skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People can choose to celebrate life and death however they choose, among people whom care about them, and whom they care about, free of judgement from any random person on Hacker News.
I think it's time to stop talking about node sizes. This reads as meaningless to me, not because I don't know what nanometers are, but because the nodes are all defined by a set of technological changes that have little to do with the measurements, and they are all very incremental and interchangeable at this point, so each node doesn't require an entirely new fab. Actually this has always been mostly true, but the capital investment of new equipment used to be less than the risk of variance from process modification. I don't think this is the case anymore. I expect to see gradually-evolving processes that are sold to customers as performance targets rather than fixed fabrication methods. Even the designs may need some kind of meta-representation that gets 'compiled' to a process, which may have traveller variances like metallization layers.

Of course we don't need to know everything, but in terms of news, maybe we could reference key technologies in use that have the largest effect on performance targets and downstream process modification.
That's quite a stretch.

I have experienced breakdown in communications due to English not being good enough many, many times.

There's plenty of stories in comments here, about how bad offshore teams are. In most cases it's just a result of poor communications(due to lack of English proficiency). I've had to switch to other languages to explain some basic things about "what the client actually wanted", because of breakdown in communications.
Have they really mastered language or are they mimicking it.

Do Submarines swim like fish?
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada

Remote: hybrid or in-person preferred

Willing to relocate: within Ontario, New York, Chicago, Detroit (I do not require sponsorship)

Technologies: HTML, CSS, JavaScript, SQL, React, Vue, Node, Express, Mongo, Git

Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bennygoldman

Email: goldmanb@gmail.com
Puma Browser | Remote-first with PST overlap | Engineering & Growth | $75-120k base & 200k+ equity | http://join.puma.tech

Hi all, I’m Yuriy, founder of Puma Browser. I've previously worked in developer relations at Cloudant (YC S08), Meteor (YC S11), Parse (YC S11), and explored Ai/ML (computer vision for self-driving cars) before diving deep into crypto.

Our mission is making new crypto protocols and LLMs easy to discover and use on your mobile phone. Private by design.

We started with the idea of a privacy-first browser with built-in micropayments (via the Interledger Protocol) and have since added support for identity (HNS, ENS; Unstoppable Domains in testing) and storage (IPFS; Arweave in testing).

We just soft launched OpenAI and Anthropic integrations and looking into ways of running LLaMA-like open source models on device. Come help us prototype and build it.

We recently surpassed 750k downloads and are excited to grow our team. We’ve raised Angel and Seed venture rounds from some of the best builders in crypto and Ai: Protocol Labs, Hard Yaka, Shima Capital, Fenbushi, HashKey, Don Ho (Orange DAO, Quantstamp), Sridhar Ramaswamy (Snowflake, Neeva, Greylock), Jason Warner (ex-GitHub CTO, VP Eng Heroku & Canonical), Illia Polosukhin (NEAR Protocol) and many more.

- We value Optimism, Kindness, Curiosity, Speed and Grit.
- Two recurring weekly meetings to maximize state of flow: Monday all-hands, Friday Demos.
- Careful with growth and never had to do layoffs.
- Capital efficient with 3+ years of runway.

Open Roles: Ai/ML Engineer, iOS & macOS Engineer, Browser Extension Engineer, Head of Memes & Growth; Internships: Eng, Design, Growth

How to Apply: visit http://join.puma.tech or email careers+hn [at] pumabrowser.com

Thank you!
What use cases are you using it for?

I haven't used it a ton, but I've found the UI to be clunkly and somewhat difficult to figure out compared to using the shell with jq
And what happens if they transfer money to you via debit online in real time, and then _that_ turns out to be fraudulent. Does the bank that paid the money to you get it back from your bank, or does it eat the cost?

Note that, when we're talking about a fraudulent cheque, and it being clawed back, it's already been cleared by the source bank. As such, there is no longer a difference between the check and a real time debit.
Adding to this.

https://duckdb.org/2024/01/26/multi-database-support-in-duck...

Unsure what the parent means by "ingest" SQLite tables (although i believe you can use COPY with sqlite tables in DuckDB), but you can interact with sqlite tables in DuckDB using the extension to attach to a sqlite db.

https://duckdb.org/docs/extensions/sqlite
I love how they are using internal AI tools as a means to lay-off huge numbers of people, but won’t make that particular image.

“AI Safety” is a farce.
Because it's equally hard to find good workforce here in Germany. Besides, I expect every IT worker to be able to at least understand, if not speak English in a way that two foreigners can understand each other pretty well. How else did you acquire your knowledge? By only falling back to literature in your language? That seems kind of limiting if you are working in IT.

Your "entitlement" argument sounds a bit harsh for me, to be honest.
A Leap-Smearing Clock
Mine is around 4 years old, but it's the 2015 design (Magic Mouse 2nd gen).
While also actively removing the rights of employees and claiming that is their constitutional right. Woo!
We'll merge that hither since the reporting doesn't seem to add anything to the original. Thanks!
Thank you for these amazing comments and insight! One element I might not have emphasized as much in the linked piece is just how much of "team" you accidentally assemble. I project managed this for Marcin, but he hired other folks (proofreader and indexer) and commissioned some photography and 3D illustration. But beyond that, likely 100 people across our printer, the outside bindery (which did the hardcover binding), and the slipcase maker (an intensely handmade product as much as flawless as it might seem) were involved in bringing it to life. Then the many 1,000s or 10,000s of people who handled the books across the shipping process in the USPS and worldwide. Lots of people involved whenever you start working with pesky atoms.
After years of investing into Google Home, I'm trying to unwind it. The assistant devices have gotten buggier and less responsive. The TV is bloated with ever more ads and suggested videos. They end of lifed the nest security system.

Not a good trajectory.
I was referring specifically to the media coverage in 2021 and later that presented fairly large numbers (in the hundreds) of possible graves. However, per the article, none of them have been confirmed yet and a number of them even debunked.

I am not denying that there are large gravesites or that terrible things happened at those schools.
You can view both the log and the diffs combined into 1 output.

git log -p -- filename

This can be a bit overwhelming with huge output, so I prefer to view the history log and the diffs separately.

I pipe the raw log into tig, a viewer that provides some interactivity.

git log -- filename | tig

Within tig you can use Vim-like searching to jump around to and view diffs, etc.

# navigate to each commits with vim-like search
/commit
# press "n" to go to next commit
n
# press Enter to see diff, q to quit diff window
<RET> q
Check the comment this is spawned from. The comment elicited all of this by saying there are misconceptions about the church.

I still don't get what the problem is. What does the asymmetric treatment between schools and church abuse have to do with the facts?

> If people actually cared about making abuse and coverups known they would bring it up every thread schools are brought up.

So you are saying I don't actually care about the abuse coverups? You think I have another agenda? You have a sick mind.

> It is almost as if they just want to attack the Church and ignore it in their own preferred abusive institutions.

It's not that, at all. Shame on you for trying to reframe it as such.
Simply tuning the model to generate a diverse range of people when a) the prompt already implies the inclusion of a person with a discernible race/ethnicity and b) there aren't historical or other contingencies in the prompt which make race/ethnicity not interchangeable, would not feel overbearing or degrading to performance. E.g. doctors/lawyers/whatever else might need some care to prevent the base model from reinforcing stereotypes. Shoehorning in race or ethnicity by rewording the user's prompt irrespective of context just feels, as I said, hamfisted.
Thanks! Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39219598 since that post has the original source.

Normally we don't change from a third-party report to a corporate blog post, especially if the third-party report gives extra background, but in this case the media article doesn't seem to add much info.
So did you run this 20 or 50 times and can you give us the statistical distribution of the races?

And are you sure that what you perceive as a lower quality image is related to the race of the astronaut at all, having similarly tested it 20 or 50 times?

Because concluding that Google is doing a "hamfisted" job at ensuring diversity is going to require a lot more evidence than your description of just three images. Especially when we know AI image generation produces all sorts of crazy random stuff.

Also, judging AI image generation by its "historical accuracy" is just... well I hope you realize that is not what it was designed for at all.
Sounds more practical for satellite-to-satellite communication than for consumer devices then if it's being sent with lasers
> The truth is these companies sold access to a certain number of simultaneously active “screens”, and now they’re changing the offering to a single household only.

Do you have a citation for that? The terms of service for these services have used “personal” and “household” for years and made it very clear that it was non-commercial, you couldn’t resell access, etc. so your suggested wording seems more like spin than the title.

https://web.archive.org/web/20181206085626/https://secure.hu...
I think that PyTorch is part of the puzzle and it certainly helps that it is supported by AMD [0]. That said, there is code that needs to run closer to the metal too.

[0] https://pytorch.org/blog/experience-power-pytorch-2.0/
I would hope that a CEO of a company that runs the forum you post in sending a drunken text wishing death upon people is both newsworthy and something that we could all agree on is bad. But not only was this article flagged by users, so were many others, as noted elsewhere in the thread.

However, I think you are making a distinction without a real difference. The company that hosts this forum set it up with an incentive structure that results in the behavioral outcomes we see on this forum. If these incentives lead to newsworthy posts concerning the CEO of the company that runs these forums getting flagged, perhaps the incentives need to be changed.
> the whole commit message is just a blog entry in the wrong place.

Right. All this wonderful information and detailed error messages need to be findable by someone searching the same error. Someone digging into the code is a very different use case and they need a tiny fraction of that information.
> I'll clarify that for you: this is still a big ergonomic issue typing notwithstanding

> That's why you don't get it. Binding hold/modtaps is what allows avoiding the latency etc.

Modkeys are how Emacs does it, but have you ever heard of Emacs pinky? Why do Emacs users swap control and escape? To me chords and modal editors are the solution. My way solved my RSI, it's definitely more ergonomic than the finger gymnastics I need with modifiers.

> That's not true since the vast majority of those aren't supported everywhere, but also irrelevant - I use better keys everywhere, so?

Use vimium in chromium, vimium-ff in firefox. Vibreoffice for LibreOffice, adding 'set editing-mode vi' in ~/.inputrc sets it for pretty much every TUI program such as gdb, sqlite, psql and so on. My window manager dwm has vim keys, neomutt for mail, newsboat for rss. For rofi and dmenu I set them manually to follow the same pattern. And the list goes on, what do you mean? Everything works exactly as expected and is intuitive to me.

Anyway, in your first comment you ask:

> Is there any complicated no-nonsense GUI for Neovim that transcends the GarbageUI of the terminals and, for example, allows you to have advanced keybinds to invoke various vim actions (like enter insert mode on tap I and exit it on hold I or modtap J+I)

The answer is yes, just use the vim way of binding the keys? The problems you mention are invented and have nothing to do with a GUI. What does a GUI even have to do with the keyboard? What am I missing, it's still unclear and I'm confused?

If you like mods just bind mods, vim supports it and I bind ctrl+p to fzf. What is even the problem? Explain it to me in a simple way don't ask me to search for what you try to say.

If you don't like neovim, or the terminal, just use VsCode like everyone else? Who's forcing you to live with something that pisses you off so much?
It depends a lot on which judges you ask. That is kind of the point: it's not a resolvable question. There is no one true perfect interpretation which is correct.

And a huge part of America is braying mad to tear down governance & institutions. Now that they have so many of their people in such high seats of power, a bullet from the blue could come and topple any institution or governance.
You can already do this by sampling the air, no spiderweb needed.

https://www.science.org/content/article/dna-pulled-thin-air-...
I have discovered Red Paint!
I agree that public companies can be successful, have long-term plans, or satisfy stakeholders so evidence of success or longevity or happy customers is not a counterargument.

But think of recent decisions that Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, or Tesla have made recently. Are they generally made with the best interests of employees, customers, users, partners, developers, and regulators in mind? Or do they only satisfy those other constituencies insofar as doing so increases profits for shareholders?

Ultimately the trust and goodwill they build up is just another asset to leverage to make more money for shareholders. If tomorrow they run the numbers and conclude that the most profitable course of action is to spend down some of that goodwill and screw over employees, customers, users, partners, developers, and/or regulators in exchange for slightly higher profits then they will do that.
I actually own a 350MHz “Yikes!” model, though I purchased mine in 2009 for just $40. It’s a very nice machine and is one of the easiest desktops I’ve worked on. Mine runs both Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X Tiger; while I own faster PowerPC Macs for running Tiger, this is my fastest machine running the classic Mac OS; it feels nice booting into Mac OS 9 every now and then and using classic applications.
I'm in 100% agreement with the poster. I'm a programmer, but also a musician. People make money by doing something better, fast, or cheaper than others. If you give me AI generated stuff for anything, I'm getting the shitty version as cheaply as quickly as possible.

I don't want crap. I'm not poor, I want to pay for quality. I don't want crap customer service, crap support, crap writing, crap music, or crap art.
And make no mistake, as much as it's impressive that a computer can make crap, it's still crap. It's polished crap, but crap nonetheless. Banal, generic, mediocre, everything that is uninteresting in media.

The message a company sends when foisting this crap on us is "we'll do anything to boost our margins, including giving you completely auto generated garbage". MARGINS!! ME! ME! ME!

No thanks.
Many OCSP (Online Certificate Status Protocol, an alternative to the Certificate Revocation List) sites have been 100% failing for the past 23 hours and counting.
I think most don't, but I'm very frugal so it's an easy point to make for me. If we consumed less, bought less useless gadgets, we'd mechanically need to work less

I'm already working 4 days a week, with a 20% pay cut, and not even a great salary to begin with, but I could get by with 2 days with my current lifestyle (if my company allowed it)

People who want to work less and keep everything the same are delusional imho, something's got to give
Germane quote from a document referenced in the article:

> “Contemporary fights about labor are also inherently fights about constitutional law—about the rights to which citizens and residents are entitled, about governmental powers and structure, and ultimately about how we constitute ourselves as a nation,” Andrias wrote.
> You're sort of singling out Catholicism though.

Yes, because church is the context of this post, and the OP opened the door. What does your comment have to do with the facts?
WiFi is microwaves.
> Increases. After all, the remainder is about how people do not understand OOP.

The author says this about "subtyping" and "inheritance", terms that do not appear in Kay's definition at the top:

Another term that – while not technically necessary – is often associated with OOP is inheritance.

Subtyping is not exclusive to OOP

Evidently, subtyping and inheritance are not mutually exclusive of OOP and in fact often co-occur with OOP. The author certainly doesn't say that they in and of themselves--or "polymorphism" for that matter--causes people to misunderstand OOP (though they might misunderstand the terms themselves, which could cause confusion). You and I don't know for sure what the author's definition of OOP is, and yet you're more confident that it doesn't include subtyping, inheritance, and polymorphism because the author mentioned them? Is that your final answer?

> Says who? You? Did you get a confirmation from the author that this was their intention?

What is it you often say? Oh right: "Did you even read" what was written? In this case I didn't say:

To sum up, the author's argument essentially is, "you critics of OOP are not using the definition that I use." OK. Well, who asked you?

Instead I said

To sum up, your argument essentially is, "you critics of OOP are not using the definition that I use." OK. Well, who asked you?

The careful reader will note that I was asking about YOUR argument, not THE AUTHOR'S ARGUMENT. So no, I didn't get confirmation from the author that this was their intention. I was seeking confirmation from you that this was your intention. Well? Is it?
A few things that aren't in the common blog post about AI:

On account of revealed truth, he knows that the machine cannot be anything more than a machine:

> Our world is too vast, varied and complex ever to be fully known and categorized. The human mind can never exhaust its richness, even with the aid of the most advanced algorithms. Such algorithms do not offer guaranteed predictions of the future, but only statistical approximations. Not everything can be predicted, not everything can be calculated; in the end, “realities are greater than ideas”. [9] No matter how prodigious our calculating power may be, there will always be an inaccessible residue that evades any attempt at quantification.

What the machine does is bound by the same rules of morality as human beings, but it can't act in a moral fashion so it's up to us to ensure that we do:

> “Intelligent” machines may perform the tasks assigned to them with ever greater efficiency, but the purpose and the meaning of their operations will continue to be determined or enabled by human beings possessed of their own universe of values. There is a risk that the criteria behind certain decisions will become less clear, responsibility for those decisions concealed, and producers enabled to evade their obligation to act for the benefit of the community.
> ...
> At times too, forms of artificial intelligence seem capable of influencing individuals’ decisions by operating through pre-determined options associated with stimuli and dissuasions, or by operating through a system of regulating people’s choices based on information design. These forms of manipulation or social control require careful attention and oversight, and imply a clear legal responsibility on the part of their producers, their deployers, and government authorities. [emphasis mine]

And the kicker - intelligence is not free will (even if the two are severable the machine will never have the latter):

> The unique human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making is more than a complex collection of algorithms, and that capacity cannot be reduced to programming a machine, which as “intelligent” as it may be, remains a machine.

----

[9] Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), 233.
Actually very like this. Thanks for sharing!
Seemingly? Is there not a direct technical reason to compare?
In North America you get lumped in with the Germans and the Russians and the Austrians too… glad I have a morbid sense of humour!
This is a reductionist view, but I believe that most people don't want to wear a computer that covers their eyes/face, and these headsets will always be a niche product.

I don't know if the big tech companies truly believe this market is likely to be highly lucrative, or if they are just pursuing it based on a lack of better ideas for what might be "the next thing."
It doesn't matter if you believe the first person who figures it out. Ten other people will try it and then there will be ten people saying they fixed it and a hundred people will try it. At some point you either believe everyone who has tried it or you lose business because your competitors have figured it out and you haven't.
> the NLRB and FTC—are "unconstitutional."

Neither of them are "core public institution". NLRB has probably destroyed more jobs that all recessions combines and might have hurt the poorest and most vulnerable population lot more. They have worked to spread the cancer of collective bargaining powers, coercive unions and other protections for their favourite people at the expense of american consumers.

> FTC

This should be considered unconstitutional. If you provide a service that is cheap you are "predatory", if you provide a service that is very expensive you are "price gauging" and if you are average your are "colluding".

FTC is an evil eye of sauron that is on every damn successful business.

I hope "trader joes" succeeds in putting a stake into hearts of these two vampires.
I maintain that Dyakonov's arguments are completely missing the mark. I predict this will be experimentally obvious, instead of just theoretically obvious from linearity, within 5 years (due to the realization of logical qubits with lifetimes thousands of times better than their parts).
So that it's totally unattractive for business interests who want VR and if possible neuralink chips to send ads directly into your brain.
Documentation is for everyone. Put it where everyone can read it, not hidden in the most esoteric place possible, via a very unfriendly tool.

I do that often and call it the developer guide. After the user and ops guides.

Not to mention comment and doc strings about why in the current code.