skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Some counter-arguments:

- TikTok revenues were estimated at $9.4 billion in 2022, at a $75bn valuation. Add revenue is projected to rise to $22bn in 2024. ByteDance (parent company) profit estimated at $6bn in 2023. They seem to have enough money to pay for the content which enables this growth (this may not just apply to the music element).

- The fact that they don't generate as much revenue per stream as YouTube is of no use to the artists whose works they are using to generate that revenue. Their work is still being used; and they should be paid for that usage. If TikTok's business model doesn't support payments to the artists, then that is TikTok's problem to solve - not the artists'.

I think a good argument is the point above that as only a fragment of a song is typically used, the amount should perhaps not be as much as a full song stream e.g. on Spotify or YT Music. Though that does open the question as to whether a stream of a Pink Floyd song should be paid as much as a stream of a Ramones song - given the difference in length!
> Some engineers must have worked on this type of integration.

Knowing how to program is not correlated to someone’s ethics or capacity for empathy. A desire to shit on users for profit is not exclusive to ad executives.
Things that did not happen.
Nah its older than SEO shenanigans. Interestingly quantitative research evaluation was an inspiration for page rank, so it make sense that they have similar issues.
There is evidence though. We've been using telescopes and listening to radio waves for decades but are yet to find anything substantial.

We can at least conclude complex life is exceedingly rare.
Right. And they have enough of DNA themselves!
Come Help Shape Hyprland
Microsoft Edge is so disappointing because it was and can be a great browser.

I recently had to use a low-spec computer (Celeron 6305, 4GB Ram, Windows 11), and Firefox just did not run well on it. I switched over to Edge and it loaded webpages much faster, and used much less RAM and CPU while doing it.

The problem was I also had to go into the setting and turn at least 10 different things off. Shopping assistants, copilot, sidebars, etc. The average user is not going to know or feel comfortable turning all of these "features" off, leaving them a browser constantly showing them adware and sending tons of data off to Microsoft.

TLDR: On low-end computers Edge runs great, but Microsoft has also injected it with a bunch of crap.
"All metrics of scientific evaluation are bound to be abused. Goodhart's law [...] states that when a feature of the economy is picked as an indicator of the economy, then it inexorably ceases to function as that indicator because people start to game it."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
I worked as a research assistant for a bit over a year after the graduation and I had an experience that put me off. We submitted a paper and got some review feedback and one of them contained something like this

... this and that paper also worked on this research area and contain this and that stuff you can citate ...

The prof I was working with told me that this anonymous reviewer was probably the writer of those papers and asking for citation.
Also, PS2 mouses and keyboards have physically identical but electrically incompatible connectors, which is like a precursor of the nightmare that is USB. ADB is positively magic in comparison.
This has been an issue with university rankings for a while. A lot of top US universities engage in this practice too - anecdotal, but I've heard a lot of professors force students to add/remove some citations, or even add their names to the list of people who worked on a paper to help the numbers for their university.

It would be good to see what the criteria is for deciding if a journal is "to be taken seriously". I imagine for example that Chinese or Arabic language journals wouls be published and citsd in journals of those languages. That doesn't necessarily mean that they arent to be raken seriously in the field, it's just that they aren't Western publications.
> Just add the ability to ask for pull requests, to comment, etc into git

That's a major understatement. To "just" add this into mainline git, you'd essentially need to either fork git itself in order to add these features or figure a way to add this without making breaking changes, and then convince git maintainers that your PR is worth adding, and then convince enough people to actually use this new standard in place of what they already have (which will also need them to integrate this with their existing forge infrastructure to mitigate XKCD Standards).
This is a blog post by a rather small operation (probably one guy). If AI-generated-imagery weren't available, he would've used a stock photo or nothing at all. I doubt very much he would've paid an illustrator for it. So no he's not blind to it, he just doesn't care, or has decided that the low quality is worth the low price. Analogous to the situation in the article.
It doesn't matter as long as you can hardly get a PC without Windows.
It is a text book example of a monopoly which no longer has to care for its users.
I tried this. Account was blocked fairly quickly. I think they pattern match on activity and block such accounts automatically
> needs a pivot where you can change the public's perception from a one-time test to continuous health monitoring through blood markers or something similar, expand to tests other than genetic and make it a repeatable, accurate test that gives you more information (and obviously stop leaking people's data).

"Stop leaking data"? Sounds like a step forward.

> But why not focus on the B2B side? Sell access to their databases.

So, it's actually: try to sell your customers' data instead of leaking it? :O

Sorry if that sounds snarky, but are we sure there are enough customers who want to pay to give their data to a company so that company can immediately sell their data on to other companies?
Seems like a great way to get rabies.
It's not that arbitrary to me. The earlier work was sometimes physically-motivated, and sometimes even based on physics. For example using Lambertian reflection[1] for diffuse surfaces.

But the key, in my view, to PBR is that the whole pipeline is based on physical principles and math, while the old renderers were not. So previous renderers would not bother properly normalizing the Lambertian coeffients for example, leading to violation of energy conservation.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambertian_reflectance
Not cross-border from Ukraine's perspective. Or the US government's.
> I'm struggling to see how somebody on their own could come up with a non-trivial scientific result that was meaningful in any way.

This is a very dominant attitude but that in itself gives guidance for more alternatives than there would be otherwise.

Naturally some people are better prepared and/or more promising on their own than others having the overwhelming support and encouragement of an established institution.

It's just plain "Nature" after all, naturally.

A certain number of the very most promising individuals are simply not ready for an institution.

That's just plain statistics.

Sometimes the individual themself is not suitable for institutionalization, other times the institution is not suitable for the individual.

>Can you give us some examples of what you mean?

ASTM contains some of the most repeatable & reproducible science published. Repeatability & Reproducibility statements are required before the vast majority of material will even be considered for publication. Mainly a committee of leading scientists will carefully conduct the proposed procedures in all of their individual laboratories, before using the data to arrive at an agreed-upon consensus. This has always been a significant effort that would be impossible without highly co-ordinated dispersed team effort. But that's just the publication. Now to some people almost everything in ASTM will always be considered more reliable on the whole than the bulk of everything in Nature, for others it's vice versa. To each his own, I would consider both publications to be equally prestigious even though ASTM almost never names contributors in the pages of its volumes. ASTM scientists participate on a volunteer basis anyway. Publication wouldn't be possible without the bureaucracy, but so many of the actual proven scientific ASTM procedures were completely originated by individuals whether or not they were working in their home institution basically alone, or using their own resources in the equivalent of their own "home".

With the dangerous chemicals I worked with, I always recommended "don't try this at home" myself.

Regardless, some of the most outstanding scientific minds and experimentalists just aren't going to limit themsleves to what is recommended no matter what you say.

But that's besides the point, IIRC since I was a toddler, publication is over-rated.

Plus there are more kinds of industrious people than there are institutions or industries to accept them.

Any attitude which reduces acceptance further can only be expected to reduce chances for overall scientic progress proportionally.
Two player Lemmings[0] (came in to the comments to find an Amiga reference, didn't find one, so leaving my own)

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chv49bHtLUY&t=256s
And https://http.cat!
> China is the world leader in renewable energy, including 40 percent of the planet’s entire solar capacity, reported Rystad Energy

Really? I thought they were way worse.
Building ad audiences and targeting people across multiple channels is super easy with Primer’s audience builder! Occasionally, we do receive some clarification questions, like questions about filter logic, for example.

Join Eric from Primer as he quickly breaks down the logic behind data fields with Primer!

For those who are new to the platform: what is Primer? For demand gen leaders selling an enterprise-level product who need to engage prospects at target accounts, Primer is the targeting platform that lets them identify and reach as many real decision-makers as possible across channels. Contact us for more details at sayprimer.com
i think you are mixing something up here.

taking things personally doesn't stop the narcissists, it only enables them and others to hurt you. so how can not taking something personally enable narcissists?

for your own mental sanity, you should try to not take anything personally. put it down to that person being an asshole, or someone who lacks the mental capacity to be nice, or whatever putdown you can think of.

not taking something personally does not mean you condone that behavior. you can reject a behavior even if it is not aimed at you.

if you take things personally it only hurts your own ego, and if that happens to much, it may lead to self-doubt, or even depression. it's not worth it.
Omg, how can a company doing genetic test burn $1.4b ? Altought better question might be, how could it be worth $6b ? :-)
We can tell by looking at the beginning. It looks like this universe started from nothing, but this is not possible, unless it's a simulation. Therefore, this universe can't be a 'top-level' universe.

However, it's a different question whether this is a 'simulation created by conscious beings' or a 'natural simulation', e.g. some kind of natural process in a different kind of universe which somehow results in a simulation of our universe. 'Conscious being simulation' theory is just kicking the can further, rather than solving the origin problem, if we assume that their universe is similar to us.
Able to pass a combat fitness test != "moderately fit"
There is a large population of people in America that depend on being able to overdraft. It doesn't make sense to me, it doesn't make sense to you, but if they were given the option between "overdraft" and "no overdraft" they will always choose overdraft. It's important to be aware of this use case for understanding the US system as practiced.

IME they eventually end up abusing it (repeatedly not paying the fees) and then the bank closes their account, at which time they move on. One way they strategically avoid or delay paying the fees if they can't / don't want to is by avoiding direct deposit. Then, you can either deposit the check (ready to pay overdraft fees and get account positive) or cash the check at a check-cashing (for a fee that will likely be less than the overdraft + overdraft fees).
401 Unauthorized: Rhode Island
There is a known threat in using lasers to damage the solar cells which would lead to the batteries fully discharging and the satellite becoming useless for lack of electrical power.
The 1/137 constant is probably the key to figuring out the simulation.
You can be obese and anorectic (it is called atypical anorexia). Simply said, if you are obese, you can starve yourself and cause serious issues without loosing all that weight first.

Plus, anorexia is not the only eating disorder there is.

Anorexia prevalence in females ranges from 0.3%-1.5% and for males range from 0.1%-0.5%. And it is raising. It happens to be the most deadly mental issue there is. Male mortality is higher, cause people associate it with women. That is not "trivially small".
China's jobless Divas hit the road
Is it just about mathematicians? Is it something new? I though that was pretty much how academia is done.
Backlink farms for universities
No way. What if those beings considered the simulation tainted and shut it down as a result?

Not that this definition of simulation matches what most people think when this question gets asked.

The answer is no you can't tell no matter how hard you try. Quantum behaviors should be enough proof that our reality can act way outside our sense of things at very small scales. Any kind of "eureka!" claims about our universe being a simulation can more easily be explained as it just being how our universe works and of course it doesn't line up with human common-sense notions of causality/physics/etc.

And not that it is even an interesting question but my take is no this is not a simulation. Way too much detail. Even if some civilization had the resources to run a simulation the size of our universe it would be a massive waste to do so. The most efficient computational system for simulating a universe with the high fidelity our universe has is to create a universe and let it evolve.
Dude the Martians need human DNA.
Such a bad take. A Quick Look at the developer docs would show that this speculation is baseless.
Academia wrote the playbook and now they're abusing the rules. Nothing new here.
i mean, customers are angry if personal data leaks, but a lot of legit usecases can be done with agregate data.
Games, or so I heard.

Oh and market capture: "maybe that excel spreadsheet I look at once a year won't work in OpenOffice/GDocs" ++ "My work is Microsoft so its the easier path"
If starting from nothing isn’t possible, how did the top-level universe start?
How long before we use ChatGPT to create ChatGPT prompts?
Yeah, yeah, make sure you are born into a rich family and a right zip code.
As we used to say, 6 months in the laboratory can sometimes save you hours in the library.

The most ambitious did both at the same time.
Whoa whoa, the Carpenter ruling has nothing to do with govt involvement in cell towers nor with the trigopoly. It has to do with two things: cell towers collect so much highly-personal info, and, more importantly, you have to have a cellphone to live in modern America.
That's the conflict at the heart of the business. But do the public care enough about that? Obviously a HN audience does, but people use Google and Facebook products every day with the awareness that all that data is sold directly to advertisers. With the right messaging ("yes, we sell your data, but it's to drug companies to help make drugs that can cure your illnesses") it's possible that the conflict isnt too much of an issue.
How is that a problem? If they aren't willing to pay as much, then obviously they don't need it as much.
If sentient NPCs in a game wanted to communicate with you, what would you do about it? Say “interesting”, then turn off the app and go to sleep?
I wonder what percentage of academic work is based on cargo culting and practices like these. There are more "scientists" than ever and yet we dont really have a quantitative increase of people that are as productive as Euler, Einstein, Newton, Neumann or whoever you want to pick as a luminary
They could easily add video chat to the web app with webRTC, so I’m guessing they want you on the desktop app asap to get all that juicy data.

It’s unfortunate Firefox removed PWA features.
And if you have an obscure Canadian TV computer from 1982 and want to use a USB keyboard with it, check out my https://youtu.be/93LBVhSx8cs?si=bC8OW3SpWIIlsgNN

(I should really get around to taking that project beyond the prototype stage)

Seems like keyboard adapters are a popular thing around here.
Qatari government is always happy to help.
Counterpoint from a former tenured academic: Maybe we just have too big of an academic class.

Our universities are still trying to teach like it’s the mid 20th Century, but the economics are not in their favor. What we’re seeing is the result of them being squeezed into the new reality.
Nobody well-known any more.

Probably have to dig through the "literature" ;)
Remote work morphs into elite status symbol for wealthy, college-educated
Are we out of names in this industry?
Yeah, as an owner of a Mac Studio with a work MacBook Pro on the side, I was confused as to why my Mac Studio specifically would need mouse drivers. Should've spotted that it was a lowercase S.

Personally, I would've probably tried to avoid confusion by wording it a bit differently (like "Mac-based studios" or "Mac-using studios") knowing that there is a product called "Mac Studio".
Hm I'm not sure if it's correct but here's my logic (here on mastodon https://social.ciaranmc.com/@ciaran/111850662374227629)

There are N-1 red balls out of 99 remaining, so the probability the next ball is red is (N-1/99).

The possible values of N are evenly distributed [1...100] (we discount the N=0 case because we drew a red ball)

The total probability that the next ball is red is the sum of the individual probabilities divided by cases:

P = SUM[1...100](n-1/99) / 100
= SUM[1...100](n-1) / 99 * 100
= SUM[0...99](n) / 99 * 100
= 4950 / 9900
= 5.0

So red or green are equally likely
Oddly, 23andme adopted an extremely cautious, risk-averse strategy with respect to providing "health information". The result of this is that many other services became a more interesting/entertaining source of personalized health information based on genetic data (often 23andme raw data extracted and fed into the other system).

I get new updated health information from 23andme perhaps 2 times per year. It's mind boggling to imagine that with all the research being done that is all that makes the cut as interesting and trsutworthy enough for 23andme to tell me about it.

In other words, a majorly failed content strategy based on fear of being shut down for providing insufficiently vetted health info.

Meanwhile, someone created multiple accounts and the ancestry results didn't match even when collected from the same person.
Curious, what kind of response in your opinion would have been better?
well, if it's that transparent... I still wonder what to do with a handful of slightly off, but relatively good papers suggested to us. 2/5 would augment existing citations, 3/5 are related but not really relevant... No author is shared between them.
"Hello to all of you, friends! We interviewed him to answer these questions about PERPLEX, which was the first blow to the Turkish Hack Team (THT) in the past, and why he made the coup. Our questions and the answers we received were as follows:

Why did you carry out the coup?
PERPLEX (P): I did not make the coup without a reason. I didn't do it to be an explosion. I made the blow because the required authority was not provided and the balls were played to me. I did what had to be done and I was successful. The things I wanted came true, and although my enemies increased, the loyalty of my friends became stronger. I staged the coup because it was necessary, you see.
> No way. What if those beings considered the simulation tainted and shut it down as a result?

That's just as plausible as those beings waiting for us to evolve our present level of understanding, and shutting down the simulation out of disappointment that we didn't try to contact them, or hack our way out of it.

This whole discussion - not just the one we're having, but probably most discussions on this topic, here on HN and elsewhere - is the nerd equivalent of trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
This story makes 23andme sound like a non-fraud version of Theranos, with some of the same issues around business viability, dodging the FDA, relentless PR and funding from rich friends.

If a healthcare startup get shout-outs from Oprah, SNL and branded Barbie dolls, is that a bad sign?
I didn't realize it's required for mobile banking, I don't use it. I can see why that would've made people complacent about it.

Ironic about the first step in resolving KYC ID leakage being acquiring more KYC ID images...
its not really self inflicted when it literally determines how many sales you will have. Plenty of people are put off of VR because of the form factor. Quest looks like a nerdy toy, which does indeed influence who buys and/or uses it
Very nice article. No mention of which browsers/OS versions are affected, no mention of mitigation techniques. The whole article is in the spirit: "we host malware on our side, but it is not our fault. A user did it". /s
Make sure the resolutions match, maybe. Either by fullscreening the browser window, or resizing it down to match the resolution that's getting sent.

It might be bugged and change the sent resolution when you do this though. (based on my limited experience with x11 forwarding)
It seems totally obvious that about 3/4 of "red first" cases happen with red majority urns.

I tried to think how so many people could get confused into thinking anything else.

I've read the code, and I still don't get it.
Apparently $356M is nearly $0 to the WSJ
I liked this take by Neil deGrasse Tyson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmcrG7ZZKUc
“celebrity spit parties”
I'm guessing there are so many other impacts of own on the model that size of print probably gets lost. I can see a future where people are forecasting updates to ChatGPT like we do with the weather.
I'd seen the RPS piece but didn't realise there's a paper, thanks.

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/you-can-play-doom-using-gut...
Just to update this thread and correct myself. The book is absolutely fine. The problem was we were using it at bedtime with dimmed bedroom lighting. When we turn the bedroom lights back on, the book works fine again!
Why did that put you off? This is a very common thing for reviewers to do. It is useful for you, because it makes you aware of other people who work in the same problem as you, leading to future job prospects, etc. But more importantly, it is useful for the readers of the article!

The alternative is several independent communities of researchers that work separately on the same problem, but do not acknowledge the existence of each other. Now, that would put you off!