skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personally I think the universe is a cellular automaton rule.
Particles dont exist they are just percieved gliders in rule following substrate.

A wave in the ocean doesnt exist any more than any other part of the water that isnt in the wave. We just focus on the wave because our brains are good at seeing moving shapes for hunting.

The substrate graph is updated by travelling rule applicators which dont require energy. Theyre like the updating edge of stacking faults between planes in crystalography.

Gravity slowing down light is just due to the travel speed of rule applicators being fixed. Higher graph density but fixed node updates per time means it takes longer to update a given volume.
cheaper but unreliable.

And at that scale for serving other businesses, people will start being more concious about what and how they seed. People already get into drama over that as is.
It's like imagine there's this force of nature that grants people astounding insight on all knowledge of the universe but causes the suicide rate to skyrocket because nobody is meant to handle that much information at once.

But when asked what people do about their innate insight they can only respond "Oh, I can only manage my finances telepathically and none of my friends have time to speak mouth to mouth anymore, their mental energy is always focused on something now."

And when asked about alternatives, "Oh, we can't just make it go away. We were born with it from the start and everyone relies on it to stay connected. And my children are given assignments where they exercise their PSI so they're obligated to use it. Then they spend a lot of time playing mind games after school with their friends. It will probably never go away, and I accept that."

I'm starting to think that successive generations will both live and die by advancing technology. It's a runaway force that no single organization is in control of, and that we cannot study the long-term effects of until everyone relies on it daily.

And just think about how many tech dependencies we don't have yet but are itching to give ourselves. A generation from now this could repeat itself when people generally consider LLMs useful enough to integrate into every fridge and ATM. Who will make that decision? It seems like when a few people make that decision for others, an acceptance loop begins where the tech is normalized over years until we stop asking ourselves how we got here at all. It no longer makes sense to wake up and see that you don't have a smartphone sitting on your nightstand anymore.
It's not for generative AI that thing are about to get a lot worse.

It is in fact the very notion of Copyright is breathing its last breath, and it is fantastic to be alive to see it happen.
In case it matters, we also push in progress code to remote at end of day. (We don’t rely on local branches for in progress work)

I’m guessing with a 1 day PR length, you’re mostly pushing finished code ready for peer review.
Mathematical analysis of CandyLand (classic version)
ChatGPT is not intelligent.

It's the user's responsibility to ensure they aren't infringing on copyright. If you are producing creatives for pay, you absolutely shouldn't be right-click saving images and using directly off the web whether you got it from DALL-E or a Google search.

Who cares about plagarism? Plagarism is a made up boogeyman created by high school English teachers.

If the work is sufficiently composed of your own thoughts, the fact you used someone else's structure for part of it is not a problem as long as it isn't your entire work or entirely derivative of one work.

If I use a Coca-Cola bottle cap as structure in a sculpture, that doesn't mean I am infringing on Coca-Cola's copyright. I still had to mold my original work to work with it.
Does ChatGPT know what a tragedy is?
My experience is that operating with integrity in a domain where nobody else is gives you a tremendous advantage over "the competition" and can be self-protective.
Maybe there is a middle ground that can be navigated. Keeping filters on. Interestingly, AWS is offering defense against copyright claims under the Service Terms although with some conditions.

https://aws.amazon.com/service-terms/

See items as of 50.10 and 50.10.1 that I reproduce here:

"50.10. Defense of Claims and Indemnity for Indemnified Generative AI Services. AWS Services may incorporate generative AI features and provide Generative AI Output to you. “Generative AI Output” means output generated by a generative artificial intelligence model in response to inputs or other data provided by you. “Indemnified Generative AI Services” means, collectively, generally available features of Amazon CodeWhisperer Professional, Amazon Titan Text Express, Amazon Titan Text Lite, Amazon Titan Text Embeddings, Amazon Titan Multimodal Embeddings, AWS HealthScribe, Amazon Personalize, Amazon Connect Contact Lens, and Amazon Lex. The following terms apply to the Indemnified Generative AI Services:

50.10.1. Subject to the limitations in this Section 50.10, AWS will defend you and your employees, officers, and directors against any third-party claim alleging that the Generative AI Output generated by an Indemnified Generative AI Service infringes or misappropriates that third party’s intellectual property rights, and will pay the amount of any adverse final judgment or settlement."
Funnily enough, I wrote a sci-fi story a long time ago where there was a machine like the replicator in Star Trek that could make anything, but it was easy to turn it into a gigaton bomb.
Sadly though, the Open source solvers seem to perform pretty badly compared to commercial solvers.

https://plato.asu.edu/bench.html
Removing context to make a selective argument is intellectually dishonest.

The article contrasts the operating environment of “Big Three” auto-manufacturers across countries. It compares manufacture costs in Germany and Japan with those in the US, and the paragraph you cite links through to a (2004) article in which it is estimated that pensions and health insurance combined add $1,784 to the cost of a car in the US.

You need to subtract some contradictory numbers in the article to come to a number you can ascribe to health insurance, but somewhere between $400 and $800 fits a quoted “$900 will flow to [pension] funds”.

Given this context it is reasonable to argue that General Motors is (or at least was in 2004) at a competitive disadvantage to manufacturers in Japan or Germany as a result of the US having no universal healthcare system.

Lamentably for your position, just because there are political decisions involved that bring about consequences, factual discussion of those consequences is not itself necessarily political.
Yeah, I'm going back to school for a different field (environmental engineering, of the crystals and concrete sort). But if I'm being honest with myself, my main preparation isn't educational but attitudinal/emotional: accepting that I will probably be much poorer in the second half of my life than the first. If retirement seemed a distant prospect before, it will certainly be an impossibility now.

I've done web dev long enough (nearly 30 years) to see it grow from some niche field for nerdy teenagers and certain businesses, to exploratory and revolutionary in the Gmail days, to now taken over by global capital and hypercommercialized.

I thought my labor was fairly compensated at $20 to $40 an hour, working for small businesses and being part of their communities not much different than a graphic designer or brochure maker.

When web dev work skyrocketed to $150-$200+ an hour, as it did during the pandemic years, it just looked like another insane dot com bubble to me. I'm glad that burst and I hope it stays that way -- IMO nothing tech gives us is worth the enshittification it causes our societies and cities, in terms of rampant homelessness and lack of housing, etc.

While challenging on a personal level, I think this was a necessary market adjustment. I know from direct experience my work isn't very difficult, both compared to other parts of the web stack and compared to the many technical fields that require years of study and PhDs and such. The wage explosion we enjoyed was just caused by speculatory investment, a form of gambling all its own, not because our skill or social value suddenly skyrocketed.

In a different world without predatory capitalism, I would've enjoyed being able to do this work the same way potters make mugs, as a personal craft and a pursuit of art. But these days more and more it seems that part of it is getting pushed out by the kind of development that only cares about profit and engagement. It's not what I want out of my career or my life, no matter how much it pays.
By that argument nothing is my responsibility because I didnt choose to be born.
If it's not an indexed column (and your page isn't too full), it can do a HOT update, which is effectively the same as an in-place write if you're flushing to disk at page granularity anyway unless you have really wide rows.
>how many of us have "owned" a product that has suddenly changed its behavior in undesirable ways after we purchased it?

I'd be interested in some examples, as I can't think of any offhand, despite your claim that this "isn't unlikely".

Also, when it comes to vehicles misbehaving in traffic, I'd say "harmful" is a more apt term than "undesirable".
There was also a very practical use/need for salt as a food preservative, specifically for storing meat over the winter. Certainly this was the case in the middle ages in Britain, but maybe not in the more southernly parts of the roman empire with warmer climates where food production may have been more year-round.
Totally. I highly doubt there’s only one answer here. Though I would expect a nutritionist to know and understand the contents of any supplement they recommend to an athlete.
Guess it depends on what you mean by "advantage"... English-language channels are a dime a decillion. But if you started posting content in Tagalog you'd find yourself gaining traction with an audience that doesn't have as many alternatives.
Don't build it where it snows then. I love Eichler homes, but there is a good reason all of them (as far as I know) were built in California. With big walls of glass and thin, flat roofs, their insulation is pretty horrible. But their design actually probably saves energy given how they encourage indoor/outdoor living in temperate climates.
Of course, the expiry dates are almost certainly nonsense. If the gear has been stored in clean, dry conditions, absolutely nothing is going to happen to it.

Rather like medications. There was a study a while back that tested drugs that were produced at various times - all the way back to the 1960s. Almost without exception, they were still fine. In the cases of the oldest drugs, some had lost up to (iirc) 40% of their potency, so dosages might not be correct.

Artificially short expiry dates are set for various reasons: (a) to limit the company's liability to a short time span, (b) to encourage discards, so they can sell you more of the same, and (c) to account for people who store items in poor conditions.
fflush and std::endl/std::flush are not synonymous with the fsync syscall. None of the standard libraries I tested above call fsync at all when using those functions. They flush the accumulated memory "to the file" in the sense of making a write syscall (or equivalent, e.g., writev), and they do not attempt to enforce a flush to disk, that's just left to the OS. The "line buffering" in question is the C/C++ library accumulated memory, and the relevant kind of "unbuffering/flushing" is just write-like syscalls.

I meant to reply much sooner, with more info from empirical tests. But now I'm happy to leave it at just the write stuff and the note about the meaning of stdio/iostream "flushing".

I think you have an incorrect or esoteric understanding of what the "buffering" in question is, but it doesn't matter to me. My argument is about what syscalls happen, and I don't care if you disagree with the (I think, standard) descriptor/terminology I'm using.
Exactly—and I would add onto that regulations with teeth, especially antitrust regulations.

The gutting of antitrust under Reagan was instrumental in allowing the massive hyperconsolidation in all markets, with tech very prominent among them. The Biden administration's repudiation of the intellectually and morally bankrupt Chicago school interpretation of antitrust paves the way for a much better future, but it's going to take time, and it's going to need our support.
wow and incredible amount of things need to go right for artists to do well in your world ?
Might want to have a demo username/password as it's hard to evaluate without signing up.

I often see that people here, will grumble and just hit the back button when presented with that option.
What a bizarre take on the entire topic and assumes such bad faith on anyone in the thread. What a absolute load of rubbish to assume being built in a non-windy location as an example for a thought exercise. Such a weasel wannabe politico comment - that never happens!
It’s tax funded, so you have a point. Still, it covers everyone so you never see anyone doing gofundmes just to stay alive.
I took a course on scientific computing in 2013. It was cross-listed under both the computer science and applied math departments. The issue is that the field is pretty broad overall and a lot of topics were covered in a cursory manner, including anything related to HPC and parallel programming in particular. I don't regret taking the course, but it was too broad for the applications I was pursuing.

I haven't looked at what courses are being offered in several years, but when I was a graduate student, I really would have benefited from a dedicated semester-long course on parallel computing, especially going into the weeds about particular algorithms and data structures in parallel and distributed computing. Those were handled in a super cursory manner in the scientific computing course I took, as if somehow you'd know precisely how to parallelize things the first time you try. I've since learned a lot of this stuff on my own and from colleagues over the years, as many people do in HPC, but books like these would have been invaluable as part of a dedicated semester-long course.
Well by Marx' predictions, this should already have happened. It throws a real spanner in the works for the theory that the evolution of a society is quite so inevitable and predictable.

But this comes back to my point. This is essentially putting faith in Asimov-style psychohistory.
Issue the tickets anyway. Impound the vehicles. Make the companies fight to get them back.
Indenting for pseudo tree handling. The first time I saw that trick was on HN. View the source of this page to see.
They chose to buy a product with a set of known characteristics

The manufacturer then changed those characteristics.

If a manufacturer makes changes post purchase to a product resulting in harm, they should bear the majority of the liability, if not all of it.

If I had a microwave that for years cooked a potato in 3 minutes safely, but then was modified by an update to catch fire under the same conditions, I shouldn't be the one on the hook for pushing that button.
The person in charge of Mojo was previously in charge of a massive effort to give tensorflow a new backend, for which he conveniently picked Swift (a language he was also involved in), despite there being better options, only to abandon it halfway through because it was intractable and Swift wasn’t ready/willing to support the compiler changes needed, so he just abandoned it, and now works on Mojo.

It gives real “Jony Ive leaving Apple to go work somewhere where nobody can tell him ‘no’ “ vibes.
So we should just plan on every self-driving vehicle ticket ending up in the court system so that we can properly apportion liability between the consumer (who pressed the button) and the manufacturer (who designed the car, wrote the code, advertised the vehicle, and then updated it many times after the consumer purchased it)?
I use `ts` quite often in adhoc logging/monitoring contexts. Because it uses strftime() under the hood, it has automatic support for '%F' and '%T', which are much easier to type than '%Y-%m-%d' and '%H:%M:%S'. Plus, it also has support for high-resolution times via '%.T', '%.s', and '%.S':

echo 'hello world' | ts '[%F %.T]'
[2023-12-30 16:25:40.463640] hello world
Scientists mull Solar Radiation Management – a potential climate-change stop-gap
I agree. The goal of these efforts seems to be to make r less idiomatic, more “tidy”.

They do this by introducing new idioms. Granted they are idioms that if every r user would adopt 100% and all older code were rewritten 100% would in fact make the language more tidy. But that will never happen. So it ultimately is counterproductive imo. If I want to write concise shell style pipelines for data analysis I could use awk. If I wanted readability I could use python. Don’t try to cram all of those things into Posit/r.
There is better open source availability than 20 years ago, I think, let say JUMP in Julia.

But I would say the culprit as to why mathematical optimization is not hyped and not as open sourced is the fact that to the layman, mathematical optimization is less impressive than say Midjourney or ChatGpt. The solution of a bus route optimization might be impressive to a public transport planner, but it requires domain knowledge.

Also, problems that are solved with mathematical optimization are often big organization problems. Sure you can model, as in this blog post, access to opiod treatment center, but to see the "product", you would have to implement the solution of the LP, aka building the treatment centers, which is unlikely to happen unless you work for the government. With generative ML, you can see something coming out of your code that is not only x1= 1, x2=3, etc.
I use `sponge` and `ts` (mentioned in the article) pretty regularly, and am really happy for them.

I have used `isutf8` a fair amount in the past, but I find it mostly redundant these days (thankfully!)

The other one that I don't use very often, but is absolutely invaluable when I do need it, is `ifne` - "Run command if the standard input is not empty". It's like `-r` from GNU `xargs`, but for any command in a pipeline.
What is the utility for deciding is one party or another is liable first? Since self driving accidents are rare, we could just have shared liability and defer to courts. I’d imagine a lot of these accidents go to court now. National streamlined processes could be established as more motorists opt into self driving technology.
This is kind of a weird take... if you said your dog isn't intelligent because it can't do calculus and most people would look at you funny. You don't have to see your pet as intelligent, but don't expect everyone else to blindly follow your thinking.
Not really, you can spend unlimited resources trying to prevent modifications and people will still figure it out. It's best to not overly worry about it and spend the resources detecting abnormal activity and banning users while making it difficult to get back on. No doubt there are players using bots to their advantage, but as long as their game play is indistinguishable from normal human play the advantage is minimal.
True.

Further extending the argument - I can potentially ask GenAI "Can you show me what does Mario looks like?" since I have never seen one and GenAI is my go to tool.
And here's Tom with the weather.
> look like English speling misteaks

I can't tell if this is intentional. Is "speling misteaks" a meme, like people writing "no ragrets"?
Sure, but making it possible for the neural network to make the movie (eventually in seconds) is somehow ok? So people can make their own private CG Mario films, as long as they don't try to sell them?

Here's my argument - even if the NN only makes the films for private consumption, eventually they'll be so widespread and fast at making them that won't matter, since everyone will be able to watch Mario movies of their own. Is that a future you think will sit well with Nintendo, Disney, etc?
Characteristics and predictors of Long Covid among diagnosed cases of Covid-19
From the paper: Statistically significant predictors of Long COVID at four weeks of follow-up were—

Pre-existing medical conditions (2.0x)

Having a higher number of symptoms during acute phase of COVID-19 disease (11x)

Two doses of COVID-19 vaccination (2.3x)

The severity of illness (5.7x)

Being admitted to hospital (3.9x)
This is entirely because these are the companies with the recognition and resources to push back against this.
> to show they posted the job and could not find people that met the description so they could hire an H1B

Kinda telling that the so called smart people who have trouble getting hired have no clue that that's not a requirement for H1B.

The midwest is not sending their best.
Salt was also valuable in economic terms, more so than the article seems to imply. There are entire regions in northern Europe that have been deforested due to salt production. It was an important and valuable industrial product.
This analogy doesn't work. Fair use is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement claims. Entities that are training models largely claim that their uses are transformative and fall under fair use. Creative Commons, among others, agrees with this position. [0] If they're right, it simply doesn't matter what license a copyright holder is offering.

There are competing legal theories and no one can say how courts are going to rule on these issues. Smart lawyers who work on copyright and AI don't know. Technologists certainly don't know.

[0] https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/17/fair-use-training-gen...
Well, there's another example. It was deliberately exploited by other lawmakers, but I imagine the original issue was probably accidental.

The thirteenth amendment, while intended to abolish slavery, actually rendered state-sanctioned slavery explicitly constitutional (albeit, with extra steps); e.g. the Black Codes in certain states prohibited “vagrancy”, which (afaik) basically let them enslave anyone they could get a jury to agree wasn't “contributing to society” via “gainful employment”. This lead to the fourteenth amendment trying to patch this issue – not by forbidding slavery as punishment for a crime, but by requiring “equal protection”: in essence, states couldn't make laws that only applied to certain people.

I don't have any examples of exploitable issues being deliberately introduced to legislation, because generally, people in a position to introduce them don't have to be subtle about it. Perhaps the 11th Congress of the Russian Communist Party's creation of the position of General Secretary was an example, but I don't know if we know what happened there.

Before the thirteenth amendment to the US constitution, §4.2.3 permitted slavery and, arguably, implicitly required its enforcement even by states that outlawed slavery. That might count, seeing as many drafters were anti-slavery, and did not expect this clause to allow the 19th-century resurgence of slavery-powered plantations; whereas other drafters were pro-slavery, and presumably insisted upon this clause's inclusion.
The thing that's flying over your head is that the people preventing it from being measured are the people you're giving the benefit of the doubt because it hasn't been measured.

In such cases, any rational actor has to assume the worst about the party preventing the measurement, to prevent rewarding that behavior and to encourage honest measurements.
There are many recently published or preprint research papers around that, not necessarily that hard to read I think.
As a consultant this totally prevents me from making any professional use of LLMs at the moment (edit: aside from actual creative work, but then you may hit the copyright issues).
But even without hallucination, using non scholar sources for training is also a problem, Wikipedia is great for common knowledge but become harmful at a certain point where you need nuanced and precise expertise.