skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Personally, I don't know specifically about building trust, but your average person seems to be more likely to buy a product if a celebrity they like is endorsing it. At the very least, a lot more people are going to /hear/ about whatever product some celebrity is endorsing.
David Mills, the internet's Father Time, dies at 85
Also, https://text.npr.org/
Oh, yeah, that makes sense. I agree that having an understanding of those things is necessary to write fast software.
It is my understanding that psychedelics can open up that learning window. I wonder if that could be used to benefit in this case. (I imagine a lot of people might be opposed to having a minor take psychedelics; but if it works, does it matter?)
Science keeps a lot of traditions that would be illegal in most fields.

A company wouldn't dare to say publicly "People older than 30 Years can't apply to our job" or "People from NY will be favored, we will not hire people from Louisiana". I see equivalent claims in the Academic field aaaall the time; is pissing on the constitution, and nobody fucking cares.
Ah that makes sense, I had overlooked the manufacturing requirements. Especially for a new type of ship that could certainly impact economies of scale. Thanks!
It means that mass, plausibly coordinated (again) downward pressure on employee compensation via a staggered sequence of staccato layoff rounds that no RIFer would sign off on under any normal conditions should have the Justice Department involved (again, again).
Because this is hacker news and not prison news.
What’s crazy is he(60) wasn’t even there for long and was already raped, it must be extreme bad luck or this occurs way more than is reported
You appear to be correct.
I've always found R dependency and package management to be considerably worse than Python. Years ago we needed to use a Microsoft mirror of cran to pin versions which routinely went down making builds impossible. Pushing to cran is arbitrary and tedious, for instance you _must_ support Oracle Solaris. Lastly, the maintainer of cran is notoriously prickly. This means it's way to easier to get new algorithms on pypi than cran, and hence a big reason why DS leans python over R.

I feel like cran is a great example of how more restrictions and tests is actually worse for software quality when it prevents iteration and creates toil for devs.
I've been an ML researcher for the last 11 years. Last week I spent 3 days debugging an issue in my code which had nothing to do with ML. It was my search algorithm not properly modifying the state of an object in my quantization algorithm. Individually, both algorithms worked correctly but the overall result was incorrect.

Looking back at my career, the hardest bugs to spot were not in ML, but in distributed systems, parallel data processing algorithms, task scheduling, network routing, and in dynamic programming. Of course I also had a ton of ML related bugs, but over the years I developed tools and intuition to deal with them, so usually I can narrow down an issue (like impacted accuracy, or training not converging) fairly quickly. I don't think these kind of bugs are fundamentally different from any other bugs in software engineering. You typically try to isolate an issue by simplifying the environment, break it down into parts, test on toy problems, trace program execution and print out or visualize values.
Can we have an honest conversation about all the people enabling X , not just those making management decisions?

If we design an algorithm that will be used to put people in jail by algorithm [1], is that exempt from culpability? What about the engineer that implements it? If they are not responsible, but the code is buggy and the bugs cause real harm, are they now to blame?

Where is the line that we should not cross ?

[1]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hertz-to-pay-168-million-in-bog...
AI-Powered Nvidia RTX Video HDR Transforms Standard Video into HDR Video
> I bet that parachuting is much more dangerous than flying on a Boeing 737 MAX

Most likely. But it's totally worth doing at least once. If nothing else, so you can say you've taken off in a plane more times than you've landed. It's a very unique experience in any case, I totally recommend it.
I took note of the planes when booking my flights to SXSW the other day and made sure none of them were Boeing. Irrational? Maybe. But also if everyone did that maybe Boeing would take some interest in fixing their broken systems.
Can you tell the difference between different types of chocolate?
I don't really understand the disagreement. The main disagreement seems to be that others say it increases the win probability by 12% assuming you score the needed touchdown afterwards, and the author says that it's not really 12% because there's a 90% chance you won't score the touchdown? On its face, I tend to agree with the others that that's irrelevant.

In the linked blog post with the actual statistics in it, she argues that it only increases your chance from 11.2% to 12.9%, so it only really increases your chances by 1.7%. But that just seems to be dishonestly reframing the numbers so people think a 1.7% absolute increase is nothing. But that really is a 15% increase in win chance. It sounds like the data says the 2 points is even better than its proponents claim?

His only other argument is that failing the conversion psychs a team out, which I respect, but that's still just a bare assertion. I don't know why you'd get so mad at statistics for ignoring your feelings. People are complex and absent data otherwise, I would think it just as plausible that the added pressure and imminentness increases performance.
> A better way to make decisions in a software project is to consult with stakeholders (if necessary), identify the appropriate decision maker based on
competence and then let that person make a decision.

Holy shit. This is one of the most profound things I've read about management in a long, long time.
Russian doesn't have the guttural 'r' of French.
I typically download a pbf extract, and then use the osmium cli for local filtering.

Then I use ogr2ogr to convert to whatever output format I need.
That's why I qualified it. If you want the general public to use your software, you need to make it easy for them or they won't. Otherwise you're just as entitled as those demanding things of developers - expecting others to do something for them. If you don't care who uses it or not then you don't need to do anything for other people.

Not sure why that triggers people.
I already have seen ai scenes in tv ads and anime. half the youtube thumbnails i see sre ai now. So.. might not even be five years. might be 2.
It's worth mentioning that Pijul is largely based on the same theoretical model of Darcs, which actually predates Git. But Pijul definitely makes it a lot more workable, e.g. by solving the exponential (iirc) complexity merge that Darcs has.
EU Votes on Resolution to List "Hate Speech" as a Crime
I find thinking about time like that ends up counterproductive. You can read K&R and code/read a little C and never build a single thing in it and have it be worth it. For instance, I wrote C in school but basically never use it professionally or for my hobbies (directly at least). But I'd say learning it was worth it - my school curriculum didn't "waste" my scarce resource of time. You do end up learning to think about computers in a different way.
Codemodder and SpongePowered Mixin cater to different scenarios. Codemodder is ideal for transforming source code you own, based on specific patterns. Changing source code allows the changes to be tracked, reviewed, and analyzed using standard tools like compilers and static analysis. It's great for large-scale codebase refactoring.

Contrastingly, SpongePowered Mixin uses Java bytecode manipulation, to transform the bytecode of a specific type. Bytecode manipulation comes with added risks and complexity, so this method is typically reserved for when you need to change the behavior of some external library or framework type. For example, Mixin is useful in Minecraft modding, because it allows modders to change the behavior of externally defined Minecraft types.

In essence, choose Codemodder for large-scale refactors to your source code, and Mixin to modify the bytecode of external Java types.
Nvidia RTX Video HDR: AI-Upscale Video to HDR Quality [video]
I would, though I'd prefer other planes if there was an easy alternative.

Sub-par safety in commercial aviation is quite good safety compared to most other areas of life. Not worth worrying too much about unless it gets much worse.
Ah, someone got to it first. Well, always good if it's good enough to share.

That's my article. Feel free to AMA or flame away or whatever.
It does. The problem is that I have a hard time determining if the output is, indeed, what I was trying to query in the first place!
I agree and think that's the main point of the story not AI, however questionnable it's usage may be
Using a service like Have I Been Pwned, could companies like 23andMe proactively invalidate credentials that are known to be leaked? The next time those customers try to log in, they're forced to update their credentials through something like an email-based password reset?
> The judge then agreed to dismiss the charges against him.

> However, just hours before he was released from jail

How does a person not just walk out of the courtroom after having charges dismissed against them? This case is harrowing.

Also, there are multiple levels of failures here. Why is a person accused of robbery, who just had charges dismissed against them, in jail in the first place, and furthermore, why are they being housed with violent criminals? Why were they arrested purely on the basis that they look like someone, as determined by an automated system, with no further investigation or oversight?
Experimental use of pig liver to filter blood offers hope for patients
The military likely would be more effective with generals in charge, yes.

There are downsides to that, which is why we don't do it. You can judge for yourself if those same downsides apply to Boeing.
I think none of those "innovative future of transportation" ideas will come to life in any meaningful scale. Transportation for the most part is a solved problem.
Car dependency is the main issue and no "super innovative personal transportation device" solves this.
The pressurization warning was a sensor glitch unrelated to the door plug blowout. Even if Alaska had fixed the pressure sensors the door still would have blown out. So I don't see what responsibility they share in the incident.
Nose Tomb
Yeah, and that last part is where it gets confusing to me. If it is no longer just a short term supply shock, you'd actually want investment and production expansion. Those pressures seem to be in tension with interest rate increases that have the effect of deferring investment.

Presumably there is some point where raising the cost of investment is not desirable, despite relatively high prices.
It means that France and the UK have so thoroughly buried themselves in regulations that they've failed to innovate in any meaningful way.
If the organic results are too good someone might click on one of them instead of a sponsored link or advert. De-indexing/non-indexing helps to avoid that outcome.
How do you promote it? How your students learn about you?
Not tested extensively, but that seems to work. It can be wrapped in a bookmarklet too, so you are ctrl+shift+b-then-click away from a standard youtube page into a simple page with the video embedded:

javascript:(function newDocTest(){ src = 'https://www.youtube.com/embed/'+document.location.href.split('watch?v=')[1]; document.body.innerHTML = '<iframe width="420" height="315" src="'+src+'" title="Embedded YT" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>'; })();

I might have to spend some time tinkering to improve it, make the default size match current view-port dimensions as closely as possible etc.
“PoC or GTFO” as they say.
You can believe that it's bad for people overall, certainly - friends with benefits type things require greater than zero management to avoid running into problems, and as with any type of relationship, not everybody is as good at handling it as one might like.

But I was talking 'toxic' as in the 'toxic masculinity' comment, which is a fairly specific thing and I don't see in evidence here.

Plus, I mean, trying to frame it as an 'evil male' thing (which you didn't but was what I was responding to) seems to me silly given women can enjoy casual sex too - and intending to find somebody suitable for the long term doesn't mean your libido doesn't exist -now- so it's perfectly possible to have short term impulses that are separate from your long term goals without them interfering with each other.

(I -do- think there are people who interpret sex positivity in exceedingly stupid ways that can be actively harmful in application, but I don't think this app is responsible for that since that's a decades old problem and in the end you kinda have to accept that other people are their own person and allowed to make decisions you're sure are a terrible idea ... much though I grumble when it's one of my friends about to blow their own foot off ...)
I think I actually like the misquote, as it's more powerful, although the original is more prescriptive.
Towards member patterns (in Java) [Brian Goetz]
Show HN: I'm a doctor and made a breathing app for stress and anxiety- Lungy 2.0
Hey HN!

I’m an NHS doctor and the founder of Pia (https://www.piahealth.co) which developed Lungy (https://www.lungy.app). Lungy is a mindful breathing app that uses the camera +/- microphone to respond to breathing, generating real-time visuals and tracking your breathing progress over the exercise. It’s initially a wellness app (for stress & anxiety), but we’re very close to having a medical device version ready for asthma & COPD - the two most common lung conditions.

It’s been one year since Lungy launched (here’s the original ShowHN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34534615) - I was delighted with the response. One year on, we have re-designed and rebuilt the whole interface, and added a real-time, 3D soft body solver which gives some really cool interactions like blobs / objects that expand and inflate as you breathe.

My background is as a junior surgical trainee and I started building Lungy in 2020 during the first COVID lockdown in London. During COVID, there were huge numbers of patients coming off ventilators and patients are often given breathing exercises on a worksheet and disposable plastic devices called incentive spirometers to encourage deep breathing. This is intended to prevent chest infections and strengthen breathing muscles that have weakened. I noticed often the incentive spirometer would sit by the bedside, whilst the patient would be on their phone – this was the spark that lead to Lungy!

Since making the first version we’ve made exercises fully customisable (you can dial in exact timings for each breath phase), added new breathing indicators, learning modules, e.g. self-care for anxiety symptoms, and lots of new visuals. The UI is now much nicer. The free version gives you access to a new breathing exercise each day, whilst premium ($14.99 per year, $39.99 unlimited) unlocks the full library of exercises.

Thanks for reading - would love to hear any feedback!

Version 2.0 here: https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1545223887
Yes.

The home assistant speakers aren’t making enough money to justify the large teams behind them. Thus we’ve seen significant layoffs on those teams in the past year.

BigCos are looking for other ways to reduce costs. Killing features is one way to do it.

There have also been situations where a feature is removed because of legal action; lawsuits alleging the features violates a patent.

Live updates givith, live updates taketh away!
This is a fair point and it's a valid criticism of scientism which blurs the line between a sort of platonic idea of "science" as an unencumbered pursuit of ultimate truth and "science" as a human endeavour which is subject to current zeitgeist, social norms, economics (funding) and everything else.
How many other news stories about the horrors of people being raped in jail have you read recently?

And then one news story that does come up is "Isn't it terrible that this innocent person was raped in jail?". Not "Isn't it terrible that this person was raped in jail?" with the fact that they're innocent being in the 8th paragraph of the story.

I think there's definitely an inference to be made that the author probably wouldn't have written the story if the victim didn't appear to be obviously innocent. Clearly implying that the rape of guilty people isn't quite as worthwhile commenting on. Because... that doesn't matter as much?

The article doesn't have to explicitly suggest it. The fact that this article was written at all, when hundreds of articles about incidents which were similar in many ways except one, is suggestive enough in itself.
>"publish or perish" and the fact that survival and job advancement depend on quantity over quality of publications.

I mean, kind of but not really.

Any academic of even marginal skill can smell a padded CV from a mile away. The type that do this are not serious people and will waste your time and resources. Knowing how to identify an imposter is a survival trait.

Usually the type to pad a CV with garbage are eyeing admin or corporate gigs, not academic success. A search committee or tenure committee wouldn't look too kindly at a bunch of wacky papers in the east austrian journal of ass-scratch.

Yes there is huge demand to be published, but quality matters a lot if you intend to seriously participate in the scientific community.
UK struggles to prove Houthis attacked its trade ships
So the story must be a lie because it advances a political narrative that you disagree with? You don't want AI legislation, so stories about harms of AI must be false?

I've never seen such a blatant example of someone identifying their own confirmation bias, then using that confirmation bias as a reason to reject evidence.
The annoying thing about this is that it will ruin this feature for everyone else. I, and many others, use this for requesting to index time sensitive content.
Touché, however i’m joking to illustrate a moot point for no reason at all. I am just pro floaty balloons.
Birdwatch: Crowd Wisdom and Algorithms to Understand and Reduce Misinformation
Crypto lender Nexo sues Bulgarian government for $3B damages
Firefox is a special case, since it uses unreleased experimental features of the Rust compiler. IMHO it's unnecessary, but that's their choice (they get some nice-to-have features).

Most of the Rust ecosystem targets the latest stable release of the compiler. Updates for Rust users are very easy and reliable. It remains compatible with sources since 2015, so there's generally no obstacle to upgrading.

Changes between versions of Rust are very small, often just new functions in the standard library or some compiler flag. But people use them as soon as they're available, so everyone else has to use latest stable Rust as well.

This clashes with policies of many Linux distros that keep years-old software and prefer not to touch it. This is more of a culture/policy problem than a technical one. Rust wants to be up-to-date like Chrome, distros update Rust like Internet Explorer.
If I have to be within 10m of the car to "remotely" enable the heating, I'm not remotely enabling the heating. No, if your BT feature doesn't work while sipping coffee in a ski lodge it's not an acceptable substitute. Add to that that bluetooth exploits are themselves a dime a dozen in the IoT world and I frankly don't even see what you gain. No, this is silly.

Stuff is on the internet. If you're convinced it's safe for your phone[1] you should be able to be convinced it's safe for your car.

[1] And, no, it's not particularly more safe for your phone than for your car. Apple and Google are incrementally better at this than GM is, surely, but everyone has zero days.
It doesn't means anything, for example there is even a company in France that has more revenue than MS. ( Total S.A ).
If you're using that analogy, then it's still a valid concern. What are the deadbolts for the connection? Can we see the failed attempts to gain access like we could with physical damage to the door? There should be some level of reasonable protection in either scenario. I feel like for many connected devices those reasonable protections are absent because most people are more ignorant about cyber security than they are about physical security, so the market isn't really adopting those protections at the scale it should.
Your experience essentially mirrors the state of the product category.

Incapable of serving as a general purpose tool, outside of specialized use cases (NLP + action, summarization).

There are more generalized things in the works that would improve that (from Microsoft and others), but afaik nothing has been released to consumers.

The issue with Microsoft's Power nee Copilot strategy has always been unification -- it may share one branding, but you're really talking about different teams, writing different integrations, with different amounts of functionality.

It's hard to meet customer expectations when "magic thing that works with PowerPoint Copilot doesn't exist in Excel Copilot."

And right now, GenAI is dependent on access to integration scaffolding with the specific service+activity -- ergo, much more IFTTT and less general purpose magic box.
To play devil's advocate (and let me be explicit: I think this would be a horrible idea) the benefit would be cheaper flights, which would in turn have benefits such as cheaper shipping costs (for air delivery), more people experiencing other cultures (which I believe, perhaps naively, would be a social good of its own), promote remote working (since it's now easier to fly people in for meetups etc), and boost tourism economies.

Increased/cheaper travel would also come with some bad externalities: Increased CO2 emissions, and possibly increased rates of cancer (high altitude is a high-radiation environment - not enough for the occasional flyer to worry about but it can add up).
...and of course the externality that lower safety controls means occasionally one of these more frequent flights will fall out of the sky.

One way to think about these kinds of questions is to reverse it - suppose flying had 10x stricter safety controls than it does today. Would the world be a better place as a result? What would be the downsides?

EDIT: I almost forgot perhaps the most important one: If flying is more convenient/cheaper, even if it's slightly less safe than currently, it is still FAR safer than driving and a shift from people driving to people flying means that relaxing flight safety may actually SAVE lives.
Have you played with control net over comfyui? Try it. You can pose arbitrary figures. Theres gonna be full kits that provide control over every aspect of generation.
I'm pretty sure most car doors would break a carrot when closing...
Depends on the time left and the calibre of your qb and receivers if you have enough time to drive down to kicking range if you fail going for 2. The opposing team may have a great run game and will run out the clock. Usually with lots of time left you always go for 1 as that’s a high percentage shot and 2 is low
In the R ecosystem, it seems like the faults of the language and packages are made up for by the ease of use of RStudio. I've tinkered/hacked in a lot of interpreted languages, but I've been most productive with R because of RStudio.
Everybody starts in a different place and nobody knows everything.
Do you have any sources/information to back up your assertions?

I did some quick Googling and everything I found just talked about the severity of the problem in the US, though admittedly that could easily just because I am a person in the US searching in English. E.g. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/fe...