skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is significant. I've got to admire the maintainers stepping up to the plate for this.

It does look like so many changes have been gradually made to other things while neglecting this most fundamental boot device, that now a bit of catching up would be needed to eliminate new technical debt when it comes to details where the long-standing floppy code might have had defect-free performance in the past.

I wonder how changes like this would affect bootability, or accessibility of non-floppies like HDD, USB, SSD when formatted floppy-style without partitioning?

How many different boot devices are there anyway? Would a loss of one forever reduce the number of choices unthinkingly?

I always thought floppy performance was engineered to be highly reliable before moving on to more complex filesystems and hard drives in the 1990's.
One weird trick to minimize Docker image size for Node apps
I imagine that in some cases they're not exactly wrong. It's become ridiculous with all the credentialing. Between that and the interview process, they might as well just make people take a formal IQ evaluation instead. It'd save a lot of time and money.
People are pushing hard for in office. Are you only applying to remote positions?
Another thing to think about is that theoretical max is the theoretical max of that collection of channels (thinking MIMO). So while a single AP might only have 2.5Gbit uplink, you might have multiple APs trying to talk somewhat close. The faster a radio can blast out it's packet and get quiet the faster another client can use that channel.

Faster wifi means more people get more data in the same space, even if the individual uplinks are less than the max throughout of the connection. The air is just a single big shared wire.

And then as mentioned this max speed is pretty theoretical of the raw PHY, it's not necessarily the true raw count of bytes you care about being transmitted in your probably less than perfect space.
You don't have to agree with it, but the reality is that the EU, US and many others do recognize Hamas (either entirely, or the al-Qassam Brigades in particular) as terrorists.
> Any basic macroeconomics class covers the effects of protectionism. Yes, in the short term wages may be artificially propped up, industries may be (temporarily) saved, but you do long-term damage to the economy, and the people are better off with free, open markets long term.

You're almost certainly correct in the sense that the people of the entire system will be better off, but your own domestic market could suffer at the gain of the other market where the business is now being outsourced to.

A good example of this might be tech in the EU. The EU basically has no major tech companies because we "import" all our tech services the US (Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc). It's great for us in the sense that we didn't have to pay anyone to build amazing online services like Facebook, Google, etc – it's just free stuff we get here from the US. But who benefits the most from this arrangement, is the US or the EU? I'd argue that the EU allowing the US to provide all of our major tech services has been great for US growth, but it's stagnated the EU economy in recent years as we've had no real reason to build 21st century companies here. The free stuff we get from the US actually comes at a cost for us even if overall the economy as a whole (EU + US) is better off for it.

Similarly, imagine an extreme scenario where US companies outsource all work to low-cost labour countries (I know this is impossible, but assume the US is 100% service sector jobs which could be outsourced). Would this hypothetical scenario be good for the US economy? It might be good for companies registered in the US because now they can provide their services to markets they serve for a fraction of the cost, and it would be great for those low-cost labour countries getting all this foreign work, but it would be awful for the actual US economy that's allowing this to happen in the pursuit of efficient markets.

So yeah, you might be growing the whole pie at a faster rate, but it's possible mass outsourcing doesn't help grow your share of the pie. And like with manufacturing, you also need to consider how you'll lose technical competency within your domestic market over time if you outsource too much, and this will likely lead to the country you out sourced to eventually out competing you in your own industries. We see this today in China.

If you want to cripple tech innovation in the US, outsource all your software engineers so there's no one in the US with the skills or resources to start the next Google or Facebook.
Pandemic happened, people bought more games, Unity got more money right before an IPO. They IPO'd pretty dang high as a result (debuted at $60 or so, peaked at $200).

So of course they capitalize on that by trying to expand into other ventures. There's only so much money to make by focusing only on games, and around this time Unreal was making huge ventures into the VFX market. Unity still invested a lot more and expanded on games and VFX as well, but you can still see on their sites a few of the many other ventures they dove into:

- Architecture/construction
- Automotive
- Manufacturing
- Energy
- aeorspace
- retail

And on top of all that they aquired quite a few things in the process. Ziva, Parsec, and ofc a big stake in Weta's own tech. Then right before the fall started that had that whole merger-aquisition thing with Ironsource.

----

It's a practice many US companies employ, and while they may not "anticipate" this, they have an easy solution: layoffs. They don't see these layoffs as a failure (maybe the PR hit from the ad price changes, but not the layoffs), just an easy business strategy once it is no longer convenient to keep growing.

And again, they aren't punished. Almost everytime a layoff happens in tech the stocks rise a bit. They jumped 3% from this announcement. Investors don't see this as a badly managed company move that shakes faith in the product. Just "oh they gonna make for a better earnings call, better invest!". There's no shame in this stuff where there should be (and there is in some EU countries and most of Asia. You can't just layoff 25% of your staff at the tip of your hat in those countries).
What a domain!
Gotta love the "We protect our content to protect our future" pop-up message when you try to copy text from the site.
The emergency procedure for runaway trim was the same for both aircraft types, and was not followed. After the first crash, an Emergency Airworthiness Directive was issued to all MAX pilots reiterating the procedure, which was not followed in the second crash, as well as not reacting to an overspeed warning.

Unreported by the media, there was another MAX incident before the first crash. The crew had no knowledge of MCAS, but did follow the emergency runaway trim procedure, and continued the flight and landed safely.
Umm... Could you please link to a resource so someone can parse what your last two paragraphs mean?

That sounds really interesting and valuable, I just have no idea where to start.
The US already plays a great many people for nothing. David Graber's book Bullshit Jobs goes into this in detail. When it comes to UBI, the question is, will people do nothing but sit on the couch and play videogames, or will they do something productive and beneficial to their fellow human beings, that they could not afford to do without UBI?
You're 22 and asking if you can get into tech? Are you insane? Yes of course you can.
Apple Vision Pro will launch Feb. 2, preorders start Jan. 19
> The article's findings are also backed by data on Eunuchs who live almost 20 years longer than non-castrated men.

The question is why this is the case... if it's historical data, it may simply be correlation, not causation, as in most societies eunuchs were prized and highly privileged compared to the general populations as the noblemen in power didn't see them as a threat to their biological line aka their wives (due to the obvious lack of balls and, in many cases, the penis). And no matter the era, those in privileged positions always enjoyed a longer lifespan due to the accessibility of consistent and higher-quality nutrition as well as healthcare.

The only thing coming close that we do have data for (simply out of ethical reasons) is pets and farm animals, and at least for pets there is some reduction in a few reproductive tract-related cancers (well, duh, what's taken out can't grow a cancer) [1] and higher life expectancy due to less fights.

[1] https://www.cats.org.uk/farnham/news/the-importance-of-neute...
Do you want to avoid it or do you want to join it?
Qualcomm next-gen XR chip promises up to 4.3k resolution per eye
That's called ruthless prioritization.
Yeah, not a valid Java package name, but can still be used as a group id for your artifact although it'd feel a tad odd.

Sorry, I realise I've been overloading package to mean "dependency you download" (I'll stick to artifact now) when package has an existing meaning in Java, and I'm muddying the waters a tad there.

There's no requirement for Java package names in an artifact to match the group id. E.g.,

> my-domain.com -> com.my-domain (NOTE: The groupId should reverse the domain name exactly, even if the domain name contains hyphens or other characters that would result in an invalid Java package name. Hyphens are perfectly acceptable in groupIds, and you would not need to change your Java package name to match it)

https://central.sonatype.org/publish/requirements/coordinate...

> com.sun.whatever

Oracle owns sun.com and runs artifacts that use that group id prefix, so yeah, when you get bought or change names, you can just keep the old name up and running. If you can't, or don't want to, I have seen some projects change group id, and there's tooling for artifact publishers to do so in a way that doesn't break end users, it's a bit clunky, but doesn't tend to occur that often. https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-relocation.html

Having artifact group id tied to DNS names isn't super-duper flexible, but it offers some assurance that the dependency you're introducing is published by the people you think, so attackers can't easily steal crypto wallet info by publishing pandass pndas pandsa to catch people who typoed pandas etc. etc.
> I'm guessing there have always been more job seekers than there are "who wants to be hired" comments

i don't think so. from my first search from 2021, there were 202 seekers, and 857 hiring comments. not sure how to get the top-level comments number only, but that ratio is already way different from 2023 (1:4 vs 1:1)
Most humans on Earth walk all day, every day, even when they really don't want to, because there isn't an alternative. Almost all of that subset yearn to go to developed countries that don't require them to walk in the rain or sweltering heat, carrying heavy burdens.

Walking would improve the lifestyle of the ~1% of humans that live in developed countries and press keys for a living. Everybody else would like to sit in a car every now and then.
I don't always love the video format but Mentour talked about Spirit, Boeing, and the 737 MAX a few months ago: https://youtu.be/SmJgweFmoxs

The discussion about snowman hole issues and other problems is really alarming.
Yes, certainly. But the carriers could configure it to make it non-functional, since it serves no purpose for them. Or they could spec it as a rivet-it-shut option from Boeing. Just seems crazy to have this big failure point in the fuselage, adding to their maintenance costs, for a thing they don't even use.
This is not correct. To the passengers, this just looks like another seat next to a window with a plug installed. It's not a door.

If there was a reconfiguration to a seating standard that required the extra exit, the plug would be removed and a proper door would be installed, with the associated interior pieces.
The problem with factorials is that 20 billion doesn't necessarily mean much.

Let's say we could solve a problem of 100 elements 35 years ago, with 100! operations. If the 2x10^10 multiplier only made the exact same calculation but faster, that would let you solve n = 105 in the same time. Business problems don't grow that slowly. Not over 35 years.

You have to get better at solving the problem in less than n! steps by culling impossible scenarios, and doing it more aggressively.
and they can still get viruses and its a shit show. Fortunately most of the stuff runs on not windows or incredibly out of date versios of windows (3.1?)
So take a copy when you’re 21 and store it, re-load it every 10 years?
And on my team we pin exact versions and use semver to inform the level of scrutiny when we manually update packages. Probably hasn't prevented any issues, but it helps folks sleep at night knowing our code doesn't change unless we tell it to.
I think the airbag comparison is a bit off, airbag deployment is automatic, so it may be that all the humans involved were like "This is fine" but you tripped the impact limits and so now there's an airbag deployment, CAPS isn't like that, a human has made the conscious decision to deploy.
Science Teacher Finds Missing Piece of Boeing Jet's Fuselage in His Yard
Are you assuming the people laid off were poor performers? That is a massive assumption.
slap ~~crypto~~ generative AI on it
You can get an exact timestamp. I will show you how on desktop and then you can post it here.

1. Go to the link https://peterattiamd.com/lancearmstrong/

2. At the bottom "Watch Podcast on Youtube"

3. Click "More" on the Description field

4. It will expand

5. Scroll down past the field to Chapters

6. Scroll past that to "Explore the Podcast"

7. You will see a section titled "Transcript"

8. Click "Show Transcript"

9. A dialog box will open on the right

10. Use Cmd-F on Mac or Ctrl-F on Windows/Linux to get your browser's Find in Page functionality

11. Type in "proud"

12. You'll find it quite quickly past the 2 hour mark
You may lose some potential audience with this kind of comment, saying AI content is the future is a non-sequitur to an idea about offsetting the very real time-wasting quality issues that it yields for the near future. The printing press analogy might be apt if the Gutenberg bible was full of verses that were modified by the press itself and looked coherent at a glance but with totally different (and sometimes nonsensical) meaning from the original. The Gutenberg press would have still had incredible potential but it would be more than useful to be able to identify book copies that may be affected.
> Aging is loss of information, you can't reverse that. You can prevent it though

We don't understand aging well enough to say this with any confidence.
Thanks for the feedback! I will look into BNTs.

> each file is hashed with a random nonce, so as to distinguish files with identical contents

Actually, the purpose of the nonce is for privacy. The inclusion proof necessarily contains a leaf node hash, but I didn't want the proof to expose the hash of files it wasn't proving. That's because it could be private information, such as "bob has sensitive file X downloaded".

Since this approach makes determinism impossible, I chose to ignore the goroutine determinism part you mention.

Storing the tree nodes would likely still be required however, since otherwise the system would be brittle against things like file content and name changes, deletion, etc.
Actually, if you read Sy Damile's (a former General Counsel of the US Copyright office) testimony to Congress (which is really worth a read), he makes a very good point that the smaller the training data set the less likely that the resulting model would qualify for fair use of the data as it would be more likely that the model would not be transformative and would be prone to reproduce the training data.

So arguably the importance of including the NYT and everyone else collectively in opt out selection is precisely because it makes the NYT individually less important in the final model.
I've said it once, I'll say it again; the evaporation of support for OpenCL is why CUDA will never die. We already identified the CUDA GPGPU compute gap a decade ago, but stakeholders in killing CUDA abandoned it so they could enforce their own proprietary API ecosystems. Now both Apple and AMD are begging the community to fill in the gap while researchers continue to favor the simplest solution (CUDA). There was an opportunity for Apple, AMD and system integrators to hold Nvidia accountable for their proprietary shenanigans; but it turned into Reservoir Dogs before Nvidia even knew shots were fired.

Apple and Microsoft's inability to work together was exploited to comical extremes, and now Nvidia is laughing their way to the bank with a 10+ year lead on software investment. Even if we're training models on Windows and MacOS in 2028, nobody will have actually solved the HPC problem. The "Linux moment" for general-purpose GPU number crunching may never arrive, certainly not without support from major OSes.
Far too kind to his team coaches, doctors and nutritionists, too.

People like Allen Lim who made millions off books and supplements. Lim almost certainly knew what was going on.

If you buy Skratch products you're directly benefiting people who stood right next to Armstrong.
Oh, I'm not sure. I'd say it's bear-ly polarizing.

I'm so sorry.
Coincidentally one of the companies Unity acquired did the exact same thing when I worked for them, many years ago. It was absolutely brutal for morale, something I've never seen at any other job before or since. Layoffs multiple weeks in a row (or maybe spaced out), everyone ultra-stressed, not knowing if they're next.
I am utterly shocked it grew at all. I am only seeing layoffs and I haven't been able to secure employment in a year. Product Management seems particularly dead in terms of hiring, especially here across APAC.
Just wait, humidity and condensation will cause a spat of "water detected, fail warranty" issues.

And now, jailbreaking will mean being able to reset tattletaled.
People are very bad at managing risk. Even with all this, a 737-NG is infinitely safer than getting in a car, and yet people drive every day. Getting into your sedan is several orders of magnitude riskier than a 737. You're far more likely to die en route to the airport.

Obviously that doesn't excuse Boeing, I'm just saying, by the numbers.

[edit] The US has 1.5 deaths per 100M passenger-miles driven. [1]

The 737 NG has hit 10,000,000 flight hours 5 year into operating. That should be around 500,000,000 miles flown. About 180 seats per plane makes that ~90B seat-miles. That's 0.0038 deaths per 100M seat-miles flown.

So the 737-NG models are about 400X safer per mile than a car.

The median American lives 17mi from an airport, so the safety break-even point is 13,600mi flown on a 737-NG, assuming your destination is also a median 17mi away from the airport. If you're flying less than 13,600mi on a given 737 one-way trip, you're more likely to die getting to and from the airport.

Unless my math is off. This is just napkin math.

[1] https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/motor-vehicle/historical-fatalit...
Aging is mamal universal. It's a adaption to predation and I think the key would be to find a mammal that was not predated by dinosaurs. Something like whales.

But even they have the predation damage. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_whale
From what he wrote(i can't verify it all, but some of them confirm his statements), he was heavily insulted, he reported it and the responsible people blamed him for it. He accuses the leadership of double standards and for running an cult.
Or become unhireable because of age discrimination
> I keep a toothbrush covered in grease for just this purpose.

Speaking from personal experience, this is also useful for brushing a robot's teeth.
I’d much prefer not moving at all, even if the Twilio product never changes, but unfortunately that’s not an option.
I read through this a couple months ago. Some investigation across reddit and other internet sources show a mixed bag of opinions about the author, but indeed his contributions to the project are significant.

I am still continuing to work with Godot after trying to leave Unity, but I am definitely not as excited about it as before. The general summary about the project having poor leadership appears to be true.

It comes down to who gets to make the decisions: the community, or the project owners (i.e. Juan and co)? As far as I can tell, there is sufficient evidence that shows that Juan personally makes most of the decisions on what gets merged and what does not.
I'd like to get SUPER model to be sure to get 12V-2x6 socket instead of semi-failed 12VHPWR.
I wish they tried to solve the 1989 4x4 crossword puzzle optimization with a modern solver, but a small memory limit (~8MB) and perhaps a severely underclocked CPU to showcase the algorithm improvements.
> I don’t think you will find many tech CEO sons doping to be the next Armstrong.

Counterpoint: Rich people still end up with Heroin addictions.

From what I've seen, doping is almost irresistible if you start down the path of high performance and have the cash to support it. People who are doping don't think they are destroying their body, they think they are unlocking their true potential. This is doubly true if you have enough money to hire a professional team to monitor/regulate your PEDs.
Most universities are shit universities at CS though.
To add some balance:

- I can't rule out that a pandas wizard couldn't have achieved the same speed-up in pandas

- polars code was slightly more verbose. For example, when calculating columns based on other columns in the same chain, in pandas, each new column can be defined as a kwarg in a single call to `assign`, whereas in polars, columns that depend on other must be defined in their own calls to `with_columns`

- handling of categoricals in polars seemed a little underbaked, though my main complaint, that categories cannot be pre-defined, seems to have been recently addressed: https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/issues/10705

- polars is not yet 1.0, breaking changes will happen
I don't think the comparison apply in this way, Turing machine may operate on an unconstrained tape but they only look at a single cell at each step.
This find and replace technique operate on a bounded context but, in the same way as a turing machine, they can "technically" operate on an unconstrained tape (technically here because the find transformer wouldn't be able to lookup an infinite tape in the real world).
I guess you could say that a turing machine has a bounded input length of 1.
I don't know about you, but in my industry, "QA" also means extensive testing to ensure that part/assembly/etc doesn't break with expected operations. So, yeah, from where I'm standing, this was a QA problem. Something did not get checked or tested as it probably should have.
Heya! Can't complain ... :)
I think my comment was perhaps not clear about what should be taxed - if any form of local tax is applied (a direct tax or other administrative measures that make carbon extensive production more expensive) then imports should be comparably taxed.

If economically significant markets implement this then it can have a real global effect. Implementing a local tax only makes the local markets only less competitive and will favor imports from countries that do not implement proper measures.
That sounds like a frustrating experience. I wonder what caused this problem? We’re the people leading your company’s subsidiary’s hiring efforts incompetent? Was it a management issue? It’s not like there’s something about being German or British or Indian or Filipino or Australian, as opposed to American, that makes you think input validation doesn’t matter.

With contracted outsourcing the root of the problem is generally a third party with misaligned incentives. But here this is no third party.
I recently reached the limits of Pandas running on my 2020 16gb M1. Counting the number of times an element appears in a 1.7B row DataFrame using `df.groupby().size()` would consistently exceed available memory.

Rust Polars is able to handle this using Lazy DataFrames / Streaming without issue.