skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
SEEKING WORK | US | REMOTE

I help bussinesses with their iOS/Apple stack. From greenfield projects to taking responsibility over legacy platforms with new features, updates and migrations.

Can also help with AWS and nestjs projects.

Proven track record with satisfied clients.

https://www.dyla.tech
They're slowly but surely reinventing OStatus (<https://indieweb.org/OStatus>), which ended with ActivityPub. Surely if they go the same path they will end up with the same conclusions.
Imagen is being perfectly accurate in what we're discussing, obviously. It's an article about why it draws racially diverse Nazis, not how it draws fingers. It drew diverse Nazis because it was asked to draw diverse Nazis. This has nothing to do with accuracy limitations of diffusion models.

> And we don't know why the prompt is there. Maybe without it, the results are even worse.

I don't mean to be insulting, but are you trolling? Why do you think Google instructs it to make prompts with people diverse?
Regular street sweeping is terrible for human health. It kicks up a huge quantity of dust. Recent studies show particulate pollution has a huge detrimental effect on health.
Not since the beginning. They made it that way after beef with the IRS.

I wish they hadn't because they are thinking too commercial (extremely high paid CEO) for instance but they have a foundation to answer to which doesn't manage them like shareholders would (eg not rewarding the CEO for dropping marketshare!). This model is the worst of both worlds imo.
Loved reading this.

Here's an archived version that still has the photos:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140713012712/https://gizmodo.c...
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-ends-tax-exempt-statu...

Every dollar of income generated through television rights fees, licensing agreements, sponsorships, ticket sales, and other means is earned by the 32 clubs and is taxable there. This will remain the case even when the league office and Management Council file returns as taxable entities, and the change in filing status will make no material difference to our business.
So at my previous place we had a monolith with roughly 700 different URL handlers. Most of the problem with things like this was understanding what they all did.

Applying rate limiting, selective dropping of traffic, even just monitoring things by how much they affect the user experience, all require knowing what each one is doing. Figuring that out for one takes very little time. Figuring it out for 700 made it a project we'd never do.

The way I'd start with this is just by tagging things as I go. I'd build a lightweight way to attach a small amount of metadata to URL handlers/RPC handlers/GraphQL resolvers/whatever, and I'd decide a few facts to start with about each one – is it customer facing, is it authenticated, is it read or write, is it critical or nice to have, a few things like that. Then I'd do nothing else. That's probably a few hours of work, and would add almost no overhead

Now when it comes to needing something like this, you've got a base of understanding of the system to start from. You can incrementally use these, you can incrementally enforce that they are correct through other analysis, but the point is that I think it's low effort as a starting point with a potentially very high payoff.
First known photos of 'lost bird' captured by scientists
Nope, that’s not what iA says, and it would be a gross misrepresentation of the DMA to be honest.

The section they’re referring to is clause 64 in the lead of the DMA[0] and it is not only limited to cases of interoperability, unlike what iA implies it doesn’t follow with a suggestion that gatekeepers can just ask if they’re unsure. Instead it states:

> In all cases, the gatekeeper and the requesting provider should ensure that interoperability does not undermine a high level of security and data protection in line with their obligations laid down in this Regulation and applicable Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. The obligation related to interoperability should be without prejudice to the information and choices to be made available to end users of the number-independent interpersonal communication services of the gatekeeper and the requesting provider under this Regulation and other Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

That’s why one of the main criticisms of the DMA is that gatekeepers generally can’t present proposals for approval and have to wait until after implementing to see if it is to the EC’s liking.

That said, the EU has inquired about the PWA stuff[1] and it seems that the outcome of that has been that Home Screen install doesn’t need to be provided for other browsers. Allowing Apple to back down from their careful interpretation.

0: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...

1: https://9to5mac.com/2024/02/26/apple-blocking-web-apps/
> A special combination of physics led to a proton having roughly the same mass as a neutron; perhaps in the dark matter mirror, that combination of physics played out differently, causing the "dark proton" to evaporate and leave behind a sea of "dark neutrons" — what we identify as dark matter.

I don't think I misread the article. Currently we expect dark matter to be neutral. So if we assume the statement is correct, what would then happen to the positrons and it's charge?
Fantastic. That's one giant step backwards not taken for the web platform.
Just to add to the common name list - I grew up in Alaska and we called the crane flies "mosquito eaters" there.
What does that even mean? Isn't a PWA just a webpage with some Javascript? How can that be built on WebKit only?
A gravel trail isn't there to make the user's life easier. It is there to prevent damage to the park. The gravel prevents people cutting a deep trench through the mud, which inevitably become a series of parallel mud trenches across the terrain. A gravel trail or even a pavement allows for more people to transit an area without doing damage. A ladder on the side of a cliff is just about making life easier and does nothing to protect the cliff.
Gotcha. My thoughts are that if you can make sure this is beyond just being able to share repositories and maybe even the go-to tool for all things coding/repository monetization/management related then that would make this a broader scalable product that solves many use cases (which gives you a better advantage). But I understand that repository monetization is only the start and you'll continue to iterate over with further feedback.

On another note, I was brainstorming this idea and thought about influencers and how they enjoy sharing their tips/hacks/recipes with their audience. What if you have another section in your app for monetization of such information? We already have a tool that sells courses from indie influencers but how about smaller info? Provides more avenues for creator monetization and I could envision an acquisition by an influencer management platform i.e. Stan For Creators. Just some food for thought.
They haven't hit the deadline yet, lobby your national and EU representatives if you want rid of this.
Any tech folks here want to help people that do this collect data on how much they get and where from? Zero clue how useful that would be, but it would certainly be interesting
In Emacs I have clangd and clang-tidy running on each key stroke!

The project size is probably a lot smaller than what most people are working on though, and I have a fast CPU and NVME disk, but it's definitely possible to do!

I'm not sure about the fuzzer part though.
Why? AGI itself makes no claim of super intelligence or even super human capabilities.
NASA Instruments Will Listen for Supersonic X-59's Quiet 'Thump'
Nonprofits can make profits. They aren’t taxed, but they can’t issue dividends. In theory there is some reasonable limit (in the millions) of how much they can pay out via salary compensation etc. they can’t issue dividends because they have no shareholders and no equity. Therefore the profit must simply be used towards their goal, basically.
Thanks for the information!

AFAIK, licensing agreements between libraries and digital publishers typically include a right to perpetual access to articles in a journal or digital library they subscribe to. Any papers published while the licensing agreement is in place are to be made available even if the library cancels their subscription.
This also includes the right to make backup copies of the digital library.

(Here's such an agreement between ACM and the Norwegian universities:
https://www.openscience.no/media/3449/download?inline )

What the library is allowed to do with this backup probably depends on country-specific laws.

However, if I understand the current situation correctly, ACM allows everyone to download CACM articles but not to redistribute them, right?

In theory, they could also explicitly allow anyone to redistribute all of their publications (they reserve the right to do this in the licensing agreement with authors).
However, I'd argue that it is not in ACMs interest to do so - and probably not in mine, either. Having a central, trustworthy source has benefits - e.g. when retracting papers.
I'm fine with the ACM DL being free to use and having library backups as safety nets if ACM ever goes under.
It means people pay sky high tax rates, and deal with lower quality government services, and the government sells of infrastructure like their parking meters. Also, land does not appreciate and the state is handicapped in attracting new highly profitable businesses.

https://reason.com/2019/03/01/companies-should-avoid-states-...
I'm not a lawyer, is it novel that someone's suing a corporate officer for breach of fiduciary duty as a result of trying to make the most money possible for shareholders?

Obviously that's strange for a non-profit, but when you hear of a breach of fiduciary duty suit it's usually because someone didn't do something to make more money, not less.

It almost feels more like an accusation of fraud than breach of duty.
How much do you think it would cost the city to implement something like this themselves? It would probably involve hiring 2-3 bike riders, a manager, some people to oversee/analyze the efficacy of the program, an approved supply chain using approved vendors. They could probably get a couple bikes with magnets on them riding around the city for < 3m year.
You need a bit of google I guess.

There is even a HN reader written in x86_64 assembly if you want, with fasm assembler (BTW, the version 2 is about to be out of rc).
The DMA plainly states that they have to give other browser vendors access to all features present on device, and that they cannot degrade the quality of their services.

Removing PWA support goes against both these obligations.
I've been reading through the rules to the Fight! RPG by Divine Madness Press and have been similarly looking forward to building characters, moves, and combos for that fight system.
University spinoffs are pretty common, but the university tends to be a small minority owner of the spinoff (unless the shares are donated back to them later), exercise no control of the operation of the company, and don't transfer IP to the spinoff after the spinning-off has happened. OpenAI is not doing any of that with its for-profit.
Halliburton was protected by the government because their top dogs were literally running the country. It's a very different scenario from OpenAI.
> and I'm skeptical that you're a moral human being

Hm, surely we don't need to go that far. This is an internet discussion, we're supposed to be nice to each other!

> Apparently poor people with families don't need larger vehicles the way middle class people with families do.

Maybe I don't understand what claim you're making: is it 1) vans/SUVs must not become any more expensive (via higher insurance requirements), or else poor people will be priced out of owning a car entirely, or 2) owning a van/SUV is almost a human right, and raising the barrier to it is immoral?

I've tried looking at listings and I don't see evidence of the claim that somehow poor people are forced to buy SUVs because they're cheaper. There appear to be many big and small cars at every price range.

For 2), huge cars have only been widespread for a decade or two. The idea that they're somehow necessary for a meaningful human life is hard for me to grok.
And yet you can run any browser engine on MacOS and the world hasn’t ended. This is a cash grab, it’s not about security and I don’t understand why people keep repeating that.
Positive cash flow and profit are almost synonyms although there can be subtleties they are not relevant to this discussion.

The parent comment is making a common mistake that non-profits can not make profits, that is false. Non-profits can't distribute their profits to their owners and they lack a profit motive, but they absolutely can and do make a profit.

This site points out common misconceptions about non-profits, and in fact the biggest misconception that it lists at the top is that non-profits can't make a profit:

https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/about-americas-nonprofit...
A) it's already been done. There are forks already.

B) Network effects drive the value of tools that are networked. The forks aren't popular at all.

C) Signal is well funded and not in financial trouble, so they can sustain effort on development and infrastructure.

D) I suspect you already knew all this too. So why did you respond the way you did?
Meta has been known for years to only negotiate if you have competing offers. I guess being the only place with high TC hiring right now complicates things but this negotiation strategy is not new.
We can nuke it from the self sustaining colonies on Mars established by Musk in 2020...
Old growth is on par with LVL/Glulam in terms of structural strength.

But to be honest the rot resistance is more important. Most wood buildings fail because of rot issues, not because the wood wasn't strong enough.
Maybe. But to know for sure you need to offset the image and change encoder settings.
"– The sweeping brush spins at about 150 rpm. It is made of polypropylene bristles, similar to the material used in municipal mechanical street sweepers."

It will surely generate less microplastic than the similar bristles used on full sized street sweeping machinery.

The question that comes to my mind is: why is there so much debris on the road?
It would be pretty similar but you would use something closed source like orcad. And the pcbs for such a small batch would be made manually using the toner transfer process instead of using a subcontractor.
> Update April 28, 2015: In the midst of several National Football League scandals last October, PublicSource asked freelance writer Patrick Doyle to take a look at the nonprofit status of the league. On April 28, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said the league will no longer be tax exempt, eliminating a “distraction.”

no longer a non-profit but no less hypocritical
Have you used GPT-4? I'd criticize it in the opposite direction. It routinely defers to experts on even the simplest questions. If you ask it to tell you how to launch a satellite into orbit, it leads with:

>Launching a satellite into orbit is a complex and challenging process that requires extensive knowledge in aerospace engineering, physics, and regulatory compliance. It's a task typically undertaken by governments or large corporations due to the technical and financial resources required. However, I can give you a high-level overview of the steps involved:
I mean they effectively did. They created a for-profit, moved the bulk of employees there, and when the board attempted to uphold its founding principles they were threatened and forced to resign.

What's next? Can the OpenAI nonprofit shell divest itself of the for-profit OpenAI and spend the remainder of its cash on "awareness" or other nonsense?
>The fear of low-profitability is what drives that behavior

Are you sure about that? Seems like a pretty bold statement where you would have to have some kind of inside information.

I don't have anything to substantiate this but I would like to believe that Apple still has the best interest of it's customers and security in mind when fighting these kinds of legislation. I switched from Android to Apple BECAUSE of those restrictions and the improved security the walled garden model provides. The other reason was the middle finger Apple gave to the cell providers about applying firmware updates to their phones. When I was using Android it was maddening to wait months for an update to be 'approved' and able to install. That led me to rooting and installing firmware that was outside of the manufactures control and who knows what might have been in that.

So for me everything that Apple does to keep a walled garden is what actually keeps me as a customer and helps their bottom line.
That's the real distinction: does the for-profit subsidiary subsume the supposed public good of the parent non-profit?

If OpenAI Co. is gatekeeping access to the fruits of OpenAI's labors, what good is OpenAI providing?
Location: Europe

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: C/C++, Python, JavaScript, Rust, Scala 3, Racket, Clojure, Linux, Git, Make, CMake, Clang-Tidy, Clang-Format, Catch2, Windows API, DirectX Math, SDL2, Qt, Play, Vue.js

Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mT6TmIjZO_dCS6q4qTP-Zikx3bb...

Email: see my about or resume.

---

Hello, I'm a recent computer science (B.Sc.) graduate eager to embark on my first role as a software developer.
I bring a diverse skill set with experience in several key technologies and a solid grasp of mathematics (linear algebra, “3D math”, calculus).
I am open to both long-term positions and contract work, ready to contribute my skills and enthusiasm.
If that's Apple's motivation, why have they been implementing PWAs at all? Killing them would be even simpler if they just weren't on iOS in the first place.
Honest question, though: wouldn't this be more of a fraud than breach of fiduciary duty?
Exactly, the Safari team has been openly hostile to PWA for a decade.
Nagfor supports half-precision floating-point numbers
SEEKING WORK | Location: Denver | Remote

Sr. Full Stack Developer / Software Engineer Manager

Languages: PHP, Frameworks = Laravel/Vue.js MySql

Resume: https://www.strategic-options.com/chads_resume.html

Email: mr(.)chad(.)humphrey@gmail.com
This is not a for-profit company. The shareholders don't get any of the money that OpenAI makes by law, so its purpose is not to make a profit.
I hope that the UK CMA enforcement action will smack Apple over the head for this one.
Are you thinking their post is indicating that they were part of the Wirecard audits? They're saying they've undergone similar audits.
Interestingly, power grids also made a lot of clocks possible that relied on a fixed AC frequency.
Most companies e.g. Unreal charge a fee for using their SDKs.

The idea that you would be forced to give it away for nothing would be a pretty extraordinary and unworkable intervention in the market.
Why do you think many devs out there are talking about the ensh*tification of open source software. Breaking news: c++ and similar are part of that.
> You cannot abandon your non-profit's entire mission on a highly hypothetical, controversial pretext.

"OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact." - https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai

I'm not actually sure which of these points you're objecting to, given you dispute the dangers as well as getting angry about the money making, but even in that blog post they cared about risks: "It’s hard to fathom how much human-level AI could benefit society, and it’s equally hard to imagine how much it could damage society if built or used incorrectly."

GPT-4 had a ~100 page report, which included generations that were deemed unsafe which the red reaming found, and which they took steps to prevent in the public release. The argument for having any public access is the same as the one which Open Source advocates use for source code: more eyeballs.

I don't know if it's a correct argument, but it's at least not obviously stupid.

> (None of which have ended the world! What a surprise!)

If it had literally ended the world, we wouldn't be here to talk about it.

If you don't know how much plutonium makes a critical mass, only a fool would bang lumps of the stuff together to keep warm and respond to all the nay-sayers with the argument "you were foolish to even tell me there was a danger!" even while it's clear that everyone wants bigger rocks…

And yet at the same time, the free LLMs (along with the image generators) have made a huge dent in the kinds of content one can find online, further eroding the trustworthiness of the internet, which was already struggling.

> They hit upon wild success, and want to keep it for themselves; this is precisely the opposite of their mission. It's morally, and hopefully legally, unacceptable.

By telling the governments "regulate us, don't regulate our competitors, don't regulate open source"? No. You're just buying into a particular narrative, like most of us do most of the time. (So am I, of course. Even though I have no idea how to think of the guy himself, and am aware of misjudging other tech leaders in both directions, that too is a narrative).
The amount of street sweeping is directly correlated with how much they can make ticketing cars that are parked in street sweeping zones. In San Francisco they sweep the streets daily and throw $70-80 tickets to any car caught during sweeping time. Does the street accumulate enough garbage in 24 hours to warrant another sweeping? Irrelevant.
More species on HN! More shameless plugs. The nomenclature of these animals is curated in our open-source TaxonWorks. The result of that work is shared on a custom site via exports and post-processing https://www.wcolite.com/.
I'm referring to the Isaac simulator. Here's an example of using parallel training to learn walking policies very quickly: https://syncedreview.com/2021/10/01/deepmind-podracer-tpu-ba...
I really wouldn't give a shit how much they were paid if we got something more than vague promises.

They could release the source with a licence that restricted commercial use, anything they wanted, that still allowed them to profit.

Instead we get "AI is too dangerous for anyone else to have." The whole thing doesn't inspire confidence.
GP clearly understands this and said it explicitly, hence “OpenAI more subtle scam” part.
That's not their first "closed-source" model. "mistral-medium" was.

Depending on your definition, none of mistral's models are "open source", AFAIK they've given no information on what training data they used, how many tokens they trained it with, etc.
the young learn from the old. their professors & TAs are the ones that indoctrinated them.

And the senior business leaders are all 40s-60s .

Who's to blame? It's on us to lead them
It's all quite confusing. A non-profit can as you say turn a profit but isn't supposed to distribute it to owners.

There is a difference between positive cash flow and profit as profit has differences in accounting rules. If you invest in some asset (let's say a taxi car) today, all of that cash flow will happen today. But there will be no effect on the profit today, as your wealth is considered to have just changed form, from cash into an asset. For the purposes of profit/loss, the cost instead happens over the years as that asset depreciates. This is so that the depreciation of the asset can be compared to the income it is generating (wear and tear on car vs ride fare - gas).
I've applied to Spruce 2 times before and never got any kind of response.

And I am an experienced developer on the tech stack you claim to want.

Are you seriously hiring?
Sure is, in an oligarchy disguised as a free market.