skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> imagine a constructive management environment, where the “mothership” worries

I think this is limited to the realm of imagination. It will never happen.

There is nothing maternal or caring about modern enterprise. Caring is an act of sacrifice-- giving more than you take.

Even charities don't "care," the leaders make bank through arbitrage/exploitation of other people's empathy.

Introspection does not generate revenue. At best it generates goodwill, until the next CEO cashes out on it a decade later and screws everyone anyway.

> part of the sales pitch is that these internal conversation channels provide a meaningful view into staff’s reactions, dynamics, and states of mind.

This really isn't a good thing, at all. It's that social media paradigm where you figure out how to keep the audience maximally-engaged without driving them away. It sounds like a beneficial thing but only ever amounts to assessing "what can I get away with before they mutiny?" It's not a sign of good leadership, it's the playbook of a carnival worker.

I do internal investigations. Half of me wishes we had this visibility for obvious reason. The other half dreads the implications of actually having it.
> A major issue that people talk about way less is well funded/large companies getting bullshit patents, and using them to sue their small startup competitors into the ground.

Do you have any examples?
The myth of big salaries (it's all marketing)
I wonder if we would have smaller llama models if compute was cheap.
They generate little value per acre. More acres = more infrastructure cost.

Look at the graph in this example @2:59: https://youtu.be/7Nw6qyyrTeI?si=BVi7PNEizNnQ7FKh&t=179
> In the vast majority of cases, these are not your customers. These are apple's customers they have given you access to.

This is problematic argument, that imo we should not accept in _any_ commercial context.

* Are people browsing the web on an iPhone Apple's customers, and therefore 30% of web sales should be collected too?

* If you use Comcast to access the internet, are you Comcast's customer? They're giving the retailer access to your traffic, so they should take a cut of every online purchase?

* Should your headphones take a cut of all music streaming revenue, and refuse to play non-compliant music?

* Should your TV take a cut from every video stream provider they allow to show video to their customers?

There is significant value to society in general-purpose devices & services, where the user pays for something concrete, and can then use it with any 3rd party provider in any way they like.

That principle has been a key driver of digital innovation for decades, and allowing it to disappear would be a Very Bad Thing.
"The thing I have noticed is when the anecdotes and the data disagree, the anecdotes are usually right. There's something wrong with the way you are measuring it". —Jeff Bezos <https://sports.yahoo.com/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-explains-2123...>
This is true, but I do think it's worth reflecting on why/how.

Someone writes these things. They are influenced by lobby, yes, but even lobbies, think tanks and such generally draw their ideas from what's lurking around in their vicinity.

There are no secret "geniuses of working out how this should work." That is what it is, and it shouldn't surprise anyone.

The public sphere is not good at producing politically practical suggestions either. It's good to talking s** and offering charismatic partial answers, speaking for some specific interest or opinion. Barely better than the lobbies, sometimes worse.
Writing a law without loopholes has the same chances of happening as writing a program without bugs. And continuing with the analogy, a "well-written" law just means the loopholes require more resources to find, thus being available in general only to very rich entities.

However, regardless of fairness or sloppyness, if a large part of society feels the law should be interpreted in a certain way, the fact that it does not literally say that may be irrelevant. Who is going to reprimand the judges if the legislative, the government, the people, the local corporations all feel Apple should be kneecapped?

Did the constitution of the USA not literally say "all men are created equal" while you still had slavery?
It's obviously not a unqualified "Yes", either. Even the worst $200 TN LCD TV would be superior at watching shows with my wife together vs. one of us sporting an AVP by our lonesome.

Or put another way: There's a couple of different contexts and occasions for using a TV, and buying an AVP is making a choice for only one of them. A $3500 TV is a lot more flexible in this regard.
Cryptocurrency Operator Sues Journalists Reporting on Lawsuits About Its Scams
You are right: it is not considered attractive. I myself do, as an example, not live in one (that said: all family lives in my region). Because we as a society somehow made "independence" the "cool" way to live.
It's worth keeping in mind the well-known principle in economics that incumbent market participants, with large economies of scale, have a strong incentive to pursue regulations that increase fixed costs but don't substantially affect marginal costs, or are otherwise decreasing costs with respect to scale. This makes it harder to start a competing firm.
I tell Dublin tourists they should definitely check out Temple Bar for one night. It's loud, has dozens of pubs and restaurants, is packed with people, and is just generally good craic[1]. I don't go there myself all too often, but it's not like I don't go to Times Square at least once when I visit NYC. I think we forget sometimes that the average tourist is on holiday and pretty happy to just switch off and go with the flow.

[1] https://www.ceastudyabroad.com/blog/content-creator/2017/12/...
> There are some outliers to this trend — murder rates are up in Washington, D.C.

Carjacking is also pretty rampant now
You are missing the point. PTX is not designed as a vendor neutral abstraction like JVM/CLR bytecode. Furthermore CUDA is a lot more than PTX. There's a whole API there, plus applications ship machine code and rely on Nvidia libraries which can be prohibited from running on AMD by license and with DRM, so those large libraries would also become part of the API boundary that AMD would have to reimplement and support.

Chasing CUDA compatibility is a fool's errand when the most important users of CUDA are open source. Just add explicit AMD support upstream and skip the never ending compatibility treadmill, and get better performance too. And once support is established and well used the community will pitch in to maintain it.
Agreed about being in for a treat! Aww, book three is absurd but one of the most impactful books I have read. I was angry/frustrated with the ending for weeks but that just made the ideas stick better and hold more weight.
Sorry I found that unhelpful because in te end your position didn't
really come across. Have the courage to speak your mind.
You may be thinking of the Stormfather?

Journey before destination, Radiant.
Yes. What needs to be regulated are systems that make decisions that affect people. The EU Data Protection Regulations already cover that, using the terms "automated system".
It's not AI that's the problem. It's power over others that's the problem. The trouble is, regulating this means regulating the power of businesses to mess up people's lives.

Worries about people generating porn with AI are overblown. That already works.[1] It's technically impressive, but kind of emotionless. Nobody seems to be worried about it.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/sdnsfw/
> it took a mass shooting to get them to stop protecting 8Chan

While I agree with moving against bad actors on the internet, it's not CloudFlares role to play the censor. Let's be real, legislators and law enforcement already have the tools available to move against these type of platforms and pushing corporations into censorship gives me the same kind of vibes like when politicians ask for ever increasing (and useless) surveillance and empowerment in law enforcement capabilities.
I'm on board with this. It shouldn't exist for software, I'd be happy to see it go for hardware too.

I'd be more on-board with the idea if non-software patents only had say a 5 year lifespan
The fact that election day is not a mandatory holiday blows my mind.

It underscores that the US is Capitalism first and Democracy.. somewhere much further down the list.
Both could be considered abusive depending on your perspective
Isn't that a sad way to be and think?
Move the Super Bowl to Saturday. More people will stay out late and stay out later. (The people that stay out and party will continue; but, so will many of the people who call it a night as soon as the game is over.)
More days off is better though.
The world hasn't used the gold standard for 50 years, and arguably even the Bretton Woods arrangement itself is a pretty significant departure from the gold standard. It's not like the gold standard proved to be historically a very effective basis for economic activity, so trying to say that Bitcoin is exactly like the gold standard isn't a strong argument.

Historically, the main advantage of the gold standard is that it doesn't require a high degree of state capacity to function, and of course throughout most of human history, state capacity was pretty damn low. But we live in an era where states largely have high state capacity, which allows us to move to economic standards that require that capacity to function effectively. Trying to argue for a system that increases inefficiency so that it can eliminate the need for a high state capacity government feels like a step backwards to me.
Who went bankrupt in that article?
Is this true of Zwave? From what I understood, one of the reasons that zwave devices are substantially more expensive, is that the licensing and certification requirements are much more strict. There also isn't a "first party" zwave hub that I can find. The Zwave alliance seems to only deal with the protocol and licensing, thus, any hub that claims to support zwave, will work with any zwave device.
Ponta De Ferraria was such a unique experience. Clinging tightly to the chains/ropes crossing the channel waiting for a wave to come in. The water coming in from the open ocean is so cold. Just when it starts to feel like you're about the freeze to death (I am a wimp when it comes to the cold), the incredibly hot water which has been heated by the spring comes rushing over you. And just when you're about to overcook, it stops. Repeated over and over again. Very invigorating. I imagine it's kind of like alternating between a cold plunge and hot plunge, except I can never force myself to get into a cold plunge.

And if you are on the island anyway, there are dozens of other natural hot springs worth visiting too.
DSLRs, including mirrorless ones, will become rarer and more specialized as consumers use their smartphones for all photography and filming needs. Having a separate device for photography, like a DSLR, will feel like owning vinyl.

Regular large TVs will be replaced by VR glasses more and more for everyday media consumption. It will be like putting on sunglasses. I'm guessing large TVs will combine computer monitor capabilities as we move towards this.

Subway or bus cards will disappear, replaced by phones or touchless entries.

Buying large desktop PCs for gaming or others will disappear instead of laptops (maybe). I feel like the way is like an online hosted gaming platform like Stadia (though I know it didn't pan out).
Same thing here. Perception is everything.
No. You need to explicitly request the tooling from the for-profit company (Analogue, which wraps Intel/Altera) so that the open source cores you write can run on their closed source hardware. It sounds exactly like the situation with MiSTer, except that there is a second for-profit middleman. Afaik MiSTer cores can't run on open source hardware or compile on open source toolchains.

It's really a matter of taste whether you like Intel more than Intel+Analogue. It's wrong to call MiSTer an open source project but openFPGA not just because the number of for-profit companies needed is different.
> but people getting married should be upfront with their wedding party how much it's going to cost them to be in the wedding.

Are you not from the states?

It's common knowledge / assumed that you pay for everything beside dinner and drinks.
Broken for me on Firefox Android.

Looks kind of pretty though. Like a blocky sunset.
>A lot of hand waiving about how "minor paperwork" for everyone isn't such a big deal. But very little coverage of what benefit that paperwork is accomplishing.

I also came here to comment on my concern about this. Only big players with significant legal resources like Google/Microsoft are going to be able to compete once you let this element start to creep in.
It’s fine. They are just looking for the A players.
I have a kid, it's great most of the time. My theory is some people struggle with life, and if that's the case, having a child can increase the struggle.

Conversely, if someone enjoys life and things are going well, a child can often enrich it even further.
It was weird enough I wondered the same (or if they were scientologists or something) but it was a multinational over 100 years old at the time...

Besides, jokes on them, childhood is repressed from trauma.
a = getInt(); b = getInt() + a; c = getInt(); d = b / c; puts(d); puts(c); puts(b); puts(a);

Nothing in the middle of this code prevents using ‘a’ even though it isn’t relevant to ‘c’. And there’s no way to arrange it to change that.
> copying an app then banning that developer's app off the Appstore is better than copying an app's features while allowing it to be sold?

I said no such thing. I said, by implication, that losing a year's revenue, but still having a functioning company, is better than being forced into bankruptcy.

Also, that in no way means that causing a third party app developer to lose a year's revenue is not a bad thing to do. Of course it is.

However, in both cases, the root cause is that the owner of the platform wants to run their platform in a way that third party devs don't like. And ultimately, unless the users of the platform care enough to force the platform owner to change, third party devs are simply going to be out of luck. It sucks, but that's the fact. Third party Windows apps today are for things that MS doesn't care enough about to implement themselves, because Windows users don't care that third party devs get a raw deal. Third party iOS apps are going to end up the same way, unless iOS users start to care about the sucky position third party devs are in. Which, as far as I can tell, they don't.
Unbloating the Buffers
"Windows" didn't sell them a computer. Microsoft sold an OS to - for example - Dell, who then sold a computer to the user. So they are Dell's customers. And Dell, for sure, earned a lot of money selling placement on the Home Screen (or pre-installation) to 3P app developers. (Of course, there are also computers such as the Microsoft Surface, but these represent a tiny fraction of the universe of Windows computers ever sold...)

Whereas Apple sold the user a phone, so the users are clearly Apple's customers. There is an argument that they are also the 3P app developer's customers, but there should be no debate about the fact that they are Apple's customers, using a platform developed by Apple. If 3P app developers want to access Apple's customers on a platform developed by Apple, then they should expect to play by Apple's rules...

(And no, I never worked for Apple. In fact, I have worked both for Google and for multiple 3P app developers who were subject to the so-called Apple Tax.)
I'd much rather have the option to sponsor specific bugzilla issues, to be honest, I don't want to give Mozilla any money if it means it just pads out the CEO salary a bit (here's hoping whoever the new CEO will be takes the job in the understanding that it's not a million dollar position, with a sensible salary instead).
Yeah, because a lot of times the equations that fall out of the KF look the same, only with variable values for alpha/beta.
My 27 y/o nephew passed away last year. He worked at a mid sized tech firm and many of the folks from the firm showed up at the funeral. His parents really appreciated the folks showing up. So, yeah, not awkward at all.
Agreed. If it's the one I'm thinking, it is absolutely a dangerous place to be in bad weather.
Are you of the opinion that “sexual assault” is not different in a morally relevant way from “assault”?

If not, then, it seems that we’ve established that in some cases, something being of a sexual nature, can be morally relevant.
Sure, you clould just fix checkboxes. But then you have to deal with select boxes, which also work badly on smartphones.

Then you have the modern smartphone-driven practice of using multipart forms, with one field on each part. You can't see the whole form at once; you eventually find out that the very last field is a date-field with three badly-behaved drop-downs that you can't interact with.

I just don't try to fill forms on my smartphone. In fact I only use it as a (shock!) phone.
> A lot of people have been happy with what they have since the last century.

I dont see many folks riding horses or using the telegraph these days, perhaps you do?
Genuine question: why does kalman filter come up so frequently on HN? Is this something I'm missing? I'm a machine learning engineer, not a data scientist.
Dammit. I should have done this.
In that case, I think you have a point. However, consider these situations:

* Honda made their car poorly and there are sharp edges at the fenders, and the driver purposely used those to injure someone. I think Honda should still have some liability; their poor construction resulted in extra injury, regardless of the application.

* Honda intentionally or with recklessness built the car in a way that would serve as a useful tool for murder, in ways that served no worthwhile purpose, in ways that could be secured. I don't know the law exactly, but I expect Honda would be liable, and IMHO that would be absolutely right.

Still, if Honda builds a safe car and someone simply chooses to use its mass x acceleration to kill someone, then I wouldn't hold Honda liable.
This analogy is strained, because when it comes to motor vehicles, aside from the concept of "street legal" cars that limit what you can do with the vehicle, we also have cops that patrol the streets and cameras that can catch people breaking the rules based on license plate. Theoretically you can't drive around without being registered.

What's the equivalent of that for AI? Should there be a watermark so police can trace an image back to a particular person's software? If that isn't acceptable (and I don't think it would be), how do we prevent people from producing deep fakes? At the distribution level? These are hard problems, and I don't think the car analogy really gets us anywhere.
I did it as cloud optimization, but at least have receipts for that (and have done more notable endeavors in such as well)
Arguably one could also translate it as "something that will never happen".

At the same time "cuda" could be translated as "wonders".
Because it's intentional. Can't have poor people voting in mass.
Who was force into bankruptcy? You're just making stuff up at this point for a strawman argument.

Apple's walled garden can more easily force you into bankruptcy though since you have no alternative way to distribute iOS apps to customers, therefore your revenue stream can be cut off without warning. Just because that one dev in that example didn't go bankrupt, doesn't prove your argument.

Meanwhile, Microsoft can't stop you from distributing apps on Windows, even though you're clawing to some made up strawman that they can make you bankrupt. You can still sell your apps just fine on your own website and people can easily pay you, download it and install it without Microsoft's permission since you can do whatever you want with that os, just like on MacOS.

I have no idea how you can argue the latter app distribution model is worse than the walled garden one, just through two anecdotal examples.
What a surfeit of words to fail to justify your false reply about "important things Mozilla has created" after I left.

You were the one who insinuated something about motives, here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39312219

I already said I was not going to speculate on your motives, after easily showing your false claim: that Mozilla created Rust after I left.

So the only "bullshit" about motives has come from you. And you are the only one who seemed emotional, if not angry, to the point you threw "attack" as a typical DARVO move. This is pure projection.

It matters who did what, when. Especially in view of Mitchell's power of the purse at Mozilla. Yes, she could have killed Rust, but it would have blown up in her face and she had no need to kill it. No, she does not get credit for creating Rust even after I left. The Rust team was working on spin-out well before they all left. As for Servo, it is better off out of Mozilla: https://news.itsfoss.com/servo-rust-web-engine/.
This piece makes the AVP look a lot like Slow News Season in Big Tech. The pros and cons to the AVP have been obvious to most since the moment it was announced, yet here we are with a weeks-spanning series of use case-specific reviews, mostly coming to the conclusion it doesn't really warrant that extended coverage.
If I could I would, but not a possibility at the moment.

An isometric view + a redesigned tileset would greatly help surfacing the fantasy behind this game in a more immersive way.
Sometimes criminality drops but at a too high price. Some cities in Latin America are "safe" from a statistical point of view but nobody dares go out at night, or even during the day, in some neighbourhoods because it's too dangerous.
> but don’t have the capital to manufacture it myself

You're looking at 10k to file it, and then all it gives you is the ability to sue. If [insert company] violates it, you could easily be looking at 100k+ for litigation that you may or may not win.

> So if I invent something

My problem is you don't need to "invent" anything. You just need to be the first to file the paperwork (and have the cash to do so).

"[sensor] on [smartwatch, glasses, goggles, belts, chairs, whatever]" and now nobody else can do it for 20 years. Even if it's blatantly obvious that an chair can sense if you're sitting in it to turn on the tv automatically.
The stats here on carjacking are so bad that I just avoid taking my car places that show nasty trends on https://crimecards.dc.gov

Example: https://crimecards.dc.gov/stolen%20autos:property%20crimes/a...
That's not gaslighting. The author is literally citing the disagreement of polls about the perception of crime vs the actual statistics of crime.
Good lord, I can’t think of anything I would want to be on a 5 hour remote session for.
It's a political problem as some parties find it makes themselves more electable when less people vote.
More TV viewers Sunday night. But otherwise I agree.
Right, I was so glad when those patents expired because the Xerox monopoly on my computer usage was annoying.
That’s going to be quite a challenge were it to happen in europe. Online prostitution in west europe is the only way some people can achieve home ownership and financial freedom.
ROS2 is not a RTOS library. It's a set of libraries and tools. Though it can be installed in a real-time OS, it can also be installed in eg a Dockerfile.

> You will also note that DroneCAN (and maybe mavlink? Not sure) devices have poor or no protocol documentation, which is astounding to me.

Astounding, yes. Surprising, no.