skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that's funny because personally I DIDN'T find that answer to be comprehensive or balanced. By my lights, it seems to go out of its way to ignore the affordances modern databases offer to protect against abuse. I found the following paragraph from the answer to be especially immeasured.

"One of the most common vulnerabilities on web applications is SQL Injection, and you are giving a SQL console to your users. You are giving them a wide variety of guns, lots of bullets, and your foot, your hand, your head... And some of them don't like you."

No, you are not giving your users a wide variety guns and bullets and hands and heads. You DO have some measure of control in the amount of power available to users. I don't consider it comprehensive or balanced not to address that fact in the answer.
The Reasoning Engine
Could it be the bed bugs don’t communicate much and don’t have a central colony so the boric infection cannot be spread among them?
Is it just me or is this stuff stupid expensive (and going up in price over time)? I found the other one, NexGard, worked better with my dog for some reason. Not any less expensive though. That said, you are right... it works surprisingly well.
Major kudos to Dan Goodin at Ars Technica for this write up. The article reads in a “progressive disclosure” manner, and I was able to follow along to the end even though I am not a programmer.
Exactly. And while one can easily just take down such a movie if an infringement claim is filed it’s unclear how one “removes” content from a trained model given how these models work. Thats messy.
> Why isn't Apple detecting the spyware\malware payload? If only Apps approved by Apple are allowed on an iPhone, detection should be trivial.

Because Apple is busy fixing exploits discovered by Citizenlab. /s

But hey, Apple is secure.
Can you imagine that we, Software Engineers in Kyrgyzstan, cannot publish apps on Google Play?! Google is blocking whole countries from publishing apps. This is not just about missing out on business opportunities; it's about being denied the basic platform to share our creativity and hard work with others! Unfair discrimination!

I am deeply frustrated by this situation. Even more so because I know there are Kyrgyz people working at Google, and one confided that the developers had made plans to include Kyrgyzstan in the list of allowed countries. However, these plans were inexplicably rolled back on orders from another department. This isn't just a technical hurdle; it feels like a deliberate sidelining of our nation and our talents.

I urge you to consider the struggles of smaller nations like ours. We don't ask for special treatment, just a fair chance to participate on the global stage.
You should check out https://pikvm.org/
But this is a ban due to alleged patent infringement (or alleged abuse of the patent system, depending on one's opinion of Apple) - comparing this to a public harm/public-benefit scenario is a distraction.
I think the inherent problem is abstraction just doesn't work in the same way as it does in software. Various things keep pulling you down to the circuit level so if you're too far above it you're going to have a hard time as you have to reason through all those abstractions you built to avoid thinking about it.

Closing timing (getting your design to pass timing analysis at a desired frequency) is a great example. Physical details like how many gates are on some path between flops, how far apart those flops are and how big the gates are (bigger gate, bigger drive, faster transitions) and what else is connected to them (more fan out more capacitance to drive, slower transitions) matter and in standard synchronous design this is pervasive across everything you do. Abstract too far from those details and closing timing becomes a nightmare.

Imagine you wrote some standard data structure in the language of your choice. Now imagine the more call sites you have for the methods that manipulate it the slower it goes everywhere every single time you call it. Imagine some tiny edge case buried deep in the logic calling it occasionally could massively slow down accesses every time from everywhere. How would that change the way you build abstractions?
There is a hundred years of legal precedents in the realm of technology upsetting the assumptions of copyright law. Humans use tools - radios, xerox machines, home video tape. AI is another tool that just makes making copies way easier. The law will be updated, hopefully without comparing an LLM to a man.
Show HN: NF Compose – An API to Build/Generate REST APIs
I believe you should have no difficulties finding these in the US - try Newark, Mouser, DigiKey, Arrow.
> And the metadata (metaknowledge?) would be larger than the knowledge itself.

Because URLs are usually as long as the writing they point at?
No I don't think we should excuse speaking this way, which isn't something everyone does nor something so many people did years ago. It is a particular style of speaking that is over-represented in certain journalist types.
Barrier has built-in encryption
Is there a concrete explanation of what Masimo’s actual innovation was in their patents?

They were posted in a previous thread, and the way they were written made it unclear what was actually covered. Is Apple allegedly infringing on the idea of putting a blood oxygen sensor in a watch, a technical innovation in how to do so effectively, or something else entirely?
And god willing if there is any justice in the courts NYTimes will lose this frivolous lawsuit.

Copyright law is a prehistoric and corrupt system that has been about protecting the profit margins of Disney and Warner Bros rather than protecting real art and science for living memory. Unless copy/paste superhero movies are your definition of art I suppose.

Unfortunately it seems like judges and the general public are so clueless as to how this technology works it might get regulated into the ground by uneducated people before it ever has a chance to take off. All so we can protect endless listicle factories. What a shame.
Anderson Cooper’s All There Is podcast is overall amazing, but I particularly enjoyed his conversation with Stephen Colbert
Except this is a comment section for discussion, so it's appropriate to discuss and point out this issue which IMHO contaminates nearly all forms of media today.
I had the same situation recently - a single German cockroach chilling on the front of our dishwasher. Being sufficiently terrified by reading r/whatisthisbug and the like, I had a pest control company out the next day to treat. They could find no signs of infestation and I haven't seen a single one since (and we did set out traps to monitor). The Orkin guy who came out said it's not uncommon for a lone individual to venture into a home.
This is not answering the GP question and does not count as a satisfactory ranked citation list. The first one is particularly dubious. Also you didn’t clarify which statement was based on which citation. I didn’t see “dog” in your text.

To help understand the complexity of an LLM consider that these models typically hold about 10,000 less parameters than the total characters in the training data. If one wants to instruct the LLM to search the web and find relevant citations it might obey this command but it will not be the source of how it formed the opinions it has in order to produce its output.
Thanks for pointing it out. I clicked on his profile but somehow missed the details of the project he's making a living off.
The beauties of make are:

* It actually does the complicated job correctly, or can, it provides the means to. A lot of things that claim to be "new better make" are simpler by being simply incomplete and/or internally more magic and less correct and less deterministic.

* Single simple binary. No freaking python or ruby of just a certain vintage and 500 modules but maybe not the system ones or maybe only the system ones...

* Always available everywhere, not just in the middle of the bell curve of modern and popular systems, and will be tomorrow exactly the same as yesterday. Deviations like gmake vs bsdmake are essentially trivial and don't really break anything or present any real problem. IE: portable across both space and time in all directions of all dimensions.

Make is sane for the job it does. It's a great example of a correct use and application of a DSL.

And all those complaints are still true. I address them by:

* Simply adopt a habit or discipline to voluntarily avoid the implicit features. Don't use globbing either. Just don't use those features that are unwise. They are still there, but you don't have to invoke them.

* Just suck it up and deal with the tabs and whitespace and line-continuation and quirks like how each line of shell in a target is a new shell environment unless you build the annoying long single command, capturing exit values so they don't reach the parent make process and get treated as an error, etc. Whatever. To me that's all just normal shell scripting requirements in any context, make not especially different from cron or cgi or other. Rather that than passing around powershell objects or something.

Could be better but ninja or whatever is not the answer to those minor annoyances.
We're not talking about consumer safety reasons here, and I was talking about a default posture not an absolute rule. The reason a judge has to approve pausing the ban is to work out whether it should happen in that particular case.
That does indeed work! Fascinating.

Now I'm endlessly curious as to why I've never gotten a correctly located link from many designers in several orgs. It is, however, sufficiently buried that I think most designers just copy the browser URL and call it a day.

I honestly can't remember a single time I've gotten a targeted Figma link like this from a designer.
I suppose I should mention the much maligned Royal Raymond Rife who stumbled onto this same phenomena over a century ago.
Yeah I should really get around to learning VHDL!
> They’re the most user-hostile of the big tech companies and I want them to lose.

I'm curious, why do you want them to lose given you aren't forced to use their services?
obsidian for my notes
List of software tools that are used by NASA
> Solidly rooting for NYT on this - it’s felt like many creative organizations have been asleep at the wheel while their lunch gets eaten for a second time (the first being at the birth of modern search engines.)

Hacker News consistently have upvoted posts to let users circumvent paywalls. And even when it doesn't, conversations here (and on Twitter, Reddit, etc.) that summarize the articles and quote the relevant bits as soon as the articles are published are much more of a threat to The New York Times than ChatGPT training on articles from months/years ago.
I'm not saying copyright is without problems (e.g. there is no reason I think its protection should be as long as it is), but I think the opposite, where the incentive to create new content (especially in the case of news reporting) is completely killed because someone else gets to vacuum up all the profits, is worse. I mean, existing copyright does protect tons of independent writers, artists, etc. and prevents all of the profits from their output from being "sucked up" by a few entities.

More critically, while fair use decisions are famously a judgement call, I think OpenAI will lose this based on the "effect of the fair use on the potential market" of the original content test. From https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ :

> Another important fair use factor is whether your use deprives the copyright owner of income or undermines a new or potential market for the copyrighted work. Depriving a copyright owner of income is very likely to trigger a lawsuit. This is true even if you are not competing directly with the original work.

> For example, in one case an artist used a copyrighted photograph without permission as the basis for wood sculptures, copying all elements of the photo. The artist earned several hundred thousand dollars selling the sculptures. When the photographer sued, the artist claimed his sculptures were a fair use because the photographer would never have considered making sculptures. The court disagreed, stating that it did not matter whether the photographer had considered making sculptures; what mattered was that a potential market for sculptures of the photograph existed. (Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1992).)

and especially

> “The economic effect of a parody with which we are concerned is not its potential to destroy or diminish the market for the original—any bad review can have that effect—but whether it fulfills the demand for the original.” (Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1986).)

The "whether it fulfills the demand of the original" is clearly where NYTimes has the best argument.
Human brains are still the main legal agents in play. LLMs are just a computer programs used by humans.

Suppose I research for a book that I'm writing - it doesn't matter whether I type it on a Mac, PC, or typewriter. It doesn't matter if I use the internet or the library. It doesn't matter if I use an AI powered voice-to-text keyboard or an AI assistant.

If I release a book that has a chapter which was blatantly copied from another book, I might be sued under copyright law. That doesn't mean that we should lock me out of the library, or prevent my tools from working there.
Yeah, it is clearly possible. But trucks have the benefit of generally accumulating huge amounts of highway miles, which is substantially easier on the entire vehicle than family hauling and commuting. Those taxis are amazing, but I wonder if that's the right model given technological change over their lifetimes.

Also, particularly for trucks, the economics of a vehicle used to make money look a bit different than one that is purely for transportation utility.
“Open source” is free labor for SaaS companies, while the insistence on liberal free (as in beer) licenses makes it almost impossible to build a software business in any other way by flooding the market.

SaaS is the least free model for software. You have no privacy, no control, and in most cases can’t even export your data.

Thus open source actually minimizes freedom in practice, at least for everyone other than developers.
> cable not having ads

> programming didn't get interrupted to deliver ads.

Two different things. "Cable not having ads" means cable didn't have ads, which we've now agreed on many, many times that cable absolutely carried ads. And yes, on channels like ESPN and USA and Comedy Central and Cartoon Network and CNN and what not there were ad breaks in shows, even at the beginning of those channel's existences. And once again, the majority of channels on cable were just retransmissions of OTA networks, which once again as we've agreed on had interruptions in the programs for ads.

Cable.

Had.

Ads.

Since.

Day.

One.

The majority of content available on cable had ads, since day one.

Any argument otherwise is denying reality.

> Netflix started streaming late 90's/early aughts

Laughable you're going to argue timelines with me here. Netflix streaming services didn't launch until 2007. 2007 is not the late 90s nor the early aughts. Once again showing me you're delusional and have poor recollection of history, or just trolling. I'm supposed to trust your recollection of the history of cable over the piles of written articles from the times in question and my own lived experiences when you're arguing Netflix was streaming in the 90s?

> That's why you don't cherry pick quotes.

Adding in the context of needing a cable box is what drove you to quit doesn't make this statement any closer to reality:

> I once had someone correct me and say cable also has ads. I had to look it up and sure enough, it apparently does now.

Emphasis added. Apparently cable has ads now, who knew. As if that's some kind of recent (from at least the late 90s+) phenomenon. When you've agreed in this thread multiple times cable TV has had ads since the beginning.

Adding in the context of "I haven't paid for cable since the mid-90's" as an argument that cable somehow didn't have ads in the 90s but does now still just shows you're delusional. USA and Comedy Central and MTV and CNN and Sci-Fi and Cartoon Netowrk and the like all had ads which interrupted programming in the 90s. That was cable. It had ads. The ads interrupted the shows on the vast majority of channels. I was there, I saw it, I lived it. I have multiple sources talking about advertising in cable channels going back to the early 80s. Shit I've got VHS tapes on my shelf here from recordings of things like The Daily Show and Dragonball Z from the 90s which cut to ad breaks in the middle of the shows. You're telling me the things I can see with my own eyes, right now, aren't real!
This could just as easily be said verbatim to the person disrupting the status quo with an animal.

You also seem to be assuming that I’m writing this from a place of personal preference to not have dogs near. I wrote very carefully; even if I liked dogs around, I would still consider it rude and inconsiderate, much like smoking indoors.
Clearly, "theft" is an analogy here (since we can't get it to fit exactly), but we can work with it.

You are correct, if I were to steal something, surely I can be made to give it back to you. However, if I haven't actually stolen it, there is nothing for me to return.

By analogy, if OpenAI copied data from the NYT, they should be able to at least provide a reference. But if they don't actually have a proper copy of it, they cannot.
Because the law has never delt with the concept of training models like these before and it's not just automatically the same thing as republishing something non-transformative no matter how much some people want to just assert that it is without actually thinking about it. It's a new case, that probably needs new different types of protections and consideration.
We absolutely need an information economy where people can research things and publish what they find without needing some deep pocketed sponsors. Some may do it for money, some may do it for recognition. Once AI absorbs all that information and uses it without attribution these incentives go away. I am sure OpenAI, Microsoft and others will love a world where they have a quasi monopoly on what information goes to the public but I don't think we want that.
Patents are a pragmatic contract between inventors and society:

- In order to be granted a patent, inventors must publish detailed descriptions of their inventions, including step-by-step instructions on how to re-create them. The inventions become public knowledge.

- In exchange for publishing the details of their inventions, society grants a temporary exclusive right to market the technology.

Without this system, the only way to safeguard a technological advantage would be to keep it secret. Inventors would be incentivized to maintain maximum secrecy for all new inventions. That would be bad for society, and inconvenient for inventors.

The patent system is an acknowledgement of this reality. Even though it seems a bit ridiculous, we allow people to claim temporary "ownership" of their new ideas, in order to incentivize the publishing of research, which eventually enters the public domain.

Clearly, there's some room for argument on the details of this specific case, but assuming the patent is legitimate, and that Apple infringed on it, then it would be bad for the long-term progress of science for us to let them get away with it.
I’m not convinced there’s a problem to solve here. Nobody is advocating for poorly-targeted legislation.

IMO it’s better to focus on “101: how legislation works” before trying to argue in nonspecific ways that legislation fails to work as intended. The devil is always in the details, so unless someone wants to argue that “protecting vulnerable people” is not a good goal, it makes no sense to criticize a hypothetical law we don’t have in front of our eyes.
> the fact that C is annoying to write and debug a web app in.

Weren’t most CGI scripts written in Perl? At least that’s what I remember.
Quite obviously this is a podcast, that's why I said "unlistenable" as well. At least with written word you can sort of skip over it and don't have to hear it. In any case this isn't a universal requirement of the genre; it is a more recent thing where it is acceptable to speak this way and not everyone does it nor did so many used to do it.
Of course that's true but in this case it doesn't seem so mysterious to me. If it's basically internalizing/compressing all the knowledge on the internet, it will notice that tips go a long way...

this is why I am pretty polite when I query AI's, I assume that would make them respond more helpfully
I appreciate this perspective, good points, thanks
It isn’t necessarily knowingly if you’re still in the appeals process.
Getting Started with OCaml and Functional Programming
Tesla will happily replace the batteries in your car for around $10,000. However generally they retain 80-90% of their capacity after over 200,000 miles and 15 years of driving. Lithium ion batteries can be reconditioned and remanufactured. ICE cars have been rusting in junkyards since the outset at much fewer miles and more expensive overhauls of their major systems for generations. The ewaste battery meme stuff is just folks hanging onto the age of fire unreasonably. The age of Maxwell is upon us.

N.b., Other car makers, YMMV. But it’s not intrinsic to the technology. If there are issues like this, it’s brand dependent. Caveat emptor.
I remember people were very passionately arguing iMessage can only be secure if the only client is the Apple sanctioned one

> the unknown attackers kept their campaign alive simply by sending devices a new malicious iMessage text shortly after devices were restarted.
A few months ago my mouse stopped working on my 2nd computer. It took me a few minutes to fix because I just plain forgot I was running Synergy. I checked, and my setup had been working without issue for 4-5 years. Definitely near the top of my list for valuable paid software.
Sure, that is already better than the average. If you feel your gums are healthy and teeth are clean sure, keep going as you are.

It is different in each country, but usually a dental hygienist has a slightly different viewpoint than a dentist. Some dentists don't care that much for gum health - they make money repairing/ extracting teeth after all and some are little too greedy. Dental hygienists are evaluated based on how well they prevent damage and further health issues/ heal the existing problems. They make more money initially when they perform deep scaling (if they are legally allowed to do that in that country) or later when your teeth are healthy doing clinical whitening. Regular dental hygiene is only mildly lucrative. Good deep scaling is exhausting however so you cannot do more than a 2-3 deep scaling patients per day if you are thorough. You have to fill out the day ideally with normal hygiene, ideally stabilized patients where it is more a checkup. Whitening is the best bang for the buck so to say. Not exhausting, more money per time than regular hygiene session.
I have been using plain text accounting for almost a decade with my wife. Specifically, I use beancount (https://beancount.github.io/docs/) and a custom set of scripts that I have developed to categorize expenses and other features (https://github.com/luciano-fiandesio/beanborg/)

I reckon is not for everyone, since a lot of stuff takes place in the terminal, but it has been working very well for us.