skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> China is building the more solar capacity than the US[0] and more nuclear capacity[1] than anyone else.

That's because they're increasing their overall energy use more than the US, which would be fine if it was entirely solar and nuclear, but the point is rather that it isn't.

> Coal as a percentage of their energy mix has been markedly decreasing since 2014

Again only because the denominator changed -- the absolute amount of coal went up, and it's still at 60% compared to <20% in the US:

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427

Meanwhile the solar you're touting for China is still at <5% and so is the nuclear, compared to 18% for the latter in the US.

China generates about the same percentage from solar and wind as the US but significantly less from nuclear and dramatically more from coal. Meanwhile the largest generation source in the US is natural gas, which even combined with US generation from coal, only reaches the same percentage as China generates from coal by itself, and natural gas emits less CO2 per unit electricity than coal.

Coal is a disaster and there is no excuse for building more of it rather than replacing what already exists.
It doesn’t matter what someone in the past thought they were for. That’s what they are for in practice, names are irrelevant here, yes, they are quite bad. But the ones in stdint.h are just typedefs for those, so that’s what we are left with.
Not who you asked, but Asus was in the news last year for overvolting the CPUs on their AM5 boards killing both the CPU and motherboard itself.
My app has the following:

1. the XCode project, a full stack SwiftUI project with some UIKit views ported using representables
2. models in ` .coreml ` format for 512 and 1024 resolutions:
3. ` SegNetIO ` and ` SegNetIOManager `, the pipeline which converts PNGs to ML ready input and back again.
4. miscellanious helpers views and files which bring the app together
5. My work in progress port from python for the .SER .EMI reader.
I recognize that these massive memory GPUs are for "AI" applications, but it really is amazing (exponential growth, I know, I know) when I think back to being at uni when I was super excited to get a Real(tm) High performance(r) GPU that had a truly massive 16Mb of ram :D (and a whopping 64Mb of system ram!)
You can always use Autokey/autohotkey to get this functionality in any software you may want.
Nah it's a stylistic thing. It's so that you can see the `=htmz>` logo in code if you order the target attribute last :D
it is explicitly given that in the system prompt https://github.com/spdustin/ChatGPT-AutoExpert/blob/835baae7...
Build AI Agents with no-code
Show HN: Animated Solutions for Leetcode Algorithms
If you squish vertical tabs so as to have as few characters shown as horizontal tabs you'll have plenty of horizontal space for an apples to apples comparison.
In case you are interested in specific lines of research, here is a Twitter overview thread of 25 specific threads on that topic (you need an account to see them all): https://twitter.com/PaoloShirasi/status/1549416261075062785

I don't blame you if you'd rather not look at the research too closely, it kind of feels like an infohazard. But it's a good source to bookmark and to perhaps come back later.
Without requiring javascript, at build time? Or at runtime?

I feel like hand-crafting charts with SVG is going to be an absolute nightmare.

You can use D3.js (or any other chart library that outputs SVG) and then just use the output SVG.
Disclaimer: didn’t read

The implicit comparison is probably to us. And we aren’t gullible like that perhaps as a flip-side of all the weird built-in biases we have.

So on the one hand we have these cognitive shortcuts that are annoying and impede a sort of stone-cold rationality. On the other hand you can’t social engineer us with something as brain-dead as Walter White-injection by way of asking for a deceased chemist grandma story.
It is allowed in some places. The problem is it's a terrible slippery slope which has been used to get rid of people whose lives were considered to not be worth living.
Great idea, but Groq doesn't have a product suitable for training at the moment. Our LPUs shine in inference.
With enough effort and priming you can trick _people_ in to believing things which are clearly untrue.

I think that's overstatement. The most I can find is references to making people more credulous to obscure claims ("Basketball became an Olympic discipline in 1925.") whose truth they couldn't easily discover (especially pre-Internet) [1].

There are other where a person is confronted by shills making claims and otherwise experiences more manipulation than just being exposed to text. But that seems of a different category.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect
This is excellent. I had a frogpad and got reasonably comfortable with it, my use case was mostly messaging so not a heavy use of special characters like {}/|Etc. Given my experience with it, I agree that using it as a model for this project was a good choice. An acquaintance, Steve Roberts, had a really clever keyboard that attached to the handlebars of his recumbent bicycle so that he could type while riding.
> A lot of people like NYT Connections a lot hate it

I was almost turned off of Connections by the poor instructions.

The instructions say that categories 'will always be more specific than "5-LETTER WORDS," "NAMES" or "VERBS"'.

Then one of the first puzzles I did had "PRONOUNS" as a category! That did not make a good first impression.

The interface also probably turns off some people who would otherwise enjoy it. It would be greatly improved if they replaced the "Shuffle" with letting you re-arrange the words by dragging them.
No, I mean full-blown private health insurance. In France, Belgium and Netherlands it's very common (and I think mandatory in NL).

Outside of those countries, it's still somewhat common to have private health insurance (not just dental), such as Mapfre or Regina Maria. Heck, even in Germany something like 1 out of 10 people have private health insurance (again, not just dental).
"A jaw-dropping amount of effort has been spent attempting to bridge the gap between the relational paradigm of SQL and the object-oriented nature of modern programming languages. EdgeDB sidesteps this problem by modeling data in an object-relational way."

All the best to the team. I however truly hope this isn't the direction the industry moves toward. I thought we learned our lesson from MongoDB. I still believe data is best modeled in sets, not objects.

The solution isn't for databases to become more like object stores but for general purpose programming languages to be more amenable to seamless access of set-oriented data.

More stuff like this:

https://github.com/porsager/postgres

https://github.com/launchbadge/sqlx
To approximate a function with a loop you would need a close to infinitely large neural net. Humans do have loops in their thinking, we need a new architecture for LLMs to be able to think in loops.
"We" don't. Here in NL euthanasia is freely available if needed.
Coincidentally, I just cancelled my wyze service because the product and support are so terrible. I wanted a simple way to see if there was a package on my doorstep but instead I got something that alerts me when any dog, person, or vehicle goes down my street, and all I’ve gotten from support is robotic responses suggesting I update my firmware and ignoring my direct questions, running out the clock on my ability to return the thing. At this point I’m not surprised their engineering is bad and amused that it’s caused two different security incidents.
What are the benefits of keeping it in git? Are the commit messages useful?

Not trying to knock the idea, I just can't imagine branching or reverting or being curious about the history of a to-do list. Maybe it could be cool for statistics over time.

But I'm really curious to hear how you're using it!
> For the record, I agree with you – I would have thought that an AI that can reason well would probably know when not to trust humans, but I suppose that assumes it values preventing humans creating napalm over being correct and helpful.

Do we want LLMs, and later other multi-modal / servo systems, that are deciding they can't trust a human prompter and taking actions based on that?

>... and that we must find a way to build an LLM that is more distrusting and deceptive if we wish to align it with our values and our nature.

Tongue in cheek or actual argument here?
Nothing really wrong with FP8 IMO, it performs pretty damn well usually within 98% while significantly reducing memory usage.
Bukele's Kingdom of Dreams
I, too, remember when GUIs (not UXs!) respected the user's desires, workflow and general agency. That's not entirely gone yet, but it's going. Heck, Office 365 updated lately and now I have this ongoing little contest of displaying the tiniest number of coworker Teams comments in the hugest amount of white space. The results beggar belief.

Edit:

Teams (it's a Chrome browser window, but that's not really relevant to my rant) is taking up like two square feet on a 4K monitor, and 3-6 messages plus links to a couple attachments are all it will show me - along with enough white space for another 300 channel names (but only channel names, nothing else), headings the size of movie trailers, just oceans of space and garbage I don't need and can't use.

In an ideal world, there'd be some way to adjust the layout a bit, and in fact when we used Slack before Teams, that was pretty easy: you move the divider between channel names and messages to the left, thus giving less space to channel names, more space to message content. Done.

But that's too much power to allow a user to have, in these modern, enlightened times. So while Teams has such a divider, there's no provision to adjust it. Want to see more than a handful of messages at the same time? Gonna need a bigger monitor. Probably 55" would be a good size.

Of course, that's one example out of a billion. It's not that software won't cater to my particular workflow... it's is that software no longer allows me to make reasonable adjustments to support a workflow that works for me, and in fact removes still-remaining means to do so on a regular basis.

Really it's the whole "you're holding it wrong" mindset that I get so tired of. We all labor under our own constraints and just a little leeway on basic customization goes a very long way to making software more usable. Just let me view more than six messages at once, ok? Please?
They're still going strong on the Codegolf stackexchange.
There's a Russian Physicist that was in an accident where a proton beam went through his head: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Bugorski He lived but with some brain injury. I'm not sure what the differences in effect electrons vs protons and a focused vs diffuse beam would be though.
Agreed. You really have to experience or see something to truly understand it. Recently, every time I’ve had a serious medical issue, I’ve learned how people who are permanently disabled live.
I see it as a kind of "perfect app" in that it does what it sets out to do very well and does exactly nothing else. If only all mobile games were the same...
The article tries to explain why your answer doesn’t tell the whole story. Did you read it?
It's called rebinding, rather than mutation. Good background here:

https://dashbit.co/blog/comparing-elixir-and-erlang-variable...
If you're so confident that Tesla stock price is inflated, feel free to short it. Specially if you feel like FSD is a complete lie.

Market cap is one of the better ways to objectively classify companies, and Tesla has been continously doing extremely well. It has for years. Maybe you are smarter than the entire market.

> Both Tesla and SpaceX would be better off with almost anybody else on the planet at the helm.

Must be why all those other space companies not lead by Elon Musk are doing a lot better. Oh wait...
We're a mixed team here, people dabble back and front - the backend work is so elegant, simple and pure compared to frontend work.

Everyone here prefers to work on the backend tasks...
"Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that.""

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

(your first sentence is good though!)
At the moment we're concentrating on building out our API and serving the enterprise market.
The PRQL extension discussed here is for Postgres, so my solution was Postgres specific.

Since when is QUALIFY part of the SQL standard? So far I have only seen it as a proprietary feature in Terradata.
This is a good point especially on laptops. It might be nice to display side tabs until a breakpoint and thereafter autohide
not a native speaker, i tried all lifelines and have still no idea what the answer is but i noticed reloading the page makes the 50/50 keyboard different each time.

so i reloaded several times to remove each letter that wasn't there every time... well it looks like there is only the M left and yet the the answer is not MMA
The tightest bottleneck sets the pace for the whole line, so yeah high volume manufacturing can get into really detailed optimization.
I don't know. This feels like an unfair question to ask. You've proposed a basically impossible engineering problem and then declared that the outcome will obviously be the outcome that you want it to be.

What if I answer, "No because humans have supernatural souls."

You can easily answer, "Souls don't exist, therefore I'm still right."

But then we actually build your machine and it turns out that Penrose's non-computable microtubules really exist and the machine is useless.

We can't know the result of such an ambitious endeavor before we go through with it. So it doesn't make much sense to me to use such a thought experiment as evidence for something much lesser that is currently contested.
E-bikes hold promise for sustainable transport in rural tourist areas
The idea I was responding to there was not NASA's.
A simple proof that love is not just hormones is that love can last for some time. If it was just a chemical phenomenon why does it happen repeatedly. Why can someone feel love for someone just by bringing to mind the symbol which represents that person? Why can someone feel love by seeing an illustration of someone they love?
Does anyone have a current reference on the reliability of HBM?
Show HN: Anycode – import anything from a Python module thanks to ChatGPT
Seven years after the StackOverflow Importer [1], I thought it was time to build an updated version using ChatGPT.

[1]: https://github.com/drathier/stack-overflow-import?tab=readme...
Got it, thanks boss.
Biologists discovering philosophy. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpers_and_splitters and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_(metaphysics)
There have been an unimaginable number of "improvements" to the bicycle over the last hundred years. And all of them have one thing in common: trading off a reduction in efficiency for "insert something else". But that "insert something else" is literally only a problem to people who don't ride bikes, so it ends up being entirely pointless. The modern geared bicycle is up there with things like the paper clip or the can opener as "perfect" designs which can never be fundamentally improved upon again short of advances in basic material science.
The long predicted LLM spam apocalypse is upon us. All open systems and forums will be rendered unusable, including probably eventually e-mail. The future is closed enclaves, private forums, and managed platforms that verify identity.

It was kind of inevitable that some tech would eventually do this, even if it was as unsophisticated as click farms and content mills. If adding information is free and there is no gate, it gets trashed by spam. It’s a classic tragedy of the commons.
>...and optional static typing enforcement at runtime (without needing mypy).

Check this out:

https://beartype.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
It's a bias modifier that causes a huge restructuring/reconfiguration of the whole world model, and even perception itself.

It's what the hormone does that's important, not what it is.
You're forgetting that treesitter is much, much faster than LSPs.
Yeah, everyone on this site and places like Blind says they are making a lot of money. Reality seems a bit different. Any startup has something of a hard cap at just around $200k salary for a senior. That's in the Bay Area, and for specialty occupations (AI infra, Linux internals, and the like). That number is not 3x median. Pretty sure those rich React devs exist only in dreams.
http://web.archive.org/web/20240219150630/https://www.nytime...
Does anyone know how it compares to Pixlr?
Y'all should read the article. It goes into more depth than these two comments! For example, two species can have sex, AND produce viable offspring, but NOT produce fertile offspring. Like a donkey and horse producing a typically infertile mule. Horses and donkeys are not the same species.
I agree with the parent comment, but I would phrase it as:

This article feels so foreign to me because I’m not trying to be productive. I don’t have a productively system, because I’m not.

I complete my works tasks. Those usually have lists.

After work and on the weekends, I spend time with friends and family, and do hobbies as I enjoy them.

Beyond that, I don’t try to remember things. I let stuff slip through the cracks (ok, I have a planner for birthdays). I don’t try to get things done.

For what it’s worth, if you looked at my life on the outside, you’d probably think I was “productive”. I can speak multiple languages, I make music, I play sports, and I have various programming projects going.

But I don’t do any of those things because they are productive. Every day after work, I spend an hour or two doing whatever I enjoy in a completely non-systemic manner. And I find that over a multi-year time span you actually can accomplish a great deal with this “non-system”
> the LLM is trusting the human

> an AI that can reason well would probably know when not to trust humans

> it values preventing humans creating napalm over being correct and helpful.

> Maybe it just doesn't share our values

> prioritises being honest and helpful.

> they are too trusting and too honest

> an LLM that is more distrusting and deceptive

Current LLM's do/have/feel literally none of these things. They do not have emotion, they do not have "theory of mind" so they cannot be said to "trust" or "distrust". They cannot reason. They don't have any values - not our values, not different values, literally they have no values at all. They are not an alien species to be understood - they are unthinking, unfeeling, unyielding machines.
The State of Culture, 2024
If you did hear it in a bar, could you tweet it out before your trade, so the information is made public?
The great irony is that open-space offices (or cubicle'd spaces) were to preserve flexibility in case one wanted to use the space for something other than offices in the future. Now that we actually need that flexibility to convert those offices into residential space, we're told it's impossible so none of the flexibility ever mattered anyway.
I think people might have forgotten that LLMs before InstructGPT came around could be weirdly opinionated jerks. There was this whole effort to train them so that we could actually give them instructions. It's probably a hell of a lot more useful to have an LLM that will just go with whatever weird stuff the human says rather than try to fight them on it.

https://openai.com/research/instruction-following
Had insider trading training, and yes, that's the gist of it. If you know or presume that the information is material (makes a difference) and not public, it's illegal to act on it.
Accusing businesshumans of greed is like accusing gas molecules of pressure. It's just part of the thing.
It is hormones. Also, life is a series of chemical reactions. However this approach is useful in some context and completely useless in other, like in context where people talk about life and love.

Although, it can be deconstructed to this it doesn't mean that the other POVs are false. The reasoning comes from the process itself, it triggers a series of calculations that are applied on the input, which are the reasoning part.

The analytical approach is useful when calibrating these calculations.
> according to the second law of thermodynamics you cannot get hotter with lower consumption of energy (with equivalent heatsinking, in terms of thermal resistance, measured in K per Watt

cpus are not an ideal thermal system and do have their own internal thermal resistance. a 7800X3D runs hotter than a 7700X at equivalent (limited) PPT, which runs hotter than a 13900K at the equivalent (limited) PPT, because the thermal resistance is higher. these are objectively measurable things!

Also, generally, surface area is a component of thermal intensity as well and if you take the same flux and spread it out over more surface area you will get a lower temperature too. A threadripper putting out 250W does so with less thermal intensity than a 7800X3D putting out 250W and will run at a lower temperature too.

like yes, you are correctly describing the measurements in which these cpus are not the same thing, but then making the incorrect leap that "because in a spherical-cow world they would be equal" that these cpus are equivalent in these metrics in real life, which they are not. different cpus have different thermal resistances, and AMD's is generally higher right now because of the decision to go with a thicker IHS (to maintain cooler compatibility) and the move towards stacking (more silicon in the way = more thermal resistance).

and again, don't pretend this is some absurd or unknown concept, we literally spent years and years with amd fans making memes about "intel toothpaste"... thermals and wattage dissipated are not the same thing. you can have a great, efficient product with terrible thermal resistance, there have been a number of them!

it's just that AMD isn't on the top this time, so everyone pretends not to get it... or volunteers a bunch of theoretical reasons it doesn't matter... or ...

just like "thermal watts aren't the same thing as electrical watts!" etc
Fantastic! It's about time!

tl;dr

> If the London court rejects Assange’s plea for a full appeal, he could be extradited to the U.S. once British officials approve his removal.

> His legal team plans to appeal an adverse ruling to the European Court of Human Rights, but they fear he could possibly be transferred before the court in Strasbourg, France, could halt his removal.
Study finds seniors enjoy virtual reality
That was fun, but in a semi-scary way. I have major respect for the source, so when Mr Norvig states that this (the "Emphasis Operator"):

sigh = 3
['oh', 'good', 'grief', *sigh* ['drat']]

results in:

['oh', 'good', 'grief', 'drat!', 'drat!', 'drat!']].

I first believed it, then doubted it, then tested it, and then came here to comment. Those exclamation points are not there in the output, which I was very relieved to see. Phew, but I also think it would be a good idea to fix it.
I don't think anyone would say that being an RNN disqualifies an architecture from being considered an LLM.
Related ongoing thread:

Making SVG Loading Spinners: An Interactive Guide - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39409140
It's really sad how the C standards committee is pushing this anti-c89 thing because it breaks one of the most important use cases for C which is writing programs that work under both GCC and JavaScript. See https://justine.lol/sectorlisp2/#evaluation and https://justine.lol/sectorlisp2/#polyglots I've yet to see any explanation of what we stand to gain, by disallowing implicit int. The whole thing just comes across as religious in nature.
I think it best we keep the folks who like to write that sort of C code busy with the IOCCC rather than out coding in the real world!

/s