skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I have trouble comprehending what this piece provides beyond bullshit slinging at big tech. Wishing you were the one making six fixture for 2 - 6 hour days?

I think the following paragraphs provide useful non-hypocritical/non-"jealous" commentary, and were the most thought-provoking for me:

> But even with stronger regulations, the manifold problems that these tech giants create for society will persist. Unlike the industrial firms that Marx and Smith wrote about, tech firms like Google differ in one key aspect: how they turn a profit. Where industrial firms extract profits from the gap between value produced and what workers get paid in wages, internet platforms rely foremost on rents, which generate profit on the basis of existing property, intellectual or otherwise. No additional labor is needed for each unit of output; profit thus becomes fundamentally extractive, or “unproductive” as Marx, or even classical economists like Smith and Ricardo, would say. For companies like Google, rent comes from owning the infrastructure through which we live our digital lives. The vast majority of Google’s windfall profits—$60 billion in 2022—come from rents.

[...]

> In the end, the tech workers themselves are not responsible for the proliferation of bullshit. Nevertheless, the work they do (or don’t do) reveals that the problem, at its core, lies in the business model of the platform economy, one that depends not on productive labor but on rents. In our present economic paradigm, rents are undifferentiated from productive work where the creation of surplus value vis-à-vis the exploitation of labor lies at the heart of profitability. Making explicit these differences, however, would reveal that these platforms are not all that different from the banks of Wall Street: they are not making value, they’re taking it. And as long as this remains the underlying form of profit, tech firms’ imaginary of a technological future will be limited to the fast and cheap profits of monopoly rents. This is at the center of tech’s innovation crisis. That tech work is becoming bullshit is not the problem. The problem is that the companies themselves are bullshit.

(emphasis mine)

That rent-based profits allow these companies to retain vast numbers of bullshit-producing workers is less significant to me than the fact that these profits are extracted from everyday internet users. We are all made poorer from the value that Google et al are extracting from us, when they don't need that value to actually provide the services we are using. But their market dominance allows them to spend some of those profits in the service of artificially maintaining dominance, rather than on improving those services, or by extracting less value to provide the same services at a lower "cost" to us.
I assume by a combination of:

- Not a serious competitor

- Based in Europe

- Bad PR to shut down a company trying to create a cruelty-free smartphone
Meh. Economy would have collapsed without stimulus during COVID. That inflation has come down without a recession is a miracle.

Given a potentially catastrophic situation, we're incredibly lucky to have gotten off this easy.
Even for a torrent client, the number of active file descriptors is a function of the number of peer connections (e.g. a few dozen). It doesn't scale with the size of the output file.
You are clearly talking about only electricity production.

The article is talking about all sectors.

The UK and France have both reduced their per capita intensity over the last few decades but after an early lead by France, the UK has caught up and may well overtake.
There is a new operator offering a service, I think it starts in 2025.
Yes, I can see it
+1 for jank.

Exactly like what was the case for Athens, the core features don't feel very refined (glitches in block editing and not good at all search) and the focus is on building arguably unnecessary features.

On a cursory look it seems like Obsidian puts more effort into having a solid core, which I appreciate.

But Logseq is actually FOSS and fits my needs better with its paradigms.
I quite enjoyed the story but that said I feel like you can say this about almost any advancement. I’ve heard it about higher-level programming languages enough, heck my EE teacher in college regularly made fun of or belittled anyone who wanted to be a “web developer”. Honestly I don’t have the time or patience to hear about how bad “AI” is. It’s a freaking tool, that’s it. A powerful one but no different from the printing press up through the smart phone.

The AI doomers are so tiring (not saying that’s what this story is about). In fact in the end this story praises the ideas over what’s generated but at the end of the day the idea isn’t worth much if you don’t have the skill or means to bring it to fruition. It’s the same way I dislike people that hate electron because it’s electron. There are countless apps that would not exist without electron. The choice was not “native app” or “electron”, it was “electron” or “nothing”. I assume those people also thing 1 piracy = 1 lost sale, just absurd.

At the end of the day tools that let people accomplish more on their own than thought possible are a good thing. My entire side business hinges on tools (not AI) that make it possible for me to write code once and use it in many places, without that I’d need to know 3 languages/ecosystems verses 1. Now, would full native be better? No doubt, I’ll never argue against that _but_ if the alternative is something not existing then I’m happy to settle.
I dont think thats the gotcha you think it is.
what is topical anesthesia ?

It's also very well documented so no it's not about social warriors
Here’s something I’d like to figure out, when, how and why it happened.

India has got “by” and “into” back to front: that is, they say “by” means division and “into” multiplication, whereas places like Australia and the USA have “by” meaning multiplication and “into” division.

I’ve confirmed this inversion with current students and with a retired chemistry teacher in his late 70s in Hyderabad, and with a man in his 30s in West Bengal.

If you ask WolframAlpha “3 by 4”, you get: “Assuming "by" is Times | Use Divide instead”. Ask it “3 into 4”, and you get: “Assuming "3 into 4" is referring to arithmetic | Use as a math function instead” and it does division (and the math function offered is `QuotientRemainder[4, 3]` which returns `{1, 1}`).

(Not sure if there’s an intrinsic reason to prefer either assignation. Full forms are commonly expressed “divided by” and “multiplied by”, and if “by” is just an abbreviation, &c. &c. Then there’s “of” which feels more definitely context-dependent: “paint three of the four albino elephants” is division, “I want three of those asbestos-plated helberds” is multiplication.)
i use obsidian too! i have a question. how you recheck your note though obsidian in another device, as obsidian is only a local offline store base. i recently use github rep to synchronous notes. if there are some better ways?
Or quote-wrap `'rm'`.
Making spaghetti/tortellini/noodles, coffee, malt-o-meal, oatmeal, etc seems common enough for most to not be a "almost never use case". At least on stoves I've seen.
Services get cheaper so we consume more of them. See Jevon's paradox.
I get these, modified to be regular notebooks, from https://snco.com/

You can get them custom printed with whatever paper you like, custom names, titles and numbering on the books, for no more cost than a regular notebook.
Systems programming languages contain features most users don’t need but some users definitely require. Often those special features are needed to implement things in libraries so that ordinary user code doesn’t have to deal with certain low level details. Likewise ordinary user code doesn’t need to know about these new features!

And C++ is explicitly a multi-paradigm language so there can be affordances for multiple approaches. You can even use it as an OOP language if you want!

As far as syntax changes go, mostly they are in the direction of simplification and/or unification intended to make programming easier in the long run. So, for example, you can now in many cases write template generics without the elaborate template syntax.

But the C++ is also pretty unwilling to break old code, so old syntax and obsolete semantics are still available should you so choose. This is confusing to people who come to the language later on.

(Note that above I wrote “intended to make programming easier”. The case I cited of generics does make some things easier for me, but of course de gustibus and all that.)
In 2009, I created a bespoke SSD adapter by combining three pre-existing products. An article in hackaday bestowed the title "Hacker" to me, and I readily accepted it... but at the end of the day it was "just building with Legos," in my head.

However, such tinkering/MacGuyverism helped me to develop professionally, crafting several genuine "hacks," a few of which I'm (not?) ashamed to admit are still in-use. [1]

Life is about attitude, and fostering creativity/"hacking" should never be poo-poo'd.

¢¢

[1] Just as stupid construction example: I renovated a historic home in Hayward, Calif... when we couldn't find a time-appropriate doorlatch, I repaired the 100+ year old [damaged] unit using a shortened piece of reciprocating saw blade as the new spring. This door still operates as re-installed, over fifteen years later.
Learn what a Large Language Model is, how they work, and the generative AI capabilities of LLMs in business projects.
I am looking forward to seeing this post in 2034!
What's the difference here?

Both seem to have adaptive neural networks where those networks change as time goes on due to a reward - for animals, mutated genes being more likely to be given forward if the change was good. Over millions of generations it's statistically likely that more good genes that caused the neural networks to be in a state that is better able to solve problems within the environment get passed on, eventually resulting in an emerging intelligence. For training you similarly change the state of the neural network depending on whether the answer is good or bad.
> Making the filesystem, implemented from first principles to handle the second style of interaction, actually be implemented in terms of the first under the hood, is a source of needless complexity and bugs. And it was here, too.

Aren’t all modern file systems implemented as a tree of discontinuous regions? That’s the whole reason block allocators exist, why file fragmentation is a thing (and defragmentation processes).

How could you reasonably expect to implement a filesystem that under hood only operates with continuous blocks disk space? It would require the filesystem to have prior knowledge of the size of all the files that going to be written, so it can pre-allocate the continuous sections. Or the second writing a file resulted in that file exceeding the length of the continuous empty section of disk, future writes would have to pause until the filesystem had finished copying the entire file to a new region with more space.

With ZFS its heavy dependence on tree structures of discontinuous address regions is what enables all of its desirable feature. To say the complexity is needless is to implicitly say ZFS itself is pointless.
Some of my expenses only rose 5-7%, mostly utilities. Most of my expenses cost ~20% more, compared to last Dec. So not doubled, true.

Going back three years, we start seeing some doubled expenses. Rent and insurance are two. Household survival went from needing 2 typical incomes to 4.
> That's right, the entire company gets the week off--paid, of course.

Via the fourth sentence of the article.
And how does GPS make that possible when things like maps have worked in the past? It just makes it easier.
Could be a case of Masimo not bending to Apple's will and offering a low price given Apple also poached a bunch of their top staff.
Are wages up 64% in 20 years? Have common investment vehicles increased 64% yields in 20 years? What about fuel? Have social security payouts increased 64% in 20 years?
HTC probably lost out on billions due to this
it says wages have grown faster as a whole, not spending. If spending went up 3.1% and inflation increased by exactly 3.1% as well, as it did[0] then true spending did not increase. It's not clear what argument your making here.

[0]https://www.bls.gov/cpi/
Sure, but who’s gonna pay for them?
Nearly half of new passenger cars in EU electrified
Ask HN: How do you find and apply for startup grants/support?
Many countries, cities, or industries offer support (financial or otherwise) for local startups or startups building something related to some goal, for example sustainability or climate. How do you become aware of these programs and apply? I'm in the Netherlands, but curious in general.
In constrast, that particular tech stack is extremely common in India. I know this is not relevant to the post at hand but I thought it would be good to highlight how tech stacks differ from country to country.

Sorry for the irrelevant comment.
You probably havent seen many hunters then. Many people use AR-10s for deer hunting around where I live. Which would probably count as an "assault rifle" to you.

What else would you use for target shooting?

Yes.
I think there’s syntactic ambiguity whether “faster” modifies “generates” or “code”
If you have >100k items, “implementing search correctly” is an intractable problem if you don’t have a hundred person team of search relevance optimizers and taggers. Search is terrible until you gather tons of metadata about each item. Search is not nearly as simple as text matching within product titles. An LLM by comparison is peanuts. You could run it overnight and just have it build tags and metadata for all your items and it would probably be 75% accurate and a hell of a lot cheaper. Things can then be fine tuned by people later.
I work as an editor for a B2B print and digital magazine (not computers, but I do write about related topics). We're lucky in that we can still financially justify producing a print magazine. Most companies can't--print is still dying a slow, painful death, with only the biggest consumer magazines like Conde Nast publications and particularly large trade magazines still producing print books.

I'm glad I was able to have the experience of producing print magazines--it's a unique line of work, for sure, and I think when I'm older I'll reminisce on this point in my career.
Why would you think a topic like that is suitable for a tech forum?
Yeah you can manipulate the accounting to get whatever conclusion you want, this is true for pretty much everything complicated.
I don't know enough about Latin, yet that quote about Alexander really seems like it could read the opposite way.

Hic Alexander responsum accepit usq. quo Alexander

(“Here Alexander received an answer [to the question]: How far, Alexander?”)

Could instead be:

("How far to Alexandria? You're at Alexandria.")

Plus, that would make sense on a map.
AI-led user interviews enable product teams to capture more insights
Ah, you have a quote right above that line stating it is the firmware that is non-free; hardware isn't mentioned. You might want to edit your original post so it is consistent with what you are trying to communicate.
What do you mean by "virtual memory"?

The Cray-1 had memory management hardware similar to that on DEC PDP-10s that had KA-10 processors and numerous 68K Unix workstations in the '80s, all of which served as interactive time sharing systems just fine.

The memory management hardware in those systems would take the addresses generated by the instructions, compare them to a limit register, and if below the limit would then add them to a base register to get the final memory address. Some systems would have more than one pair of base/limit registers, such as a pair for code and pair for data.

Some people do call such systems virtual memory, because the addresses specified in the code are not the addresses that the memory sees (unless the base register contains 0). But I think it was more common for systems where all the MMU did was simply relocate segments and all of the program's code and data had to be in memory for the program to run to not be considered to be virtual memory. Virtual memory usually meant systems that allowed you to run programs that used address spaces larger than the available memory.
The airline industry looks like the least likely to decarbonise to me. I'm extremely sceptical about any messaging from them that purports to indicate they have any intention in that direction.
Yep, seen.
The same with trees and 'plants'. Many trees are more closely related to plants, than to other trees.
One of these again...

If you call yourself an "Open Source Company" and you are not an Open Source Company, then yeah, people will criticize you for it. No, that's not a sign that the world is evil to you or that Open Source does not work or anything else. It's just that you lied to people, and you're not getting applause for that. Deal with it.

Ultimately, all of these stories come down to this: There's a company that really would like to get the positive image of Open Source, but on the other hand, really would like to have a business model that's incompatible with Open Source. So they want both, they can't have that, then they try to have both, and then they complain that they can't have it.
I don't know that it is really that much of a stretch. People move from Obsidian to LogSeq and vice versa. While some people use both, they are certainly both Personal Knowledge Management solutions.

Now, they approach the problem differently, to be sure, but so do vi and emacs and visual studio code. People choose between them for software development tasks though each has a wildly different approach such that you might use more than one.
To your specific point, the legal issues are so idiosyncratic. You can’t write an article about them. You can’t tease out the difference between “this is a best practice everyone should follow” and “the patent lawyer is selling the holistic social experience of compliance,” which is the non-trial attorney’s primary product. It’s the same energy as DocuSign: when your biggest competitor is a pen, you know all the bullshit they peddle about timestamps and tracking and custody is just that, bullshit.

It really comes down to, what is your role? Are you making discoveries or working for people who do? Both are very worthy. In my experience, the PIs - and their subordinates who become PIs - they aren’t thinking very hard about lab notebooks and their tactics vary widely. No best practices. However they are focused on maximizing the amount of serendipity they can have per unit time, which tends to devalue how you’re documenting stuff for patent lawyers.

Does Benchling have a manifesto about why you should care about lab notebooks? No. It has a ton of little reactive opinions that are relevant to its sales pipeline. But nothing like “Agile, except for life sciences” which incorporates their software. It’s everything to all people, like most life science software. I know people receive huge grants on promising discoveries in life sciences, and some of their labs have Benchling licenses and don’t use them. The people first authoring the papers use lab notebooks of course, but see this as a small part of their process.
I hope you're being hyperbolic about the Fed's intentions. Bankruptcies and recession are often unwanted side-effects of attempts to tame inflation, not intentional effects.
Hahaha. I think you’re wrong again, so please, by all means, elaborate. What’s incorrect, and what would be correct alternatives? You know I was referring to a specific famous poem there, right? Feel free to consult a definition and let me know specifically how my use fails to fit. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/cf

Like your mistake with anecdata, it can be hard to say when something in English is incorrect, which is why it’s not just boring and unimaginative to police language, it’s ironically so often wrong to make such claims. Dictionaries can only provides examples of usage, they cannot prescribe incorrect usage.
Some product managers will really jump through incredible hoops to avoid actually directly talking to their customers. The problem is the insight is often in the subtle things that happen surprisingly in a conversation - it's not a massive data collection and filtering exercise. At least in my opinion.
Apple loves to bully competitors and suppliers with both patents and app store. I doubt being on the other end of this will make them change their behaviour.
It’s like the announcers at a tight rope walk, NASCAR race or hockey game. The interest is driven in part by the danger, the threat of a fall, crash or fight. The fundamentals of the activity are beyond most of the audience’s comprehension and spelling it out would be hopelessly dull for people who already know and the people who aren’t interested enough to have learned about the activity before hand.

“Holiday Sales Figures Mostly Unchanged” is not a clickable headline. The paper boys would fall asleep before they shout “read all about it.”
Not at all. There is no largest natural number to begin with even in the standard model. One way to conceptualize non-standard natural numbers would be to consider natural numbers with an infinite number of digits. Any such number would be greater than any natural number, and no first order model of arithmetic can exclude every possible way to express such numbers.

The main issue is that first order logic can't define the concept of finite. There is no way for a first order system to express a statement like "There are only finitely many x such that P(x) holds." Introducing such a finite quantifier or finite predicate will also introduce inconsistencies.

If it were possible then one could introduce an axiom along the lines of "For all x, x has a finite number of predecessors." and then we could eliminate all non-standard natural numbers.
What is the rationale behind changing how print statements work in C++? Is there something broken about using cout or is this just another case of C++ adding extra ways to do the same thing for the sake of adding extra ways to do the same thing?

The only significant difference I see is that std::println automatically includes the newline which may or may not be desired behavior.
Ehhhh Vitamin D is pretty important even if it isn't the cureall that some people believed. There's a reason why people stationed in Antarctica during the winter regularly take mega doses of vitamin D as directed by medical staff.
> It eventually will connect all three major metro areas (SD, LA, SF) as well as the capital city (Sacramento).

There are no concrete plans to do anything related to Phase 2 since the active scope was narrowed, so the SD and Sacramento connections are really wishful thinking at this point; the Authority still says that planning is happening on Phase 2, but lists no Phase 2 related progress (even planning) in their annual reports and similarly has no Phase 2 related progress goals in those reports.

Its an SF to Anaheim project.
> This is literally the entire point of search - show what you're searching for if it exists, and show related things after it.

That might make sense in an abstract way, but no, that's not what people expect. If I'm searching for something at Netflix, I don't want the answer to "does it exist?", I want the answer to "do you have available for viewing?".
They're short for different phrases.

"How many times does 2 go into 20" is 20/2, which is shortened to "2 into 20".

"20 divided by 2" is also 20/2, which is shortened to "20 by 2".

I'm not sure how either term is used in the case of multiplication however but I'm pretty sure that's how the division side of it works.
I can see it
I appreciate the response, thanks.