skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> SEO is gaming Google's heuristics.

I fail to see immediate disagreement here: I don't see how Google's ranking process/method/algorithm being heuristic changes the observation that to a website in the end it is a set of ranking rules, that can in some ways be gamed. SEO is two part process: discovering those ranking rules and abusing them.

Your example with gaming alphabetical listings only reinforces the idea that SEO abuses rules set forth by the ranking engine.

However, it does not meaningfully matter whether the incentives inherent in the ranking system form results the way they do intentionally. What matters is the eventual behavior of the ranking system. Mostly because by definition you cannot filter out bad actors entirely, all you can do is 1) place some arbitrarily enforced barriers, which are generally prohibitively costly 2) place incentives minimizing gain of bad actors.
IANA (not w3c) just maintains a directory of who uses them to avoid collisions.

As should be obvious from the collection, there’s nobody in charge here. You can just ask for whatever prefix you want. I guess in that way, I agree with you: it is nearly anarchy.

I personally think that’s fine. Why does it matter if the names aren’t consistent? The different protocols using well-known don’t have to talk to each other. Any individual program is likely to just care about one for whatever protocol it’s speaking. All that matters is they don’t overlap.
I think this makes sense given the prominence and place English holds in the world.

Hepburn has made Japanese more accessible universally given its phonetic nature and relationship to English. There are many other transliteration systems out there that people are using with their local languages as well.

If you want to see the opposite approach, look at China and Pinyin. It’s made pronunciation of Chinese in English and elsewhere less intuitive. In order to pronounce Chinese words properly you need to learn Pinyin and its phonetic rules. As a result, many Chinese people take on Westernized names to avoid the inevitable butchering, which is a bit of a shame.

While Pinyin was probably the best choice for enhancing literacy in China, it has inadvertently created hurdles for foreigners. In contrast, Japan’s Hepburn system has avoided such challenges.
No, because you never separately voice consecutive vowels in Japanese. There's no such thing as a glottal stop.

Tone aside, "kounan" is pronounced as a native English speaker would pronounce the word.
Condolences to his family, Aaron murdered a hero.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/26/1234005058/what-we-know-about...
Not smaller, denser.

(Although in some cases still smaller)
The article talks about how "y" is replacing "x" as the official romanization in Japan. "The official spelling of the central Japan prefecture of Aichi" indicates that "Aichi" is the official spelling. This means to me that "Aichi" is "y" and, by extension, that "Aiti" is "x".

"Aichi will replace Aiti" doesn't add any clarity if it's breaking that logic. There's a reason why others also find this article hard to parse.
I agree with you - I've seen this in other countries, where whatever you buy, companies can have their easy-to-manipulate price, but there's -always- the price per 100g/litre, so it's always easy to compare, even across products of different brands.

This does feel a little like micromanaging but it does seem good. If someone buys the same product every week for 10 years, they're -never- going to be on the lookout for "has this product changed this week, is it smaller now?".
This lo-fi blog https://www.mouseprint.org/category/downsiz/ is (probably) the best maintained documentation on shrinkflation. Maintained for over a decade by a former Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General in consumer protection.
$9700 for 300km range? These should be selling like hotcakes but for you'd be a pancake thanks to megacar culture
"this seems like a massive, energy intensive exercise in redundancy"

This is commonly refered to as a market working as intended. Yes, the waste from this type of redundency can be massive, especially if you realize that ultimately just a tiny percentage of these efforts will result in even moderate success. But it is the price to pay at the edge of progress. A planned monopoly might be more efficient (despite popular banter that just compares a megacorp or a gov, which is basically the same, to a single succesfull startup ignoring the 999 that tried and failed), but those seldom beat a market on innovation.
I actually just got one of these CGMs after listening to Peter Attia's (audio)book Outlive and started monitoring my glucose and experimenting with meals and exercise to see what effects they have. Apart from the weirdness of having something attached to your skin, it's like having another watch and you won't notice after a while. It's pretty cool and a lot more people than just diabetics would benefit from this knowledge.

Like I just learned for example about resistant starches, of which one is cooled potatoes: I ate the exact same dish but the first time, right after cooking, my levels shot up (not abnormally but you should ideally never have spikes, so your body doesn't have to keep pumping insulin), and then the second time, reheated, it was like I didn't eat anything. I was surprised so I researched and found https://www.webmd.com/diet/what-to-know-resistant-starches

Everyone is different so I definitely suggest to try them out for a month and see what gives you spikes in your diet. Then try to get rid of those spikes.
I love it when right wing political muppets are being shut down by innovative companies.

What a lot of xenofobic pundits from wealthy counties who vote right wing don't understand, is that a lot of their economic growth they saw in the last decade or two came BECAUSE of migration.

Would be curious if they're ready to put their money where their mouth is, as in, accept economic contraction for the sake of "getting rid of foreigners".
I think your equating hopping with age is misplaced. Yes, younger do hop more, there are plenty more senior people that maybe want something new and interesting - making it less about making more $$
News to me! If so, that makes sense, but I rarely/never see the use of the accent mark.
Over a hundred years ago, Babbage might have said:

>We already have machines that are generally intelligent and require as much energy as a few coalgas lights. Why wouldn’t it be eventually possible to replicate them in brass and steam?

My understanding of the argument of this article is that the conceptual design that replicates intelligence is what the industry has failed to generate today. Simply stating that it might be possible to create is failing to engage; the massive increase in compute power from Babbage to McCarthy didn't give us AGI, because they didn't figure out the right design to reason about anything in even a hundred times a human's energy consumption. If from McCarthy to today we still haven't actually found the proper recipe it just might be worth considering the point the article's making in spite of our other advancements since then.
The vast majority of all deaths in the WW2 were Soviet. The Soviet Union really deserves the gold medal position for winning WW2.
Well it's probably too good to be true.
Because you ask, I'll lay it out in more detail. But it's a general point that might not even apply in these cases (it's only two mod actions and so not a lot of data points) so I don't mean to over-emphasize it:

The two changes you listed and I quoted, while I think they improve the quality of those OPs, resulted from a level of scrutiny that seems higher than what most OPs receive.

Imagine Vim and Emacs users were again at odds. And imagine that Vim users raised every possible objection to Emacs OPs, resulting in a lot of extra scrutiny of the Emacs posts. Even if each mod action was even-handed, overall the actions wouldn't be even-handed between Vim and Emacs.

But as I said, the Gaza war is a very hot topic and extra scrutiny seems like a good idea. Anything that cuts down on unsubstantiated claims seems especially good.
Because they aren't machines, we don't understand how they work and it's very much an open question whether we ever will. OpenWorm tried and failed the get the fully documented behaviours of the C. Elegans nematode (for which we know the complete connectome and the full lineage of every one of the 959 cells of its body) to emerge from simulations of its 302 neurons. We don't understand how an individual neuron works. We don't even understand what an individual neuron really does and the brain contains 100 billion of them. The hubris involved in looking at biological nervous systems and thinking "how hard can it be? Give me a big data centre and 5 years!" is staggering.
Korean Revised Romanization [1] also went forward with a similar logic two decades ago. It slightly prefers simpler rules for native speakers over the phonological accuracy, and it was a reasonable choice in my opinion.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Romanization_of_Korean
The corpo leeches collectively caught on to this interpretation of manager/leader long ago, and subjugated these ideals for their own, sad, status-quo maintaining goals...
Extremely fair. #2 is a tricky one. On one hand, I know a few executives who genuinely have some demonstrable area of expertise that isn't related to technology. On the other hand, an executive whose area of expertise always seems to be "It's in things that are impossible for you to understand" is unfalsifiable from my viewpoint. I err on the side of caution until they do something that simply can't be explained away... like scheduling a four hour meeting to say nothing as the outcome of a six month process.
Is the integrity at risk from allowing difficult controversial subjects? Or from prohibiting them?
There's no ambiguity: in Hepburn, Konan is always "Ko-nan", you'd need to write it Kon'an if you wanted "Kon-an". Which is also unlikely in Japanese, unless you're writing about root vegetable safety 根案 or something.

If anything, using stress marks would be worse, because Japanese is (slightly) tonal and accents are on rare occasion used to mark them: háshi vs hashí.
Thank you for the reply, and sorry for my delayed response.

I actually meant being in VATSIM from the ATC side of things, not as a pilot! (Since the ATC side is all volunteers as well.) You seem to be describing how a pilot would be on VATSIM... though then again, maybe that's how a lot of ATC personnel get involved?
WHat a strange piece of writing.

"Planes and Cars today fundamentally use the same technology we had for almost decades, henceforth ...."

The real question to ask is "does AGI matter"
Isn't fake everything on the rise, because that's OpenAI's business model?
If with each step we are halfway closer to the goal of AGI, how long before we get there ?
IT is now https://github.com/yashg/AuthWin
Source - https://github.com/yashg/AuthWin
Indeed. Zone of Interest is a very impressive film that really explores the idea of ignoring politics.
Predictions aren't worth much without a bet, but I think the tech will plateau in the next decade, for several years or more, just like it has in the past

One main reason is that I think people underestimate how much work OUR brains are doing when we interact with LLMs. It seems like the initial "wow" has worn off for many people, but definitely not everybody.

For coding, people will get stuck in loops, trying to get LLMs to modify LLM-generated code

And I think the market will cool down, which seems inevitable considering Nvidia's stock price (I'm a shareholder), and the fact that they seem to be the only ones really making money

If you compare Google after 8 years (2004) to OpenAI after 8 years (2023), the business is uh very different
What a wild story...it's crazy to think that we have 1080p emulator video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EufWGcflwjQ) without having the underlying rom ever ending up on the internet.
These meat machines aren't necessarily computers, that may be only our best available metaphor (previous metaphors for the brain have I think included telephone exchanges, steam engines and plumbing), and although in principle silicon can simulate anything, in practice not so much: there have been various projects to simulate C. elegans, such as OpenWorm, and they fail because the worm depends on the physics of its environment (possibly including the environment inside the worm) and it's all more subtle than just its nervous system. So yeah, it's reasonable that it might eventually be possible to replicate the human brain in something, once we have the slightest clue how and what.
source: https://twitter.com/amandaaskell/status/1765207842993434880
> The best argument I liked so far to what's happening is that this flooding of Chinese EVs is due to the internal slowdown of EV sales.

They're dumping on external markets. Tariffs will put a stop to this.

We'll likely want tariffs if we want to give our domestic auto manufacturers time to adapt. And domestic automotive industry is important to maintaining a manufacturing base for defensive purposes during wartime.

> They were just busy building inside but now that they need new export markets and have mostly finished building inside, they are looking outward.

Their domestic market is saturated and experiencing economic headwinds.

They're looking for external buyers because their internal economy has slowed. There wasn't enough real domestic consumption to prop it all up.

> They can out build the West, the developing world and India.

For a while. India, Mexico, Vietnam, et al. are ramping up.
It's like to see this (taken from the front page) explained: “Backed by the creator of SQLite.”
Startup Business Models (and How to Choose the Right One) – DigitalOcean
Have been acquired/acquihired a few times. Universal. Some holding company you've never heard of but probably have spent quality alone time on their primary website. Activision. General Electric. Accenture.

The distractedness of the executives is spot on. But it always seems to be in hindsight that we look back and go "huh, funny..." I am sure we could write an inference bot that monitors the calendars of people in the organization and estimates that an acquisition is imminent.

And the security/bug fixing. "Yeah, that bug has been there for three years, nobody has time to fix it." Well, all of a sudden, we are fixing it. And more besides. And the licensing of software and source code. Getting a full run down of every open source license, and I mean _every_ license, and then going back and checking them again. A sudden drive to document everything.

I've also seen the ugly side of acquisition too. An equity claw back that happened to me many years ago that I am still sore about. Sudden acceleration of equity grants and a "re-interpretation of what 'it' means" or extreme scrutiny of whether you actually qualify for the equity in your contract. I've seen a few good people suddenly not get anything because there was a missing signature on a document even though the person had been at the company three years.

Large amounts of acquisition money does strange things to people.
It's こうなん, not こんあん, but apparently the hepburn romanization of こう (and other long vowels within the same morphene) is "supposed" to be represented by the accent macron (like "kō"), according to wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepburn_romanization

Sounds like there's variation here, however -- see the picture of the railroad sign in the wikipedia article, which is a mishmash of different approaches.

I don't tend to dwell on romanization of words, because I just go to hiragana when there's doubt (which was my point).
I mean it probably helps that few, if any Japanese sounds are alien to English speakers. I've studied some Japanese, been several times, can't remember any sounds that were particularly difficult (whereas Japanese speakers definitely struggle with some English sounds, like "th" and "l").

There are intonation aspects that are hard for (native) English speakers, and the syllable speed is higher than English, but the basic sounds are straightforward to grasp.
As a native USA, english speaker, I come across this usage enough that it was familiar and not out of place.

The second noun definition[1] and first verb definition[2], but only after expansion, google gave me[3] match.

The second verb definition[4] on merriam-webster.com, similar on dictionary.com, second noun definition on cambridge.org, but mostly missing, in an example but not definition for some reason, in the verb section.

[1] the point from which an activity or process is directed, or on which it is focused.
"the city was a center of discontent"

[2]occur mainly in or around (a specified place).
"the mercantile association was centered in northern Germany"
have or cause to have (a specified concern or theme).
"the case centers around the couple's adopted children"

[3] https://www.google.com/search?q=define+center

[4] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/center#dictionary...
to give a central focus or basis
centers her hopes on her son
the plot was centered on espionage
Is that better or worse than saying every one is „Vice President of“?
I think their strategy was always to dominate EV exports, it’s just that until now their supply was mostly eaten up by internal demand. They do need to pay attention to their margins though, if they aren’t high enough this won’t be sustainable (and ya, tariffs).

China is hitting that demographic cliff much quickly than Japan did, so I wonder what that will mean in a decade or two. Maybe they will turn more attention to robots next.
Everybody said the exact same thing while I was busy writing it out. Neat.
One road one belt was a political decision to have more influence.

In terms of what rails transport can process versus container ships, it's barely useful.

They downsized one road one belt loans to a minimum last years. Most likely because countries can't afford those predatory % ( the details are also not open).

The years that China had "interesting" growth are over. Perhaps EV's, who knows.
I think we've way over done the 'general intelligence' part of AI already, that is already 'super general intelligence'.

What's lacking is agency/autonomy. I have a bad feeling even 'general autonomy' will take a fraction of the power we're already using which means 'super autonomy'... is probably already possible.

Which means ASI soonish.. which leads to uncontrolled ASI either deliberately or accidently.. which means.. well it's out of our hands at that point. Anything can happen.
What about the position of a technical team lead, who sits above 3-7 devs. working together with them but with mandate from The Powers That Be: to actually push back against the grind of moving tickets left to right ASAP, making sane architectural choices instead of "lol msft says we need this", and actually teaching people to write code instead of complexity tarpits?

Highly idealized, but something to aspire to nevertheless.
One thing's for sure, there are now a lot more people looking to make it happen
Surely the fact that "Chinese" (Mandarin, Cantonese, etc) is tonal while Japanese is not is also a factor.
Tariffs only apply to countries that make cars really, so don’t expect Australia to care much if BYD is selling below cost. America and China already have mutual tariffs in each others cars, China has those with most car producing countries (put in place originally and ironically to protect the Chinese car market)
Well that depends. Are you romanizing the word while living in Tokyo or Osaka? :P
Not sure, many booking websites have added a toggle specifically to opt out of those planes
[dupe]

More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39622842
Mercedes sells more cars in China than all of Europe. China is Audi’s biggest market. China is BMW’s biggest market outside of Germany.

So if Europe decides to prevent Chinese EVs from coming into the market, China would do the same for European cars. This is why Chinese EVs are prioritizing Europe over US as a market. Plus the aforementioned fact that Europe wants to move off oil faster than US wants to.
From what I understand, the next step after this is a device that continuously measures ketones as well.

Very interested in that
Not unlike ==> Like
Don't Worry About Donald Trump. Worry About Yourself
Is the license CC 4.0 or one of the older flawed ones?

That part is very important when it comes to CC licenses. Make a mistake in attribution for pre-4.0 CC license and you are open to being sued by the rights holder.

Cory Doctrow has an article about the background and the industry that sprang up to make use of this.
https://pluralistic.net/2022/01/24/a-bug-in-early-creative-c...
Hepburn doesn't use the apostrophe for that. The apostrophe is for words with a glottal stop like ze'tai. Or without an apostrophe as zettai is possible too.
I suspect you are wrong on the first part, at least for large technology companies.
I do agree with the view of what is needed in practice to be a good leader.

However, i think your assumption there is no need to do that is wrong.

Take an area like the bay area - it has about 120k software engineers. This is not a small number.
Even so, most companies the scale/size of Google, Apple, Facebook, etc have, at this point, interviewed 95+% of the bay area SWE population, and most (Apple is the exception here) had done so by the time they were ~10-12 years in existence.
That is a very short time period to go through the available population, and the population does not grow that quickly.

So even if there was zero rampup time, etc, none of which were true, they can't practically afford to churn people as quickly or as randomly as you suggest because they can't replace them fast enough except at very high cost.

If you talk about something that has a much much larger available population, or companies with much smaller need it might be true.
> Why wouldn’t it be eventually possible to replicate them in silicon?

I mean if you simulate all the chemical processes in some being then yeah probably you get close (assuming you get everything right), let’s assume there is no unknown in how the atoms in our bodies interact.

Sounds like an expensive project.

If you are _not_ talking about a perfect emulation/simulation of such a machine, I will pose your question back to you: why _would_ it be possible to do something we don’t know what it is? Seems rather contrived to say “we can do this thing we don’t know what it is”.
Does anyone have the links for the "more information can be found here" and "download instructions here" bits of this?
“Open source” is when sources are open, i.e. available to anyone. That’s literally in the name. FSF/OSI traditionally reassign the meaning in their own scope and have a process of approval, probably for a good reason. Also some people will resist and blame you for being “misleading” with your “open source”. But you definitely can have an open source non-free non-modifyable project. There’s no law of physics which could stop you, nor legal laws which prohibit combining words into meaningful sentences. Just make a proprietary app with all legal remarks and open the sources by publishing them somewhere.
The author mentions a bunch of signs, but he misses the most important one in my opinion. There is really one sign that is the telltale sign of all signs with a much higher degree of accuracy than any of the author's mentioned signs. One person is the indicator. It's not the CEO. It is the CFO. Why? When an acquisition is about the happen, the CFO is sent scrambling to ask the founders, accounting, lawyers, and all others involved for many pieces of information about the company's financials. The acquiring company is doing due diligence during this period and needs this information from the company being acquired. The CFO gets put into a mad scurry and a fire is lit under his ass to get everything done on time, accurately. If you see your CFO is more anxious and much busier than usual, asking everyone who has information for information, there is usually something going on.