skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I recently made them work with meeting presentation transcript. Mistral 7b (tiny one) was enough to reliably extract quite a lot of information!

- It could derive speaker names, based purely on how people called themselves in the conversation

- Drew a mermaid sequence diagram that wasn't perfect, but wasn't a complete garbage either. With few back and forth corrections it was on-point.

- Created a truly usable meeting notes

It was a much better UX than having to hunt down relevant video section, watch it and force to focus despite a lot of filler communication. That works very well for those kinds of 30 min. upward meeting, where the real content is in the spoken words and slides just reitarate that. I was really pleasantly surprised how much I liked that.

Also, some models can rate each speaker contribution :o)
This seems like a wild claim. On chess.com I've gone from 500 to ~1050 in a handful of months without any real study,

Is rating on chess.com similar to rating in lichess? The article mentions 1%, but you start with 1500 in lichess??? If you lose often, you quickly go down. But if you keep an even record, you stay in 1500.

I don't understand how people learn from slamming blitz/bullet games.

As in the article, speed training helps recognizing patterns and dealing with them. At first it seems impossible to play significant moves with so little time, but you can try to just doing it. You'll adapt very soon.

I recommend starting with blitz 3+2 and later bullet 2+1. There are tournaments of 1+0... or even less time. 30 seconds is really crazy.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37939796
> That said, yours is a completely artificial problem imposed upon you by the company you made a purchase from.

Nobody owns even their hardware anymore.
yes, but more underground. see https://old.reddit.com/r/usenet for recommendations
In summary.
At some point an ai assistant will replace 80% of the functionality/apps offered by iOS & android - it will finally become the new OS (as we all knew from watching her).

This is bad for Google as google’s main feature is search. Ai assistants will replace search and kill the main revenue stream which is ad clicks.

Google’s secret plan is to eventually canabilize it’s pixel phone with an ‘agent first’ device to try to beat Apple, MS & OpenAI with a horizontal offering that is significantly better than the fragmented world of ChatGPT &iOS & azure.

But it’s worth remembering and I think the article fails to point this out. Agents will still ‘recommend’ things, you ask them to book you a flight - they still have to recommend a couple of options out of many - the agents need to decide and ultimately that decision is the same as choosing who to place at the top of the search results page - whoever wins the agent wars will win a significant proportion of Google search revenue as referral fees AND a significant proportion of IOS App Store revenue.

It really is winner takes all.
Wesley Faulkner (or maybe the person doing the interview) needs to differentiate between the future they want to see (aspirational or values-based futures) and the likely or probable future.

I'd love to live in a world where I could bring my whole self to work. I would love to live in a world where social and racial equity is part of the purpose of the company... where companies are radically transparent and honest.

We should absolutely fight for that world, but there is absolutely nothing certain about it. Wrapping it in "the future of..." is a dangerous framing which implies certainty or probability, which sadly isn't the case.
Not sure about the US but that price and statement might have been true 15-20 years ago in the UK.

These days a high quality handmade king size mattress of natural materials starts closer to £2,500 and might have a guarantee of 10 years.

I’m lying on a small, high quality mattress purchase 6 years ago for £1,100 from a small boutique business and it started to dip in the middle a bit about 2 years ago but I think it’s got a 2 or 3 more years life left in it.

£630 ($800) will get you a very cheap mattress today and if it’s both comfortable and lasts 20 years that’ll be like winning the lottery
You'd never be able to compete with qt anyway.
China is building more renewables than anybody else and are flooding markets with EVs.
There was some story once that a quality handmade tailored suit costs about the same amount of gold centuries ago compared to today.

Would love to see this fact checked.
> The idea that the expansion of money supply led to the price increases seems to be mostly a media narrative.

Some would call it "common sense."
That's not true in general. Sounds like you have a really inefficient server that allocates too much.
Yes, they do and Thierry Breton is on the frontline in this fight. He proposed legislation that would have endangered free journalism and protection of their sources aside from the fight for editorial control of social media. And he did that multiple times, every time to protect particular interests that fool people that have diffuse fears about social media.
> The SSH handshake had been formally verified ... and the proofs are still "true".

This seems unsurprising for me. Formal verification advocates believe it will prevent all issues, but it seemed obvious to me that the verification is still vulnerable to human fallibility in deciding _what_ to verify.
By default this is because the skill bell curve in programmers including their managers. Most developers simply don't really care too much about their profession. They use what they've been taught at university or whats already used at $CORP job, fulfil some requirements given to them, and collect their paycheck. They usuallt can't be bothered to pick up more interesting tools on the side.

Ontop of that there is fluctuation and risk-avoidance, so using anything that is not absolutely mainstream is seen risky, because replacements might be a bit harder to get. Combine that with the usual mediocre preexisting employee base, and its obvious why by default the dumbest/broadest thing is everywhere in use, even though most people involved in the decisions aren't idiots.

There are roughly 2 types of places where you can encounter Elixir or other exotic tech:

1. The decision maker / CTO / tech lead actually has the autonomy and the personal interest in this tech so he is the driving force to level up and stand out. Only works in tandem with enough dev motivation in the team or it will backfire.

2. Startups/new tech insourcing departments, where a small circle of actually competent/motivated people got to choose the foundation and are by some miracle not blindsided already with "pick the cheapest and least risky" option but understand that tech can be the critical advantage needed.

Joker slot: be a solopreneur and use whatever you feel comfortable with. Thats the general escape hatch that is becoming increasingly popular it seems.
The one where there's too many people for two few courts.
Could you make some actual example? Because I read 3 paragraph and I have no idea what you're talking about.
Because without Russia and China to point a finger at, the arguments are just bad.
To me this is why I don't like IDEs.

My Ruby projects often have a wrapper that reloads code and puts me in a pry prompt. I can edit code and introspect objects live as the code changes.

It's a natural extension of Ruby's Smalltalk legacy.

I recently replaced my X window manager with one I've written in Ruby, and I can just attach to it and modify state or change code live to test or fix things.

Being confined to JS and Java in VS Code for work is like having one arm tied behind my back.
Yeah. You have to realize that in chess there are two players and one of them is going to lose. Sometimes it's you, sometimes it's your opponent. To progress in chess you need to win more games than you lose. 50.5% win rate is enough in the long term.

My suggestion based on my own emotions with chess is that you should start playing quick games like 3+2 or something. The time and emotional "investment" in those games is low enough that you might not care when you lose. Just start another game and try again. Losing classical game that you were playing for 2 weeks is a different beast.
According to your logic we should be failing half of all school classes because half the kids shouldn't be above average.

Not many people are going to think that a system which weights everything to be distributed that way is useful as a metric for evaluating human experiences.
I remember an older HN post about this, it explained that both sides of the argument are right.

For people who never toast bread, refrigeration ruins it faster.
For people who always toast bread, refrigeration keeps it usable longer.

I'm in the latter category, I can attest to a loaf of "french bread" being perfectly fine in the fridge for about 3 weeks.
Instead of turning Pixels with Assistants into iPhone killers and becoming Apple, author should have looked straight at Microsoft Copilot and how a paradigm shifting LLM in G Workspace could kill Office. The Pixel is still only sold in 21 countries, scaling to Apple level would be brutal.

Also that idea Google will build such a magically superior AI to every else is a bold claim. Can it make a competitive one? Yes. Can it make one so good that it makes every other AI obselete and everyone trade their iPhone for Pixel? I think that's unlikely given the level of competition
I imagine they would be expected to treat the VHS and DVD as a single item, not loaning out both at the same time. This is what CDL is, and has been practiced without major issue by digital libraries including the IA. What they did here was remove that restriction and loan out an unlimited number of simultaneous copies of a given book, something which a physical library cannot do
Sure, that's what I was getting at. Being able to pass stateful allocators as function arguments is very flexible.
I was the same. I can't easily describe what changed, but now I don't play to win or lose, I just decided to play for the sake of playing.

If you lose a game, just stop playing for a bit, and don't give in to the feeling of wanting to play another to prove you can win. This will only result in frustration.

If you lose, make yourself think "That was a fun game. I learned X, and will try and do Y next time."
I guess Hamas only went for a stroll through Israel and it didn't murder, torture or kidnap any one. Why are you lying?
it's a social phenomenon.

no coincide that BTC and alt/memecoins rose at the same time as social media and generation of people who grew up with the internet.

it's a social casino and it isn't going anywhere. it captures the post 2007-2008 zeitgeist perfectly.
Yes it does, there are suffering humans on the other end as well, now with one fewer path to reducing that suffering
An acquaintance of mine was looking into the general area of using cheap electricity. The pitch is "Instead of looking at storing energy efficiency, look at things that become profitable if energy is really cheap, but only for the fraction of the day". This demand in turn will drive building more generating capacity.
> What is the better solution that retains the anti-theft capabilities of the device?

A private key that is given to you upon purchase and that you can store in your password manager.
It's all a shell game.
Humans progressively feel agency over events triggered before their actions
Agreed. Ruby is not Rails in so many ways, even on philosophical grounds. Rails is full of magic, implicitness, and conventions, which enables a great deal of very speedy development but also becomes† a minefield if you steer away from The Way; while plain Ruby is very explicit and in plain sight, there's no magic. It's a blank page, an open field, it's raw material for creative ground.

Rack or Minitest for example are very Ruby. RSpec on the other hand is full of Railsy magic, just yesterday testing some threaded stuff I was bit by `let` because it has concurrency consequences, and the magic becomes darkness as you have to look behind the curtain and beat it into submission in roundabout ways that obscure the thing you're actually doing.

† or sometimes is a minefield, all by itself, like this nonsense: https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/1512cf2ba578282c898b8eb6...
Nah, they’re right.
>You think governments have the ability to combat misinformation without living in some Orwellian-esque regime

yes. Of course it can and has been abused, but if we use that line of thinking we'd have zero government.

>If we could even start by labeling misinformation properly, then maybe we could do something about it.

I agree. It's very case by case, but I'd hope in this case that "flooded with fake images [about war]", i.e. propaganda, is at least one of these cases where you do want governments (emphasis on plural)to intervene. Especially as AI will only hasten the ability to generate such propaganda.

>"Misinformation" hardly fits into that in its current state.

misinformation fit into all 3 aspects you mention, though. misinformation has harmed people, regardless of your political spectrum we should be able to agree with this. And the ability to process the proper facts does keep things fair over who has the "hottest memes" or exploits SEO the best for their goals.
> mildly inconvenienced

Judging by GP comment, they sound like they are heavily inconvenienced. Am I reading it wrong?
It will make the decarbonization slower, because people will be driving old cars for much longer.
While obviously the true Hacker News opinion is ‘hurr durr Apple bad’.

Beeper is requesting money for illegally distributing Apples copyrighted code which they then use in a questionable way. Cry me a river.
I've also made something similar. It was originally for the Prusa Mini, but I've updated it with a beta that accepts an arbitrary array of probe points: https://bbbenji.github.io/PMSBLM/beta/
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.chess.ches...
That does not quite seem to be the point. There is a huge difference between "better" and "crushing".

> We are taught from a young age that winning is the objective of playing a game, but what if it wasn’t?

No, we aren't. The are multiple players in a game. So you win some, they win some and sure, you are taught to try to win more than 50%. But if you win 90+% of the time, you are wasting both players' time.
It's publicly announced by Intel https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
This kind of case is why I hate patents. As many other commenters pointed out, the fact that light through the skin can be used to measure biometrics is arguably "obvious" given that many people noticed it around the same time. The patent simply measures which group had the $, time, and motivation to submit a patent before any of their peers did. In this situation, the basic measurement method appears all over the place, like in cheap pulseoximeters. Sticking the same device in a wearable or other device isn't a giant leap that deserves being defended via patent law to protect an "inventor".

I'm sure patents have a place in the modern world, but I rarely see a case where they are being used as intended - more often than not, it's as I said above : a measure of who from a bunch of peers who "invented" the same thing at the same time made their submission to a patent office first with the goal of squelching competition or building revenue streams via licensing. Basically, scummy practices abusing the system. Apple certainly is not innocent in this regard - I hate it when they play this game just as much as I hate it when others do too.
You've got replies telling you that you're wrong about what people can afford. I'll tell you that you're wrong about what people should be prioritizing:

Millions of Texans lost power, only a few hundred died. For most people losing power really isn't a big deal they need to be super concerned about. They get more blankets out of the closet and carry on just fine. People vulnerable to freezing to death in a few days without power are a small minority; it's pretty much just very elderly people without much sense living alone and infants with very neglectful parents.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I haven't made any arguments. I asked you a question.
This. But if you use integer surrogate primary keys and seed one server with even ones and one server with odd ones, both incrementing by two, and put some uniqueness constraint on your natural key, you won't have this issue of insert collisions and halted replication, just normal SQL errors. IIRC (non postgres-based advice from an earlier life but should work.)
Without talking about your use case, this is such an absurd claim that doesn’t deserve a response. The rest of us can easily run a dozen or more typical light load HTTP services within 512MB.
I’m not sure this is quite true for S3, but for the general case, once there’s consensus that a record is eligible to be deleted, you don’t require consensus to delete them. You can do it any time after the drop dead date. Once a month for instance.

One of the consensus algorithms Google was bragging about a few years back was built on very high precision hardware clocks that set a ridiculously short timeframe to achieve consensus on new data. After a few hundred milliseconds you could be certain a record had settled and make business decisions based off of it. It’s the same basic idea, but three orders of magnitude faster.
No. Mitigations were available for openssh before you wrote that comment. Follow the recommendations from ssh-audit (master version). [0]

For packages, openssh and openssh-portable 9.6 include the fix, but every vendor will need to backport if they maintain their own pile of patches against a particular version of -portable.

0. https://github.com/jtesta/ssh-audit
They both have smaller printable areas and +40%/+100% is still a pretty big price difference.
Thanks for posting, if anyone has any questions about Tiny Code Christmas, feel free to ask.

It's not too late to start, there's no time limit. It's all very informal so you can start anytime and the videos and website will stay up. Checkout #lovebytetcc on Mastodon to see what people are up to, the discord is also very welcoming and active if people are stuck and need help.
Just make the gguf yourself it takes 5 mins and you dont need thebloke
> your usage of that device is conditional on being in the good graces of a group of very wealthy, indifferent, strangers.

Was it necessary to say “wealthy”? That doesn’t seem relevant, but rather incidental.
Yes, and I can do all that now without your device, and I was able to do it before digital devices became prevalent. Yet, it does not happen, because no one has any motive to do this to you even if the means to do it has now been reduced to simply taking your phone. If someone has that motive then access to your phone will /not/ be the deciding factor.

The opportunity costs don't bear out either, as just because someone has an expensive piece of tech, does not mean they have the kind of assets you can drain into Bermuda. The reward ratio is not significant to plan for this eventuality in any meaningful way.

Which is why most people when faced with the prospect of insane security will just choose to layer two simpler methods together instead, such as basic old 2FA via SMS or FIDO. These technically reduce security barrier of entry but allow the portions of the implementation to live further apart from each other, which for most people, is enough.

Also, if your work didn't issue you a secure PC and trusted 2FA hardware, then allows you to have privileged information like email on your home laptop, that's entirely bad policy on their part.
Useless as he never updates them post release. You are better served doing it yourself.
And quite often pair programming could be done by single programmer and inanimate object.

Still. It does often work, specially if the other person has better knowledge of technology or code in question.
Don't forget, nobody prevents the user from opening an issue. If it's critical and the maintainers care, they'll work on it with or without the user's star.
PayPal recently did this to a friend - asked them to verify their account, then terminated it.
Meta: confused, upset

INFO: I've gone through my last 200 comments on HN[1] trying to figure out what it is I'm trying to promote. Other than the last few comments it seems to be heavily AI and Musk related with nothing related to Nazis, Eugenics or other such things.

I've also done full history searches for various things that could be the "it" you refer to, but my HBD discussion was about three years and several thousand comments ago and I have only a few posts that mention "eugenics" and they're all about word meanings, so I think you are referring to my repeated attempts to lecture people on meanings of words (trying to teach clear thinking about word definitions and ideally teaching people about why Tabooing words[2] is an important rationality technique). But while they are admittedly quite common, they actually seem to get almost no engagement and would be quite ineffective flame bait.

I will still stop as that's what you want though. :(

[1] Up to here:
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=20&prefix=false&q...

[2] https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WBdvyyHLdxZSAMmoz/taboo-your...
Lessons from Fundraising as a Female Founder
"param" isn't a variable unless you defined it in the current method - it lacks a sigil so if it's a variable it must be a local one. So it's more likely to be a method, and so you can usually find where it was defined with self.method(:param).source_location (or use pry or irb, or rdbg, and drop to a debugger session and you have easy access to nicer methods). If you don't want to run a tool like pry or rdbg, then sure, Ruby will be painful for you, just the same way as refusing the use the best available tooling will make working with most languages.

As for disliking Rails, join the club, plenty of Ruby users dislike Rails too.
> It seems like the implicit assumption is that there must be a harm somewhere, we just haven't found it yet... isn't any business's primary purpose to compete with / harm competitors?

As a general rule, firms want to escape competition in order to make higher profits. There's nothing wrong with that! Indeed, the mechanism by which economic competition generates many of its benefits is that firms innovate in order to escape competition, and for those innovations to be useful for us all. So, where does competition/antitrust law come in? In part, it's about ensuring that firms escape competition in the way that we want. Innovation and competition on the merits is good, underhanded tactics to harm competitors is bad. All competitions need these kind of rules, regardless of whether they're economic, political, sporting, etc. When you have a large population of thousands of firms, you can be sure that some of them will be trying to compete unfairly, hence the assumption that there is some harm that we're yet to find.

> there isn't any consumer harm to be found, only harm to smaller competitors' businesses

We can distinguish between 'static' and 'dynamic' harms. Static harms are those which happen in the short run, such as a cartel agreeing to increase prices or not innovate. These harms are quite concrete and easy to define. Dynamic harms are those which affect the way a market might function in the future. For instance, a harm to innovation may result in people not having access to new products. It's hard to say for sure whether these harms will actually manifest, so we're usually talking about tendencies instead of certainties. It's perfectly reasonable to consider tendencies under the law though (e.g. we might prohibit drink-driving for the same reason). Dynamic harms usually have harm to consumers as a second order effect (e.g. reduced innovation or choice).