skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I use a Synology NAS in my house with Syncthing running on it (for Dropbox-like directory sync) and Wireguard running on my router so that when I'm remote I can tunnel in and access all my services that way rather than opening ports individually (also great for mobile device ad blocking via my pi-hole). I'm luckily not behind a CGNAT, so no external proxy is required—just dynamic DNS. It was a fair amount of work to set it all up but it works flawlessly now, and I had fun. :)

People who are really hardcore about data sovereignty would probably take issue with my choice of Synology, but you could roll your own if you prefer. Synology seems to have a decent record and reputation, and my experience with it has been pretty good overall.

For backup, I'm currently using Synology's proprietary thing to do snapshots to Backblaze, and mirroring all my critical stuff to various other places. I'm planning to set up a Restic backup for more redundancy (and a bit of obscurity), and I would also like to figure out a cold backup scheme for the whole NAS though I haven't thought very hard about that yet.
This might be my personal experience, but I've never encountered a QA team that actually writes the tests for engineering.

I have only had QA teams that wrote "test plans" and executed them manually, and in rarer cases, via automated browser / device tests. I consider these types of tests to be valuable, but less so than "unit tests" or "integration tests".

With this model, I have found that the engineering team ends up being the QA team in practice, and then the actual QA team often only finds bugs that aren't really bugs, just creating noise and taking away more value than they provide.

I would love to learn about QA team models that work. Manual tests are great, but they only go so far in my experience.

I'm not trying to knock on QA folks, I'm just sharing my experience.
Human intelligence itself is shaped by our interaction with outputs. Our learning and understanding of the world are profoundly influenced by the language, behaviors, and cultural artifacts we observe.

Think about the process of a child learning a language. The child does not have direct access to the "inputs" of linguistic rules or grammar; they learn primarily through observing and imitating the language output of others around them. Over time, they develop a sophisticated understanding of language, not by direct instruction of underlying rules, but through pattern recognition and contextual inference from these outputs.

Then that language itself, learned from outputs, becomes the cognitive apparatus that enables the child to imagine, to reason symbolically and abstractly. Humans bootstrap intelligence on top of language, which itself is learned by mimicking outputs.

Moreover, the analogy to weather prediction or stock market analysis is somewhat misleading. Yes, these models benefit from input data (like air currents for weather, company fundamentals and CEO statements to the media for stocks). But these systems are fundamentally different from intelligence.

Intelligence, whether artificial or human, is about the ability to learn, adapt, and generate novel responses in a broad range of scenarios, not just about predicting specific outcomes based on specific inputs.
Not really. They don't care about the liability until they have to. That's why they didn't care about steering wheel checks either. Tesla were not scared to "even let drivers take their hands off the wheel". It was the NHTSA who said "No, actually, you need to be", and started forcing their hand to actually implementing the checks (or rather with a reasonable interval).
GDPR is on the right track, but they made collecting consent too easy so now the entire Internet is covered with dark patterns trying to trick you into giving consent.

What we need is basically GDPR except that consent can only be collected in the form of a signed and notarized contract.
MtG, mentioned earlier, tournament play is very similar. Unless they're draft, they usually devolve into all the decks everyone knew about on Top8 several weeks before release. People can say there's very conscious strategy or tactics, except there's not. Because of the mass share, aggregate reviews, and mob think, it all homogenizes quickly each season.

4 of with 36 non-land, and 24 land in mid-range, means you're really only choosing 9 cards unless its a weird deck. Often the whole season devolves into something like "[Delver's the best/Sword Crow's the best/ect...], all other choices are failure." Hasbro doesn't really care unless sales go down. Hasbro's only motivation is selling cards. If humans buy, Hasbro sells.

Standard Draft still tends to devolve into most pursuing 1st strat, 2nd strat, ect... depending on what gets grabbed nearby.

EDH or Commander is usually viewed as the most variety, simply because there's far too many combinations with only 1 of each among 100.
I can't agree more.

> Focus: There is real value in having people at your company whose focus is on the quality of your end product. Quality might be “everybody’s job”…but it should also be “somebody’s job”.
Yes indeed, naturally every person have just one focus, having dedicated person focus on QA is important.

Another practice, or buzz word (or used to be buzz word:) ), Exploratory Testing, which can pretty much be conducted only by dedicated QA.
> If you can't either verify the user has actual access to other people's consoles [...] in 18 hours, then you should probably just close up shop

It's impossible to prove a negative. Maybe they believe that this was user error/malice but are doing more research to confirm this and find evidence of a vulnerability.
WebExtensions are (or at least can be) ultimately just a weird type of HTML+JS app, as far as I understand, so I suspect it's possible to run that in one WebView context on iOS and bridge the required APIs between the extension and browser context using content scripts.
To play devil's advocate here, I did not _really_ get training for my software engineering role. I got a little bit from 1-2 college courses, but the vast majority of my role I had to pick up on the job or on my own.

I can tell you, I definitely didn't get training for QA tasks, but here I am doing them anyways. It's just work that needs to be done.
Authorship conventions vary a lot within the academia. In general, the closer the name is to either end of the author list, the more significant their contributions likely were.

Things also vary from paper to paper. Sometimes the first author just did the actual work for somebody else, and sometimes they also made significant intellectual contributions. (If the first author is listed as the sole corresponding author, it usually indicates the latter.) Sometimes the last/senior author just brought the money in, sometimes they were primarily mentoring the first author, and sometimes they were the driving force behind the project.
Franz Ferdinand was somewhat of an outcast of the family, not just because of his morganatic marriage, but also because of his plans to federalize the country and his intense dislike and distrust of the Hungarians. The consensus immediately after his death was that the murder actually "solved" a difficult succession situation for the Hapsburgs. Few people in early July 1914 expected A-H to escalate towards the infamous ultimatum.
I'm not an expert here, but with:

> That is a lot more programmers than Nvidia can afford to employ

How do you account for the increased complexity those developers have to deal with in an environment where there are multiple companies with conflicting incentives working on the standard?

My gut reaction is to worry if this is one of those problems like "9 people working together can't have a baby in one month".
Just got to the same paragraph, and that last line really seals the point of the affect internal division and tribalism has eroded the independence of journalism — specifically at the NYT — and pressured us to be against ourselves in spite of, and not for, our ideals.
> Don't really see anyone writing anything in SYCL though

My work involves writing software that runs on many GPU platforms at once. So far we have been going through the Kokkos route, but SYCL is looking pretty good to me recent days. There is some consolidation happening in this space (Codeplay gave up working on their own implementation and merged with Intel). It was pretty easy to setup on my Linux machine for Nvidia card. Documentation is very good and professional, unlike AMD's, which can be frankly horrible at times. And Intel has a good track record with software.

I genuinely believe if someone is going to dethrone CUDA, at this point SYCL (oneAPI) is a far more likely candidate than Rocm/HIP.
Only Fans Lite
Love Socket! A lot of folks (think most) were loading the compromised package through another package, @ledgerhq/connect-kit-loader [1], via a CDN call [2]. Would be great if Socket could pick up on this because Socket's @ledgerhq/connect-kit-loader page [3] doesn't include any warning.

[1]: https://socket.dev/npm/package/@ledgerhq/connect-kit-loader

[2]: https://github.com/LedgerHQ/connect-kit/blob/main/packages/c...

[3]: https://socket.dev/npm/package/@ledgerhq/connect-kit-loader/...
We can't even successfully curtail adverse behavior in the enterprise, with budgetary spends for DLP and communications monitoring measured in the millions.

Parents don't stand a chance. You could be running a fucking kiosk with only Minecraft on it. If it still has an internet connection, kids will be harassed, bullied and solicited.

It's the kids who taught me about the existence and purpose of Finstagram accounts.

The only effective parental control is unplugging them from the internet. But you can't do that, because our lives are inextricable from it now.
or Lisa Su
> There are no "Software Quality Assurance" academic degrees, there's barely any research into testing methodologies,

There's a lot of this actually. Entire communities of people working on software quality assurance. Practitioners in this space call their field "resilience engineering".

The field likes to talk a lot about system design. Especially in the intersection of humans and machines. Stuff like "How do you set up a system (the org) such that production bugs are less likely to make it all the way to users"
I’m not pretending Bitcoin is new. My comment was because of that fact. It’s the same old tired song and dance. Bitcoin goes up: “these idiot kids got lucky.” Bitcoin goes down: “about time those idiots learn their lesson! Bitcoin’s a scam!”

Bitcoin is undeniably volatile, but it is becoming less volatile over time and it continues to (on an investment period longer than a year or so) be a fantastic hedge against inflation.

Even if you buy stocks, the general consensus is that you should be looking at a longer timeframe to ensure you can handle any short-term losses.
CSS Neural Network (number detection)
> Are you telling me the EU, the richest block in the world, has less money to spend on fabs than TSMC

I didn't say we don't have the money, but that it's a problem to commit the money. It's basically the norm that EU countries unanimously agree that "something should be done" on a certain issue, but then disagree on how much it should cost and where the money should come from. This gets more and more complicated the bigger the cost is (and this is an expensive idea) and the farther we are from the regular 7-year-budget process (it was last agreed in 2020, so jockeying for big items will probably resume in 2025-26).

I don't disagree on the overall lack of vision in European political classes (hardly a fault of the EU, it's common to basically all countries and all levels of government), but even a visionary leader would have to work hard to get agreement on such a big project.
Getting rid of QA teams are a slow ticking bomb frequently imho. Cause some issues are might not be even breaking functionality. You can mess up some tracking/analytics and managers will make wrong decisions based on incorrect data.
But personally I feel like within few years everything might change a lot. Machines 100% will be be better at coding, maintenance and testing things.
Why not? You could open a store and accept it as a method of payment.
A few days ago I bought an 18TB enterprise grade hard drive from a hardware refurbishing company for 170 bucks. I assume he can find a home for his data for around $3500 (if he chooses to not have any redundancy)
UDMs are discounted right now for the holidays. I'm in the process of migrating my home networking/server stuff into a rack, and I was tempted to pick one up because my current little PFSense box isn't particularly rack-friendly. This thread is cooling my heels a bit.
The page looks amazing on mobile!
Well first you say,

>I don't believe LLM's will ever become AGI, partly because I don't believe that training on the outputs of human intelligence (i.e. human-written text) will ever produce something equivalent to human intelligence.

Now you say

>I'm using the definition provided verbatim in the linked article: "We believe superintelligence—AI vastly smarter than humans—could be developed within the next ten years."

AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is Super Intelligence. I've never seen posts moved so fast in my life. So are you not a General Intelligence then ?

This is the problem with these discussions. Everyone so sure of something they can't even properly articulate.

I'm asking you what a Language Model needs to do to be considered AGI and it needs to be something every human can do, else it's not a test of general intelligence.
At least on home computers connected to crappy TVs via composite or coax, uppercase characters are almost certainly more readable than lower case characters just because uppercase characters use more pixels of an 8x8 pixel matrix.

Also uppercase was also standard on Eastern European computers, and I doubt they cared whether they could spell GOD all uppercase ;)
User Finds Critical Bug That Could Have Wrecked Your X Account–and Gets Banned
I believe Bitcoin is a bit more durable than a VHS, but this is a fun comparison nonetheless.
If your login/access token request is cached this could happen. But that may qualify as "tragically bad".
The revenue keeps rolling in so, clearly, they made the right business decision... >sigh<

I use a lot of MSFT software and services in the "day job". I wish there was some kind of consequence to them for their declining quality.
I came to Schmidhuber's work learning about his approach on creativity and curiosity and I loved it so much. It’s still so relevant. And beautiful, actually.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0709.0674.pdf
Family structure is devolving away from two stable parents, so the state is required to step in.
My point is that invariably some people over the centuries say that the current generation of young adults have been coddled and can't handle adversity.

Here's an editorial from 1916 on "The Youth of Today" at https://archive.org/details/fort-wayne-sentinel-1916-03-04/p... which I found in a quick archive.org search, suggesting the youth of the 1910s wanted the safety of "the pod" too much and weren't prepared to handle adversity, because their parents coddled them:

> Dr. J. G. Hibben, president of Princeton university, holds to the opinion that too much luxury, even too much comfort, is a bad thing for the youth of the country. ...

> "The great danger lies in the fact," says he, "that our young men should have on all sides of them comforts and pleasures which make them consider themselves alone. Many of our youths are indifferent to everything under heaven except how they can maintain their comfort and convenience. They have done or experienced nothing that would make them ready for service and sacrifice." ...

> ... our young men seem to be less sturdy and robust in character [than the young man of yesteryear]. Our forefathers did not find life easy. Existence for them was a struggle. They were acquainted with hardship: they touched elbows with privation. Experience tempered them. "There must be an awakening of the Old spirit of our fathers and our father's fathers," says Dr. Hibben, "who did not have all the luxury which we have but who had an integrity of spirit which we do not have. Military preparedness will be of no avail in time of danger unless we have this spirit of consecration." Here are criticism and counsel, hand in hand. Both might be pondered to advantage by parents who, in mistaken affection, make life too easy for their sons, and by sons who, in narrow selfishness, are thus saved from inconvenience and discomfort."

On the other hand I also found this nice quote from 1968 at https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.112052/page/n3... :

> If today’s youth are substantially different from those of earlier days, as I think they are, it is because they have grown to maturity in a different world.
Too often the claims of unethical behavior are knee-jerk, baseless, and speculative. In the example the author cites, Dropbox only sends data to OpenAI when the user explicitly tells the app to engage an AI-related feature, for example to summarize a document. Yet the backlash seems to assume that they're scanning and uploading people's documents en masse, even though there is no evidence of this.

Unethical behavior definitely exists in AI companies. Personally, I'm agnostic about whether it's higher or lower than the base rate of unethical behavior in the general population. Anyway, if we're going to talk about bad behavior, we should use specific examples with cited evidence, not fear-mongering.
0 should have a bar through it by default imo.
> ...it's a fucking soap opera and trying to manipulate your readers with one sided sob stories...

In other words, all display of Palestinian suffering is "Pallywood", correct? Only if they had a Spielberg or a Bob Dylan for their narratives, then perhaps we'd relate and rally behind. Btw, are posts on Holocaust too one-sided for you? Is the Nanking massacre a sob story? I hope you see how severe your views really are.

Besides, Paul isn't Wikipedia or a WaPo/NYT journalist sworn to some arbitrary Bible of neutrality. These are his views where he relates with Palestinians and their plight as humanly as one can (imo), which for some strange reason has invoked a vile and vicious comment from you.
Oh, your problem is you don't have anyone doing risk assessments (see Risk Matrix for an example) and quantitative risk analysis and measuring cost to fix vs likelihood of occurrence and cost of an incident against that fix over an extended period. It's a bit like an in house insurance adjustment. Tangentially, a lot of companies decide to buy insurance as a "fix" for a risk. Because the insurance costs less than implementing whatever solution is required.

Just good enough often times is an orgs own policies and standards, and security teams catch when things aren't meeting those standards.

Your complaints are a lack of maturity in your cyber security organizations. There are cases where a business can absolutely decide its "good enough". But that decision is made by people other than those that point out the vulnerability. It's usually done by which ever team handles security remediation or they talk to someone who handles that analysis as part of the remediation process if the fix seems prohibitive. Cost to fix can also go down as new solutions become available or infrastructure changes and a new design makes it easier to build in a fix/control/detection or whatever. So re-evaluating "accepted risks" periodically to see if its something that's easier to implement is also part of it.

Cybersecurity shouldn't be in the business of saying no (unless its something insane like storing passwords in plain text on open shares), we're here to say, "here's some problems we see", here's where we think we can help, everything else is up to the frameworks and policies your company has set to adhere to or someone at a higher level to say cost exceeds risk, we accept the risk until such point cost comes down, etc. Cyber should also be helping to put in systematic controls that make good controls the default, and good practices easy to implement, so that ops and devs don't have to think about it.
On December 17th, they'll be at the Original Farmers Market in WeHo from noon til 5pm.

https://waymo.com/tour/#schedule

Join the waitlist asap so you can get access when they launch in socal.
O or 0: that's why zero had that strike-through line.
in the classic model, most QA orgs were a useless appendage. partially by construction, but largely because QA gets squeezed out when dev is late (when does that happen?). they aren't folded in early, so they twiddle their thumbs doing 'test infrastructure' and 'test plans', until they finally get a code drop and a 48 hr schedule to sign off, which they are under extreme pressure to do.

but every once and a while you ran across a QA organization that actually had a deep understanding of the problem domain, and actually helped drive development. right there alongside dev the entire way. not only did they improve quality, but they actually saved everyone time.
A Marvel comics reading list manager. It lets you subscribe to series, see what came out any given week, then mark things on your list read or skipped.

It uses the Marvel API so it's not monetizable and it's hard to get motivated to run a money-losing project. I've reconsidered modernizing it and opening it up now that I have more disposable income for hosting.
You're assuming an absolute. If none of the fish had moved to fresher water, I imagine there'd be a lot more fish washing ashore. If all of the fish had moved to fresher water, there would be no fish washing ashore. Also, abnormal ocean currents have caused this before.
I read through this and I just don’t get it. Is it overhyped?

What’s the breakthrough exactly?
Well, my point was made in reference to the original comment which said

> If consciousness is not well understood, how is AI on silicon allowed, or any computing machines at all

Which implies that we should care about some kind of suffering inflicted on conscious beings. My argument was that we don't care about AI suffering because we don't really care that much about suffering generally, because of what we chose to do to animals.
Mine states 120.0.6099.26, which was released a month ago, https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2023/11/chrome-beta-fo...
Ask HN: What is it like working for "growth"?
Oftentimes when I see a software engineer job listing for a SaaS, there’s always a “software engineer (growth)”. What is that like?

I think marketing metrics and using engineering to grow in general is super cool. If you work in this space do you get to learn a lot about digital marketing?
Yeah, Apple likes to say that (and reject apps for violating that rule!), but then there's also things like Linux x86 userspace emulators in the app store that can run unmodified ELF binaries downloaded via curl from any random website...

At this point it's just a polite fiction, maintained jointly by Apple and app developers, that allows Apple to maintain a somewhat straight face when saying things like "you can't download third-party code at all" or "all code extending app functionality must be downloaded through our designated mechanism".

iSH is one such app, this blog post is very interesting: https://ish.app/blog/default-repository-update

Given the current regulatory scrutiny of their app store, I believe they just don't want to open yet another can of worms by rejecting "browsers" (which are really WebKit wrappers) for injecting third-party JavaScript into all web pages displayed within them, even though by their own rules, they arguably totally should.
Reading the post, my first reaction is to remove all docs from my free dropbox account.
This is a big reason why AMD did this deal with PyTorch...

https://pytorch.org/blog/experience-power-pytorch-2.0/
Then the AI isn't going for a walk, the robot is going for a walk.

I can currently take an AI for a walk on my laptop, that's not the same as them being able to go for a walk.