skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Show HN: I made a visual editor for GitHub Actions workflows
Hey there,

I have always been a fan of GitHub Actions workflows but for some reason never liked YAML files as being the assigned file format for non-linear workflows. While YAMLs are great as configuration files, they can be quite tedious when it comes to creating, reviewing, and maintaining workflows.

To solve this, I created a visual node system that makes the workflow creation and maintenance process more efficient and intuitive. It's a straightforward node engine with an UI editor.

Examples for such a node graph are here:
https://www.actionforge.dev/github/actionforge/graph-runner/...

and here:
https://www.actionforge.dev/github/actionforge/graph-editor/....

For clarification, they are directly executed on GitHub runners. These graphs took me minutes to build in order to focus on my actual project.

The next time you create a new repo, give it a try. Love to hear your thoughts!

Thanks!
Seriously? Our "business leaders" are still wasting money on their Blockchain casinos? FFS.
I think it's the opposite. With exception to startups like Bun, it's big businesses that can marshall enough financial justification to do high-performance rewrites and maintain custom code.

A common complaint on HN is bloated web performance. Surely we don't think the web is bloated because of too much custom code as opposed to too many off-the-shelf components?
Mushrooms and various roots are all great for us.
Yes, I believe that is correct. If you do something "transformative" with the material then you are allowed to treat it as something new. There's also the idea of using a portion of a copyrighted work (like a quote or a clip of a song or video), this would be "fair use".
This is a somewhat Sith-like dealing with absolutes.

Laypeople generally understand that software may crap the bed in the sense of "the system is down, please wait, then try again". But few people have experienced subtle changes in stored data.

A judge looking into his document cloud may be ready to see a "sorry, not available right now" notice, but doesn't expect that some sinister program is, in the background, silently editing texts of his judgments and pronouncing people guilty when he intended to free them etc.

The problem with the Horizon scandal is in this sinister manipulation of data. It may also have been done by Fujitsu people themselves, in order to cover some tracks and tamper with evidence. This is a very untypical failure mode.
what you're doing is akin to claiming LEAN manufacturing should be credited with the advent of anti-lock brakes because LEAN manufacturing was being employed during the time when anti-lock brakes became popular.

or guns should be credited with the advent of plumbing because guns were popular when plumbing became a thing.

The entire reason I pointed out that the joel test existed was to point out that industry leaders were actively trying to get people to become more sophisticated completely outside of agile. Why aren't you claiming agile is the reason people started creating timelines for software releases? Oh what's that, agile is really into NOT having those but releasing when it's ready?

It's almost as if different market forces were at play.

At some point you have to put your own biases to the side and realize that you do your own agenda more harm than good here.
That's what Microsoft was thinking when they, in practice, stopped developing Internet Explorer (after version 6). That didn't work out too well for them...
I knew I wasn't the only one thinking this lol - glad it's proven by an investigation
How does one think Google is planning to change it's ranking system?
If crabs are the terminal object in the category of evolvable animals, orchids are an initial object in the category of evolvable plants?
>> In the artist's opinion, OpenAI violated that license...

So? Why does the author's opinion even enter into the equation? Authors cannot claim ownership beyond the bounds of copyright. If what AI is doing qualifies as fair use, the artist cannot do anything about it. I'm sure that lots of artists would not want anyone to lampoon or criticize their work. They cannot stop such things. I'm sure lots of artists would never want anyone to ever create anything in any way similar to their work. They cannot do that either.
Counterargument:

China got rich by plundering, ahem, technological transfer.

The IMF tells developing countries to respect western intellectual property, but when you think about it. If you truly cared about your country and it's people, why exactly would you let this straightjacket stop you? Only a fool would proudly wear it.
I kind of like the idea the flag is sarcastically calling them very fun and very safe.
Paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10336-023-02113-4
A small bit of UX feedback - when I type a search query that has no results, nothing happens. At first it made me think that the search form was broken. It would be better to show some kind of "no results" result to make it clear that the search has actually been performed.

I'm not in the market for a new pair of running shoes, but the site looks great - and I'm always happy to see more things being built in Elixir and Phoenix. Keep spreading the word!
These are all popular dietary supplements sold by numerous retailers. Many are the same products with different branding because they're made by the same white label manufacturers. Not newsworthy or even interesting.
And AI is only accelerating an already existing trend. Freebooting and content farms have existed for a decade now.

I wish too that consumers will grow tired of low-quality stolen/generated content, but that is not the case yet. Take some horrific YouTube Kids content farms that are still churning billions of views for example.
Computers and machines have been capable of mass production for decades, and humans have used them as tools. In the past 170 years, these tools of mass production have already diminished many thousands of professions that were staffed by people who had to painstakingly craft things one at a time.

Why is art some special case that should be protected, when many other industries were not?

Why should we kill this technology to protect existing artistic business models, when many other technologies were allowed to bloom despite killing other existing business models?

Nobody can really answer these questions.
Im an experienced software engineer in the late stage of building an AI-based language learning app for English learners and I’d really be up to partner up with someone that understands about the language learning business.
I mean, that's just being overly pedantic. Surely you see a difference between these two pieces of code?

while (true) {
redraw();
}

and

while (true) {
waitForAndProcessNextEvent();
redraw();
}
That's just BS. If people weren't replacing artists, there would be no need to prompt with "in the style of ___". are you honestly saying that only artistX is using the prompt "in the style of artistX"?
Maybe there's some nuance of your description that I'm missing, but fair use is codified as a limitation to copyright in US statute (although not until 1976) [1]. Application of it to any given situation is still heavily dependent on case law, though.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107
The automated test suite can check many code paths but compilation of a statically typed language checks all possible code paths.

Put another way, automated test suites give you an extremely high level of assurance when using a statically typed language. When your test suite passes in the new version Ruby, you're happy but there still could be cases left that you've not dealt with in rarely triggered code paths/conditions.
Crustaceans, not animals in general, and there are also examples of crab-like species that have evolved away from crab features. This is one of those popsci memes that is wrong and just won't die.
As a native English speaker, I agree!
That is evidence that GPT Can violate copyright, not that all of the outputs do.

It supports an argument that GPT shouldnt produce outputs that are extremely similar, not that the content can not be used as an input.
The Apple Vision Pro is basically a Mac mini on your face
if you're looking for a good pumpkin pie alternative while pumpkins are out of season, sweet potato pie is also excellent.
You think it's IT pushing this? They are just executing orders.
ICE-TAP: The cool way to learn about brain monitoring
That entirely depends on your user numbers.
Should've started with this, I'm part of the team btw. Would love to dig more into this topic as we've been talking about it a lot since we started Hardcover.

Storygraph is one of the projects we appreciate, and we have a lot of respect for the team. We have a slightly different approach, and luckily the book space is huge. Our goal is to offer readers something significantly better than other platforms stuck in the past. So far so good
>But sometimes your work is put on Instagram without your knowledge or consent (eg by an Instagram aggregator account)

That's copyright infringement. You can't claim to own other people's work and then give license to others to use when you don't own the work.
Functional programmers have long worked to improve the compiler optimization of functional language implementations. This is how we got innovations like the continuation passing style (first used for compiling Scheme), deforestation, defunctionalization, tail call elimination, and strictness analysis (for lazy languages like Haskell).

Also, a lot of literature on improving garbage collection came from trying to improve the speed of a functional language like Lisp or Standard ML.

It seems to me that functional programmers tend to care more about optimization than e.g. Python or Ruby developers, because functional programming has a long history of being perceived as slow and they want to change it. Scheme, OCaml, Standard ML, and Haskell all have implementations that perform well and compile to assembly.
And Imagination.

Notably Intel and Nvidia were not impacted. I wonder if the security hardening that Google worked on with Nvidia for Stadia helped prevent this
I'm not sure I'd recommend DrySchema or DryValidation.

I've had real problems upgrading client's projects built using DryValidation prior to v1 in the past.

They changed the syntax of the validations just enough to break stuff and completely removed features like shared predicates. The upgrade process was very poorly documented with suggestions to go read random blog posts.

I think the replacement for shared predicates was supported be macros but even that is marked as likely to be removed in v2.

Just looking through some of the Dry changelogs the work BREAKING still features far more than I'm happy with. I'd be much happier to use Sorbet or an RBS based typing solution than work with Dry again.

It might have advantages over ActiveModel but ActiveModel is far better supported.
#3 is certainly bullshit, but Yahoo failed because of #1. Forcing a user to drill down through hundreds or thousands of categories to do a search is absurd, don't you think?

What other buttons do you want?

But for sure Google has crippled its core product. First they removed the + option, which forced the inclusion of words (their excuse was that it "interfered" with their stupid "Google Plus" product which is now gone). Yes you can use "allintext:" but come on. I'm not even sure that's honored anyway.

And the removal of the ability to exclude certain sites from results.
All human endeavors are dead ends, in the end.
Put differently - if you perfectly memorise Harry Potter, write it down into a book and sell it, you'll get into trouble.
> Where's the protests demanding Egypt allow refugees entry?

Why would Egypt aid Israel in ethnically cleansing Palestinians? People who live in Gaza belong in Gaza, or in their original homes in Israel that the Zionists forced them from during Nakba in 1948.
I once read an inspiring post from a european user who explained why these companies generally succeed. Namely, that formal treatment and healthcare for the underlying condition targeted by the "wellness" product is prohibitively expensive for American customers, and so snakeoil thrives in the absence of legitimate medical science.

you could literally bankrupt these companies in less than a fortnight with single payer healthcare.
> Texas and Georgia both have massive immigration from other states. People vote with their feet.

The technical term for this is "race to the bottom," abetted by short-term thinking on the part of "customers." It's similar to how people complain bitterly about the quality of air travel, but then go for the lowest-possible air fare.

(OK, the actual technical term is "revealed preference vs. expressed [or stated] preference.")
>But we are allowed to use copyrighted content. We are not allowed to copy copyrighted content. We are allowed to view and consume it, to be influenced by it, and under many circumstances even outright copy it.

It's important to consider in any legalistic argument over copyright that, unlike conventional property rights which are to some degree prehistoric, copyright is a recent legal construct that was developed for a particular economic purpose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property#History

The existing standards of fair use are what they are because copyright was developed with supporting the art industry as an intentional goal, not because it was handed down from the heavens or follows a basic human instinct. Ancient playwrights clipped each others' ideas liberally; late medieval economists observed that restricting this behavior seemed to encourage more creativity. Copyright law is a creation of humans, for humans, and is subordinate to moral and economic reasoning, not prior to it.
> The horse is out of the barn already, deal with it.

Like leaded gas, the government can make regulations to deal with anything should they choose to.

Why do you think it's okay for massive companies to freely profit off the work of others?
From an outsider's perspective (I've written a little Python, but not enough that I consider myself a Pythonista) I didn't think it was backward incompatibility that was the problem as much as community libraries and frameworks not moving forward to v3 for a long time.
> they're tying to use the vagueness to take advantage of you

Not always. I see AI safety used without further specification all the time even here on hacker news. I doubt the users are trying to take advantage of anyone.

In that case it's more of a case of the author considering one of those meanings so much more important/relevant that they think it's obvious what they mean. But often it's not – everyone fills in the meaning they care about the most.
Copyright is a bad idea in the first place, and should just be thrown out entirely; but that isn't the whole picture here.

If OpenAI is allowed to be ignorant of copyright, then the rest of us should be allowed, too.

The problem is that OpenAI (alongside a handful of other very large corporations) gets exclusive rights to that ignorance. They get to monopolize the un-monopoly. That's even worse than the problem we started with.
This has been on my mind the last few years and I've thought about writing an academic paper about it in one domain.

I've sort of increasingly suspected that some domains might involve an intrinsic amount of stochasticity or uncertainty that is baked into things. As in, an amount that becomes nonignorable relative to what you're trying to predict.

There's some math and comp sci papers that basically argue (in a proof sense) you there must be a limit to modeling. It's been awhile since I read the papers but my recollection is that the modeling process itself creates (necessitates?) a certain gap between the model and the real world that creates hard boundaries.
For example, if the modeling step requires an amount of time A, some information is lost in that time.

These are a couple of the papers:

https://arxiv.org/abs/0708.1362
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.4169/amer.math.monthly.121.0...

I suspect as the system you're trying to model is more complex or has more dependencies it gets worse.
I agree that copying music is not all that similar to an AI model using training data, but they're both examples of a superficially similar activity being transformed by automation and scale. The difference between manually copying a song on cassette for a friend and uploading that song to napster resembles the difference between a human learning to draw in an established artist's style to an AI model learning to draw in an established artist's style. In both cases, the offender's defense is a variation on, "It was okay when humans did this slowly..."
You got that via the legal "first sale doctrine" which has been killed for digital works.
NOBUS (Encryption which Nobody But Us can break) which is the rationale for DES weakness) doesn't make any sense any more today. Can the Americans spend a thousand times more on compute power than the Chinese today? Do they have uniquely intelligent mathematicians? No. So there's no point in popularizing any solutions that the US can break, because if they can the Chinese can break them too.

I think lots of people have this idea that everybody thought DES was fine and so the reality of attacks on DES was astonishing, therefore AES won't be any better we're just in the dark somehow. That's just not true, DES was known to be purposefully weak, good enough but not actually good. 56-bit keys and 64-bit block sizes - you can't brute force that with a computer you can buy from the store, but it's not ludicrous and clearly somebody with government money can do it eventually. AES makes those numbers enough bigger that you just can't break it this way.
"Ruthless, cunning, deceiving" are very different from "machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy" of the dark triad. And are we saying that definitive driver of execs success is due to having all these traits?

I am not trying to nitpick, and this is totally offtopic from the rest of the thread, but suggesting that huge group of people is more "successful" due to being evil, narcissistic, deceiving, [insert any other trait] seems to be a major bias in itself. Especially if the root cause is having strong emotions due to that group's role in modern society.

OP even jumps from averages and statistics down to making personalised conclusions ("who wants to have a beer with their CEO?"), which is textbook confirmation bias[0].

Unfortunately, I see this kind of argument often here on hacker news.

0 - https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/confirmation-bias
Why wouldn't we assume this?

What is the pinnacle of human achievement? I guess anything you say, someone else will claim that's not it either.
Virtualself
Why post if you're not going to argue in good faith?
We have all been using physical keys for our homes and cars our whole lives. Physical U2F keys for digital authentication are basically the same level of convenience and actually very very secure: no shared secrets, not copyable, not forgeable, not vulnerable to phishing, etc. I don’t know why we haven’t all jumped on this solution to digital authentication
Arkansas too. Lots of places where the biggest and best export they have is their kids.
The issue is not the difference in machines, the issue is that I need to run multiple apps and not just dedicate all of the resources of my machine to your app.
No one wants to live under the bridge even if it was perfectly legal.
Hah, I should have spent 120 seconds searching :)
This is exactly it, also a way to get out from under the Saudis.
I think it's important to note how they're highlighting top MBA programs though where admissions numbers haven't changed a ton and are "typically" still highly sought after.
so maybe there actually is a market for sub 6" smartphones? I found it to be insane that there did not even exist an android one (except for outdoor ones) when I looked, when 6 years ago there still were options for sub 5" ones. That's quite insane and I can only imagine it has something to do with the cost of manufacturing (or margins, see SUVs as well?). Anyone want to chip in on this?
> is very rarely used as a dogwhistle for 'Jews'

I'm not sure why you would be so caught up on "Jews" specifically when there are plenty of other targets that can be used. But yes, that term has been used to refer to Jews the same way one might say "Hollywood types" or "Bankers." I can't think of a specific example, but I think that's a bit high of a bar as I don't have an eidetic memory and it's not like I've been keeping a log of every time some mentions special interest group. Like most people I only remember the broad concepts and general notions. If you're aware of a way to easily Google or search this information, I'd be quite interested to know, because that's a very useful task. In the mean time, I'm sure you could find some if you dug around more around the Ukraine war, with both US right wing and Russian news platforms being the most likely place to find these. There's a lot of anti-semetic conspiracies revolving around Ukraine (with it even being the Russian's main initial propaganda) so that's why I suggest looking there.
Whether this is bad or good or should be banned or not is functionally irrelevant. There is nothing that can be done short of terminating the global internet. Sure you could ban it in the US and Europe, but you can't in China, et al. You can't ban it everywhere. You can't ban open source.

Art has been democratized. It's not going back in the bottle. A kid with a laptop anywhere on the planet will be able to compete with the largest Hollywood studio in the near future.
If that includes a drastic revamp of copyright laws to increase the public domain, why not.

I don't see why Disney or Universal would be more legitimate than OpenAI to profit from stuff made from now dead authors 60 years ago. Both seems as legitimate.
You're underestimating how many people live in food deserts and basically don't have access to fresh food. That might seem like a nitpick against a larger argument, but I think it serves as a good example for why you need to take a close look at the environment that these people exist in as a whole, and that it likely goes beyond their innate habits or those of just their immediate family in childhood.
Nobody? GP said "While every animal seems to eventually become like a crab...". That's not nobody. I think you'll find a lot of people online who have gotten the "crustacean carcinisation" idea wrong and think it applies to all animals.
At what point do the board members start to become concerned with the prospect of Caremark personal liability?
Anyone else feels that the double clicking of the side button doesn't feel ergonomic? It doesn't feel right to me when doing it. I end up holding it like a gun, and then double clicking it, as in the default pose of holding a phone, my thumb is unable to double click.
You sound like every failed non-technical founder trying to convince an engineer why they get to be the first employee and should be thankful for 5% equity. To reinforce my point, take YC's top 3 outcomes so far:

* Stripe - Paypal but better and dev-focused

* AirBNB - Couchsurfing.com but better and we charge for it

* DoorDash - Seamless and GrubHub but better

Those ideas, on the surface, are all garbage. Yet they had by-far the best outcomes for YC. Why? Execution. That's why YC invests in so many poor ideas -- they're investing in people are likely to be able to execute, not the ideas themselves.