skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I did parenting courses, multiple times over the years.
The best parenting course I ever did was one that was taught by a team of psychologists who specialised in child psychology, and also maternal mental health. I had to do the course as part of my treatment and recovery for postnatal OCD.
The course itself was based on attachment theory. The stuff I learned from it, I’ve carried with me through the years.
Then… when my kid was struggling in school, I got an educational psychologist who did some assessments and created a individualised report and learning plan for his specific needs, I give the report and plan to teachers.

I rate attachment theory pretty highly and would say, if you can’t access parenting courses based on this stuff, you still might find some good books in the library for parenting strategies based on attachment theory, and also Google scholar if you’re feeling super academic and wanting to get nerdy about it.

In contrast, the worst parenting course I ever did was one that was hosted by community do-gooders which based their techniques on ideologies around what they believed were the socially accepted family values that all people should adopt. It was not culturally appropriate for a lot of reasons and just awful, so when it comes to parenting courses do your research before jumping in…
And when parenting gets hard, which if often does, or you feel like you’re out of your depth, getting advice from experts is fine, it doesn’t mean you need some fancy label or clinical diagnosis, sometimes an outsider perspective on family dynamics in general can be pretty helpful.
As a CA, you may sign a certificate for anything. Public CAs don't do it for IPs for obvious reasons, but if you're cloudflare or Google, you can coax them with enough money and goodwill to sign a cert for your very expensive quad-single-digit ip, especially if you manage to motivate that request with the fact that the IP is a DNS resolver and can't be pointed at by a domain in the first place
As a CA, you may sign a certificate for anything. Public CAs don't do it for IPs for obvious reasons, but if you're cloudflare or Google, you can coax them with enough money and goodwill to sign a cert for your very expensive quad-single-digit ip, especially if you manage to motivate that request with the fact that the IP is a DNS resolver and can't be pointed at by a domain in the first place.
Anyone who has worked for Boeing over the past couple decades will regale you with stories of profit over plane. We're seeing that play out in tech right now. Google is extracting profit over innovation, Amazon is putting profit over quality, Facebook is putting profit over safety and mental health.

Where are the execs who have any long term aspirations or vision?
Hard to be embarrassed at the player when jingling keys in front of an infant is often literally the game.
You can smell another book while reading an ebook, and those are readable offline
Recapped, towards the end of the article:

> The Luddites, again, were not anti-technology. They were anti getting trampled on and anti having no say in the way that this industrial development would take place. And when they lost that battle, this was the cost. It was decades and decades of mass immiseration.
That's (whatboutism) not a logical fallacy. I meant it can be, but I don't see how it is in this case.
So it’s going to be both small and far away?
I don't know if the Visison Pro is like other 3d head sets, but I realized there is more of a cognitive load on the brain then just using a 2d screen. I think it has many applications, but I wouldn't want to be using it for long periods of time.
We’re pretty close. I’m not sure that 51% of the people I work with understand what DNS is, what a call stack is, what the difference between inheritance and polymorphism is, or what a mutex is
>where the AI was constrained to only coming up with words that have an associated emoji

Sorry but clearly the game description is about joining two things together into a logical craft and AI is contrained with that – not coming up with random words that have an associated emoji. In doing so the AI is not convincing, the combinations just feel random. And yes, you need common sense to come up with logical combinations which makes a game like this interesting in the first place.
Why not just give the latency sensitive processes a higher priority than those that aren't? If there are extra cycles on the latency sensitive cores you wouldn't want them to be idling. Trying to outsmart the scheduler can lead to worse scheduling so you have to measure the real world performance.
Be careful what you wish for with this sort of thing.

The Matrix has obviously become a cliche, but it's modern telling
of Plato's cave allegory is handy.

Imagine if I could give you a "healing" pill. But I'll warn you, in my
best Laurence Fishburne voice, that when you wake up you will see the
world exactly as it really is, no more, no less. And even if you go
back in the cave you won't be able to unsee it or relate to other
cave-dwelling people.

There's a reason 99 percent of us take that blue pill every day. We
like to have friends, go to dinner parties, wear acceptable clothes
and say acceptable things.

Trauma sets you apart. That's the best way I can put it.

PTG is a 20 or 30 year process of adapting to so-called "super
powers".

A movie they never made is "What ever happened to Will Hunting?"
After Matt Damon hugged Robin Williams and drove off into the
sunset... what came next? Drug abuse, alcoholism? A 20 year gambling
spree in Las Vegas? Or just endless fun with Minnie Driver?

I'm not against recreational psychedelics, indeed I take the Bill
Hicks view that they should be mandatory for some :) But to use them
as a "pivotal" therapeutic shortcut to "wellness" doesn't seem to add
up in my view. You'll still have to do "the work", sooner or later.
I feel like I've seen this title every month for the last 20 years. And of course, the not-included subtitle is: romans didn't have cars, that weighted a lot
So I guess the question is, how did she figure out the size of the entire universe?
That's silly cope justifying a bad argument made initially in ignorance of what the actual metric was.

"It's meaningless because we need the perfectly unbiased representative sample of raters doing rating right, instead of the biased raters doing it wrong that I'm currently imagining" isn't an appealing or honest argument.
The creepiness is something nobody ever seems to mention about The Far Side and that's my biggest lasting impression of the comics. They're deeply unsettling and have a weird uncanny valley feeling to me.

That's not to say they're bad. But something about them always has a tinge of horror to me.
A good college should teach students how to solve problems and how to think. The major is only a part of that. Computers will likely be around a long time. Computer Science programs also teach AI and all that fancy new stuff.

What else would you focus on? Picking a major should also be about your interests as as student and not about what the parents think. I know this isn't easy, especially if you pay a shit ton of money but you gotta let go as a parent.

I feel this is crazily prevalent in the US that parents cannot let go. Your kids' opinions are often overlooked until they are 18 and then, when they can legally make their own decisions they are not trusted to do so. It's so mind-boggling coming form a European country.
Could you name a few countries that are more socially to the left than the US? Let's say with regards to abortion rights, LGBTQ debates, college admissions, immigration, racism.

For context, I'm not white, not American, not christian so I guess I have a different pov, but to me Europe was much much more socially to the right than the US. Maybe it's different when you are white in Europe though :)
https://archive.is/7TnUB
Ask HN: Guide for Implementing Common Lisp
I have written compilers and interpreters before, but I find it hard to understand how Common Lisp compilers work – what with their readtables and read macros and normal macros. It's hard to figure out how the compilation pipelines actually works, and how the process of implementing them goes (e.g., what subsets are implemented before the rest, etc.).

This got me thinking: is there any implementation guide on how a Common Lisp is/should be implemented?
Ask HN: Suspicious Url? (Gotolinkurl.com)
When I click on a google result, they go to this domain first. No information is available about this. I'm on linux (somewhat outdated NixOS) and firefox ...
Your hypotheticals are all extremely unlikely. People who ace interviews are usually good, and people who lean on stuff like ChatGPT aren't. I'd also rather not have someone dumping massive amounts of ChatGPT output into a good codebase.

>what's the problem?

Using a LLM is akin to copy/pasting code from random places. Sure, copy/paste can be done productively, except ChatGPT output comes completely untested and unseen by intelligent eyes. There are also unsolved copyright infringement issues via training data, and a question as to whether the generated code is even copyrightable as it is the output of a machine.
The type of ai that can end humanity will not be a chatbot. Knowing statistically which word is liable to be next in a sentence is what these tools actually do when you take off the marketing glowup. Whats more likely is that these sorts of ais take a lot of jobs that produce churn content, a good thing if people spent that waste of a time doing something creative instead perhaps, but unfortunately our world does not alleviate us from busy work to provide us with food shelter and creative outlets in its wake. Quite the opposite. Maybe thats what needs our attention in a more automated world than anything from sci fi.
This data isn't terribly surprising to me in itself. The promise always seemed much greater for anxiety disorders than for depression, and I honestly believe we'll never find a pharmacological treatment that significantly outperforms SSRIs when depression is defined as broadly as it is in this trial. Depression is really a wide family of disorders that we don't have very good ways of telling apart yet, but likely work quite differently, along with a very fat tail of somatic conditions that are very commonly misdiagnosed as MDD or some other depression diagnosis. This seriously confuses any attempts at comparing efficacies like this.

Anxiety disorders are much better understood and more clearly delineated. And what we see in anxiety land is huge strides being made even just in new forms of therapy. Metacognitive therapy is starting to show real improvement over CBT. Pilot studies with a new form of intensive exposure therapy have shown staggering remission rates of over 70% in severe anxiety disorders like panic disorder(look up the Bergen 4 day treatment). MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD looks very promising as well.

For depression, dissociatives have looked much more promising than psychedelics for a while now.
Thanks for this well written and insightful post! I had a lot of misconceptions about this that are cleared up now.
I was responding to another comment, so my conclusion was not fully stated in my comment alone.
That's not what Center Stage is.

Center Stage is a feature where a device uses an ultra-wide camera, and then is supposed to track your _face_ as you move and shift around it it's field of view.

I find it most useful for FaceTime calls on Apple TV, where you can leave your phone near the TV, and it will automatically frame you sitting on the couch and will follow you as you shift around, etc.

There is a similar feature to what you're describing for FaceTime, but I don't think it has any cutesy name.
you might find this podcast episode about neuroscientist Richard Davidson who also studied with meditators interesting https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/seeking-serenity-part-1/
Haha, wow... it was my siblings' favorite game (and mine, too)... I've done a deep dive several times now searching for this game over the years without remembering the name. Finally, after a decade of occasional searches, I found 1991's Arctic Adventure. Thanks!
Why? Anyone less gifted.

(It's very absurdist humor, but anyone into that should and MUST know about Larson, the person who did so much to damage the field by disappearing... willingly... etc. What a fly on the wall he wasn't, etc.)
I've been thinking recently about how Buddhism and even some western philosophies are arguably sciences of the mind. You can't refute that ancient thinkers dedicated to contemplating reason, virtue, meditation, or otherwise were ahead of their time, so to speak. We are still proving out what they discovered, however subjectively they may have done it. It's sort of a marvel. I'm not sure people appreciate how incredible it is that thousands of years ago, with little more than paper and brains, these people recorded insights about psychological phenomena which we still struggle to understand.

That's not to say people in the past have necessarily understood it. They experienced it and recorded it though, and the evidence of these collective experiences throughout time and space have turned out to be remarkably consistent.

My favourite thread throughout eastern and western philosophies, as well as modern psychedelic research, is how crucial dissolution of the ego is to attain clear perception (at least what we consider to be clear) and ultimately, more virtuous action in the world. Buddhists did it, Taoism, Hinduism, Stoicism... I'm sure there are others, but I'm not that well-educated, just interested in this stuff.

Many people will be strict about what qualifies as a science and exclude anything that appears to be religion or philosophy. I think it's worth taking seriously, though. I certainly wouldn't have 10 years ago.
1st of all: sounds incredibly controlling.

They could also work on things in their free time and to be honest, as long as they do their work you shouldn't need to care. You only buy 8h of their time usually.

Camera off: Oh shit, I don't want to be watched in larger zoom meetings

Sharing one tab at the time: Crazy. How dare them.

LinkedIn is none of your business. It's their private profile and they can do whatever the hell they want with that.

I am not saying they aren't overemployed but your behavior isn't exactly at its best either.
ORMs never block you from issuing raw SQL queries. But mapping the results to entities inside your programming language’s abstraction is a repetitive task, ready to be abstracted away. The reverse direction is the same way.

I feel most of the criticism of ORMs come from people who don’t actually know how to properly use one. They were never meant for OLAP, they are for OLTP.
Well a lot of it is quite dark. One of my favorites being the jet pilots asking each other why there’s a mountain goat in the clouds.
adobe is literally mudbrick, this is too easy – like fire and water = steam
Using ChatGPT as a tool makes as much sense as allowing a human assistant to take the exam with you.

In an open-book test, you have to know what you're looking for and roughly where to find it in the book. That implies some knowledge. With ChatGPT you could type the question verbatim and get a potentially right answer, without even understanding the answer at all. It is therefore unacceptable for use on any exam.
Sure, it ought to come from above. But what software dev in 2024 doesn't know that keeping everything in the source code is really really bad?
Argh! I knew I was going to make a numerical mistake somewhere, thanks for spotting it. Correction will be up shortly. Thanks for spotting it! :D

And thanks for the text example! This looks like what I was trying, but clearly I had a mistake somewhere.
gollum + schizophrenia = smeagol
I’m pretty the submenu has a timeout before it considers non-hovering to be a close-submenu action
And please, donate.
Reminds me of a cool tool I made at a previous company. I combined a software validation ticket database with version control blame in order to paint the entire source code repo line-by-line to represent how "validated" it was. I generated a HTML listing with png thumbnails next to every source file, allowing you to quickly find areas of interest. Maybe that sounds boring, but it was flight code for a space ship.
What a sadly narrow definition of the hacker spirit you seem to have.

I enjoy reading articles about interesting research, regardless if there's a practical application of it or not.

(If you don't like this sort of thing, just flag it and move on. No need to waste comment space with denouncements.)
> Nowhere else matters.
Until the California people want to move somewhere liveable with good public transport, low crime, low poverty/homelessness and sensible social safety for their children.

Then - and only then - does Europe miraculously become interesting. Who knew?
you want to make kickstarter an international bank?
Google inks major new offshore wind deal
I wonder why a page like this thinks it needs cookie tracking, and thus the cookie banner. There are no ads, so what's the point?
> Would you say that GPT-4 can reason now?

Let's assume reasoning entails going beyond the stochastic parrot level. Can LLMs have skills not demonstrated in the training set?

Here is a paper demonstrating that GPT-4 can combine up to 5 skills from a set of 100, effectively covering 100^5 tuples of skills, while only seeing much fewer combinations in training on a specific topic.

> simple probability calculations indicate that GPT-4's reasonable performance on k=5 is suggestive of going beyond "stochastic parrot" behavior (Bender et al., 2021), i.e., it combines skills in ways that it had not seen during training
https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.17567

So they show ability to freely combine skills, and the limit of k=5 measured in this benchmark illustrate that models do generalize. They are able to apply skills in new combinations correctly, but there is also a limit.

The interesting part is how they demonstrate that, let's say on a topic with n=1000 samples in the training set it is impossible to have sufficient training examples covering tuples of 5 skills, but models (mostly GPT-4) can handle it. Other models top out at tuples of only 2 or 3 skills.

Models combining skills in new ways are not just parroting. They can perform meaningful work outside their training distribution.
It might not be popular in general, but surely IPFS crowd specifically would be a lot more receptive to such a thing? IPFS itself is similarly niche.
The oldest boomers (born 1945) have not turned 80 yet. The medical problems still lie ahead. Majority of healthcare spend is in the last 5-10 years of life.
Driving through cow country it’s impossible not to think of all the far side comics involving them and ponder what’s really going on in their heads. XD
Actually they do work like that. Engineers can be asked to solve problems in interviews. But the pressure doesn't seem like in software, where many people complain. There's no LeetCode equivalent for other kinds of engineering I think. But some of them do have licensing to deal with.
Apple declares last MacBook Pro with an optical drive obsolete
I think story and narrative will be the hardest nut to crack. I like to think humans will always be interested and capable of driving at the top-down level.

Image, video, voice, and instrumental will be easy. But it's still going to require a human with very sophisticated understanding of narrative, theme, pacing, structure, etc. to draw these elements together in a pleasing, coherent, and artistic way.

I think voice and performance will still be human-driven by actors for some time, but that a much smaller cast of less-than-supermodel actors and actresses will be able to do everything themselves.

I'll show you current SOTA animation if you email or message me on Discord.
> A subsequent Bayesian reanalysis did show a statistically significant advantage to psilocybin, but this difference was not clinically significant.

What does it mean for something to be statistically significant, but not "clinically significant"?
Deutsche Bank to Cut 3,500 Jobs
Someone working in a lab doing routine blood work isn’t going to benefit from this. They aren’t doing anything novel just running the same assay a hundred times a week. A machine can do that job without ai today.

Someone working in cancer research is probably doing novel work on the other hand. They might not be doing routine assays but optimizing their own one off assay. Since gpts are trained on existing data it probably won’t be very useful for novel work outside of vetting the literature perhaps, but gpts botch that pretty badly in fact unfortunately. Lots of mistranslated information lacking correct context and not a lot of citing of sources. Better to just read human generated review articles to get a top down technical summary of the subject.
I agree, of sorts. The problem being that we have developed a culture of making user-facing user interface and APIs the same in Unix-y tools. I think "everyone" recognises the problem, but we may have different preferences about what the default should be. Personally, I'd prefer a default way of indicating "I want API behaviour now" but defaulting to more human-friendly output, because even in most cases like "tool | grep xyz" from the command line I'm still more likely to want colours etc. to stay intact through the pipeline. Most of the time that's fine, but you're of course right it will give unexpected results some time.

I think my ideal expected behaviour (which would still not be perfect) would be something like:

* Tools defaulting to unescaped output in scripts, but with a standard short option and/or ENV var to trigger colour output.

* Tools default to colour/escaped output when run in an interactive shell even if in a pipe.

* Tools being escape sequence aware, maybe with switches to turn that behaviour off if you genuinely e.g. do want to grep for sequences that may include escapes and you want them considered.

But I'm not sure there is a good solution to this other than decoupling UI and API and having different defaults for tools that are expected to be "user facing" vs treated as API. I have an "ls" replacement on my system, for example, which changes formatting and adds more colour to my ls output, and it's obviously not named ls because the amount of stuff that breaks if "ls" isn't reliably the same as always is significant. It's still not great to have to separate this given that part of the ease of composing pipelines etc. is familiarity with the output, but maybe if coupling that with reasonably standard switches to turn on/off machine-friendly output.
You can't just wave your hands about having a scheduler that magically optimizes throughput and also promptly switches to a low-latency task as soon as it becomes runnable. There isn't one, because the way of sending the low-latency task to the CPU right away costs the throughput task some of its time.
It Technically could as it has plugin support but as far as I am aware it doesn't.

Some alternatives:

- TT-RSS¹ has multiple plugins, including the one I currently support Feediron²

- FressRSS³ has CSS selector support out of the box and has a readability extension⁴ that supports Readability or Mercury

I've been dreaming of porting Feediron to both FreshRSS and Nextcloud news. But I barely have any free time as is... one day

[1] https://tt-rss.org

[2] https://github.com/feediron/ttrss_plugin-feediron

[3] https://github.com/FreshRSS/FreshRSS/

[4] https://github.com/FreshRSS/Extensions?tab=readme-ov-file#by...
Writing my business logic with no libraries, no standard testing framework, and a syntax and overall feel comparable only to COBOL? No thanks.

(Some databases allow writing stored procedures in other languages, true, but that means a nonstandard interface, tightly coupled deployment model, and testing is still awful)