skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Neither enables armed rebellion, especially not Republicans (they'd be quick to squash that with maximum force).

I'm not sure where the Democrat party is openly opposing the parent comment's interest of financial success. They're simply following the facts that lead to better economic success, which can include putting tax dollars towards benefit programs with high future returns for society as a whole.
"balancing it out" is just a nice way to say you're discriminating against certain people because you prefer a different skin color. Equal opportunity employment laws explicitly outlaw this in no uncertain terms, and it's against the spirit of everything I was taught growing up about inclusion.
At 420?
Didn't realize it doesn't have chrome - bit of a deal killer right there for work purposes.

Also, the inability to have more than one mac desktop is very strange.

And the weird limitation on not having audio from your mac go through the headphones.

I'm waiting to see if Immersed Visor [1] ever becomes real and lives up to the marketing.

[1] https://www.visor.com/
I'd strongly suggest to include the sample PDF screenshot in the Github readme as well.

Also just my opinion and honest feedback but I don't really consider that PDF "beautiful" or readable. However, your project is a very good start toward something that is potentially very useful.

Here are my suggestions:

- Switch to a modern, beautiful, readable serif font that isn't an overused (Times New Roman, Garamond, and pretty much any MS fonts are overused and will make your PDF end up looking like "yet another Word document"). Some good options that come to mind are Tiempos Fine, Butler, Lora, but there are lots of good ones out there. Shop around for something both unique AND highly readable. Make sure your PDF generator embeds the font or (preferably) converts all text to paths instead of just referencing the font.

Also, know the difference between fonts designed for printing and screen reading and fonts designed for both, and adjust according to whatever use case you're marketing.

- Figure out how to make the sub-headers heavier weight and significantly larger to stand out. Be bold with your font size changes. Printed documents look "nice" when the sections are clearly laid out and EASY for the eye to parse from a distance how the document is organized and which are top level headings and which are subheadings under those headings. For generation purposes there's a good chance you can probably just parse it from <h1> <h2> <h3> ... tags in the HTML, unless the website uses some JS-framework-of-the-month bullshit. Use more white space before each header to physically separate it. Avoid using lines between a header and the text it corresponds to, as that can be distracting to the eye since lines are normally thought of as separating sections.

I'd give you a pull request but I'm super busy these days.
Pythontutor.com
Wegovy Maker to Boost Production Capacity with Multibillion-Dollar Deal
IMO Optimizations like that should be at least a __warning__ and ideally lead to refactored and more correct code as a result.

Also IMO, the default should always be unsigned (modulus) integers, not signed. That would promote more correct consideration of integer types and operations. Yes, the ship has sailed on that, but it would also be nice if code linters added 'signed ' where not specified to remind everyone of the present default.
https://www.mealbymeal.com

It's macro + calorie tracking over text message. You just text what you eat and it matches against a food database to estimate your food intake. It's basically an easier alternative to MyFitnessPal.

My stack is OpenAI on Azure, Vercel, Convoy, FatSecret API, Postmark, NextJS.
I self-host my garage door opener. Instead of having a remote, I have a VPN and password protected webpage that I hit to open my garage. It's come in handy when other people have to access it, I can open it from anywhere I have Internet, and I can give other people access with their own password.
MAME's cheatinit is just like ye olden C64/Amiga Action Replay and Final Cartridge days.

Scan the RAM, die once in the game, scan again for decreased values, repeat until just one address left.

Then patch that address for unlimited lives.
"Replacing the CEO" isn't a panacea because most CEOs are pretty average, but when an exceptional CEO does take the helm, they can pull off some amazing feats (e.g. Satya Nadella).
Wouldn't any sane SSO implementation let you recover and switch to a password simply by proving ownership of the email address via a challenge email?
The Greening of Transportation
TC39 Created an FAQ with Common Asked Questions About JavaScript Decisions
Eh, there is a ton of unrealistic technology in book 1, the stealth ship for instance is impossible. By the authors own words they don't think of the books as being Hard Sci-Fi, harder then Star Trek sure.
Pretty cool engineering to pull this off
I’m still experimenting but thus far I’ve found it to be nice for lounging usage (couch, bed, etc) because it lets me keep my head up and eyes focused several feet away instead of down and a few inches away.

It does need more apps but those are coming along at a decent pace, and if necessary I can write what I need.
single digit read lengths is pretty rough, I don't have the chemistry knowledge to tell if this approach is scalable
consider also, games must be built with handtracking for it to work, controllers wont suffice. So not all vr games even if they do open it up.
SQL is popular because it can be run on a map/reduce backend. So once you have written your code it can run on any number of machines.
I'm curious how much that will impact the device.

I mean, will a lot of people do this? Transforming a $3500 device into a $2500 refurb over night?

I wonder if they will get a lot of these.

Of course, my problem is I can not test it. I need eye glass lenses to test it (apparently), so I don't even think I can go into the store and give it a 30s look. The barrier to entry is quite high for me.
This is honestly my only complaint about Cue after having it used it for a few weeks after looking at everything else in the space (KCL, Jsonnet, Dhall, etc.). Cue is incredible imo and the commenter above talking about not being able to define the schema vs. the data is sort of missing the point - Cue makes them the same thing in a way that really understands the whole role of config langauges and IMO is way better for it. When you start to really understand what a config language _should_ do, Cue is the only option, and most attempts to dismiss it seem like hand-waves in order to push some other preference.

However it only being in Go and not implemented with some C ABI is a major downside for adoption, especially when their documentation itself for implementing the core CLI functionality in a go program (to then compile to a DLL for use in non-Go land) is pretty sparse.
What I'd like to see is a different scoring system that measures how much attention I have to pay to something.

Score 1: This is an implementation bug in the library. Update the library and you're done. It doesn't matter that this gives remote root on a machine with no services running, all you have to worry about is to install the patch and it's 100% fixed.

Score 2: This is a vulnerability discovered in multiple implementations. Some of them have fixed it and some of them haven't. Here is the list of known-good implementations, you need to check that the one you're using is on the list and if it isn't then switch to one of the ones that is.

Score 3: This is a flaw which some platforms don't currently provide a means to implement securely for any implementation. You need to pay attention to this if you use those platforms and possibly redesign your applications to do something else there.

Score 4: This is a design flaw in the API. We can't fix it without breaking compatibility so here's a new API and now you definitely have to update your applications to use it and the existing ones will continue to be vulnerable. Compilers should emit a deprecation warning for anything still using the old API.

Score 5: Spectre. We kind of mitigated it some and you need some patches but now you have to review all existing code, probably won't catch it all anyway, people will continue finding new variants for years and we're all totally screwed.
If they want to improve and gain wider adoption, they should try eating their dogfood. Give Apple developers the VP treatment and see what they do with it, fix the problems, enable the features, and make the real use models work.

Just having the right few thousand people use it a couple of hours a day a few days a week could have a big impact (or kill it and move on to something that will). Or save a few million and let it languish for years, draining billions.
Whatever is distributing the chunks is still a point of central coordination.
>If Google chose to just ban my account
UK professor suffered discrimination due to anti-Zionist beliefs, tribunal rules
Playground for Hugging Face Models
Test models available on the Hugging Face Inference API in one place.
I was holding a free screening of a short film I made, and as an alternative to Eventbrite and the like, I built a simple SMS-based ticket reservation system that used GPT-4 to read and respond to messages. People interested in attending would text a number and their messages were routed by Twilio to my Node.js app, which in turn sent them to GPT to generate a response. The LLM was instructed to provide a structured JSON of each reservation once the person gave their name and the number of the seats they wanted. Worked very smoothly and only took an afternoon to build. Would've been infinitely more tedious if I had to worry about parsing messages with my own code.
Except from their own subsidiaries?
That's correct, Rust does not have this, in principle Pattern Types (a possible future Rust feature) could do this, but you probably wouldn't use them for this purpose.

WUFFS can do this, it calls such types "refined" types - and indeed WUFFS can also do:

assert n_bits < 12 via "a < b: a < c; c <= b"(c: width)

What that's saying is "As the programmer I say on this line n_bits is strictly less than 12, and I claim you can prove that based on knowing the value of width, and here's why"

WUFFS doesn't know how to create such a proof, it's in quotes because WUFFS has a list of proofs a human gave it, baked in, and just accepts any of those proofs, after all a human mathematician assured it these are true. But it can check the rest of your assertion given this proof, and if that fails your software doesn't compile.

WUFFS requires that it can see why everything you're doing is OK, whether that's indexing into an array (if you write dogs[k] where dogs is an array of 16 dogs, WUFFS needs to be certain that k is strictly in the range from zero to fifteen inclusive, or the program won't compile) or arithmetic (if bits is supposed to be an integer between one and thirty two inclusive then we can't very well do bits = k * 2 can we, because k might be zero)

As a result WUFFS gets to be entirely safe. As a side effect (and also with the help of some clever SIMD friendly language design choices) WUFFS gets to go very, very fast. And all for the very affordable price of abandoning generality. The next Doom, Excel, Apache and Linux cannot be written in WUFFS. But the question is why your thumbnail making code, or your file compressor is written in anything else.
Yes, we agree. I was just clarifying that "what you said" can be quite different from "what the police said you said".

If it were recorded then that's different....
Yes, in the thought experiment it runs underwater. It's fine though because it can run underwater in both cases, so that doesn't ruin the symmetry.

The article implies a situation where the pump is running in the opposite direction as normal, sucking the water in. That's not time-reversed though (eg in the time reversed version, the pump generates electricity instead of consuming it, because the water is pushing it instead of it pushing the water)
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. If it had a Thunderbolt out, or HDMI or something, that it could sit on a desk and double as a Mac Mini, for example, I think it'd be more 'keepable'.

Most of my friends work in the tech space, and a lot of them have at least one VR headset, most of which have been sitting in 'the drawer of stuff I'll come back to at some point' or have been given or lent to friends/family.
A third way is to run essential services yourself rather than relying on other companies. This is my preference.

EDIT to reply: " self-hosting doesn't eliminate risks, it just changes them."

Absolutely true, but from my observations over the past couple of decades, the overall risks are lower with with self-hosting than with having someone else do it. The tradeoff is that self-hosting is more work. What's right for you depends on your particular needs.
Funny to see this continue to get so much energy. I was strongly opposed to making some AWS Step Function workflows fully immutable in the first project I used it for. This was all the more my feeling with some of the gigantic state machines that teams around me were building. Not shockingly, situations would arise where we could know ahead of time that a large portion of outstanding state machines were cruising to a crash at step $BIG_NUMBER.

Ironically, I'm still largely about idempotent calls that should be able to trigger something. And those idempotent identifiers can be stored such that you can replay or serve up the relevant data, as needed. But going all in and forcing a long compute chain that cannot be changed is something you do in places you have to do it. No reason to choose to do it everywhere. And certainly don't build larger and larger compute chains between durable writes to the backing data store.
IDs are one thing, cursor-able fields/columns are a different thing.

You cursor on timestamps, or serial numbers, or etc., not IDs.
The current business strategy across the tech industry is to kill off the competition rather than compete.

Amazon, Google, Microsoft, really any business. Buy the competition or undercut the market so much that they die off. Once you are a monopoly, jack up prices.

Its industry standard.
> Youtube remains unprofitable 3 years after Google acquisition (dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com)

2009/July
This made me do some research into "hearsay" because I'm not really familiar with how it all works.

> Per Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a), a statement made by a defendant is admissible as evidence only if it is inculpatory; exculpatory statements made to an investigator are hearsay and therefore may not be admitted as evidence in court, unless the defendant testifies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay#United_States

So it's not hearsay if it makes you look bad (but it is if it makes you look good), and police don't even have to be telling the truth, nor do they really have to be worried about perjury charges if a given encounter was not recorded.

I still can't imagine why a confession given in interview isn't logically nullified by:

"How does the defense plead?"

"Not guilty, Your Honor."
If they received $36 MM in a fundraise 3 years ago, you better believe that those investors put pressure on the business to grow fast or die trying. Those investors are not looking for a somewhat risky medium % return, they're looking for each company to have a small % chance of being a unicorn.
"4 passages of 140 characters each, with at least 85% of characters recoverable"

oh good grief, even back then, we were limited to this value
I was working on this stuff before it was cool, so in the sense of the precursor to LLMs (and sometimes supporting LLMs still) I've built many things:

1. Games you can play with word2vec or related models (could be drop in replaced with sentence transformer). It's crazy that this is 5 years old now: https://github.com/Hellisotherpeople/Language-games

2. "Constrained Text Generation Studio" - A research project I wrote when I was trying to solve LLM's inability to follow syntactic, phonetic, or semantic constraints: https://github.com/Hellisotherpeople/Constrained-Text-Genera...

3. DebateKG - A bunch of "Semantic Knowledge Graphs" built on my pet debate evidence dataset (LLM backed embeddings indexes synchronized with a graphDB and a sqlDB via txtai). Can create compelling policy debate cases https://github.com/Hellisotherpeople/DebateKG

4. My failed attempt at a good extractive summarizer. My life work is dedicated to one day solving the problems I tried to fix with this project: https://github.com/Hellisotherpeople/CX_DB8
Fair -- to get to a billion dollar founder valuation, you need a VC, and even with a VC, the chances are less than 1 in 100.
Of all the debuggers I've ever used, I'm most keen on the one that's part of openMSX as you can rewind time in the emulation with it to see how the registers and system ram came to have the values they do. It's been a while but can you rewind time with MAME's debugger these days?
That sounds like Japan and Korea, i vastly prefer the status quo over that
Yandex Owner to Sever Ties to Russia with $5.2B Sale
A run a B2B tech company in Silicon Valley and have been without any mobile phone for 3 years.

Started as an experiment but at this point I enjoy my increased privacy and renewed attention span too much to have an interest in going back.

I have enough internet access on laptops and desktops. I do not also need to be online every second between access to those devices.
> This is the primary reason for selecting the annihilation of a proton (p+) and antiproton (p–-); the products include neutral and charged pions (πo, π+, π-), and the charged pions can be trapped and directed by magnetic fields to produce thrust. However, the pions produced in the annihilation reaction do possess (rest) mass (about 22% of the initial protonantiproton annihilation pair rest mass for charged pions, 14% for the neutral pions), so not all of the protonantiproton mass is converted into energy. This results in an energy density of the proton-antiproton reaction of
"only" 64% of the ideal limit, or 5.8x1016 J/kg.

I love that someone wrote and published a serious paper where the end design involved first stage thrust of 550 million ft-lbs and the total ship weighs something like 17 million metric tons and if I'm reading page 26 correctly, the payload on the ship has to be 7,500 kilometers from the ignition source to survive.

https://www.relativitycalculator.com/images/relativistic_pho...
I'm working on something like that. Feel free to email me (address in my bio).
What is the actual thing that will happen if the Supreme Court rules one way or another in the Chevron thing?

Very roughly, the Chevron ruling ensures that federal courts give deference to executive agency policies when those policies are reasonably based on the law passed by Congress. Federal judges, lacking detailed knowledge of some specific set of regulation, cannot impose their judgement during a case - they must defer to the agency.

Overturning Chevron could allow lower-level, unelected judges impose their personal views when hearing cases (vs deferring to the agency tasked with enforcing laws). The argument that an unelected bureaucracy is "making law" doesn't pass the sniff test - those agencies are reviewed by Congress and limited by law. Federal judges have no such oversight - our primary recourse when they go off the rails is impeachment.

Super-simplified example...
Boeing doesn't want the FAA to regulate airplane doors, so they sue on the grounds regulating doors isnt explicitly listed in law as a something the FAA can regulate.

The judge hearing the case believes Boeing should be able to build doors however it wants and rules against the FAA (under Chevron, judge would be required to defer to FAA's industry knowledge).

Impact: Boeing can now install doors with fewer bolts that required without risk of being grounded by the FAA.
Thank heavens I can now listen to Bach without fearing he may not be great. Now if "maths" can prove da Vinci was a great artist and Michelangelo a great sculptor and Shakespeare a great writer!

Was this in need of "proof"?

Read, for example http://www.ram.org/ramblings/books/the_eight.html

If only Neville had proof it would have been a much better novel.
Indeed, we think the community aspect of this is super important. Being able to reuse high quality work confidently is very nice. Our export is pretty cool already! We build outputs in CI on a server, ready to drag and drop directly into JLC, including BOM and PNP files.

Being able to use git was our fundamental motivator, we all previously worked a big companies and found it maddening that we couldnt work in parallel on projects without breaking everything.

On parts specs, for sure, we currently capture all the data you would see on JLCs website. We do have dielectric and voltage ratings for caps. Eventually we plan to scrape a bunch of datasheets to build out a high quality dataset, I am very excited about this!
Note that the 2nd statement only applies because of the Doppler effect - energy of the photon is a function of its frequency.
Agreed, except I would not call it "existential"

C++ stores references to dictionaries from/with the things they describe, that's "existential"

Haskell passes in extra parmeters that are dictionaries and doesn't (except for user-written code that does) keep around extra references to them. That's more like "universal" than "existential".
We called it "watermelon paper" since the stripes had green tint.
On Day 2. It's genuinely amazing. It's really a fantastic product all around and surprisingly useful. Watching Gravity last night in the "theater room" was a truly special, immersive experience. I just threw it on to see what it would be like and ended up watching the whole thing.

What surprised me the most, though, is that when you put it on — the pass-through is certainly nothing convincing. I had the impression that reality would look like reality, but the truth is it looks like a sort of lower-fidelity, grainier, hazier dream world version of reality.

In practice, this doesn't matter much. Once you start doing work VisionOS windows are sharp and look great and that "dream world" is more in your peripheral. It's not distracting, but it was surprising. I'm not entirely sure it matters but it is perhaps noteworthy.

Is it a must-have product, money aside? No, I don't think so. It can be tiring on the eyes and it's certainly not replacing my Mac anytime soon, but I absolutely buy into the notion that this is in some form the future of computing.