skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ah, I was going by the RAISE Act:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAISE_Act#Full_details_of_the_...

The goal of the RAISE Act was to substantially reduce family-based immigration while not increasing employment-based immigration to compensate for that.

I didn't realize Trump had his own plan (that was never going to be law anyway). But based on what I actually personally experienced Trump actually do, my Bayesian prior for it being helpful to immigrants is extraordinarily low.
The compressed size is what matters when discussing image download time- CPUs made after around 2010 can uncompress files ludicrously quickly.
Do you know of any independent tests of various brands? I'm sure motor racing teams and other professional driving setups know, but as an ordinary car owner where would one objectively find out whether Firestone 123/45R56 or Dunlop 123/45R56 is nominally better? Even Which magazine decides it's too much effort, and just reviews them by the aesthetic value of their tread!
> An additional critique is that surely one of the many true-believers in old-school Internet ideals of freedom and openneess could lead for 1/10th the compensation

That doesn't translate. A believer in freedom and openness should be compensated more than a counterpart in the private sector so they can work even harder for the causes. They may not be in it for the money, but they shouldn't be punished financially because of their belief, as surely there are no lack of lucrative opportunities in for-profit organizations for them.
> Like boiled cow bone and skin derivatives in yoghurt.

Yogurt is already made out of bovine bodily fluids. Why is it so shocking and disgusting for another bovine product to be used in it as well?
Von Neumann. He was so higher in intelligence than everyone else that ever meet him that it was scary to them. He was not more intelligent, he was leagues ahead. I think the only person right now on this planet to get close to that kind of intelligence so high it feels alien when you meet it is Edward Witten.
IPFS last I checked still has an extreme bandwidth wasting habit. Unless something has changed, which would be awesome, They spam want lists to all connected peers just in case they have a block of data, and there can be dozens to hundreds of peers at once.
The layoffs were for wage suppression, if anything, they need more H1B to continue that wage suppression. I work in BigTech, we had layoffs and are also hiring like mad.
It's an iteration on Conway's "Game of Life".
Right, it's nothing to do with it being "newly added".

That issue had been filed by its OP as a feature request. It then got repurposed into a tracking issue for the feature, but it's not following the standard tracking issue template that lists any blockers, stabilization steps, etc. (Compare to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/119364 that happens to be the newest "Tracking issue" atm.) Also since the OP didn't intend for it to be the tracking issue, it's possible they're not intending to do the rest of the bureaucracy to get it stabilized either, which is why it's stalled.
> The only downside of higher voltages are increased insulation requirements.

Is there increased risk to emergency responders who might have to cut into a vehicle to rescue occupants? Or is there a possibility that deformation from an accident could result in metal parts charged to 800V? I hope things are designed to prevent that. Perhaps the insulation you mention is armored for the high voltage paths.
It's like 8 different and mostly unrelated disciplines, so, "hardware security", "software security", "vulnerability research", "exploit development", "software reverse engineering", "cryptography engineering", maybe "systems security" if you want to put OS security in a different bucket from software security. And then all the IT and risk management stuff (network security, corporate security, &c). This is off the top of my head. Most of this work is totally unlike QA.

Even the parts of it that are like QA (vulnerability research, say) are pretty unlike QA; the bugs you find in QA tend not to be driven by adversaries, so you get to work with a relaxed set of constraints. QA work is much more process-focussed, about repeatability and coverage, and less about detailed study of how systems work. In hardware and cryptography, the work closer in spirit to vuln research is called "verification".

There's superficial vuln research that any QA person can (and should! but probably doesn't!) do. But if "looking for bugs" is "QA", have fun explaining to people writing Tamarin proofs for protocols that they're just QA engineers.

None of this is to belittle QA work, which is very difficult to do well, and which has its own subfield of ideas and research and tooling and stuff.
When die casting, you inject semi-molten metal into a cold mould.

The mould must be held closed while metal is being injected. The "9100 tons" refers to the force keeping the mould closed. That force is approximately proportional to the surface area of the object being cast.
Obviously that’s the ideal situation. But in cases where you’ve already deposited funds you can’t pretend you didn’t.
What must i hear, a whiney sound from so called "hackers", who make thousands of dollars each month, let prime run for years, and now, when adding a few extra dollars to continue to have free shipping and ads free video seems like necessity, well, now they are upset! Ridiculous.

And sipping their next Latte for 10 bucks on their way to work. :)) Oh wait, going to work, thats is now out of the question and very unsettling too.
The main difference is that profiles allow for different extensions to be enabled. You effectively get completely different browsers. The price for that power is a bit of IT geekery - if used regularly, you'll need either a bookmark to about:profiles or a desktop shortcut pointing to Firefox.exe -P yourProfile.

I mostly use containers for everyday work, but when a site looks borked (which typically happens because of strict ad-blocking extensions doing their job), I temporarily switch to my "unprotected" profile that has no ad-blocking whatsoever.

(And also when I test new extensions I build, but that's a very niche use case.)
You could use the same pattern as DeprecationWarning. It's suppressed by default and test runners like pytest enable it. A new ReplWarning could be enabled by interactive tools only.

I think I agree though: what you really want to special case is the situation where the user types precisely 'exit<cr>' at a REPL prompt, and that hack needs to exist further up the stack than in the implementation of __repr__.
A regulatory state where a government agency has to decide whether every product is sold in a way that accurately describes its risk to the consumer is going to be bigger, more expensive, and more intrusive than one where sufficiently dangerous products are banned outright.
I was one of the few who had to pay for it, since my warranty ran out.

The problem outlined in this article was so absolutely banal I don't believe it caused any safety concerns at all. The front control arms were poorly designed so that the wear in the bushings would cause them to squeak. This happened to ours car after 4.5 years. It cost me 200$ out of warranty to repair.

That's what this whole article is about squeaky bushings. Notice how they make no definitive claims about anything and vaguely make some throw away comments on safety without mentioning anything concrete? That's because it's all over a squeaking noise.

Good part is the new control arms make the car feel like even more planted and improved cornering (which was previously amazing already).

200$ that's the only maintenance cost my Tesla had in the first 4.5 years. What a scandal!
The Mercedes HUD on their electric cars has some augmented reality features, highlighting where you'd supposed to turn in the outside world: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp4O4AsGkZM
> Which is a highly context-specific evaluation, so is it better decided by the person with the most knowledge of their own circumstances, or across the board with no context at all?

It depends on the context.

In many, many contexts, people are explicitly not the people with the most knowledge about their circumstances. When I'm crossing a pedestrian foot-bridge, I have much less knowledge about whether this particular bridge is safe or not than the people who built it and the regulators who regulated it. The same is true when I drive my car, take medication, eat food, etc. etc. etc. I make risk decisions every day, but those decisions occur within a societal context, and part of that context is a general regulatory framework.

We are not all experts in everything. Which is why we (The People) gather together and delegate that responsibility in general to bodies of experts who try to make context-aware determinations about what in general should be allowed, what shouldn't be, and what should be left up to the end-user. It's a vast spectrum, and people often disagree about what goes where - this is fine! But if you want to get rid of the spectrum and have everything decided by people who should have "the most knowledge of their own circumstances", then it sounds like you're in favour of people dying and then blaming them for it.
There's no server required measures. There's even a flag that lets you treat a specific IP as a secure context for domainless stuff(Hopefully nobody ruins that).

The problem is actual missing features that would need to be added. Mozilla tried with FlyWeb but abandoned the project.
This guy is hawking supplements, IV hydration, and "stem cell therapy for general health and longevity," among other things, on his personal website. A website that has an entire section dedicated to JRE links. Getting some strong 'Dr Oz but for JoeBros' vibes.

Can't wait to see what other fun new things creep into my youtube suggestions after watching this...
I was raised by my lawyer dad to believe this, but over time I've refined my beliefs and think it's generally wrong.

If you're actually speeding or breaking some other traffic law and a cop pulls you over, you're likely going to get a ticket no matter what you say. The important question when determining how to handle it, then, is whether you are going to take the time and effort to fight the ticket.

If you're busy, have plenty of money, or just generally are inclined to pay the speeding ticket and move on with your life, then refusing to answer the cop is probably suboptimal. Your justification for not confessing is that if you do so, you "have no further defense for the speeding ticket." If you're going to fight the ticket, you're right and I agree with you. If you're not going to fight it, this has no value whatsoever.

If you're not going to fight it, then you shouldn't be optimizing for maintaining the best possible legal defense; rather, you should be optimizing for not getting the ticket in the first place. I believe that for most minor traffic offenses, you're better off confessing (and throwing in a relatable reason if you can pull it off).

Going with the lawyerly response is, in my view, more likely to get you a ticket than going with, "I think you pulled me over because I was speeding, and I want to apologize for that. I just left a first date with a girl who I have a feeling is going to be my future wife and got too excited. It was irresponsible and I should know better." Cops are people too - taking responsibility and making yourself relatable just might get you out of the ticket.
Gas prices will fall in 2024 for second year in a row, saving $32B
I don't think that is true, at least not EU wide. I frequently (have to) use cash and I was never flagged by any of my banks or had to provide any sort of receipts for my transactions, not the local one and not the international ones. The only exception was the sale of my car, as the transaction exceeded 10k, I had to provide a short explanation, which in my case was the purchasing agreement.

I am really curious how this has proven to be an issue for you or if this is just another banks bad crpyto thing?
I propose getting paid before doing the work for the actual labor of creation. Crowdfunding, patronage, comissions, sponsorships all seem like ethical ways to get things done sustainably. That way creators get paid before they work, not after.

We must strengthen these business models that don't depend on artificial scarcity because this number selling nonsense was over the second computers were invented. It's as dumb as asserting that you need permission to use memcpy or the mov CPU instruction.
Did you use regex for the html part?
The FTP connection seems to be using active mode (PORT command). Does using passive mode (PASV command) help at all? This is usually the easiest fix for problems with FTP and firewalls, without having to reconfigure or poke holes in the firewall. I actually thought that most ftp clients had switched to passive mode by default to avoid this type of issue.
Speculate HN: How does OpenAI's GPT Builder work?
it's clever, just updating the preferences of the GPT by talking to it - I like this approach.

I can appreciate why it wouldn't be deployed to ChatGPT proper (especially after promising they don't train on user input data LoL) - but let's put on our magic computer wizard hats and speculate.

There is stuff like this: https://github.com/SamurAIGPT/Open-Custom-GPT

But I really liked the SPECIFIC aspect of having an "admin panel" for a GPT where I can just pass in files, data, etc, my feedback immediately and it really learns.

Is GPT builder just cheating, and doing a forced "RAG" type thing that it loads in? Or is it really changing some kind of individual user policy per GPT?

So many questions
Thanks, man; that was just a typo; still interested in the answer.
Writing code should be part of the OS as fundamentally as web browsing. You should get a cursor to write code, have a tree worth of files and have a button to publish the application as a single clickable program.

Anything else is a tribute to the rant.
The ads on this site are obnoxious.
> Have you considered that may they try but fail to land them far away from the population.

They keep using inland launch sites when this is a known significant risk, so objectively they are not trying very hard.
Do whatever they want or say whatever they want?

A free speech absolutist would argue that they should be able to say whatever they want.

I like free speech absolutists.
Screams Without Words
This rant is spot on and it's disappointing (but not surprising) that there are so many commenters here that don't get it. Honestly a few years ago I'm not sure I would have got it.

It definitely seems to be specific developers/communities that suffer from this "UX doesn't exist" sort of attitude.

I have also run into Rustfmt issues when trying to format single files (necessary for Phabricator's arc lint) and they have an unreleased "version 2" which we dutifully used from source... for 5 years. It turns out their plan is to never actually release this.

Python also seems to fuck over its users quite a bit. Two examples:

1. Setuptools has broken editable installs so that static tooling (IDEs, linters, type checkers etc.) can't work with editable installs. Because who would want to edit Python code with an IDE, amiright? Facepalm.

2. On Windows there is no python3.exe. Say goodbye to portable instructions/scripts. Why you ask? Well there's some obscure situation if you have multiple Python installs in your PATH and by some miracle that hasn't totally trashed your system already (relevant XKCD) that it would trash your system slightly more. So we won't ever fix that. And please don't point out that if you install Python from the Microsoft store it does install python3.exe.
When someone finds a huge security hole (eg "blast this signal over high power bluetooth and you can make all Xiaomi cars within 1 mile immediately go to full throttle and crash!").

Or when a server the car uses gets shut down, and suddenly basic operations like opening the doors can't be done because it turns out the car's OS pings that server before letting any door open.
It is basically an argument for increased centralization of power. If that is what you want that is completely fine. In my view centralization can be efficient but has higher risks of corruption.
It's just extraordinarily difficult to make it so, and to convince yourself that you've made it so.
My Mind
If radiation in the exclusion zone causes less damage than human habitation, what is the argument for maintaining the exclusion zone?

Bearing in mind that coal plants have a lot of negative health effects, so there needs to be an argument that life in the exclusion zone would be detectable worse than life near a coal plant.