skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Unless you are working directly with something like reading the signals off the clock on the motherboard you are bound to deal with third-party code when dealing with clocks.

What's the point of your home-made timer if it doesn't faithfully emulate the actual clock that's going to be used in your actual program? How will you have confidence that your tests are even doing anything useful?

There are plenty of things that might be out of your control. If you try to emulate time. For example, the system, when using a realistic timer may decide to do some context switches, seeing how your code is blocking waiting on some wakeup event, while if you test against a timer that tries to speed things up those context switches won't happen. And there could be plenty examples of similar things.

If not, then how are you going to implement your home-made timer? Is your home-made timer going to be an actual timer (i.e. it will have to read time, thus relying on third-party code to do it) or will it pretend that time doesn't exist (and thus test something different from what your code is actually supposed to do)?

Your ideas about "substituting" system clock with hand-written code are out of reach for most developers out there. Even those who theoretically could embark on such a task probably won't because that's just too much effort.

What I'm getting at: the whole idea of mocking time for testing is a fool's errand. You'll be testing things that you don't actually need and won't be testing that actually need testing.
Tech Billionaires Need to Stop Trying to Make the SciFi They Grew Up on Real
I wonder why this got buried so deep - the comments seem civil; maybe it's the comment to score ratio?
But not their platforms. Automakers generally make their own platforms (though they will rebadge someone else's too), engines (again they share with each other, but most have their own), and transmissions. Everything else is outsourced to companies like Bosch.
Modern software is so buggy, but it's considered the norm. I was talking to a non-technical person recently about that, and although they were at first puzzled by my view that most software is problematic, they realized that they experience the same bugs I complain about all the time. It's become so normal that people hardly notice it, but that doesn't make it better because bad software wastes human life time whether they realize it or not.

> But if you propose a major refactor, there is no question about (rightly) where the blame lies.

LOL Yep.

Worse is when the blame lies on the semi-technical cofounder of your company who, granted, achieved quite a lot on their own, wrote a barely maintainable mess. Do you really want to be the one to indirectly point out that his code needs to be replaced? Haha I think a lot of developers would rather wait for the Dilbert Principle to kick in so that the cofounder gets out of the way enough for significant changes to finally be made.
https://archive.is/PKWVs
I tend to prefer test harnesses, over unit tests[0], but each definitely has its place.

Testing is good. Integration testing is very good. Someone posted a story, a few days back, that linked to a GIF of this video[1] (I want to go to the source -Facebook, unfortunately), with the caption: "When the unit tests pass, but the integration test does not."

[0] https://littlegreenviper.com/miscellany/testing-harness-vs-u...

[1] https://www.facebook.com/100001967368624/posts/2559941464081...
Yeah that's what I was hoo-boying about. The subtle shift in term.
Indeed, a lot of people in America believe that there is no path to success. It's a very popular notion on HN. Another thing I'm in a small minority of is pointing out that adults of sound mind and body in America are capable of success.
Source? Regardless, even if VLC or a version of VLC is broken in some configuration, it's not universally broken on wayland.
I have been using it on Wayland for multiple years (some of that might be through XWayland, I don't think all of it, but I'm not sure).
The chDB team is great! We worked with them recently to add chDB support to JupyterLab via a %%sql magic: https://jupysql.ploomber.io/en/latest/integrations/chdb.html
As a KDE4 user, I had been using a UI KDE4 for two years when Windows 7 came out in 2009. I thought Windows 7 felt a lot like KDE4 and maybe was inspiration for MS. Also, KDE4 was a one step back two steps forward release, and so it kind of felt good to see MS intentionally or unintentionally assimilating KDE's UI.
This is very cool thanks for doing this!
"Why I'm doing this": https://lisa.sunder.net/why.html
I'm imagining Kramer, Linux developer: "Jerry... what if we randomly used a different random device each time?!"
Good point. If someone publishes a photo then they violate the child’s right to privacy and I agree that they should be punished.

Doesn’t this mean that the crime is in the act of publishing? If they have the photo but don’t publish it then what have they done wrong? What about if the photo is a very realistic rendering of a child that doesn’t exist? (Or just a drawing, for which people have indeed been prosecuted in some parts of the world.)

(The flip side is already covered in law: if the face is real but the scene is fake then it is still an invasion of privacy.)
ImGui is brilliant. I can highly recommend this hex editor built using it: https://github.com/WerWolv/ImHex
I‘m not taking about FSD, I am talking about autopilot.
Yeah science! Yeah Mr. GPT!
You see, you think very differently from me, and your opinion on this is mainstream.
I thought quality hashing algorithms have no known collisions? Like, it's theoretically possible, it just has never happened, anywhere, not even once.

Why would a collision happen here?
Chrome OS and Android are surveillance/data capture platforms designed to funnel data to an advertising giant, including being caught secretly sending location data against users wishes more than once.
In this aspect, Gygax is wrong :)
But like you said, other networks will eventually catch up so long term tesla won't control the network either.
I prefer to say that "code is a liability, not an asset." Liabilities are useful and help achieve goals (want a house, get a mortgage), but the code is not the goal. Code is a mechanism that achieves that goal, but more code becomes a drag.
> a waiver stating your need for a window

In my area, building codes require two exits for every bedroom. It's not a "nice-to-have", it's a life-saving requirement in case of a fire.

With two exits for 4,500 people, this dorm was a massacre waiting to happen. The rest of the conversation about the design is pointless, given that fact alone. It's a non-starter.
This is cross posting pirated links
I think you overestimate the reliability of the random crap you hear from other human beings on a daily basis
Yeah if you want maximum performance on multiple platforms you'll probably have to package multiple frameworks. Llama.cpp might be a decently fast option on Apple Silicon, I'm not sure of the state of the art there.
I've used the entropy analogy also. In particular, entropy always wins in the end. But I do think it weakens the "debt" analogy to consider it the same thing, because I like the idea that this is sometimes transactional - a choice you make for benefit now which has amortized cost. I think this is a valuable idea that is separable from the problems of complexity growth, entropy, etc.

I certainly don't agree with the idea that all technical debt is due to shoddy work, that's obviously silly. I suspect that people fall into it because it is easy to understand. The original framing is more nuanced and harder to think about but no less in effect.
> As for tooling, first of all, Quint has type checking, which TLA+ doesn't.

I wouldn't put it quite like that. It's not that TLA+ doesn't "do type checking" because TLA+ is just a language for writing mathematical descriptions of things. It doesn't "do" anything (do the formulas of Newtonian mechanics do type-checking?). It's more precise to say that TLA+ is an untyped language. But the model checker does check something like "typing" in the sense of set membership. I.e. the invariant □(x ∈ Int), i.e. "x is always an integer", can be checked with a TLA+ model checker just like many other invariants.

Furthermore, a model checker is "static" in the sense that, just like a type-checker, it doesn't "run" a "program". It's easy to see that a model checker doesn't run anything if you consider that a model checker can prove the following "type" on the right hand side of the implication:

x ∈ BOOLEAN ∧ □[x' = TRUE ∨ x' = FALSE]_x ⇒ □(x ∈ BOOLEAN)

It proves it nearly instantaneously, even though every "execution" of the "program" on the left of the implication is infinite in its duration and there is an uncountably infinite number of such "execution", so clearly nothing is "executed" and the check isn't dynamic. So a TLA+ model checker does do something that's analogous-ish to type-checking.

However, it is true that by type-checking we normally mean an automated deductive process, i.e. one that applies inference rules, rather than an automated exhaustive analysis of the semantic domain, which is how a model-checker works. And yes, there are implications to the different ways "type checking" is done, especially when it comes to the algorithmic complexity of the checker.

This is just another example where comparisons to programming are unhelpful when describing mathematics that don't "run"; it just is.

It may be best to say that a language like Quint is inspired by the TLA logic (the TLA part of TLA+) and is similar to a programming language, whereas TLA+ is something else altogether (that requires learning something that is very much not programming) and leave it at that.

I admit that explaining the difference between programming (or something that's programming-like) and specifying a system with mathematics to people who are less familiar with the latter is difficult. It's a little like trying to explain the notion of a physics formula to a catapult builder in ancient Greece. There's clearly a relationship between the two (and some physics formulas may certainly be helpful when designing a catapult and make the catapult builder a better catapult builder), but they're also completely different things operating in two different domains (a formula isn't something that can fire a projectile).
I just want to point out that regardless of how you feel about the design, "cheaper" seems to be objectively false. Munger's University of Michigan dorm cost $155 million to house 630 students, which appears to be very expensive compared to every other comparable project I can find.
It sounds more like a case of "Use the tools you know". Like, the stated ORM toolkit may be complete overkill, but if they don't have experience doing object relational mapping by hand that's one more thing to learn to get the job done. The asserted goal is to deliver something for a group of people to use, so it's not a hobby of trying to find as many new lessons to learn as possible.
Purr – zsh CLI tool for searching through Android logcat
Sure, I get your point. In your specific case in your specific region, it is a shame that this did happen. However, the first comment you made was a much more generalized, broadly sweeping statement. A statement that effectively did seem to dismiss biking infrastructure or the investment in biking infrastructure. It is that statement I took issue with, not the highly anecdotal specific case it turned out to be based.
Thanks thats helpful. One place where the parallelizability of this method falls short of the transformer is not being able to pack multiple varying length examples into the same array during training with block diagonal attention pattern. If I understand correctly thats not possible with this architecture and its an important practical concern in large scale transformer training.
Absolutely and this is basically the entirety of the debate around best practices boiled down to a single word - context. There is no meaningful way to make decisions about software without the higher level context.

To be fair to them, maybe they just care more about learning new stuff instead of shipping - so in their context all of the stuff they do makes sense. For me i know how to write good code so am no longer interested in doing it, except when it's necessary :) First you must learn how to write great code, then you learn when to write simple code instead.
Land O'Lakes Settles Debate: How Long Can You Leave Butter Out on the Counter?
This reminds me of how the Quake-3-based game Tremulous has just two functions to simulate physics:

https://github.com/darklegion/tremulous/blob/master/src/game...
> No, the attack angle is either a untrusted app running in a sandbox (f[l]atpak, snap or crosvm or qemu with wayland passtrough[1]) with only a connection to the compositor or a trusted app running in a sandbox getting exploited

Agreed. This debate is particularly frustrating because X11 vulnerabilities get brought up as an excuse for ignoring other sandboxing efforts, and then Wayland gets dismissed because of vulnerabilities when not using other sandboxing methods. You can't win!

----

Even if I'm giving my web browser full access to my computer, there are apps I want to sandbox without running them in a full VM. And there are multiple parts to this puzzle to get better security and sandboxing, but those sandboxing efforts don't work if I can't secure the most basic parts of the visual desktop. If someone is demanding perfect sandboxing before we start looking at X11, they're going to be waiting a long time because there is a limit to how much progress we can make in this area while X11 stays dominant.

And okay, sure, we're setting up clipboard access for web browsers, but I can turn that off. And then I can take advantage of flatpak, snap, qemu, whatever and I can at least get closer to actual sandboxing controls, even for non-malicious apps. And I can do partial sandboxing, which is also a good thing -- the idea that everything needs to be either fully separated from each other or have full permissions is just not a good approach to security, sometimes we partially trust things.

----

Linux security is like we're in a boat with multiple holes that are taking in water, and whenever anybody tries to plug one of the holes, critics jump out and say, "what's the point, if someone can execute apps on your machine, there's plenty of other nasty things they could do." And so you move to the other hole and somebody says, "what's the point, attackers can just record your desktop." There are multiple holes on the ship, let's start patching them.

Getting better sandboxing controls into Linux is something that is going to take time and that means we're going to be patching holes while other holes exist that we haven't gotten around to yet. There is a limit to what tools like Bubblewrap can do for a graphical app if it's hooked up to X11. And yeah, I want clipboard controls for my web browser, but also I run more apps on my computer than just a web browser, and different apps have different problems. It's not even just about exploits or malicious apps entirely, sandboxing is useful even just for setting up temporary builds or dealing with buggy code and the fact that we don't have perfect solutions shouldn't be an excuse to not improve the situation at all.
> The first was in 2008 when NATO decided Ukraine could start the NATO membership process.

NATO membership of Ukraine and Georgia was, is, and in foreseeable future remains a pipe dream. Any hope of NATO entry was dashed when Russia invaded in 2014, because NATO members did not and do not want to get involved in an on-going conflict. It's always been the opposite: weakness has encouraged Russia to act bolder and bolder. We are now at watershed moment where the previous policy of appeasement has been discredited beyond repair and western experts have finally begun to universally recognize this simple truth.

> This whole war was telegraphed a decade ago and nobody involved was willing to compromise.

There is nothing to compromise over. Russia wants to subjugate us, we want to live in freedom. We have as much common ground with Russians as Britons or the French had with Germans when Hitler "telegraphed" his intentions.

> I think personally that it would have been better if the parties involved could come to a solution based in self-determination and demilitarization.

This strategy is how most neighbors of Russia from Finland down to Romania got invaded by Russia the last time around and lost a sizable portion of their population to Russian crimes of genocide.

Even Sweden, which had been neutral since Napoleonic times, decided to ditch neutrality and sign a mutual defense pact with other European nations, because the threat of Russian aggression is too large to face alone.
not only that, it had multiple faults in multiple systems one of which was not even related to charging.
Man freed from prison after trial's key witness was found to be blind
The More Features You Add
> you absolutely do choose to do the mathematical processing

And what makes you decide to choose to do the mathematical processing? Where does that signal come from?
That’s where governmental regulation should kick in and require compatibility, so you aren’t forced to change charger because you either change car or power company. I expect EU to get there at some point.
Try Reactionary[0] for a W2K-ish like thing for KDE. The same author has other themes like Expose[1] which I'm actually using for my daily theme.

[0]: https://store.kde.org/p/1252411

[1]: https://store.kde.org/p/1479063/
.NET Aspire Preview 2
A large number of standards are what one company did on their own and then made available to everybody via the likes of ANSI/ECMA/ISO. There are a number of reasons a company would want to do this.
Emergency evacuation was indeed one of the sticking points. 4,500 students in one building, only a couple of main exits, bedrooms with only one way out. When I was in a dorm, we had to evacuate fairly regularly when someone'd set off the fire alarms burning popcorn... and that just disrupted a couple hundred of us at one time.
Wayland feels more customizable and modular to me, in that it is a set of protocols and optional extensions with multiple implementations instead of one server (Xorg) to rule them all. This feels much more in the Linuxy/FOSSy mindset to me.
In fact, many, many people complain about the multitude of wayland implementations as fracturing and a division of work.

I'm not saying that I don't see the benefits of all building on a single server, but I can't say a bazaar-style development of multiple implementations and protocol extensions feels at all corporate.
Most of the state lives in coastal counties, which are the highest risk areas as you mentioned. There isn't much "low risk" real estate to help pay for the high risk areas. Flooding in an already humid environment usually means mold in the house so I can't imagine there are many places that aren't at least somewhat flooded by a statewide hurricane.
Why should I care about this? I don't care what google have hidden away. The best AIs are always going to be for the the most privileged.
Tube time is great podcast time.
> The OPT 6.7B model, for instance, exhibits a notable 97% sparsity within its FFN layer.

Does anyone here know what exactly that metric refers to? Does it mean the layer has 97% 0 values? That it can be compressed to 3% of its size?
> His great transgression, according to Berlin, was to say aloud what everyone knows but no one will admit: multiple ideals cannot be simultaneously attained. We can’t have everything good all at once.

Everyone will admit this. No one honestly believes all virtues are equally and simultaneously attainable. At any given time, certain things must be prioritized.

But some of us believe that it's not a zero-sum game; that "human nature" is not set in stone, and that it is a worthy project to try and engineer conditions which allow more of humanity's virtues to flourish. Machiavelli would seem to dismiss the possibility that a society can reorient itself towards empathy, charity, and equality without imploding. He also seems to believe that it's correct to trade individual prosperity for state power and glory.
| You sound like you saw the phrase "Right Way Guy", felt it sounded pejorative

I'm not sure what it sounded like, but I'm pretty sure I didn't feel that way.

| decided it must mean That Type Of Guy I Don't Like.

... huh. That escalated kind of quickly.

| I have no idea how the Primer anecdote relates to anything at all.

Well, I had hoped the paragraph following the anecdote explained that, but I guess I can't win them all can I.

EDIT:

What I find super interesting is that my original comment was that there are some interesting success and failure modes associated with "Right Way Guy".

And I follow it up with a musing that social pressure to conform is a way for the social hivemind to protect adherents via statistics.

THEN one of the comments looks suspiciously like it's chiding my social disharmonious actions.

Very cool.
> Under emergency conditions, you'd expect the separation to be handled by ATC.

ATC is never responsible for general traffic separation in visual meteorological conditions in the United States.

ATC is responsible for separating IFR airplanes from other IFR airplanes. When flying below 18000ft MSL in VMC, those IFR aircraft are still responsible for looking out the window to see and avoid VFR aircraft who may not be talking to ATC (and to be clear, the VFR aircraft is jointly responsible).

Just to drive this home: it is still 100% legal to fly around in a Piper Cub at 9500ft MSL with no transponder or radio in most of the country. It is legal to fly around VFR in a jet at 17500ft squawking 1200 not talking to ATC almost everywhere in the country. Primary radar coverage is going away, not getting better. You have to look out the window.
Ah, twm is still better than Gnome.
South Korea does it, and from what my friends who lived there (ranging from living there for a year to multiple years) told me, it is about as bad as you would expect.

For one, you cannot even access a ton of services and websites unless you got your alien resident card. Online shopping, games, most websites, tons of services, etc. It is such a shitshow, being without that alien resident card might as well make you non-existent. And it takes a while to get it even if you live close to a government office that schedules appointments for those, given it is a good old bureaucracy.
And in the US, just being arrested -- even if the arrest was a mistake and no charges are filed -- has serious adverse consequences for the arrested person.
The “Aero” in “Frutiger Aero” is Windows Aero. And Microsoft’s Segoe is practically Frutiger.

So more than being part of the era, I think it’s fair to say Windows Aero defined the aesthetic.
No need for well sourced data. Just a misread! Maybe take an introspective look at your interactions with other people. You seem a little unhinged!
Why cant they reduce home prices, health prices and education prices? Just like they managed to do for messaging, email, social, video and search.

All they need to do is disintermediate Wall Street/banks/insurance and real estate middle men.
It seems that there are at most 10000 Tor nodes.

Are the identity of the node operators known? Do known trusted organizations and individuals own the majority of these nodes?

It’s indeed expensive and risky for individuals to run Tor notes.
I don’t know why they’re selling lack of JSX as a feature. React works without JSX too. It’s just (very convenient) syntactic sugar.
London Underground tunnels are very small, so there's not much space for anything to be added. Many are lined with iron. Phone service was discussed many times in the past, but the phone companies didn't seem willing to pay what it would cost to install it.

(It's nothing to do with bombs.)