skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Certainly the printing press can enable the spread of a lot of low quality content and misinformation, but we managed to work out the kinks.

I think the author's point is that generative AI is a completely different animal than the printing press. The printing press could be used to spread both factual information and misinformation alike, and for various reasons factual information seems to have predominated, and high quality information is at least readily available, even if it's not the majority of printed work. Then there's the Internet, which can similarly be used to publish both information and misinformation. Perhaps due to the lower bar for entry and the speed of dissemination, the balance of information to misinformation and high-quality to low-quality content doesn't favor information or high-quality content as strongly as it does in the world of printed text, but at least the Internet always has the potential to spread factual information and high-quality content.

Then there's generative AI. Unlike the two communication technologies referenced above, AI can ONLY produce low-quality content. It is by design a statistical inference technique that generates content remixed from its training data. Without substantial human rework and rewriting, AI will always produce such low-quality drek as "it's hard to learn volleyball without a ball". And it's increasing promoted as a way to reduce human effort in writing, ensuring that people will continue to use it without supervising it's output, especially if they are trying to mass-produce content to make money. So now we have a new situation in which the majority of content produced going forwards is likely to be extremely low quality and perhaps contain substantial misinformation as well, whether intentionally or unintentionally. The author seems to posit that exposure to this type of content will negatively affect people's ability to learn to produce good, original content of their own, as they are not exposed to even passably good writing from a young age, so they cannot learn to emulate it.
Most of your cottage automotive manufactures are partners with a big brand. You can do many things on your own, but you want the large partner to supply engines (it is basically impossible for a small industry to build an emissions compliant engine from scratch - expect to spend over a billion $ in the R&D if you try - and you can only get that cheap if a lot of the engineering is done in places like India). You also buy your airbags from their supplier.
Wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_turn

> A hook turn (Australian English) or two-stage turn (British English), also known as a Copenhagen Left (in reference to cyclists specifically),[1] is a road cycling manoeuvre or a motor vehicle traffic-control mechanism in which vehicles that would normally turn from the innermost lane of an intersection instead turn from the outermost lane, across all other lanes of traffic.
I don't think an apple that works by stack ranking existing high capex low margin markets and ruthlessly focusing on revenue growth is an apple that's not gonna fade. That sounds more like Amazon's vibe. Creating trillion dollar markets is more apples vibe but that's not exactly an easy thing to do - they're trying again with vision so let's see how that goes.
His “antics” is why SpaceX became possible in the first place. If he cared what others think he wouldn’t have started it, and wouldn’t be who he is.
Apple is one of richest companies in the world, already has chips most competent for AI in any widespread portable devices, and smaller teams like the one at Mistral can create something as competent as the 7b model without backing from the largest players, ie. if Apple wants it they could buy up a lot of talent create something wild.

Also Gemma is a complete joke, and gemini is still not on par in my view.

If they drop the ball it's organisational - like the way they have ignored any documentation for the Neural Engine and just started with MLX now, Ferret etc. But they are moving!
I read it as 20M premium phone customers who it thinks will be amongst its first customers for this premium car price TBD. To me its a big logical leap to think someone who paid $750 for a phone will suddenly be willing to spend $75k on your car.
> I would like to have positive ROI on the conversations that I have.

You must be fun at parties.
Oh wow sorry didn't mean to be personally flippant to the VP! Hacker news is wild.

I just had a look at the billing screen and I can see notifications but not budgeting options (on the Pro plan). Ideally I'd like to monitor/configure spend per deployment as some of our sites have big sales which can = big fees. Is this possible?
How would one know how much they invested in AI, if they've not discussed such?
> this policy

I wouldn't think it's a binding policy at all, because the billing procedure (automatic full bill, manually discounted bill, etc.) would follow it if it were. More of a procedure.
Why would they want to run LLM queries every time someone asks Siri for the normal shit people ask their voice assistants: weather, timers, controlling music; on a scale of every iPhone user out there.

It'd just be waisting compute money with no obvious way of recouping the cost. Doubt many people would be interested in paying for Siri.
I'm not sure women are as homogeneous as you're suggesting.
HN is quite lightly moderated compared to most forums I can think of. I see lots of boundary-pushing comments survive without getting downvoted. The team running HN work hard, obviously, and there's some smart tech managing things like the front page, but people are allowed to speak pretty freely on here as long as they adhere to the rules. Punishing rule violations is a little different from moderating speech too, I'd argue.
It's one of the stereotypical failure cases of dynamically-typed languages. I cite this not to bury them in general, but because it's something that people programming in dynamic languages need to be aware of. If object oriented languages seem to frequently end up with "God Objects" dynamically-typed languages end up with "God Functions", where Just One More Parameter at a time, a core function grows slowly and steadily until it is a monstrosity of several dozen parameters and there is simply no conceivable way to document how they all interact with each other, test all the combinations, conceptualize all the combinations, etc. It's very dangerous because it happens often just one parameter, or even fractions of a parameter ("let's make this string also able to be an array of strings") at a time, each step seeming sensible at the time but the totality becoming a nightmare.

Statically typed can incrementally end up with too many parameters too, but the static typing generally helps reduce the complexity and there is generally more incentives to start binding the parameters up into meaningful other structs. Dynamically typed languages on the other hand have the tendency to start widening what types each parameter can take which makes the problems even worse. Is "targetURL" a string, an array of strings that will automatically turn the return into an array of results, an object that implements ".toURL()", a function that will be automatically called with some magic parameters, a None which will then invoke other magic to get the URL from somewhere else, etc.?

(Don't worry, dynamic typing fans, static languages have their own characteristic failures, like the aforementioned God Object.)

Dynamically typed code bases are not doomed to end up this way. It can be avoided with discipline, which starts with the awareness that it is a problem at all. And it's a very good idea to learn to avoid them, because they're terribly difficult to tear back apart once constructed. I've worked in a code base that darned near had a "JustDoEverythingWeCanPossibleDo(...)" function, where (...) doesn't represent the true horror because there were rather a lot of global variables getting set that had huge impacts on the process as well. Trying to pull that apart to do any real work was, ah, an experience.
Keytrap DNSSEC Attack
> nativecomp is pretty much a gimmick and should make absolutely no difference in perceived Emacs slowness during actual usage and not stupid microbenchmarks.

That is completely wrong. I'm using Emacs back since when I was compiling it on 486 with 8 MB of RAM. nativecomp is the single biggest speed boost I saw Emacs ever getting. Using Emacs on the same machine with nativecomp on or not was night and day (a Core i7-6700 in my case: maybe the difference would be less noticeable nowadays but I couldn't tell as I now only ever run nativecomp and compile it with nativecomp on).

You're the first person I ever hear saying nativecomp doesn't make a difference.
This is hilariously brilliant thx for sharing.
Looks great Burak! Appreciate your contribution to Open Source Data ecosystem!
From ~late 2022 onwards, Quest users were no longer obliged to have a Facebook account, but rather a (non social-media) 'Meta account'.

Not defending them. Merely anecdoting that, as one of that small minority who never cultivated a Facebook account, getting and using a Quest unit had no special or far-reaching implications for me or my private information.
Some of the countries that require going through a "worldwide partner":

https://www.dnb.com/duns/google-developers-duns-creation.htm...
I love Adrian's work.

Take my money.
That is correct, but there is much more success than failure if you look into it unbiased, they delivered all commit tasks and then some stretch ones too.

Based on your response I won’t go any deeper, it would be time wasting, you appear to have made up your mind already.
Of course. Other space companies would just say something about "an anomaly" and that would be it. "RUD" is just a rocketry inside joke. It is not - and it never was - anything else.
Or inconsistency in how bugs are reported and tracked. Or variations on what is considered a "bug". Or huge natural differences between fe and be teams, same with customer facing vs internal facing products.
This is exactly what I meant, but even beyond relatively common jobs, if you're likely enough to bump into open people, there's a good chance some of them will be doing more niche interesting things too
Say goodbye to cluttered desktops: Screenshotmagic is a Mac app that utilizes AI to automatically provide descriptive names for your images.
I don't think the spirit of the Constitution is being violated here at all. As you say, the Constitution didn't account for private speech making it so easy to reach a wide audience, so it doesn't really have anything to say here, one way or the other.

Personally, I think having a government Twitter as a "digital public square of last resort" is fine as a solution, as long as it has no curation abilities whatsoever: no recommended pages, no default feed or algorithmic timeline, not even a search function. Any pages you get to come via external links, or internal links placed manually by whichever page you're looking at.

This way, you avoid any issue of bias, and while there may be Nazi pages somewhere there, you wouldn't be able to get to them except by getting linked elsewhere to Nazis, it wouldn't be the platform actually recommending Nazis to you (because it wouldn't recommend anything).
Reddit Spends 55% of its revenue on R&D
> Steve Yegge uses emacs, and half his motivation was to equalise editors by moving the language processing elements to an external place that’s shareable by all.

That is cool. I was thinking just today (without knowing it was the intention) that LSP has meant I moved from an IDE to an editor with plugins (Kate, not Emacs), because an editor now has so much more of what the IDE can do.
If, hypothetically, prices for the next 30 minutes were published online through a standard API so that customers wouldn't need to install dozens of apps, would this ameliorate your concerns?

I kind of agree with the previous poster that, if done properly, this would benefit the seller and the consumer.

"Oh, cheeseburgers are a dollar right now at Wendy's, let's go there instead" has an interesting sort of cost-savings allure to it on a road trip.
> "Space Influencer Bots"

i just figure with all those light-years in between here and the next world, we're gonna need _some_ kind of entertainment to occupy all that time

> deploy micro bots/bots to mars and have to fund raise here on earth

makes me think of a Cosmic-scale everyone-participates version of Risk

if my bots meet Musk-teams bots on Mars, every fight will be televised in 3D/16k@120Hz
I would argue forums are just a subset of social media. "Social media" being the high level umbrella for platforms where users interact. Differentiated from platforms which are "read-only".
I don't know anything about the Reddit poster, but I see so many CVs with great academic credentials who can't do the most basic programming tasks - would fail Fizz Buzz. So much so that you can't believe they managed to do the coding their academic work required.

Of course I don't know if that applies to that poster, but I met many people who could say something similar and didn't know how to write a Python for loop.
That's right - you have to package awslabs/aws-lambda-web-adapter into your docker image which proxies the API-GW/ALB requests through.
I am very interested in data ingestion. I develop a desktop data wrangling tool in C++ ( Easy Data Transform ). So far it can import files in various formats (CSV, Excel, JSON, XML etc). But I am interested in being able to import from databases, APIs and other sources. Would I be able to ship your CLI as part of my product on Windows and Mac? Or can someone suggest some other approach to importing from lots of data sources without coding them all individually?
I haven't played for more than a minute, but reading the README here, it's interesting how there's a different experience with a FOSS game released but still in development, especially over so many years. Instead of "SuperTux 2" you have incremental changes. "The next level is finished, all the boss battles are improved". There's no canonical versions like there are with at least classic console games. I know modern games have patches and stuff but I don't think they rework the game this way but I could be wrong.
A common way to break into the car market is to start with the very expensive cars. You just barely break even at best, but you learn enough in those early cars so that in 5 years you can build the next cheaper model, and so on down the line.

It isn't the only way to break in, but it is common.
I think Siri being terrible is probably an indictment of ai now broadly, more so than people believe right now.
> The predictive nature of LLMs are perfect for voice assistant use cases

But people in general don't seem to be interested in voice assistants in general. They were a huge hype when you basically had to manually uncheck boxes to not accidentially order an Amazon Echo, etc, but as quick as the hype was there it was gone. To my knowledge Amazon has yet to make any kind of substantial revenue with Alexa stuff.

With LLMs I would expect this to be even more of an issue given how costly the inferencing alone is when we're talking about an LLM. And yes, the utility will likely increase substantially with the adoption of LLMs as opposed to previous language processing techniques, but I don't think this will outweigh the disinterest in the overall technology.
I think it would benefit by being broken up into modules and a little less simplified, at least naming the things.
I was binging your website and thought other people might find this page interesting. I agree, it's a bit ridiculous to read all these headlines. And the little SQL snippet at the bottom was a nice touch too.
Even before that point, it's a bit of a false premise to even label this as "discrimination"
And when it does bear fruit, many big tech companies come to copy or purchase it only to have it wither in some corner of their company.
The Legacies of the Atomic Bomb in Anime
The problem is that the companies that can do that are rarely also the company's that are willing to do the hard work of productionizing those moonshots. Lots of people have nice salaries and jobs that depend on pumping out ideas and PoCs, but few have a clear dependence on getting it to market.

But the really big stuff all requires working like your future depends on it. They can't do that, so they usually just end up with laundry lists of fancy PoCs.

Even when they work, the rollouts can be glacial at best (eg, Waymo).
I am not discounting ideas or culture at all. I chose my terms wisely and never once mentioned genes. Culture is heritable and is very difficult to completely isolate from many other heritable or semi-heritable factors. Is cultural inheritance as straightforward a process as genetic inheritance? Absolutely not - but culture is certainly heritable. Take populations with barely functional societies and introduce Marxist cults of personality and you don't get North Korea. North Korea is a rarity in this sense. How long did it take many other pseudo-Marxist states to fall apart? Many of these states destroyed themselves so quickly they were essentially lost to history. Again, nothing to do with genetic determinism or cultural determinism - we're just noticing reality here. Humans deserve dignity and nothing I am saying is aimed towards undermining that.
I suspect Ioniq 5 and 6 were supposed to be those models, up until Hyundai exec leaked negotiations to media presumably thinking it'll somehow give them advantages. Timelines match up.
What Every Programmer Needs to Know About Game Networking
White House urges developers to dump C and C++
The implication here is that once an open source project is widespread enough, the maintainers are morally forced to provide development and support for free. This obviously doesn't make any sense.

In real world, when maintainers change the license, if a software is widespread enough, a fork is created, and at least part of the community moves to it.
Why ORMs Aren't Always a Good Idea
> According to Gell-Mann, McCarthy knew a lot about 20th century physics...not in terms of math but in a "history of ideas" sense, i.e. where major physicists stood on various questions.

This really came across in The Passenger and Stella Maris.
> This feels more like a scam to me. Why do serverless platforms like Netlify and Vercel not have ddos protection, or at least a spend limit?

Normally it should just stop serving the bandwidth once the limit hits, just like when you max out your credit card, it just gets declined, they don’t charge you forever just because someone else is abusing it..
Their existing chiplet approach is already horrible for laptops. Making the IO die bigger and more power hungry is not an option unless they switch to much more expensive packaging to get interconnect power down to reasonable levels.
This never made sense. They just have an ungodly amount of money to burn.
> Time will only tell.

Tim will only tell.

...I'll walk myself out now.
And apple successfully got wearable health monitoring in their watch to be a thing and got 510(k) clearance as a class 2 medical device etc. They're already big players in health even if not marketed that way.
I think for this purpose you could use something like privacy.com, generate a virtual credit card, and set a monthly limit on it. This way you don't have to deposit any money in advance.
If jobs was still around I’d be as curious as you. Under cook I have no faith
Attestation creates all sorts of challenges absolutely, but it actually doesn't really help here - there's plenty of services doing this on real devices, and no real challenges to doing so at the prices people will pay. The overhead is the one-off cost of the cheapest legitimate device that will attest, split between the many users to get near 100% utilisation over a large period. Once you look at cheap androids & PCs, this gets very cheap indeed.

The only solution is actual paid services, or real-user verification (and deduplication, which means little privacy, which means legal problems in much of the world) for free accounts.

If you publish something on the internet for free, you _must_ accept that people can read it automatically. You can make it difficult, make it a bit more expensive, but at the end of the day paid data means paywalls.
It could also use a decent editor
Hetzner is a really great value option if they cover your region (primarily Europe).
Sure the AI input/output itself doesn't have a ton of value. Tell that to Microsoft and Google, who seem to be obsessed with chat interfaces while lacking any creativity as to where else the technology can be deployed.

Apple's key strength is Integration. If their AI play is different and better, this is why it will be so. When Samsung puts AI in their phones, its a sparkles-and-magic button in an action bar that pops up a list of actions that might as well be chat prompts. Microsoft releases 365 Copilot and its a chat sidebar to the normal Office apps. There's real opportunity to integrate AI more deeply into the OS and the actions users take when using the OS.

I don't know what form that takes; that's Apple's job to figure out. I think WWDC this year is when we'll be presented their vision (ha) on how it fits together. I think: If it looks a lot like the Galaxy AI event, then your take is right and I immediately become bearish on AI and honestly bearish on Apple's future among the ultra-high-value companies of the US. But, I'm leaning toward feeling that they're going to surprise us, and I'd put money on the outcome that WWDC represents an "iPhone Moment" for AI, leaving a lot of organizations scrambling to understand how their product fits into Apple's world and not the other way around. But, we'll see.
> a function of ... severity

Not severity; that sort of thinking is actually part of low-safety cultures. A highly safe culture requires the insight that people don't behave differently based on outcome. In fact, most people can't assess the severity of their work (this is by design; for example someone with access to the full picture makes the decisions so that technicians don't have to). So they couldn't behave differently even if they did somehow make better decisions when it matters.

But, and I'll reiterate the point for emphasis, people make all their decisions using the same brain. It is like bugs; any code can be buggy. Code doesn't get less buggy because it is important code. It gets less buggy because it is tested, formally verified, battle scarred, well specified and doesn't change often.
Unfortunately, my decade plus as a military aircraft tech has taught me that no, practical knowledge does not make it through the system nearly as fast as engineering "expertise".
funnily enough, elon himself gives me such great shame. he perpetuates an us vs them mentality with his personal beliefs, boosts racists, fascists, and antisemites, and uses his loudspeaker to attack minorities almost every day.

he has put a lot of money and taken risks on interesting and useful ventures, but i don’t think his vision for humanity outweighs the negativity and hatred; we can’t go to mars if we all kill each other
I usually cringe when people make this quip but it might be the first time I've seen it used effectively.
OK Great Leader. People are noting that the “Homebrew guy” is behind two back-to-back stupid ideas (that package thing and this). You can’t deny that he was involved with Homebrew and that’s all that’s being said.

The OSS CV thing can be a double-edged sword for all involved parties.
It wasn't the engineering that did it, it was the egress charges. But I think the IaaS tend to charge more for this than the clouds, who in turn charge more than the "servers for rent" people.
It’s more aggressive in guessing your location to comply with local laws. Ironically you may get less spying.
Another dubious optimization you could do is finding an optimal transport solution to move the apples the least amount of distance, something similar to the Earth Mover's Distance.

https://jeremykun.com/2018/03/05/earthmover-distance/