The programmer can test from the inside out, whereas QA has to treat the program like a black box, with outputs and effects resulting from certain inputs.
more than that, you only have so much time and money, concentrating on more important pieces allows you to be more thorough where the highest impacts are.

perfect is the enemy of good, "security" people act as if all breaches are equally relevant.

When your surface area is everything you're more likely to have holes, that's just a law of nature. Limit your surface area and suddenly you can be more thorough.
The Instant-On gear is physically almost identical to the professional line, but with heavy software limitations.

Best built hardware I've used, and I'd still be using their PoE at home if they didn't patch out SSH/REST access a few years ago.
I took the train from Rotterdam to go to the beach at Den Hague. It was great. I didn't have to plan ahead at all.

When I grew up in Buenos Aires Argentina we used to take the train to our small boat, that train ran every 15 minutes. The boat was kept at a "dry" marina stored on bunks in stacks of other boats. We would call them about 15 minutes ahead of time, and they would forklift the boat into the water. I used to ride the train myself to school so my parents didn't have to drop me off with my variety of things. On the way home I would get off the train at a beach for after school sailing lessons. They had Canoes, kayaks, windsurfers, small boats, etc. so you didn't have to own your own or bring it on a train.

When I lived in Seattle, and Vancouver, there were busses that regularly went to trailheads. They would add express routes on the weekends from downtown directly to trailheads in Seattle.

If I were a golfer, I can't imagine being willing to walk my clubs a few miles over 18 holes, but not be willing to walk them a block or two to the bus stop. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that some people leave their clubs in a locker at the course so they don't have to load them into and out of their car.

All of the "problems" that you solve with your car have already been solved in other places without using cars. It seems like a distinct lack of imagination to think that everything you own has to be at your home, and that you have to use a car to use it.
“In a post-trust society”

Is it really useful to think in black and white teleological terms? “Post-trust” just sounds a bit sophomoric/marxist. Like “late stage capitalism” or something similarly presumptuous.
I was also somehow aware of this acronym. Turns out the about page of Mozilla's add-ons page also uses it[1], so it's "official" so to speak.

[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/about
Notes on 'Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard' (2016)
Even Nature has clickbait titles now.

I agree with the quote. The ability of AI to augment human capabilities has way more potential than the more speculative ideas about artificial general intelligence. This is why I'm not very sympathetic to the skepticism toward deep learning and LLMs as "not intelligence", "not real AI", "stochastic parrots", etc. Who cares whether or not these systems are generally intelligent agents, if they have the potential to increase the scientific output of humanity by even 10 or 20%?
Agile sure is a weird way to pronounce micromanagement. Why not just call it what it is?
A train breaking down or otherwise stopping causes no risk of injury or death.
This consensus you mention captured in a funny newspaper headline that didn't age well:
https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-vancouver-sun-archduk...
Opening of a sci-fi novel: Chinese manufacturers embed a Trojan horse mechanism into chips and batteries. The mechanism, triggered remotely by predetermined signal, disables chips and causes batteries to short-circuit and explode.
Some important context: the discovery is that a certain number in combinatorics is now known to be between 2.2202 and 2.756, not just between 2.218 and 2.756 as discovered last year. The improvement is by finding some particular sequences of numbers which have some special properties, not by a logic-heavy mathematical proof. (That doesn't mean it's unrigorous.)

But it's an interesting and possibly useful method of coming up with examples, pretty much a genetic algorithm with LLMs.
I’m working on a simulator for a subset of VHDL in Racket Scheme, because I’ve recently become interested again in digital logic and FPGAs.

I’m starting with manually translating VHDL into Racket to get a feel for it and how to model it. The goal is to implement a language extension for VHDL with the help of the Beautiful Racket book.
The PDF format is an open standard, maintained by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
I find the premise that users should trust tech companies by default absolutely ludicrous. The author seems to live in a bubble where tech companies don't commit privacy violations regardless of what their privacy policies say. Yet in the real world, even when they're caught with their hand in the cookie jar, the fines these companies are forced to pay are just the cost of doing business.

Earlier this year Microsoft was fined $20M for collecting PII from children, which it "shared" with advertisers[1]. And this is _Microsoft_, not even an adtech giant. The abuses from those have their own Wikipedia articles[2,3]. FB was famously fined $5B in 2019[4]. It would be beyond naive to believe that these were just "oopsies", and that somehow these companies have changed their ways.

_This_ is why it's not implausible that the software that runs on our most personal computing devices, built by these same companies, is hoovering up our data in the sneakiest ways possible. Equating this to conspiracy theories is dishonest at best.

When Mark Zuckerberg puts tape over his webcam and microphone, it would be foolish to think you know better not to.

[1]: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/06/...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_regarding_Goo...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_concerns_with_Facebook

[4]: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2019/07/...
Touche! I guess we'll see if it's an issue in practice. My intuition is people won't change durations that frequently in practice. eg. OpenAI has a limit of 40 messages per 3 hours and hasn't changed that for months.
Like others are saying: I think a lot of modern frameworks already fit this mold, or are so close that people can't quite tell the difference. But for a near 1-1 example, maybe look at XState? Especially given that XState has a visual, graph view which interactively indicates state in real time.
Notes on 'The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High-Tech World' (2017)
> it also gives people the impression that a better world isn't possible—that there aren't better and worse choices for who to trust with their data and privacy.

I have no choice but to believe that a better world is possible. The current state of things isn't tolerable, and if tomorrow can't be better then what's the point of anything?

Also, I'm sure that there are better and worse choices for who to trust with data and privacy -- but it's literally impossible for me to know who that would be (or if anybody is "trustworthy" in a broad sense), so I have to work on the assumption that nobody can be trusted.

I want to be less cynical, but the way things have gone over the last decade or two makes cynicism look entirely justified.

Is my attitude incorrect? If so, how can I correct it?
By that logic no privately owned company would ever be held accountable for anything they did wrong.
> Not disagreeing with this, but there's one thing they won't always be aware of. They won't always know what code a dev touched underneath the hood and what they might need to recheck (short of a full regression test every single time) to verify everything is still working.

It doesn't necessarily matter what code was changed, a change in code in Module A can cause a bug in Module B that hasn't been changed in a year. A QA test plan should cover the surface area of the product as used by consumers whoever they might be. While knowing some module had fixes can inform the test plan or focus areas when the test schedule is constrained, only testing changes is the road to tears.
AMD and Intel together have more revenue than Nvidia, even without considering any other player in the industry or any community contributions they get from being open source.