skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> try hover.com

> it is a responsive website, they do not have native apps, you can still use it on a phone

I see a largely static site with very little functionality.

During search the site jumps when the progress bar disappears, so you can easily misclick on items in the list (I did at least once).

During checkout it takes a second or so to add additional items to the order (could be long network connectivity, but there's no indication on the page).

I'm supposed to be impressed? You call this an application?

GoDaddy of all sites had all that in mid-2000s. Just checked: they still do, and it's faster, the page doesn't jump around, and additional selections are applied immediately. If something takes time, there's a loading indicator (inline if needed).

Okay, I decided to sign up and see what's there. Literally nothing works, but that's not really important. Here's the sad/funny part:

A static page showing domain details with literally just text on the page and a few icons requires 2.5 megabytes of Javascript.

Yes. This page with almost nothing on it needs 2.5 megabytes of Javascript: https://dmitriid.com/media/6/b/1/f/912c-e91b-4530-af54-09247...

Yes, you said it correctly: "inherently nothing is bloated". You still managed to bloat it. Go and read "Performance Inequality Gap 2024": https://infrequently.org/2024/01/performance-inequality-gap-... (I don't agree with Alex Russel on many things, but his performance analyses are always spot on).

> every website is a potential web app if written responding to screen sizes correctly

Honestly, web people should leave their bubble at least for a nanosecond from time to time. No, a site displaying a few hundred lines of text and a minimally functional checkout (and still doing a rather poor job of it) is not an application.

Having a responsive design does not make a website into an application.

> I do not really understand why you hate web apps that much, just do not use them! use them in your favourite browser or whatever

Because I'm forced to use them as they are the cheapest fastest way to make stuff for people who wouldn't know a good UI/UX (and good apps, and good programming practices) if it stared them in the face. And who cannot even design a text page without requiring enough resources to power a small town.

> whether a sotware shit or not, depends on the developer, not whether it is c++, java, swift, android-java or js...

And yet, the shittiest software is somehow still made for the web, en masse.
I've been restoring a 1954 Chevy 6400, commonly referred to as a 2-ton. There are so many great resources online like this.
> I think you're dishonest, and I think you revel in it.

You know, when you’ve spent an entire reply attacking someone for words you put in their mouth it’s really not the right time to accuse anyone else of dishonesty.
> attempting to secretly use them in remote coding interviews.

We have from time to time simply asked people to write pseudo-code in something like Etherpad or Google Doc. I'm sure that you can get an AI to type in your answer, but I feel it going to be pretty obvious what's happening.
On frugality: I've always lived like a student, right though being an undergrad and then at masters' and running my businesses, to being a student again 30Y+ later! Skip the fast cars, save that for food!

Do you have local business schools (eg within a university) or accelerators? They might have people with marketing nous that could help and are looking for others to partner with, even if only for days/weeks/months. Last weekend I was helping my uni run a hackathon, which again might point out to you some sparky people that you could work with.

Also, I have had small marketing/etc support grants from local government enterprise groups in the past.
No mention of testing in the article. It seems odd how often accessibility advocates talk about following rules rather than testing. Shouldn’t we be testing with screen readers or something?

If a website doesn’t work in Firefox, we fault the developer for not testing it in Firefox. Similarly for mobile browsers.

If testing is in place, LLM’s are much safer to use. You’ll notice when they give you code that doesn’t work.
This business of damping or lack thereof, is really just a frequency response change.

The concern with the resonance of the speaker is overblown.

When you boost a frequency range electronically with an equalizer, that is also resonance (electronic rather than mechanical).

Instead of your speaker ringing for a couple of cycles, the circuit is doing it.
> Given that Chrome isn't shipping ActiveX or Flash, what's the issue?

What does this have to do with what I wrote? Literally nothing

> Apple and Mozilla decide how (or if) they want to implement each standard.

For something to become a standard there needs to be consensus, and at least two independent implementations.

Just because Chrome ships something doesn't make it a standard.

> If there's no demand for the feature, it shouldn't be a problem ignoring it. If icky features like WebUSB and Bluetooth are terrible, users won't notice anyways.

Neither WebUSB nor Bluetooth are standards. There status is literally, and I quote, "It is not a W3C Standard nor is it on the W3C Standards Track. "

> Google's strategy is pressuring Apple to make more capable software.

That's not Google's strategy, and never has been. It's also quite telling you decided to ignore Google's clear anti competitive practices. I guess by sabotaging Firefox they were also "pressuring Firefox into making more capable software or something".

It amazes me to no end that Apple/Safari haters will contort themselves to no end to justify Google because Chrome can do no wrong.

> When a user has more freedom in a browser than they do in their hardware's native runtime

Google couldn't care less about the end user. All Google cares about is its dominance. To that end it doesn't care if it breaks the web [1], or twists it to their liking [2]

[1] Speaking of breaking: Breaking the Web forward https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_th... and Stay Alert https://dev.to/richharris/stay-alert-d but you will ignore these, too. Because it's not "ActiveX or Flash", innit?

[2] People keep mentioning sites like https://whatwebcando.today/ and https://whatpwacando.today/ and they are filled to the brim with APIs that Chrome ships and whose status is "not on any standards track".
> Copilot is encouraging us to block users unnecessarily, by suggesting obviously flawed code, which is wrong on every level: wrong ethically, wrong legally, and the wrong way to build software.

I share many of the same worries as the author. This is why I think teams need to build and run their own Copilot-like systems, so that they can guide the suggestions they receive. Each developer and team has their own way of building software, and they need to be able to shape and evolve the suggestions they receive to fit their definition of the "right" way: https://blog.continue.dev/its-time-to-collect-data-on-how-yo...
Maybe, but not by the court system. That's called a repeal.
Any plans for a Linux client?
Npmjs.com is written in Rust [pdf]
I really didn't like this paper, and gave up on reading it three pages in when they started using differences between probabilities as a measure of distance instead of, say KL divergence. I thought the English was fine, but the technical details and ability to explain were pretty lacking.
Tautologies don't make for good strawmen, and network entropy doesn't need to identify the quality level of music on its own to be useful.
Tailscale also works excellent on even an original Pi Zero W if you want it on a VPN easily.
Glorious. This is exciting. Looking forward to seeing youalls progress
WordHoop – A Daily Word Game
I'm a Software and thrilled to share my latest hobby project, WordHoop, with the Hacker News community!

If you enjoy word games, I think you'll also enjoy WordHoop.

Thanks,
Armin
Isn’t that what the softmax layer is doing? The token with highest probability among all the available tokens in the model dictionary is chosen as the next token!
From personal experience, SPM is much smoother in moderately complex projects. Gradle (and to a lesser extent, Android Studio) drives me a special kind of crazy, especially when a project has sat for a while and Gradle updates have accumulated and Gradle version compatibility of dependencies has diverged.

This is somewhat exacerbated by the need to import so many libraries in Android projects. My Mac/iOS projects have between a fourth and sixth as many dependencies as their Android counterparts.

CocoaPods though… ugh. Horrible. Was thrilled to part ways with it several years ago.
Signal v7.0.0 with phone number privacy
But then someone has to check if the URL matches the complaint, right? Or?
That’s sound about right for small town Alabama. I’m in East Alabama and we have a local broadcast owner who is probably disappointed that he didn’t think of this first.
Yes, correct the 100MB is being downloaded on every boot!

I tested it initially because it’s the naivest implementation. The right implementation would bundle it in.

But I ended up primarily reporting timings that stop counting up as soon as control is handed over to user generated code - since that’s the number you care about the most.
> did you know that the most common (and accepted?) way to communicate exceptions in C# is via doc comments written manually by humans.

Well, the accepted way to communicate them in Python is "we don't". I think C++ follows that same principle, but the ecosystem is extremely disconnected, so YMMV.

Java tried to do a new and very good thing by forcing the documentation of the exceptions. But since generics sucked for the first ~20 years of the language, and nobody still decided to apply them to the exceptions, it got bad results that discouraged anybody else from trying.
It's early days, but the broad strokes are:

- LLMs writing code that pros struggle with isn't a real thing (yet), and i've tried them all
- except, weirdly, lisp
- lisp can call tree-sitter now
- if you can write lisp, you can write/refactor most anything
- a far better strategy than comparing MMLU between `gpt-4-1106-preview` and `dolphin-8x7b-v0.1-q4_km` is to run them both (along with others) and have them review each other and make this easy in every tool (from emacs to vscode to zed)
- `llama.cpp` and `ollama` and `lmstudio` et al. are awesome, and the OpenAI protocol support is necessary and useful (for now), but we need a real `protobuf3`/`gRPC`/`connectRPC`/`buf.build`/etc. standard with a good reference implementation in (probably C++, but maybe Rust if Candle or whatever gets fast soon) that does all the model-server shit we did at FAANG and doesn't require the user to remember what 2^n context window is on pain of breakage
- once you have an extensible, open, fast protocol with great docs and trivial linkage courtesy of `buf.build`, ASR (`whisper.cpp`), TTS (probably StyleTTS but I haven't gotten that far yet), and other modalities now win big enough to not be non-starters in JSON
- other people will write better model servers, at least for certain applications, and everyone wins

This is obviously a pile of work, and there will probably be a commercial venture that's semi-adjacent, but the core stuff will be MIT (or maybe Apache 2 or something else that means "do what you want"), but it's coming along.

Right now this is a bunch of code not ready for release and like, a domain name that 404s, but if there's interest we'd be open to firing up a Discord or something. You can email me at `b7r6@pm.me` if you want to rap about it.

Appreciate the interest!
Sounds reasonable, but the secure boot mechanism of the Pi not only allows verifying the boot chain but also enables you to implement disk encryption with keys stored in the the hardware itself that you can then only access from the running OS. Stealing the Pi or just taking out the SD card will not allow access to the non-OS parts. I'm not sure if the secure boot stuff of the Pi has ever been thoroughly verified or exposed to serious attacks, but in theory that's all possible.
>Where in the argument is the designer defined this way?

The argument is, roughly speaking:

(1) The fine-tuning of universal constants is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design. (2) It is not due to physical necessity or chance. (3) Therefore, it is due to design.

Ok, let me try and help you here.

In the argument, the designer is defined as beyond understanding right here:
"(3) Therefore, it is due to design."

Still having trouble seeing it? Let me try and help a little more. It's here:
"(3) THEREFORE, IT IS DUE TO DESIGN."

Do you see how absurd it would be for you to propose that this "design" came about on its own, or by chance? How that would put you right back on square one, exposing fine tuning as the mindless drivel that it is? Do you see how comical it would be of you to suggest that you have all the mysteries of this universe figured out and you are now ready to take on the challenge of figuring out its designer, or even more comically, that you have barely even begun understanding the universe you're in but you're "open" to leapfrogging right into figuring out the thing that designed it? Where else are you going to take this? The simulation hypothesis? As if the dude that built the simulator can be any less complicated than the dude that fine-tuned everything?

Let's resolve this disagreement before tackling the other issues you raise in your response. Do you still have trouble understanding where in the argument the designer is defined this way?
Google says there are 7 million search results for "Star Wars" on Etsy.com, an online marketplace for handmade goods. They're likely all infringing on Disney IP, as anyone big enough to get a license to make official Star Wars merchandise isn't going to qualify as an artisan handmade crafter to sell on Etsy.

To perform a crackdown on those 7 million listings, you're proposing that Disney would need to make a $700 million dollar deposit with Etsy and wait for hopefully most of it to trickle back in. If the infringer is somewhere on the other side of the globe that Disney can't easily reach legally, they can't get their deposit back until they spend thousands filing a federal lawsuit that'll go unanswered, so the deposit is more than forfeit in many of these cases. That's for a single company to defend a single franchise on a single website.

I don't think this is a "simple" solution.
They left out the part where you can appeal their findings to a federal appeals court.

https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/what-we-do/decide-cases

You do see a judge, and you can have that trial by jury.
> How about a camera server?

I love ESP32s and use them both for fun and professionally but let’s be careful about overselling them. Can you get single photos from a specific set of imaging sensors? Yup. Can you encode 1080p h.264 video and stream it with eg RTSP? Definitely not.
It’s really weird because Flash existed on Android, and it sucked. Even the hardcore anti-Apple fanboys were unwilling to defend it much at the time because everyone knew how much battery and RAM it used, and how poorly Flash content designed for desktop screens and controls worked on phones.

I don’t love how other things were locked down, but losing Flash for the open web was an unabashed win.
Rotten Apple
Taste Games
It’s better in terms of visuals, but worse in terms of weight, bulkiness, and your faces/eyes being enclosed.
Because it has to be done individually for each headphone. It would require specialized equipment, like a super accurate reference microphone capable of accurately listening to a headphone speaker, in the same way as your ear.

The best thing is for the speaker manufacturer to assume zero ohm output impedance from every amplifier, and for them to do their work to get their speaker to have a close to flat response. (Or whatever: some markets prefer a huge bass.) Then it has that designed response in any such amplifier.
Making Minimalist Linux Web Server Using X64 Assembly [video]
It makes you more productive than not splitting commits at all. It doesn't make you more productive than doing it in a GUI.

It's like you're saying "guys you should use this new hand drill I've discovered! It's so much more productive than digging holes with an awl!" while ignoring the fact that electric drills exist.
This is really cool! I spent the time a couple years back to build a windows sysroot, but having a macOS one was on my mind for a while. Will definitley use
could, would, should ...who is Google? What's their address? Hell, what's their email address? Has anyone been able to write an email to Google? (
)
Is this people’s preferred way to run and develop on top of local models?

Any other must learn tools?
Yes I would agree with "perfectly doable". I don't really like tools that are "perfectly doable"; I prefer "easy".
Open up the page, then mouse over the tab to read the page title. The page title is "How Showmax, an African streaming service, dethroned Netflix - Rest of World".

You can also press F12, and in the <head> section, read what is written in between <title> and </title>, which is what I quoted above.
> Tinder is play to play

You said it man. And so are most people on it. Used to be a term for that sort of thing.

> If you have spoken to more than a half dozen people and everyone is awful, the problem is you. Figure out what you want, rinse, repeat.

Or you know, you're using Tinder in earnest and it is the McDonalds-of-humans.

Try to remember how people used to be before this app and instagram and the Kardashians. My healthy hell no is to simply not take people who participate in this culture seriously in the first place.

There are still physically attractive women out there who read a good book occasionally and don't have any of this shit installed. Hard to find but they exist.

All things being equal pretty obvious whom you would pick.

I use Tinder occasionally just like I eat McDonalds or a Doner Kebab - it isn't real food fit for human consumption. Only if you are drunk or as an absolute last resort.
To make sure I understand…this would provide a private API endpoint for a developer to call an LLM model in a serverless way?

They could call it and just pay for the time spent, not a persistent server.
No problem.

I didn't wanted to sound snarky, I thought that I wasn't aware about some cool docker optimization hack :)
> As an engineer, I hated bloody corporate BS: individual performance reviews,

Good to have someone acknowledge that individual performance reviews are ineffective nonsense. I have seen little evidence to contradict this in organizations that I am familiar with.

The result seems to be that promotion is largely based on seniority, personal influence, random chance, or changing jobs.
> When comparing solar to nuclear we also need to include storage and dimensioning to get an equivalent 24/7 output.

No, that is a red herring. That exact comparison would be only for greenfield projects disconnected from everything else. When connecting to an existing network, the existing (and future) generation on it is also important. For instance, if the network already has a high enough amount of gas generation, 10MW of solar or 10MW of nuclear would reduce the use of fossil fuel by the same amount; the same applies to reducing the use of water stored in hydroelectric dams.
Imageomics poised to enable new understanding of life
> People to not secure their routers and have default passes that is the big issue here.

Is it really? ISPs in USA/Canada/France/etc give customers WiFi routers with random passwords for many years.
> The federal government is the last desk in situations where coordinated action between or restrictions on states is needed to avoid bad outcomes and prisoner's dilemmas for everyone.

That kind of regulation is the core of the central planning fallacy. If people know how much demand for wheat there would be next year or what crop yields would be then farmers would know how much to plant before it would become unprofitable and you wouldn't need anyone to order them to. If that information isn't available then it isn't available to the government either and they're not going to make any better a decision, and in most cases it will be worse because they'll have less information than the people actually doing it or less reason not to be careless or hidebound because it's not their livelihood on the line.

The purpose of the interstate commerce clause is that sometimes the victims of a misdeed are in a different state than the perpetrators and then the victims have to be able to go somewhere for redress that has jurisdiction over the perpetrators. But that only applies when the commerce is actually inter-state.

> I wish they would apply it to ban the sweetheart deals states give companies so that we can end the race to the bottom where states have to suck ceos off to get them to set up shop.

The sweetheart deals aren't a race to the bottom, they're corruption. If the state wanted to attract business generally then it would create a generally favorable environment with low administrative overhead or quality infrastructure etc., not create weird exceptions for one specific corporation. Those one-company deals never actually work out because their true purpose is to steal from the taxpayer.
I've been using Nvidia and it stopped being challenging in about 2006. I hear perpetually that Nvidia is horrible and I should try AMD. The 2 times I did admitted a long time ago it was... not great.
Is there any place for IP fragmentation anymore? On surface level look, the main motivation seems to have been fitting over-sized dnssec responses in single datagram, but with ecdsa/eddsa is that still a relevant concern? I realize some TXT etc data might be big, but presumably those could also be queried over TCP/HTTP/QUIC/etc; I see UDP more as the fast path for common A/AAAA queries, and those should fit in unfragmented packets just fine?

What are other cases where fragmentation truly makes sense?
Not every day is a windy day. Battery storage is ridiculously bad for the environment and wasteful. As mentioned, not a lot of hydro storage in Kansas.

Plus, when the hydro storage fails and floods a town, that’s still pretty bad.
Unedited version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqIysr3o_vY

But apparently they went to the wrong site. According to [1], the WJLX tower was next to another tower (for WIXI) which is still standing, but that second tower is not visible anywhere in the video.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39413347
AMD is the underdog, and that's what happens when you choose the underdog.
> thanks for immediately disregarding my personal experience and inserting your own uninformed prejudged assessment

Isn't that exactly what your toplevel post is doing? Physician, heal thyself!
As long as equity returns are higher than interest rates buy borrow die is effective. When youre a billionaire its not an effective way to not pay taxes ever, but its still extremely effective for delaying them. You get $26 million stepped up on death completely untaxed so buy borrow dying that much always makes sense.
That article does not talk about the FCC monitoring ordinary licensees for "silence" (which I assume means off-air i.e. transmitter turned off, and not dead-air i.e. broadcast of silent audio).

(Dead air is actually a bigger sin than off-air. Off-air happens. Dead air should almost never happen.)

The article talks about monitoring stations who have a history of poor usage of their license. And it's not clear that "monitor" here would mean any active steps, vs just requiring the usual mandatory reporting of unscheduled, unpermitted, extended off-air events.

But the FCC does not routinely monitor for dead air or any other violations. They do respond to complaints of all kinds. In competitive markets, licensees monitor each other.