skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Guess OP never cracked a book on crypto. The aes penguin is like two decades old now.

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pakesson/diy-ecb-penguin/m...
As we know, defaults are powerful. Defaults that destroy privacy for one of the last trustworthy local-first interfaces left are quite informative.
That’s why the phase out is for a long time and involves public subsidies.

I have ridden in cabs that were owner operated that were electric already. TCO was better for the owner despite their great cost consciousness. And a lot of poorer people drive very efficient cars, it’s the rich that tend to be the “showy wasters of resources, screw every one else” folks.
Wrongthink can move. I upvoted and his grey disappeared. Now they're piling onto me (-4 points now). I'm melting! What a world, what a world!
As someone that works on a boat in the middle of the ocean, I welcome more accessibility. Being able to talk to my wife and kids while at work is so much better than being cut off. Also the better availability of weather information or technical information if there is a problem can literally be life saving. I also sometimes miss the days when I would go to work and literally have email every few weeks. Things were simpler then but I was young, single without any real responsibilities. Unfortunately time has moved on and even checking my bank account has become impossible without being able to receive 2FA messages. [There was a period of time where I could get enough service to load the app/web site but they insisted on a text l or email which was loading so slowly it would take more than half an hour that the 2FA was good for.] During COVID I had a coworker from Mississippi whose wife had to drive to the school to get photo copies of school work because they didn’t even have internet at their house with cell phones. Modern government and society has made internet connection mandatory to participate. Some people don’t have a choice of being somewhere remote.
I'd be interested in details on how Google is using TVCs for the same functions as full time employees.
Thanks for your insight. I’ll sit and think on this.
(I vouched this comment, because I wanted to reply to it.)

I'm not making the statistics up; you can just Google "DNSSEC deployment statistics" to see that I'm right about them, and I even provided a methodology in the comment you responded to for readers to verify for themselves.

Where DNSSEC signatures are climbing, it's largely because of registrars that automatically sign domains for customers. That's security theater. Moreover, it's capturing the least interesting cohort of new DNS zones: random things people register. I own a bunch of them, including "atmosflat.org" and "paulgra-ham.com" (don't ask me, I don't remember). If I had registered them at an autosigning DNSSEC registrar, they too would count in the "steadily increasing" count to which you refer.
Hover CSS effects on archived pages can move the archive.org banner
> housed in separate offices had different badges and more.

I don't think that particular kind of "separation" is conclusive, just suggestive. Imagine that Acme corporation direct-hires a few hundred workers and then splits them into two groups, with different badges and offices and branding and e-mails.

While clear differences would exist, they wouldn't be the right kind of difference that could alter their legal classification as Acme employees.
I don't understand why they chose that insanely long form factor. What's wrong with landscape mode?
> They might have less aquifer water or whatever, but that's not really essential.

I think most of the Great Plains disagrees[1].

I'm pro-technology and pro-development. But I don't think we should kid ourselves about what we have, and about the limits of our ability to geo-engineer ourselves into global homeostasis, versus out of it.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer
(2021)

Some more discussion from then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28189435
> runtime ... GC ... not viable as systems programming language

A GC can work fine. At the lower levels, people want to save every flop, but at the higher levels uncounted millions are wasted by JS, Electron apps etc. etc. We can sacrifice a little on the bottom (in the kernel) for great comfort, without a difference. But you don't even have to make sacrifices. A high performance kernel only needs to allocate at startup, without freeing memory, allowing you to e.g. skip GC completely (turn it off with a compiler flag). This does require the kernel to implement specific optimizations though, which aren't typically party to a language spec.

Anyway, some OS implemented with a GC: Oberon/Bluebottle (the Oberon language was designed specifically to implement the Oberon OS), JavaOS, JX, JNode, Smalltalk (was the OS for the first Smalltalk systems), Lisp in old Lisp machines... Interval Research even worked on a real time OS written in Smalltalk.

Indeed, GC can work in hard real time systems e.g. the Aonix PERC Ultra, embedded real time Java for missile control (but Go's current runtime' GC stops are unpredictable....)

Particularly when we consider modern hardware problems (basic OS research already basically stopped in the 90s, yay risc processor design...), with minimal hardware support for high speed context switching because of processor speed vs. memory access latency... Well, it's not like we can utilize such minuscule operations anyway. Why don't we just have sensible processors which don't encourage us to unroll loops, which have die space to store context...

There were Java processors [2] which implement the JVM in hardware, with Java bytecode as machine code. Before llvm gained dominance, there were processors optimized to many languages (even Forths!)

David Chisnell, a RTOS and FreeBSD contributor recently went into quite a bit of depth [1] ending with:

> everything that isn’t an allocator, a context-switch routine, or an ISR, can be written in a fully type-safe GC’d language

[1] https://lobste.rs/s/e6tz0r/memory_safety_is_red_herring#c_gf...

[2] https://www.electronicdesign.com/technologies/embedded/artic...
I don't fully agree (although I do agree a significant amount of 20-somethings including myself today act kind of like children), but I do appreciate your friendly tone while expressing disagreement. Have a nice 2024.
A terrible story but not new. Reminds me of a fascinating article from decades ago, "A Rape in Cyberspace."
If physical (evil maid attacks) are not in scope I fail to see the concern. To turn the FPGA into a malicious device you would have to gain root access to the system hosting it. So by the time the attacker is able to gain the ability to program the device, there is little need to even make it malicious. One could argue that it adds persistence vector to malware, except that the device likely will get reprogrammed over and over during normal operation. If malware authors wanted persistence they would likely target firmwares of random flash roms on chipsets and commodity PCIe cards that are less likely to be re-programmed. Lastly, the only other valid concern possibly more dangerous than root access is perhaps a remote attacker programming a bitstream to completely fry the FPGA faster than the power regulators can react and thus killing an expensive chip. That one is concerning.
The trick is to throw memory at it. if memoization helps, that’ll work without the memory hit!
New images reveal what Neptune and Uranus look like
Part of the reason is that an organ isn't 'just' an instrument, it is a building which happens to contain an organ. In order to properly model an organ in a particular setting you'd need to model the building as well and that is getting into a wholly different level of complexity.

Pianos are more or less designed to sound 'the same' (with some obvious differences between major brands and some pianos that have been constructed very explicitly to sound different, such as the Klavins instruments).

https://klavins-pianos.com/products/

So within reason you can model a particular piano just by specifying make and model and look up a bunch of parameters in a table.

With an organ in a 'virtual' church you could specify the exact disposition (the number and kind of sets of various pipes and other complications) of the organ, and you could supply some basic parameters of the space (size, area, placements of the ranks and so on). But I suspect that if you did that you'd not get even close to what the real instrument in its actual setting sounds like. Organs are super temperamental, air pressure, humidity, temperature, intonation, various stuff that is broken (almost no mechanical organ is ever in perfect shape), mechanism sounds (which can appear very different even within the same make and model) and so on.

This is a stupendously hard problem and as a happy user of Pianoteq I'm impressed with Modartt even attempting this and I really hope they will succeed in being able to switch seamlessly between different venues and to place an organ of a different manufacturer into an existing church (just to give one example of what that would make possible). But I'm not going to hold my breath for it and sample based organs (including the free GrandOrgue) still hold a significant edge compared to Modartt's organ simulator. But for piano it is now so good I almost prefer it to the real thing for practice. Not that I'm such a discerning user, more that I've grown up with pianos and they're always (unless very recently tuned) a bit out of tune and that can be quite annoying. The software based one is always perfectly tuned and sounds as good or even better than the best sampled instruments (personal favorite from the sample side of the aisle: Yamaha P-515 Bosendorfer sample set is extremely good).
Shouldn't that be solvable by extending mandatory access control frameworks to the IOMMU?
Correct. But my original post is not normative, but rather descriptive. Despite how things should be, this is how they are.

I've found that it's extraordinarily valuable to separate these two cognitive modes wherever possible.
Not really. I elaborated more in the rest of the message.

IMO the language is fine, and imports are fine too, but the way they're used in popular frameworks isn't good programming. Again, IMO.

My problem is with the excess of transitive dependencies in JS files as a programming style, even though the language supports other more modern idioms just fine. It's the classic Banana-gorilla-jungle problem, to quote Joe Armstrong. One component depends directly via imports on dozens of others, and it can't be separated. This specific style needs lots of compilation trickery to mocking imports in unit tests, for example. It's like Java or C++ in the 90s: zero independency and maximum coupling of everything, killing all portability and reusability.

Every React component directly depends on React, for example. This was a design decision, and is not strictly necessary, from first principles. This is IMO bit of a regression in terms of framework design. Like I said, with injection this would be unnecessary.

IMO one doesn't need "dependency injection everywhere" or "interfaces everywhere" (like 2010s Java, which is also not good), but when you have such a good and simple abstraction like "components" in React or Vue, it is a bit of a waste IMO to not use them and just use the imports-everywhere strategy.

Vue got it right, IMO, with "global" components for example. But this is also shunned by the community (even though it is used a lot by the authors of Vue and authors of libraries).
Apparently this works by asking questions to someone while they are still alive. Then after the individual has passed, friends and family can ask questions to a video screen which will pick out the response that it feels is the most appropriate and play it. Though I'm sure we're not far off from a service that will do this through deepfake technology

Makes me think of the 2004 movie The Final Cut where people get memory implants that record their entire lives for the purpose of creating a highlight reel of their lives after they're gone
But this is a contrived test, and looking for the fastest solution, so your arguments point to taking the fastest: the one with the least interference.
This repo, albeit "old" in regards to how much progress there's been in LLMs, has great simple tutorials right there eg. fine-tuning GPT2 with Shakespeare: https://github.com/karpathy/nanoGPT
My point is that Japan can claim whatever they want about copyright not applying to LLM inputs (training data), but it makes no difference. Copyright infringement will be judged on what they output. Of course, many outputs will be novel enough to avoid copyright claims, but not all, same as the output of a human.

No doubt generative AI systems could be built to self-police and not emit any tentative outputs that are too close to training samples, but that's certainly not the way they are today, and it's not clear from the article that started this topic that this issue is addressed in any way by the Japanese law, which is just about training data.
> I don't know if that matters enough to make them a novel invention, though.

That's called structural typing, which is at least as old as OCaml, i.e. 25+ y.o.
Who is Ruth?
> Have you ever watched the original Superman movies and Clark talks with the AI hologram of his biological father from his home planet?

You get that this only played out positively in the movie because the writers/director wanted it to play out that way, right?
https://www.apple.com/au/apps/

There is a common usage for these terms, they are not arbitrarily.

Describing websites purely on a “static vs dynamic” or “online vs offline” is arbitrary.

That is simply assigning subjective values to the way you interpret a website as behaving and then categorising all websites by that subjective set of metrics.

That’s what arbitrary means.

How do I measure how “dynamic” a website is? Gut feel? It’s a meaningless metric.

How “offline” is my website? Is it a bit offline? Certainty I know when it’s entirely off line… but on a scale of 0-10, how “offline” is a website that runs off an api vs one that fetches static json data files?

Wouldn’t you say that categorising websites by these metrics is totally arbitrary?

I certainly think it is.

This is some classic armchair theorising (look it up); first you invent some labels, then you put everything under those labels in a way that is convenient (rather than data driven) then you talk about it to support some ideas you have.
In Memory of Late Niklaus Wirth
That would be an improvement, but authentication would still be based on a phishable credential vs a cryptographic assertion, and ultimately exploited in the enterprise environment it was designed for.
> It makes me sad that even WPA3 doesn’t have a native provisioning mechanism.

And that's how you get spoofing management frames, deauthing, and all sorts of fun attacks.

Cause the moment you talk to unauthenticated and unencrypted machines, well, yeah. Payday.

So you cant do that, even if you really want to.
My data is mostly from having driven around longish trips on the West Coast where I expected it to be a much worse experience than it was, between the bath room breaks, food, faster charges when empty, etc.

If you haven’t tried it, I don’t think the idea that the route planning software gives does not reflect the actual experience, at least my experiences. Now I am not a hardcore stay in the car ten hours driver so YMMV.

The technology is getting rapidly better, all the use cases will be addressed before the fleet turns over. I had a leased Leaf in 2016 which was a lot worse than the used Model 3 I picked up in 2020, and the options I expect to have if I buy again seem to all be better each year. So far tho, the Leaf was destroyed in a pretty small fender bender, the Model 3 is holding up well.
I'm not comfortable being too specific publicly but I guess I'm just wondering about the legal implications if Company A was more like:

"screw it, let's have them be de facto members of the team: do the same work on the same days, and move on once we hit the 'too long to lie' mark" and steadily moved to that arrangement for a significant amount of work for a large portion of job functions.
Is there any guide for setting up ECH? Are we waiting for support in HTTPS server software?
> Even if NPM did allow developers to unpublish any package, there's nothing stopping me from downloading a tarball of your package as soon as you publish it, and hosting a mirror of it somewhere else.

As far as I can tell, NPM does not enforce any limitations on the license of published packages; I would not assume you can legally do this unless you have verified the package has been published under a license which permits such actions and which you are certain you understand.
no, I am not talking about switching branches. I mean pushing to a remote repository. Git was designed to be decentralized such that you can push and pull from multiple machines in any flow you like. Most folks at engineering shops use git in a central model from my experience
SEO Mindmap
Why Substack Is at a Crossroads
I expect Google will one day try to sell us a similar service built from our Gmail accounts.
I'm surprised the next three sublevels weren't named "im-invisible", "an-eraser-of-love", and "why-dontcha-call-me-i-feel-like-flyin-in-two".
Regarding k vs j, I will just say that ngn and I both agree that both the k and j array models are far more coherent than bqn. And that k is slow for multidimensional arrays ('mangle your data so it's fast in lists' is a poor response). And leave it at that :)

C is a historical accident. Its existence makes sense in context. Its continued usage only makes sense in context of artificial social factors. There is no reason why we cannot write all software in high-level languages except perhaps when targeting microcontrollers. (For example, there are strategies that can be employed to reduce the rate of memory errors in general-purpose code written in languages without automatic memory management, but there is not much reason to learn these strategies when pretty much the only code that really has to be written without automatic memory management is the memory management code itself, which is hardly 'general purpose'.) The extent to which it makes sense for people to understand the low-level details of the machine is a separate issue I won't express an opinion on here.
these people all work for a company whose sole job is to exist as an off the books shell company that is allowed to give inferior benefits. They have none of those freedoms.
All these plan9 scientists love their own brand. I started using Go in 2012, but after they killed deps.dev I gave it up. Some years later when I wanted to get work done at work I tried to introduce it on my team and another engineer spent a good amount of time looking into the language and listed all the reasons why it sucked, and he was right. The main takeaway was, yeah it's simple, but it does silly things that makes it a pain to use (error handling and unused imports) to name a few. I personally like the error handling but hated the type system.
> What legal responsibilities is Google avoiding that aren’t handled by the contracting company?

Inter alia, collective bargaining, to wit, the thing we are commenting on.

> The contracting agency isn’t an invisible, blameless middleman.

Are you sure? I'm not sure if I should believe you or some other guy I know who says that's sure how they work in practice. That man isn't me.
A member of my family was applying for jobs about 9 years ago and they had very little adult work experience but needed the income and health insurance.

One of the first "employers" who gave them an interview was extremely kind and willing to pay a decent salary for her to work as a secretary, said she got the job and had her file paperwork including her SSN, full name, current and past addresses, bank information, etc.

Later she had a call from the bank about some suspicious activity, cards were activated, and a pair of expensive shoes was bought under her name. She was not the only one in the waiting room for "interviews" that day and I am sure they stole the identity of plenty of them who were just down on their luck looking for work.

The identity information is still out there in the hands of these crooks. Always vet potential employers.
>I’ve heard this argument repeated a lot, but it doesn’t really make sense. What legal responsibilities is Google avoiding that aren’t handled by the contracting company?

But that's precisely how it's supposed to work - there are things (legal issues, other things, whatever it may be) that Google doesn't want to deal with. The theory is that Google pays the contracting agency to deal with those issues so that Google doesn't have to be bothered with them.
And here I just deployed 802.1X wireless and wired across our four hospitals. Maybe you’re not doing something right.
> I am astounded to hear that it can be illegal

Is it really news to you? There's also another reason - companies trying to duck various taxes tied to employment.

> At the cost of complexity

There are many more costs than that, including loss of a lot of negotiating leverage, job security, and opportunity for advancement.
It seems really unethical to train a model on someone else's words without their permission.
XenForo is made of former lead vBulletin developers. I see that a lot more than vBulletin nowadays.
Companies like Persistent Surveillance Systems (https://www.pss-1.com/) have already been doing that since 2004.

Disclosure: I work for a satellite imagery company. As far as I know, our data is not usable for the level of tracking described in your comment. However, I likely have a personal bias towards data transparency. Opinions expressed are my own.
Blind virtual transpose (as seen in numpy) is a bad idea. A principled, locality-aware version would be fine and good.
that and the Sharp Zaurus! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharp_Zaurus#/media/File:Zauru...
It’s a web-based tool for showing GamePad device inputs visually. For example, a speed runner would use it to show their inputs while they were breaking a world record.
There is no federal law that requires all employees to have the same benefits.

It’s very common at large companies with different tiers of employees (corporate, warehouse, headquarters) to have different benefits contributions

Unless California has a different state law, I don’t think this has anything to do with contracting. Even at Google’s scale, they could create a separate subsidiary company to hire the employees on different plans if they wanted.
I'm suggesting that even if non-garage owners never own EVs there are still a lot of potential EV owners.

I'm curious what data you've seen about the fire risk. What I've seen suggests EVs are safer.

Grid capacity problems, when they occur, are related to maximum load, not average. EV charging load is among the least time sensitive loads there are. In fact, there are programs running now that allow EV owners to sell power back to the grid during periods of high demand.

It's my perspective that for some drivers, like myself, EVs are more practical than ICE, not less. This isn't true for everyone.
As I recall the Go GC is a primitive 70s design as well. No idea if it still is.
I think a lot of people would like to see the sidekick reinvented tbh
Do they broadcast an SSID? They can't have "NotYourSCIF". That's my home network. Someone else is the building is using "FSB_BugsNet". Another local one i see is "CEyeA".
Many of those are dependent also on trim level, not just make and model; which makes the original point moot, no?

But maybe I've also been spoiled by German car rental places — literally every single car I got here in the past ~5 years has had CarPlay, backup cameras, etc.

And I'd care about all of the above if I were to _buy_ a car, but for a week (or two) long trip, I genuinely can't imagine caring.

(Though, I guess, I am quite opinionated when it comes to picking my computers and phones, etc; and if I had to use a loaner Windows PC for a week I'd probably be mad too. I guess people can have that kind of preferences in cars?)j