skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's zero political will to admit Turkey, that's the reality.
The biggest hurdle is values, culture and democratic rule. Turkey's democracy is retreating and instead you get something like a dictatorship with a bit of Islamic chauvinism thrown in. If there were ever serious considerations about Turkey (I kinda doubt it) I'm positive it was before Erdogan's current rule. And yeah, let's not pretend that the religion issue doesn't play any part - of course it does. The EU wants to remain secular Christian.

Ghosting, good personality, nobody cares. The EU isn't going to commit political suicide because of optics.
Sure, but then what happens to the thing I said? How do businesses get loans? How much interest should be paid on that money, if any?
A git branch is a pointer. It can point at whatever.

This shouldn't be confusing, but it is because that's not a natural way to think about revision control, so we instead have to relitigate it all the time for people that haven't learned git's obtuse naming conventions.
I used to get motion sickness as a kid when playing descent. Great game though.
The title makes it sound like the app is learning using LLMs. It's an app that helps you learn through Q&A&Feedback.
There was a turn based game called pc emperor where my prickly pirate youtfull self actually bought share wäre. Oh and baron baldric..
Hmm. Of course, we don't need to know how Oracle is fast and secure, why Autodesk is a monopoly in the industry, winrar is still used a lot despite being paid, and how Adobe's artificial intelligence-powered filters work.

I am developing HALAC and HALIC as a hobby and I don't expect everyone to use them. I'm happy when I can get good results, and it's bad when I can't. I say this as someone who has been dealing with data compression for 9 years.
It is true that safe systems require more than just a programming language. However, the Rust compiler has already been qualified for some safety standards, with more on the way, including the things that Airbus does. You're right that "defense in depth," in a sense, is a good thing for safety, and starting with a language that's memory safe by default adds an additional layer in comparison to things that don't.

There is already a bill in the US (it's part of a funding bill so it's just a matter of time until it passes) that, after it passes, the DoD is going to be putting out a plan for moving towards memory safety for things purchased by the DoD. Now, as we all know, because this isn't something that will happen overnight, and so there will be signoffs for exceptions, I'm sure, so we'll see what actually comes of it.

There is also a similar one in the EU, but I know less about how things work there so I won't say more other than "I know it exists."
SEEKING WORK | REMOTE | NA or EU

~*~

20+ yoe as dev/IC. 10+ yoe in managerial and executive roles. Multiple great exits and acquisitions. Built tech for Tezos, Oracle, Shell, Digitas, Saatchi & Saatchi, Time Warner, Sparkasse.

If there's a problem related to tech, I can solve it - and make it sustainable. Available for work as dev/IC, EM, Director, or CTO, with experience in each. Full-solution MVP development from scratch. Performance optimization and modernization of older systems. DSL and programming language design, compilers. Let me know if you're looking for experience that isn't below! HN posts are short. CV upon request.

If you think I might be able to help you, shoot me an email: damian.jobsites@gmail.com

~*~

Example estimates:

- Security audit: $2000/day

- Review your code and dev processes, 10-page report: $3000

- Short-term dev and research work: $1200/day

- One-shot meetings: $150/hr

- Fees flexible for longer engagements
This is likely the biggest disconnect between people that enjoy using them and those that don’t. Recognizing when GPT-4’s about to output nonsense and stopping it in the first few sentences before it wastes your time is a skill that won’t develop until you stop using them as if they’re intended to be infallible.

At least for now, you have to treat them like cheap metal detectors and not heat-seeking missiles.
Using AI against itself.

Demonstrating the problems of AI (what it has produced is dodgy in various ways).

A sense of bitter futility, hating AI but realising they can’t actually stop it like this and so it’s not worth the effort of proper drafting.

Perhaps some mixture of these, but mostly the first.
Do you have the legal right to prevent that, if using it as part of the training set is considered fair use?
I cannot emphasise enough how many benefits we get from reproducibility. The binary cache, sure. Distributed (developer laptop) builds that are cryptographically identical, and my personal favourite, a ten fold reduction in support complexity because now every bug can be reproduced after a user reports it.
Unless NYT proves the few people with a NYT subscription cancels NYT for a chatGPT subscription I don't see anything coming from it. Publicly scraping is what all search engines do. There also isn't any proof of intention, imagine if the US bans AI and china allows it because of the NYT.
If I'm in a shark cage then the probability that matters is conditional on being in a shark cage, sure. And it should certainly be higher than the global probability. But I don't see how this connects to saying that anything that can go two ways is 50-50? ("always 50% because he either lives or dies from that operation")
that would be absolute chaos, especially when it comes to foundational terms such as does the government have the ability to raise a tax or not
I could but I don't want to, it's even more of a dark pattern and looks way too "spammish" IMO. I don't want my users to find this in their email and think that I'm trying to trick their system. Also I wouldn't be suprised if some antispam tries to detect this as a spam criteria.
To what hostile purpose? Just out of spite?
The way I'm reading the comic, it'd be something like "main/master is special", and "always merge in changes". Things that make people assume that forward history is somehow enforced by the software.

But yeah fixing up work and cleaning up a branch prior to merging is a feature not a bug. Git got it right.
"The most important function" is still a hyperbole. I am not denying "an important function" or "one of critical functions".

But you can exist without smartphone.

You cannot without food.
Found the Apple user.
Halloween Harry. Descent. Harpoon (I think there was a shareware version). Escape velocity.
Editors could be even smarter and detect that you typed the quote twice and print it only twice (replace the double “” end quotes with a single “). Most of the time this would probably be fine, but I guess there might be corner cases that I haven’t thought about.
I don't think so, at least not in the logical sense (an ambiguity means that the terms need to be refined to produce a decision, whereas a contradiction means that no decision exists).

(Maybe this distinction is silly, but I think it's important: ambiguity is inevitable, but asserting that the IRS knowingly maintains contradictory rules suggests some kind of sovereign-citizen-adjacent thinking.)
For most of Twitter's existence, it was a fantastic source of real-time information about rapidly-changing events. Many organizations used it to distribute urgent information, and it was totally reasonable for users to rely on that.
The solution is not to automate or codify any of this, it's to remove it. This is utter nonsense. What problem could this possibly solve other than widening the equality gap?
Great example of why it's important to archive old obscure comics and look at them in a new light: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXjlx-1h6yQ
The old have colonialized the youth and the pension funds eat the children.
(this is the first time I've seen "this comment was too long" here, so here are my skills in a separate comment)

Main tech skills:

- Backend Programming: Python, JS, TypeScript, Node, Vue, React, C, C++, SQL, Perl, PHP

- FP: Haskell, Elm, Scala, Clojure, OCaml, Erlang, Elixir, Theorem provers (TLA+, Isabelle HOL, Agda, ...

- Fintech: Dev experience for banks and financial institutions. Launched Tezos and other major blockchains. Dozens of smart contract audits)

- Devops & co: Distributed Systems, Ansible, Terraform, AWS, Docker, Linux admin, ...

- AI: LLMs, predictive text, machine vision (trajectory tracking), DSP, Big Data, ...

- Infosec: Cryptography, Red team testing, RE, audits, threat modeling, ...

- Other tech: Godot game engine, audio engineering (mastering), Verilog, VHDL

Management and business: Minor in Psychology, led and managed teams between 2 and 30 people, product design and gamification, hiring, and a lot of other experience that won't fit in this post.
Do you also worry that rogue employees or literally anybody with the keys to the office of a printer could have been changing the texts of laws as printed in official publications and books for the past few hundred years?

If not, why not?
Isn't there a Microsoft native thing that can do this?
As the Michelin Guide Turns to Hotels, We Investigate Their Criteria
My Windows 10 desktop is not supported for upgrade to Windows 11, but still does everything I ask of it with no slowdowns, compromises, or sacrifices that I can observe, including running Baldur's Gate 3 at full fidelity and experimenting with self-hosting 7B LLMs.
or even better, if I upload a video to YouTube and it includes a Nirvana song, and if YouTube has permission from Interscope to distribute Nirvana music by virtue of an explicit license or the fact that Interscope uploaded a bunch of Nirvana videos, since it's YouTube doing the distributing shouldn't their licenses cover all? Don't even bother technically under the hood digging up the licensed copy

Obviously they don't, but they should
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python (Pandas, NumPy, Keras, XGBoost, Seaborn), AWS (S3, EC2, Snowflake), SQL, GitHub, PowerBI/Tableau

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19yxjyuRHcK_m6mf9YzqDOT4vZXV...

Email: nkeklikian@gmail.com

I am a Data Scientist with 6+ years of experience creating and optimizing Fraud Prevention models at FinTechs
Extremely disappointing.

The 4090 wins in every benchmark for 1/3rd the price. Why would anybody buy this card? Is 8 GB more VRAM and lower power consumption really worth that much when the performance is so lackluster?
The basic 401(k)/403(b) rough equivalent in Canada is an RRSP. They also commonly have employer match sometimes. There are differences of course.
Source: “I heard from somewhere”
I don't think that first link means what you think it means:

> Ultimately, Judge Bibas denied summary judgment and ruled the case should proceed to trial.

> Judge Bibas cautioned against “overreading” the Supreme Court’s recent fair use decision in Andy Warhol Foundation, in which the Court limited the weight to give a defendant’s transformative purpose if it is commercial and substantially similar in purpose as the plaintiff’s work.

> "Ross’s uses were undoubtedly commercial. And one of its goals was to compete with Westlaw. Thomson Reuters contends that this commercial use weighs heavily against finding fair use. [...]"

All that the judge is saying is that previous rulings are not comparable to AI related ones. It is also difficult to see how ChatGPT is competing with NYT, as ChatGPT does not generate (actual, real) news, because it cannot interact with the world as journalists can. Maybe image generators could but a similar judgment stated that it was difficult to see how AI generated images were similar to an existing artist's.
It’s generating what are arguably important discussions at a time when no one really knows where all of this is going.

I wouldn’t frame this as stupid, or even trolling. An art project maybe, and one that is doing its job seemingly pretty well.
Other people did not get the education you got. Thus, this being a problem with education.

People say things like "a branch does this" when they mean "We have rules on the git server that enforce this", or when they mean "We have a convention to do this, you have to keep track of it". One word to describe this is synecdoche - a part represents the whole or vice versa. Some part of the system does something, or some part of the PROCESS does something, and so people say "git does this thing".

Imprecise speech is shorter, but it can waste a great deal of time in the long run.
It's accurate in most common workflows, but definitely a convenient lie. Consider the case where I create a new branch B from A then remove a commit. The branch is now more like a "a pointer to a commit on a DAG" where branch B points to a commit on a different DAG than branch A.
Ask HN: Google, MS and a 5-yo Outlook/GDrive bug causing repeat 30-sec. freezes?
Gmail inserts this code by GDrive links:

img src="//ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/common/x_8px.png"

Exactly like that -- no https, or file, or http.

Outlook sees that as a Windows File Sharing link, tries Port 445. Google ignores it (doesn't deny it) and Outlook hangs for 30+ seconds every time you mouse over the message.

People have had to go through byzantine Outlook macros or teach users how to edit messages to remove the broken image link.

This is an extremely old bug that evidently no one at Google or Microsoft has "blinked first" regarding.

https://superuser.com/questions/1421061/how-can-i-prevent-outlook-from-hanging-when-receiving-google-drive-links

https://www.slipstick.com/problems/outlook-web-bugs-and-messages-hang/

For those of us in a corporate environment who receive these links, it is excruciating when people reply, and reply to that, and reply to that, and suddenly your inbox is full of messages causing a 30-second lag every time your cursor even gets near them.
Let's examine exactly what you said from the beginning so that we can put the goal post back from where you moved it with this ridiculous paragraph:

> Just to underscore the source of conflict here: you don't seem to understand that hot code reloading (especially hot code reloading with "no stop-and-recompile"—a constraint that was explicitly mentioned not once, but twice in my original comment) is a far more general subject than hot module reloading, which is what you're describing.

...

> In other words, rather than having a graphical interface for tweaking values at runtime, you interface with it the same way you normally would—by changing the constants in the original source file, but the difference between the ordinary stop-and-recompile way of doing it is that the changes get picked up live, so there is no stop-and-recompile.

You've had it explained to you that "stop-and-recompile" isn't even a factor because you can pick up these changes live regardless and you've been shown how.

> Let's ignore the overhead of having to refactor your code for a quasi-plugin architecture in the first place.

You keep pushing this idea that this is somehow difficult and takes a ton of time. It's not and it doesn't. How am I supposed to assume you're competent and knowledgeable when what you write says you're not and you aren't?

> How do you reload a shared library using dlopen after changing a source file without recompiling it?

You recompile it because recompiling it and reloading the code isn't an issue.

> The wounded tone suggests that you're reading way too much out of the (true, and what should be totally uncontroversial) statement that, in order for edit-and-continue to work when debugging an arbitrary program they're working on, "the conventional static languages folks have generally needed to rely on support in sophisticated IDEs". This was not a challenge in a static-vs-dynamic (or PL-vs-PL) holy war, and your taking it as such has you behaving with insolent irrationality.

This word salad suggests that you're butthurt about having your programming chops challenged when you make bullshit statements about reloading code.

I'm sorry, but I'm well and truly done with this. You say to assume competence and stuff but you seem to not understand at all that the things you're saying go against that entirely. You've now sort-of redefined what the original problem was to make it seem like hot-reloading shared libraries doesn't solve it.

Honestly, just learn to not make these silly statements from the beginning instead when you're out of your element.
Thanks for the reply. I'm glad my comment is no longer flagged.

What do you mean that "this point isn't particularly controversial?" If you just mean that "X may be useful", then of course. But the particular X matters, and "could be useful" is much different than "is useful".

People who like category theory want it everywhere. I don't know your mathematical background, but spend any time in a math department, or even classes, and you'll find people ready to explain any topic in the language of CT.

The may be useful, but it has to be justified. It's clear in some mathematical contexts, but definitely not in ML (yet alone analysis).

ML has a problem in that no one knows what certain methods work. Just look at something like batch normalization: I can think of at least 3 different "explanations" on why it works.

ML people want explanations, and mathematicians need work. Category theorists therefore have work. But I don't think you should mistake this as being an explanation. You just get a nice get a "cleaner way" to present concepts.
If a king's Go programmer had to hire a witcher.
Non-availability in the USA would be the main issue. But even then, those cars are fairly narrow and quickly become uncomfortable when your kids get older.

It's crazy, but a Ford F150 SuperCrew has pretty much the perfect passenger space; if only they would put something like that in a two-row wagon format.
>> What's your evidence or supporting research?
> We didn't need it. It was based on a-priori knowledge.

Well, you may hold these truths to be self-evident, but that's hardly an argument. And since you say "It's likely what your team uses, as it is the commit message style that is typically recommended as a "best practice" you acknowledge that you hold a minority opinion.

"What I'm saying is self-evidently true" is unlikely to sway anyone.

And I find it dishonest to phrase that as "The psychology portion isn't subjective".

From your colleague:

> The reason that the "subject-first" approach is used is to get contributors to talk specifically to the impacts made to the software itself, rather than talk about themselves and their labors.

I don't recognize that description at all about the majority opinion. Yes, some people write terrible commit messages, but that's not the best practice you seek to upend.

> Of course it's the state after the commit, why would I talk about what was

You'd be surprised. It's more common in bug reports, but I've seen this in commit messages too.

>> Are version numbers ever decreased?
> They have been,

Oh, really? Do you have an example?

> In any case, I'm not here to quibble about commit message formats.

Thanks for clarifying that you base this policy on nothing but your subjective opinion, that there is no research to support it, and that everyone else is doing it wrong, because your subjective is clearly objective.

Nothing wrong with that. I do have a problem with you misrepresenting this as objectively better, with a handwavy "scan in F shape". Don't say it's based on research when it's just your "common sense". That's unprofessional.
It's wildly insane to assume one can simply "know" who "needs help".

It's even worse to assume that a person - regardless of whether they can or can't easily tell - would be motivated to find out if they weren't handing out own food or money.
lolled and closed tab when i quickly realized this was just about time to submitting random job applications and had zero about the problems inherent in the actual technical interview process. thanks for timing how fast you could speed run rote forms i guess?
Thanks for this feedback, I actually changed this because some of my clients complained of the opposite, that the link was a bit too "dim" and didn't look like the the obvious Call To Action in the email. But it's all very debatable I agree and I may change this again in the future.
> Telling someone they have a negligible chance of being in an aviation accident is worthless comfort if they end up in one.

It's significant comfort in all those flights where no crashes occur, and for most of the time up to and during those that do end in crashes.

Anyone who really believes they are about to embark on an activity having a 0.5 probability of killing them should put their affairs in order, but then, by the same reasoning, there's a 0.5 probability of dying while doing that!

I believe the fallacy here is using an uninformative uniform prior when a much better, empirically-verified one is available.
But for any LLM they may have used to produce this, it was most likely trained on various sources in just the manner they are protesting. Can you truly protest something by engaging in just the thing you are protesting? Trying to keep this within the HN space, the Windows Refund day organizers didn't utilize Microsoft software products when planning their protest by claiming they'd "use their own weapons against them", that'd only hurt their cause.
Early 2000s, Tinyspell.
Back in the XP days when a spellchecker was not a standard part of an OS, some folks glued a keylogger and spellchecker together to give universal spelling correction.
It would beep when you misspelled something and had a global keystroke to pop up a replacements menu.
It was incredibly-annoying in cmd.exe until they added an option to ignore certain apps, and I still miss it.

Now, I wonder if you could do something similar with a local LLM but just have it beep when you type something you might regret?
If you ask Alexa to clap, can it turn itself off?