skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> That's more performative arguing then constructive arguing, no?

That's a nice distinction. But from a practioners point if view, I see little difference. Who would argue without the implicit desire to convince/convert?

Agreed... It is a good list. The recommendation to argue in person and not via media is very pertinent.

One thing the list misses is the importance and power of facts. Indeed, the English philosopher Hume positioned facts as the atomic indivisible of philosophical discorse. Of course, facts can be twistered... But ultimately there is no such thing as 'your facts' and 'my facts'. Anyone with the facts at their disposal has the power of god in an argument. Like him or loath him, this acounts for the ability of Chriopher Hitchinns to completely destroy his opononets (Aka the famous Hitchslap).
Old and busted: American companies destroying Americas environment.

New hotness: France companies destroying Americas environment.
I don't doubt that's exactly what would happen, in fact I think that that rogue hacker is about to do his thing, quick, erase the backups!
This is awesome, but there were a couple of great laptop interfaces from that movie too. Spent some quality time in the 90s getting AfterStep/Litestep to look like them.
That's how it starts. Then people invent a micro-shotgun capable of targetted killing of select mosquitoes with precision and it can cook your dinner, basically the liquid metal from which T-1000 is made.
Balaji Fund
Ah, yes, this is the "start from the assumption that everything has failed" trick.

"if attackers can run arbitrary code on our systems then they can exploit vulnerabilities!" or "if attackers can send arbitrary payloads to services which are turned off in the actual image and in any case not accessible without breaching a perimeter firewall and passing through a DMZ then they can exploit vulnerabilities!"

OK, sure, what about "attackers kidnap the families of our AD admin team and force them to do whatever they want"?

Also, "high" meaning "sometimes we just don't care".

No, sorry, I do not care that (e.g.) CVE-2023-4911 has been categorized as "high", I am not in a rush to replace every single Fargate task that contains a vulnerable glibc because it's just not an interesting vulnerability in that context: let's assume you (a) bypass the payload validation on the (private!) API Gateway, (b) construct a payload that allows some kind of RCE in my JVM, (c) somehow escape from the JVM sandbox to run arbitrary native code, (d) successfully implement the attack, (e) get root in the underlying VM ... it's a Firecracker VM that doesn't have ANYTHING ELSE in it.

But, no, it's a "high", I better start cutting change tickets for literally everything in the universe to conduct an incredible load of busy work in order to do a no-op.

Really smart cybersecurity would be (I'm just making this up, I haven't really thought about it) "you know, if we're looking at services contained in a VM security boundary like Fargate, perhaps we don't care about Attack Vector = Local or Physical, or User Interaction = Required?" but what we actually get is "raw CVSS score tells you all you need to know and absolutely dictates urgency and triage priority".
Did you train yourself?

On my first day of work I was given access to SVN and then had to piece together how to run the project. So I was bouncing around IntellIJ and all the various tools to make up a modern development environment.

In week-0 of an iteration you might just be spending time to get a development environment working.

If you wanted to get something working, did you ask your colleague "how to get company IntelliJ linting configuration to work" or how to set up all the IntelliJ modules or facets.

Someone coming in with no experience has to learn:

* git

* command line

* linux

* containers

* gradle (build runner)

* makefiles

* java jar files,

* pom.xml

* javascript bundlers, React/Angular, selenium, frontend testing, storybook

* database migrations

* IntellIJ' integrations/representations of the above
Dammit, only has two mouse buttons. :-(
Yes, I found it depressing how many people needed to be involved for such a simple decision. "We installed a vendor update" is not blog worthy.
You are responsible for your actions, but you act according to imperfect information, so your actions are never going to be perfectly virtuous. But then again, even with perfect information, that is rarely the case.

There's a pretty big difference between knowing full well something comes at a huge cost of human suffering and turning a blind eye to that, and inadvertently participating in something that turns out has unanticipated externalities. The two are not the same, and relying on the possibility of the latter scenario to justify the former is bad faith.
Renesas 32-bit RISC-V CPU
AI faces seem realer than real
Okay, how's this for nuance? There are plenty of news stories about shepherds killing or severely injuring toddlers. Heck, even the POTUS' shepherd has injured and hospitalized multiple people: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67015811

People make up all kinds of pseudoscience about why pit bulls are involved in so many severe attacks (e.g. the myth of "locking jaws" after a bite - which isn't a thing in any dog breed). The core problem with most of these claims is that "pit bull" is not a breed but actually a number of different breeds and mutts, many of which aren't even related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

All of these contribute to statistics involving "pit bulls" (contrast this with German shepherds, which are very narrowly defined) and even then this ignores that people looking for aggressive dogs often want "pit bulls" because of their reputation and make them aggressive (i.e. traumatized) before they eventually end up as rescues in situations where the aggression endangers children.

I don't like dogs, generally, and I don't like most "pit bulls" because of their looks alone, but most of the studies people like to cite uses garbage data that fails to consistently define "pit bulls" (if you look at the methodology the groupings usually rely on what breed the dog is registered as which tells you nothing given that "pit bull" isn't a breed and various mutts will be lumped in as well) on top of being misrepresented by people trying to reaffirm their biases instead of looking at the complex socio-cultural context. Heck, most studies don't even correct for population sizes (i.e. giving statistics about registered dog breeds relative to the number of dogs registered for each breed).

Most of the difference between dog breeds are cosmetic, some are physical, very few are "neurological" but at the end of the day, all dogs are domesticated predators, all dogs can bite and dog bites can be life threatening to humans. All things considered, dog breed is one of the least important factors to whether a given dog poses a threat or not. Yeah, big dogs are more likely to bite in a way that is life threatening and anxious dogs are more likely to bite and abused dogs are more likely to be anxious and dog breeds seen as "aggressive" are more likely to be abused. But given how diverse and hetereogenous the group of dogs classified as "pit bulls" is, any genetic argument is clearly nonsense and just because you can misinterpret studies to reaffirm your biases that doesn't mean you're not just trying to find a simple and easy to reason about explanation to a very complex problem.
How LoRa Modulation works – long range communication using chirps [video] (2021)
An electron is a fluctuation of the electron field, not a singular point.
And forever on internet.
"Using it" is fine for a simple tool. But IDE is a complex beast. You can easily fall into a local optimum without discovering and using the best features. Think using arrow keys to navigate in vim. It works, gets the job done but is far from optimal. You could read the manual but I'm sure you agree that training is a lot more efficient use of your time
> React is what a young hacker would invent under heavy hallucinogens after a week of reading Advanced Haskell tutorials

That's precisely why it works: it presents an alternative to the liminality requirements of maintaining the Ballmer Peak (which is is too NP-hard to reproduce) by tapping into the underdeveloped PFCs in young developers everywhere and making them productive by psyop-hacking their sense of adventure into the pursuit of complexity.

It's honestly sad, but a nonetheless really interesting study in emergent psychological dynamics.
Exactly, and while you’re at it, add a few more million to get rid of billboards - money that could have been spent on hunger, or health.
My recommendation of Fall of Civilizations podcast from a few days ago [1] seems relevant here:

https://www.youtube.com/@FallofCivilizations/videos

Maybe it will be some solace that's excellent work done by one your countrymen :)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38514078
Because there's no real source included therein.
Anyone hear of GPT4.5 drop today?
It's amazing how you can make something explictly worse, specifically to fatten your bottom line, and have people cheer you for it.

If the goal is openness, i.e. why GitHub has the prestige it does, allying itself with open software development goals, then you should be able to do most things without having to sign up for the service. That includes browsing and searching. Neither of these need your identity.

On the other hand, if GitHub really just wants a walled garden with paying customers (either directly or the money to be made from datamining their identity and activity), it ought to shut itself off completely and get no benefit from being associated with openness.

What they've done is insidious. They're open, they're the trusted custodians of open source, but ah ah not really. For a preem experience you gotta pay up, choob! They let you search for 15 years but now they don't. And here you are cheering them rather than questioning them.

What's next? The certificate transparency project requires sign-up and logins, it's just too expensive to let anonymous users see the transparency logs you see, and by some amazing co-incidence, everyone signed in @google.com sees no results for mis-issued GMail certificates?
If not vertical farming, weed killing lasers, an ze bugs, where is innovation needed in AgTech?
Abstract vs concrete is not the main difference of images vs text.

The main difference is that an image (without text in it) can relay a lot of information at once. Counter example: try reproducing an image from a description.

A text on the other hand is able to give unambiguous explanation of relationships. Counter example: try painting “a primary and a secondary disk” as an image without any text.

So images are good to give an overview fast, but text is needed to make it unambiguous.
Doesn't support bad blocks at all.

Bad blocks don't count as allocated unless they are newly discovered - data should be moved asap if it's still recoverable. An allocated block with nothing in it is an error.
In my purely layman view of someone on the outskirts of AI development, meaning that I knew about the techniques from a basic concept view, saw the rise of ML and NN into the mainstream software development the past 15-20 years (and not from an academic background), and now seeing the latest generative AIs and LLMs.

My biggest anxiety with AI development rapidly increasing in pace and capabilities is that we don't work in a system which will distribute the efficiency gains brought by those developments to people, they will be captured as profit, we don't have anything in place on how to absorb large swaths of workers out of a job when an AI can help to automate 90% of most office jobs.

I really try to not be a Mennonite about it, technology invariably causes splash damage to jobs, from looms to robotic arms in factories, we increase our efficiency to produce but for some reason it feels like an AI boom will bring such a shift much quicker and broader than many past inventions. And I don't think we are prepared for the aftermath of that.

Let's say if in 10-20 years some 50% of white-collar jobs can be made redundant by AI, there would be large swaths of workers with non-marketable skills, how do you retrain so many people so quickly? We already struggle to retrain small pools of the labour force from jobs that are disappearing, like coal miners or factory workers, progress always come at a cost and so what's going to be the cost when that many people are out of jobs, out of prospect of jobs with their skills, and the value added by AI is captured by the few owners of capital?

That's my main anxiety. I have so far embraced AI as a way to make my job less tedious but I started to have this tingling feeling that I will see myself outskilled at my job by AI during my lifetime... And I have no idea what will be left to do. Given that predicting what will come next is nigh impossible, I don't think we will be prepared for the aftermath when it comes, just like we were not prepared for the aftermath of social media and just live with the malaise nowadays.
It's hilarious that you would attribute that to capitalism when the Fossil Fuel and Gas industry was one of the most subsidised industries over the last 100 years. Capitalism is against government helping any kind of company :)
In the short term, the employee. In the long term, as people leave due to lack of tip pay, service degrades and customers stop showing up due to the degrading service, the employer. Tipping as a requirement needs to go. Pay them a minimum wage because it shouldn’t be the customers problem. If a business owner cannot do that, the business should not exist.
Open and Collaborative Bluetooth Security Assessment Methodology (BSAM)
during years of austerity when fast fashion was a money maker it was all good

now that companies are under observation for their waste and pollution suddenly it's ok to criticise and demonise it and by association the poor who relied on it

- as if its the people who are responsible for the waste and exploitation of sweatshop labour that enabled it
Pretty sure the "some reason" is just legal reasons. Afaik, Apple does not allow Apple software to be virtualized on non-Apple hardware. So while it may be technically possible, it may be legally questionable.

In my head, when I saw this post, I instantly thought "Time to Apple legal action.... 3, 2, 1...". But maybe I'm wrong or things have changed.
China is still in its infancy regarding propaganda. Russia performs better than China, but it still lags far behind the state of the art in both depth and prevalence.
> The BSC, Europe's leading developer of open source computing technologies

> The fact that the [..] architecture [..] of these new processors is open source, and therefore non-proprietary and accessible to all, reduces technological dependence on large multinational corporations

I hadn't heard of either BSC nor Open Source Computing before. I'm curious though, are there a lot of people out there who are not tied to large corporations and who have the knowledge and the means to produce computer hardware? Are there hobbyists out there producing their own custom chips and graphics cards?
My daughter has this in her car after she got a DUI. This summer she had to have her car towed to their facility because it refused to let her start her car after getting gas. She had the option of paying to have it towed to them or having someone come out to fix their equipment at the rate of $250/hr. This type of thing has happened several times but usually they can fix it remotely. So, imagine your daughter coming out of work, someone in the parking lot making her nervous, her getting in her car and it won't start because their sensor is a POS.
You’d be able to get in to the driver’s cab by just pressing Enter on the keypad
Restoring and Trading older cars keeps getting more attractive as a business.

Expect there will be legislation to remove older cars from the road as soon as the planners figure out an excuse. Perhaps: "Safety standards make older cars death trap; they can't compete with modern cars that weigh 3x what they do"
Does skipping the 80 years of computer chess development leading up to stockfish make this a worse or better analogy?

I don't quite understand it but the group of people saying "AI is an evil god that will destroy us all" and the group of people saying "I am building an even stronger and more powerful AI with an explicit goal of it becoming godlike" seem to overlap more than you'd think.
>Capitalism is against government helping any kind of company :)

Was that ever the case? I can't think of many industries that didn't see direct help from the government in one way or another.
I think it's less hyped but still widely used. There are new tools such as flink as well.

For analytic transformation Snowflake, BigQuery and other modern column based DB are fitting the bills too so that's probably why they are the new hype.
I would say that languages where "if" can be used as expression provide a different (perhaps better) syntax for the same ternary operator.

a = if x then y else z

is just a more verbose version of

a = x ? y : z;

Raku uses yet another form of the same operator:

a = x ?? y :: z;

Syntactic sugar :-)
Has anyone written about the computers/interfaces in HBO's "Silo"? I've been trying to find information about that because they seem quite interesting.
It's a "micro" optimization that can be automatically applied everywhere. And its not destructive because debug info contains all you need to calculate the frame pointers after the fact. Really a no-brainer to have it on unless you are dealing with broken tools.
I am not sure about that. You are already using API, should be trivial to use a tokenizer to get the number. Also prompt is just minor part of the cost. You have much less control in the completion part, which is the majority of the cost.
https://archive.ph/TDj5W
I think the main obstacle is that intelligence seems to be inherently unreliable.

There is no shortage of human intelligence in the world. The average person is remarkably intelligent. But they need a lot of learning and practice, and often plenty of organizational support, before they can use that intelligence to do something useful reliably.

We know how to make cars that are stupid and reliable. We know how to make cars that are intelligent and unreliable. But there is still a lot of work to be done before we can make cars that are both intelligent and reliable.

The only AI product I use in my daily work is Copilot. It can usually make useful and accurate suggestions, sometimes even remarkably so, but it also makes stupid mistakes all the time. Copilot is most useful for automating boring routine work, where I can quickly catch and correct its mistakes. It's far less useful for the difficult parts, or when I don't know what I'm doing, because the mistakes it makes are less obvious to me.
Something which is significantly "controversial", or has no significant and pertinent impact, should not increase the compiler technical cost. Syntax sugar is the enemy of compiler technical costs.

For instance, a "feature" of significant and pertinent impact missing, in the list I provided, load and store from unaligned memory address should have their own keywords as this is really important, even though modern hardware micro-archs tolerate that at a cost. Anybody using that abomination of "struct packing" C extensions should think again: C has been meant for aligned access by default, namely unaligned access should be at a syntax cost, and should pop up from the syntax and be HARDCORE explicit. I don't even think rust syntax is that clean, am I wrong? (hopefully)

For instance in linux printf, I did run in a beautiful (irony) "aligned" attribute on a stack variable. I was reading the code and I though there was a bug since I did not read the variable declaration as I was very mistaken that the variable name was enough... Yeah, should be banned from the kernel (hopefully, rust is careful to avoid that abomination in its syntax).

When I have "packed" data structures, I am, usually, careful at having everything "byte" defined and use explicit macros for Xword loads and stores.

"Letting the compiler do that for you" is dual edge sword. And I don't even start on the _Generic abomination, which creates so much type indirection you don't know what you are dealing with unless you read a ton more code.
Yeah.. I've just realized that while it's entertaining to watch how it unfolds or predict what can happen next, it's also sad, because pretty much everybody in the rail industry loses..
While I find this story a fun and intelligent allegory for the issue of ASIs and a fun thought experiment, I find all the doomsaying around ai safety research kind of tiring. AI safety research is an important and worthwhile field without us needing to constantly be worrying about a far off doomsday that may never come. Yes ASIs are an existential threat and yes once they are out, they are out, and there's no stopping them nor turning them off or anything so we better get them right the first time, but like we don't seem to be anywhere close to ASIs. I have my doubts we will even achieve AGI in this century let alone ASI which I'm not even sure are possible for us non-super-intellegences to create. It seems obvious to me that we are still several major breakthroughs away from AGIs and if these are anything like the deeplearning breakthrough we will probably have a few AI winters between now and then, we have plenty of time to see this supposed doomsday scenario coming and preparing for it. And again this is not to say that ai safety research isn't important. The alignment problem is very much an important and immediate issue right now for Narrow AI let alone for AGI. But seriously the ai isn't going to go from Narrow to running a thousand loops around the whole of humanity in 2 seconds flat, no need for all this doomsaying.
it stops short of saying that humans should stop anthropomorphizing quite so hard, yes.