skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's a fun thought experiment: to imagine what level of detail of snowflakes most people are able to discern.

Reminds me of a little bit of that one xkcd.

https://xkcd.com/2501/
Zwicky Transient Facility detects four ultracompact binaries
I've used clover seed on my lawns for decades. It helps if your soil is such that dandelions don't grow well, or if you can resist the urge to apply herbicide even if they do grow.

It would be even better (in North America) to use native clovers instead of white clover.
Bash kinda broke seq for me since you can just write {99..0}
At that point, is your glass half empty, or half full? There are powerful technologies that motivated people can use to do good things.
OpenBSD – rpki-client 8.8 released
Any good Vim-emulator extension has macro support. VSCode also has an extension that lets you run the actual neovim server to manage your text buffer.

The settings GUI in VSCode is just an auto-generated layer over raw JSON files. You can even configure it to skip the GUI and open the JSON files directly when you open settings.
The AI generating it (Hosted on OpenAI-controlled servers in the case of ChatGPT and DALL-E) is the entity redistributing the work. The end user who asked for the infringing content isn't the entity that is infringing on the copyrights and trademarks.

I'm perfectly free to ask people on the street for t-shirt with Mario on it, but as soon as someone who isn't Nintendo or licensed by Nintendo sells me that t-shirt they're the ones infringing on the copyright and trademark. As the consumer I did nothing illegal, and a court would say that I was deceived by the infringing party.

Distribution (seeding, uploading) and facilitating copyright infringement is what gets you in trouble. When you ask DALL-E (a paid, commercial product) for a picture of Italian plumbers and it gives you an obvious picture of Mario 100% recognizable to the layperson as Mario and not a distinctly different image of a similar character, that's blatant trademark and/or copyright infringement on the part of OpenAI.

> If the AI is completely unable to generate non-infringing works even if you are _trying_ to get away from it (which the author very much doesn't seem they are, they are purposefully making and show prompts that infringe), that's the problem of the AI creator then.

I see some parallels to the Napster lawsuit. The fact that the users were the bad people asking for infringing content didn't give Napster the right to facilitate infringement. Napster was ordered to monitor its network and make sure that they were blocking non-legitimate uses. They couldn't logistically comply and went bankrupt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster

Which begs the question: Does OpenAI even have the technological ability to block trademark and copyright infringing content generation? Even if they do, how useful will ChatGPT be if all phrases and imagery that closely resemble copyrighted works are blocked from output?

Whats even worse for OpenAI compared to Napster is that it wasn’t individual users uploading copyrighted content, it was OpenAI’s ingesting the data. Nobody twisted their arm to include copyrighted works in their models.
This article provides a detailed introduction on how to quickly set up a blog using the WordPress program on a VPS.
>Here is a (very) incomplete list

Unlike the potential of a vehicle making driving mistakes, none of your examples is harmful, especially not to random third parties. The only thing on your list I have direct experience with is Windows--I've had the Pro license ever since Win 10 came out, now on three different machines, and I don't see any ads on my desktop or popping up in my file system. (of course, I don't log in to any Microsoft account, maybe that explains it).
I explored the idea of making code branchless by replacing if/else with bit masking arithmetic. I did this in the context of preventing timing attacks in cryptographic primitive algorithms. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27865974/is-masking-effe...
That's a reasonable argument. In that case, I argue that the manufacturer who wrote and signed the firmware should be liable as the operator of the vehicle.
As individuals we are never going to own self-driving cars.

If buying the hardware is even an option to begin with, there's going to be a hefty fee to subscribe to the required 'cloud based' self-driving service.

(And there's certainly no way individuals/small businesses will be able to buy such a car and run a self-driving taxi service profitably when a megacorporation could have all the income from all the cars)
we're clearly splitting microscopic hairs if you're going so far to call a logo a market to have "monopoly" over. Even if governments didn't exist, people find all kinds of ways to differentiate "value" from brands. The entire hobbyist collectors market works this way.

Governments just make it easier for people who can hire lawyers to assert this. Much easier to send out a C&D (which stops most infractions) than to generate some sort of "code of quality" or whatnot.
It boggles my mind that in almost 2024 people are still using garbage like facebook to communicate, it might worked back in 2007 but these days with all the available better options? Crazy.
I'm skeptical of low-code
To me a DAW is a category of software[1], so I'd choose a more general name for the site.

[1]: https://linuxdaw.org/?t=daw
Test in the REPL with `a |> mean()`. Then add a `<` when it works.
A carbon-lite air could be a sign of water, life on other terrestrial planets
They shouldn't be immune from traffic tickets, but manufacturers should be the target of those tickets, under the condition that the driverless features were used in the way the manufacturer intended.

I'm not liable for a traffic ticket when I get in a taxi or on a bus and the driver does something wrong. In a driverless system, the "driver" is the manufacturer, or whoever wrote and updates the self-driving software.

But this also needs to come with some regulation. Driverless mode needs to be audited and certified against a standard, by a third party. Similar (in spirit, anyway) to how human drivers take a driving test before being issued a license.
Going to repeated class action lawsuits every time there is a bad software update sounds like an inefficient use of the court system to me.

I think most people will eventually want the manufacturer to be the defendant in court cases that result from crashes due to a manufacturer updating cars. I can only imagine NHTSA (US Auto Regulator) will evolve to make this the case.
We already have laws that make it so the driver is liable for infractions, crashes, etc. Even if you own the car, but someone else drives, driver gets the ticket. If this weren’t the case, rent-a-car agencies wouldn’t exist.

The same rule should extend to self-driving cars. The manufacturer is driving, ergo they should be liable for everything the car does.

Mercedes’s approach to self-driving feels the most promising here. Afaik they are so far the only manufacturer who has said “we’re driving, we’ll take the liability” – https://insideevs.com/news/575160/mercedes-accepts-legal-res...
No, you can indeed write `df$foo <|> f()`.
If it isn't UL or ETL certified? You very well might be, depending on circumstances. Your insurer may treat all fire as covered peril, but it is not guaranteed.
Sorry, I edited my comment as you were replying.

Do you think it would be possible (and desirable) to split liability, or should it remain solely the manufacturer's?
Less known maybe for most people who read HN, but you're right that a lot of shell scripting folks would know about it.
I mean… neither did any AI.
The information was in the post - ws2812 (or ws281x, there are variations) which are also known by the semi-brandname "neopixel".

They come in various form factors including fairy lights, strips and matrixes.

They are very easy to work with, and there are good libraries or open source platforms (eg wled) to run them.
so... like copyright?
At the moment, personal stack only. React native web local + react query + async storage + supabase + etc.

If I pull up a contact 'MyClient' I can see every entity that's ever been related to it.

- What contacts (customers, employees, suppliers) it has.

- What locations (sites, warehouses, drop ship locations, digital locations) it has.

- What tasks (projects, todos) there are. I see 'service board implementation' which is an old project on 'Completed' status there right now, for example. And if I drill into that project, then I can in turn see every entity that was ever linked to it.

- What messages (emails, phone calls, etc). there are. Phone calls, SMS etc. are not integrated yet.

- Blueprints (e.g. 'Monthly vendor reconciliation 3rd day of every month'). auto rules not implemented yet, I'm manually clicking a 'load in template' button.

- Etc.

I can also view(/filter/etc.) by entity Status.

- 0. New

- 1. Respond (Something has changed, e.g. a customer has replied into it. Attention is needed).

- 2. Active <-- this position is not a hill I am prepared to die on. Personal preference.

- 3. Waiting (on external)

- 4. Hold (no action to take until specific date)

- 5. Evaluate (no further action needed apart from analysis+closure)

- 6. Cancelled

- 7. Complete

So everything actionable floats to the top, and everything non-actionable sinks to the bottom. When an entity becomes actionable, it then automatically floats to the top (e.g. 'EmployeeA was supposed to have provided reportX by now. Followup'.)

But basically, 2 clicks to create an entity. 3 moves to relate an entity to another entity. Automatic entity creation from different services into Supabase (Gmail, working on MSGraph, etc.), with server side triggers & functions to process and automate.

I can view the entity-relationship graph via 'displays' (not all implemented yet):

- Pods (drag and drop widget grid)

- Kanban

- Form

- Table

- Calendar

- Map

- Json

- CPA / Nodes

- etc.

So it's just a representation of my brain that saves a lot of time (especially in tracking things down) and augments my own abilities.

I am working on using this in a B2B product (an ERP for MSPs is the primary use case).

I consider every ticketing system, ITIL service board app, todo app, messaging system, Jira, PM application, ERP, etc... To be completely missing the big picture.

As soon as someone has implemented both a 'Customer' and a 'Supplier' table in a RDBMS, I think an opportunity has been missed and that we have not realised how refined relational db tech has become in the last 10 years.
I consider us to need a generalist 'Hub' structure that other services interface with. Self hosting option vital.
I have formal data structure training (relational database design, yes a lot of UML historically, set theory), consider this abstract level of the space to be slightly more objective than others do, and have the hubris to consider myself qualified. But, I know that I would not be able to convert everyone to my way of thinking - Nor do I have the time or the inclination. I just love thinking about data structures.
> I set up the scenario to show that no matter how careful the consumer is, their supervision will not work in practice (since the vehicle's behavior can change at any time and without warning)

Sorry, can you explain that better? The whole point to the metaphor of "supervision" (e.g. of party A by party B) is that party A is not trusted to behave correctly in all circumstances. You seem to be saying that supervision can only work if B is never required to intervene at all (and by extension, won't, if A's behavior changes)? In which case there's no supervision happening, right?

Again, it really seems like you're just playing tricks to make the manufacturer into an unsolvable villain. I mean, you get that's ridiculous right? We trust our cars not to fail already. And have, for a century. And sometimes they do fail, and when that happens we adjust regulatory strategies to minimize risk. Why is any of that different when there's a scary robot involved?
OMSCS is ~$9k
Contract trumps copyright - it's a whole different thing.
Both of them, especially Casey are focused on extreme performance. If you write graphics engines and low-level tools for games, you have constraints that 99.9% of devs don't.
It is a valid thought (which I suspect was done with a wink) that is worth following. If students are more productive (in terms of output volume) how are teachers going to cope with that? Do we need to delegate grading of AI output to AIs? Will this contribute to the heating of the planet or does it lead to a self improving and aware AI? And another concern: Writing is sorting thoughts and putting them in order. Writing is thinking. If students delegate writing will they learn to think?
I don’t think I do HPC (I only will use up to, say, 8 nodes at a time), but the impression I get is that they are already working on quite hard problems at the high-level, so they need to lean on good libraries for the low-level stuff, otherwise it is just too much.
> They’ll

What if I asked you to list all our source material that led you to use that particular contraction. Heuristics will not do, you must list each.

Can you do it? Do you believe AI should.

> I agree that it should be possible to implement

Those exact words appear in another forum post from 2006:

https://discourse.igniterealtime.org/t/cm-3beta-compression-...

Should you have quoted that as a source for your reply? What if we knew you'd read that post back in 2006, affecting your neurons, then should you?

It might not be too hard to imagine a simple case of a specific topic where you might have some more prominent sources, but even in those cases I believe if you think it through you'll find there was a ton of other sources that led to the weights that allowed you to 'know' the topic.
Yes and no.

MPI and OpenMP are the primary abstractions from the hardware in HPC, with MPI being an abstracted form of distributed-memory parallel computing and OpenMP being an abstracted form of shared-memory parallel computing. Many researchers write their codes purely using those, often both in the same code. When using those, you really do not need to worry about the architectural details most of the time.

Still, some researchers who like to further optimize things do in fact fiddle with a lot of small architectural details to increase performance further. For example, loop unrolling is pretty common and can get quite confusing in my opinion. I vaguely recall some stuff about trying to vectorize operations by preferring addition over multiplication due to the particular CPU architecture, but I do not think I've seen that in practice.

Preventing cache misses is another major one, where some codes are written so that the most needed information is stored in the CPU's cache rather than memory. Most codes only handle this by ensuring column-major order loops for array operations in Fortran or row-major order loops in C, but the concept can be extended further. If you know the cache size for your processors, you could hypothetically optimize some operations to keep all of the needed information inside the cache to minimize cache misses. I've never seen this in practice but it was actively discussed in the scientific computing course I took in 2013.

The use of particular GPUs depends heavily on the problem being solved, with some being great on GPUs and others being too difficult. I'm not too knowledgeable about that, unfortunately.
Do you really see no difference between someone drawing a piece of fan art and trillion dollar corporations stealing other people's works and reselling it for their own profit with no regards to anyone or anything else?

And yes, obviously society cares about many things depending on the scales in question. It's okay if a dude goes onto a lake on his small rowboat and catches a few fish for dinner, it's a completely different story if you're talking about a massive barge indiscriminately catching literally thousands of fish with huge nets. The latter has to adhere to much stricter rules than the prior, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks these 2 situations should be treated equally (unless you're a commercial fisherman with a barge, I suppose, the quote "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." comes to mind here)
Permian marine mass extinction linked to volcanism-induced anoxia
* Amazon Prime Video is now showing ads.
It’s really fun asking/showing those people how much estrogen is in cow’s milk. After all, milk is meant to be consumed only by babies.
Its only in the conclusion, though.
Memory architecture and bandwidth are still very important, most of IBM's latest performance gains for both mainframes and POWER are reliant on some novel innovations there.
I think the argument is that IP is pretty much never the best choice due to a slew of architectural decisions that turned out not to be great in hindsight (or, at least according to Day, sometimes in foresight). Things like buffet bloat, device/service mobility, difficulty upgrading infrastructure (see: IPv6) and unbounded routing tables in devices are symptoms of this. RINA is also a lot architecturally simpler than the current Internet stack while (theoretically?) maintaining or improving on its performance advantages, so it is indeed in some sense a more minimal protocol than TCP/IP — albeit one that doesn't (as far as I know) sacrifice any functionality :)

The main argument for using IP over something like RINA is just inertia: a lot of software and, worse, hardware is built assuming IP (and even more specific things, like TCP over IPv4 over Ethernet). Ironically, the difficulty of adopting incremental improvements to IP is due to the same architectural constraints that make people want to abstract over it or replace it: in a RINA-like architecture, something equivalent to the IPv4→IPv6 shift could be rolled out incrementally without connected systems having to be aware.

There are a variety of workarounds in the wild, mostly built as additional layers piled on top of IP: VPNs that present themselves as Ethernet layers (but really run on top of UDP/IP), software-defined networking at the HTTP level (very popular in the DevOps world), etc. fly.io has a particularly neat hack where IP addresses are hijacked as service identifiers. But they all come with complexity and/or performance costs. In scenarios where performance is important, you see alternative protocols in place like RDMA (HPC) or DCTCP (intra–data centre communication).

Interestingly because RINA is fully encapsulated you can run it on top of IP as a replacement for the software-defined VPN or HTTP stacks we currently use, with the intention of gradually building downwards.

[Ouroboros](https://ouroboros.rocks/), which gets mentioned here occasionally, is a newer, more experimental network architecture that is spiritually and technically related to RINA.
Not directly.

I'm basing it on the similar Kobe Steel aluminum and copper scandal and report.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-43298649
You mean in the HTML, not in the actual presentation, right? The way it looks on screen is more or less identical.
Yes, I did the same. I actually posted on the SiYuan user forum[1] and thanked you for the example code you posted, since I built on it:)

[1]: https://liuyun.io/article/1702364516248
Wouldn't the majority of this be used in conjunction with a DAW? seems in the right ballpark.
English isn’t my first language.
The Mindset of Doing High Quality Work [video]
Hey the longer and whiter the beard the more badass of a programmer you are. Stay awesome.
This isn't true in my experience, but if you'd like to share a couple examples of shows that you weren't able to find, I'd be willing to verify whether UHD rips exist
Huh? Who’s gonna pour seawater on their food or to preserve meats?

The reality was just that making salt is an unpleasant, labor intensive task. In the Roman era, this involved slaves and thus capital.
Interesting to see typst getting adopted outside
I had a similar realization about OpenGL a bunch of years ago: I don't need to draw a world of hierachical 3D objects, I just need to draw a list of sorted triangles. That flipped a switch in my head and made a bunch of optimizations very easy.
Timmy did however spend years and years training on his own data ingested from incredibly high quality sensors. Not sure what your point is
Thank you! As a musician I often complain about having to dual boot to get access to all the really good plugins. Mostly due to me not knowing where to find decent enough plugins without having to rely on hacky workarounds using wine
So, all of biology and physics then. If souls exist, they have no mass, and have a weird way of being repeatably disrupted in consistent ways by damage to certain parts of the brain or specific chemicals.

Just because consciousness is a mystery today, doesn't mean we get to stop and say it will be so forever more.

Heck, the problem still fundamentally exists regardless of if you're atheist, monotheist, polytheist, or pantheist.

--

“We’re not listening to you! You’re not even really alive!” said a priest.

Dorfl nodded. “This Is Fundamentally True,” he said.

“See? He admits it!”

“I Suggest You Take Me And Smash Me And Grind The Bits Into Fragments And Pound The Fragments Into Powder And Mill Them Again To The Finest Dust There Can Be, And I Believe You Will Not Find A Single Atom Of Life–”

“True! Let’s do it!”

“However, In Order To Test This Fully, One Of You Must Volunteer To Undergo The Same Process.”

There was silence.

“That’s not fair,” said a priest, after a while. “All anyone has to do is bake up your dust again and you’ll be alive…”

- Feet of Clay, Terry Pratchett
> Imagine a toy that kills children, and you tell parents, "well, you pressed the 'On' button, so it's your fault". Imagine a furnace that burns down your house, and you tell homeowners, "well, you pressed the 'heat' button, what did you expect?". No one would be willing to buy anything at all, because every manufacturer would be in a race to see the shittiest thing they could trick people into buying. Every product on every shelf would be snake oil.

You're totally right! This is why we have in the past had a regulatory (and partial participatory) state that, prior to decades of attacks and gutting, prevented that stuff from being sold. Perhaps the self-driving car hypemen need their own equivalent of UL/ETL and need to convince insurers and the NHTSA that they have a sufficient story--and perhaps they shouldn't be allowed to sell cars that sport those features at all until they do!
Very simple. Now scale it to feed an army with 2000 year old technology.
Even back in the day it must have appeared to some bright people that an ordinary railway stays put indefinitely when you cut the power but a gyroscope monorail does not. This is btw different from hovering, levitating and wheel-based monorails which also do not suffer from catastrophic failure on power cut. There's one very successful monorail that looks like the gyrotrain but upside down, the Schwebebahn in Wuppertal; because it hangs down from the rail, it needs no gyroscopes just to barely exist as a functioning system. As for electric unicycles, well, personally I find them as undesirable as segways, but I segue.
Cool! Regenerate entire limbs like a jellyfish!

But what if you grew a tentacle instead?

Actually, that would be even cooler.
Moving Fast and Breaking Things Is the Opposite of Tech Optimism
Since we're talking about traffic tickets, which are (currently) routine and generally try to avoid the court system as much as possible, I'd say that we need laws that provide no ambiguity, and I'd rather those laws place the blame on the party with the most control.