skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Scylladb people boast being better than Cassandra in terms of compute efficiency, so it can be worth a try if it saves cost.
They’re pretending that an LLM recognizing patterns that exist in reality reflects a problem in its training data. So much of the conversation around “reducing bias” really means intentionally introducing biased data to “socially engineer” LLMs (and by proxy their users) so that they have a less accurate picture of reality.
..powered by cellular automata!
No real way to guarantee though you can go to great lengths to reduce the chance it happens.

Because it gets decrypted at some point.
OpenAI isn't free either way, they don't let you do porn etc with their models.
Previously discussed here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37152978 last year, but there's been a update and link changed (see https://web.archive.org/web/20240130043828/https://bellard.o...).
Even in large orgs, devs have so many different responsibilities, I just cannot see them be able to do their job if limited to working on tickets only.

This seems like outsourcing sweatshop kind of practice.
I'm not familiar with the articles but where I live it wouldn't be surprising for an elderly person to have a million dollar home and not much free cash, since they bought and paid it off decades ago. So that is 'wealth' but not easily accessible as 'money'.
Better yet, imagine AI bots writing bullshit articles about AI bots...
You can't encrypt all your data at all times. It has to be decrypted somewhere along the line to be used, and hackers can gain that access as well unless the security is truly extremely tight.

Security is not anywhere close to "good" in most corporate environments however, and many things are still stored in plaintext that should not (e.g. passwords), let alone data that is merely "private".
I actually got my break in tech through a program Accenture ran called the Veteran Technology Training Program. It was essentially a partnership with Udacity where they sponsored veterans through a 12 week Java course. At the conclusion of the training, they ran me through a series of interviews and extended a job offer. I ended up doing systems analysis work for them, which was a nice introduction to the field, especially considering my military occupation was infantry--not exactly tech-adjacent. After a few years of programming in my spare time and building up a portfolio, I got an opportunity at another company to do web dev, which I've been doing since.

I think it's pretty cool to see this acquisition happen. I can't speak for what Udacity has become since 2015 (when I went through the course), but it definitely benefited me.
Or simply make exchanging bitcoin for anything of value illegal. It makes extortion of all kinds too easy, and company data is just the tip of the iceberg.

I was in Italy recently, and saw articles about the epidemic of kidnappings there in the 70s. It won't be long before organised crime figures out how to use crypto to bring back the glory days.

Killing bitcoin would shut down an enormous illegal economy overnight. And stop the crazy electricity consumption at the same time. Maybe you can help me here, but I'm having difficulty thinking of a single real downside.
When I saw "n" in the title I assumed they wanted something that worked reasonably for large n. Rejection is no good because of the notorious "curse of dimensionality". So my idea was to choose a suitable distribution on the radius, then draw from it and choose the angles at random (not sure what those angles are called). You might have to delete the point at the center for that to work.
I find it humorous that Trump claims to be so rich but can't somehow find his own money to spend. Neither of them is good about paying bills anyway.
Depends if the balls are placed back or not. Similar to cards, any game which never replenishes the deck and lets you draw all the cards down to the last one lets the last pick (but not the prior ones) be non-random.
I think we're looking at things in a similar way. The key point of differences I think are:

1. Car repairs are capex, even if their exact timing is unexpected.

2. When it comes time for a car repair, you may not have time to apply for a loan specifically for that purpose. In that case, a credit card is a reasonable choice.

Perhaps car repair costs are predictable over 1 year, but not over 1 month.

It's sad that:

- many people can't distinguish between using debt to fund an investment in the future, and using it to fund current expenditure

- many people in the US live in places that aren't dense enough to make public transport viable
> It only seems to run Android apps compiled for x86

You can run ARM apps as well using libhoudini. Checkout: https://github.com/casualsnek/waydroid_script

> I haven’t tried it on WSL2, but it seems like a practical approach without reliance on Microsoft

Waydroid won't work on WSL2 as the kernel provided by MS doesn't have binder driver.
Sorry to jump to conclusions!

How did the export go?

Gotta find a new home for years of data as well.
> It's not unexpected because you're checking your statement summaries when they arrive and being notified of transactions as they happen. Right?

Do you design your software assuming users always do things in a well thought out, fully rational and responsible way? If so, I'd love to hear how that works out! :)
Bad idea to guarantee the improbable (deleting their own copies), a valid choice for a one-time result (unlocking your data on your device).
The transition from incandescent to LED lighting, perhaps?
WebTV founder Steve Perlman went on to fund OnLive [0], one of the early video game streaming startups that later went bankrupt. Some ex-OnLive, ex-WebTV employees went on to start Google's Stadia which was axed because, 10 or so years later, there was still no market for video game streaming.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnLive
I'm sure Musk wants his money too.
For CPUs it also happened when we moved to mobile devices, like phones and laptops.
> everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it's totally OK to not share the science...

everyone... except scientists and the scientific community.
Whether it is Elon or Altman that controls it has nothing to do with how open or not openAI is. And it has become very clear that OpenAI is nothing but Microsoft in a trenchcoat.

No matter his motives, I applaud this lawsuit. Who cares if his talk doesn't match his action? His action, here, is good.
> And whoever does that inevitably will have to copy SwiftUI directly or alienate the people who actually know Swift.

I may be wrong, but I don’t think this is actually true. SwiftUI isn’t universally loved in the community, largely thanks to its rough edges and how it struggles with that last 10% of polish in projects written with it. While copying SwiftUI wouldn’t necessarily be wrong per se, you’d actually probably get more rapid buy-in by copying “boring” old imperative UIKit, as that’s what most writers of Swift are using.
A decade? That's nothing. macOS had a compositor 22 years ago, and Wayland still isn't as good. A bunch of unpaid amateurs just isn't good at moving humanity forward. At least the Linux kernel has some truly paid contributors; the talent bar is higher there. Apple software is a grand architected cathedral; most open source software is accreted, like a stalagmite.
How do they plan to monetize it? How many people will pay for Search? Will they have an ad-supported version? If so how would their direction be any different when they face the same problems?
Get a burner phone without a SIM and leave it at work.
> That's objectively BS and 100 % skill issue on your side.

Why so aggressive?
>> This is not a problem in need of a solution. You both seem like really talented guys, and it's depressing that this is what you've decided will help make the world a better place.

>> That you're part of the YC24 cohort says a lot about what's wrong with the tech industry's priorities right now

Couldn't agree more, it seems that there's a big disconnect of what startups are getting founded and what would actually change the future.

Personally this ranks somewhere in-between web 3.0 and generic AI <feature>.
Most credit card interest rates are far, far higher than student loans?
Oh, I read that as if it was the founding stage, not 2 years later. Yeah I agree it puts things in perspective a bit.
Oh… he’s right.
> the opposite of the original intent

Agreed, I see this occur over and over, what seems like reasonable or good intervention often backfires in the most unexpected ways.
> Nice, we'll be able to consume the Earth's resources even faster. Congrats everyone!

That isn't a worldview, it's a drive-by troll comment intent on inciting people.

It adds nothing to the discussion.
> Suburbia and cars were massively subsidized by the government and have a very high cost for society.

Yes, and you can probably predict my opinion of those subsidies.

So I'm not sure why you strawman me to be in favour of suburbia, or subsidies for suburbia?

(Btw, I think we should shift more of the funding for roads onto usage fees for them. Ie toll roads. The technology for road usage tracking has become a lot better and cheaper in the last few decades.)

> I don't want to tell people what to do, but if a damaging thing is subsidized, suggesting that subsidizing something else might be better isn't much of a stretch.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just drop both subsidies.

It's the same thing with free trade: unilateral free trade is optimal, no matter whether the other guys insists on damaging their own economy with protectionism. So mutual 'trade agreements' are useless. (Or should be.)
> Now you might ask, why PAM3 and not PAM4? With 4 levels you can transfer 2 bits, and that seems much easier to work with. Well, it's because we hate ourselves, and we hate you. That's why.

> For context, a GDDR6 channel uses 16 DQ (data) pins + 2 EDC (Error Detection/Correction) pins and 16 transfers for 256 data bits and 32 CRC bits transaction. GDDR6X (from my understanding) does the same thing, but since it's PAM4, it sends 2 bits per transfer with (I think) half the number of transfers.

GDDR6X did not transfer 2 bits at a time despite being PAM4, because they disallowed transitions between the lowest voltage and the highest voltage.

Because of that each group of 4 symbols has 139 easily-stackable sequences, so they went with 7b4S.

https://research.nvidia.com/publication/2022-04_saving-pam4-...

I couldn't tell you how each transaction is laid out.
Privacy is important to protect people's liberty and is important in itself. I don't think it's worth throwing away. Lots of intimate information is on and can be derived from tax returns.
I haven't seen most of the issues you describe, but I do know that AA is incredibly finicky with the quality of cable you use. When I first bought my car I would use a random cable from Amazon and Mazda's infotainment would straight up crash (can't blame that part on AA though). Mazda's infotainment is pretty notorious for being terrible; that it takes so long to connect (and get past the safety disclaimers EVERY SINGLE TIME) is truly annoying. I will say that I just bought a wireless AA dongle off Amazon and since I got that it's a lot more reliable because I'm not swapping cables all the time, though my Mazda still will take a while to connect to AA, then start playing my phone music, then switch back to radio for now apparent reason. It feels like the two subsystems are competing.
A bunch of what you wrote isn't accurate..

Here's the 2020 990 which shows the first 5 years of the org's existence (including the time at question for this suit): https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/810861541_202012_990_...

Page 15 is Schedule A Pt 2 which shows the total contributions by year. They did indeed raise ~$133M over that time frame. Row 5 shows the contributions from any 1 person who contributed more than 2% of their total funding (this excludes other nonprofits) -- so the $41M there is definitely Musk. So his share was only ~30% of the total and the other 70% was public support which you can confirm in Section C at the bottom of that page.

"Public support" includes other nonprofits - and it's fine of e.g. Musk 'laundered' other funding via a DAF or something at a different nonprofit since the funds belong to that nonprofit and they have ultimate discretion over the grant.
With Google, they intentionally bloat their OS/app updates so that users are eventually forced to upgrade for decent performance again.
> However, you had space. Your own space

No. By definition, if you were a serf, you didn't have your own space. You had a space in your lord's space, which you weren't allowed to leave, and you had a lot of work. The idea that medieval peasants had more time off than moderns is bullshit, by the way: People did hard work mainly for the privilege of probably not being killed in the immediate future. And if a war rolled in, if you weren't conscripted to die in an army you'd be starved and raided by armies that "foraged" primarily by stealing from peasants.

And that's assuming you somehow avoided disease. Don't step on any sharp rocks, kids, sepsis is a slow and lingering death.
Doesn't appear to work in Firefox on Android either.
Code Is Leverage
Yes!! I recently found a 12% overall latency win (_much_ higher in just the datetime code I changed) at $WORK replacing some of the native datetime conversions with something more intelligent, tailored to the specific <redacted work stuff> context at hand.
agree, this seems like a super bitchy kind of he-said-she-said cat fight and the update doesn't make any meaningful contribution other than 'no you didnt!! See, I have emails to prove it!'.

Yeah yeah, put it in the court documents if it's relevant.

This is drama for drama's sake / PR positioning for ??? reasons (someones ego).

I thought OpenAI was playing the 'we're grown ups' game now?

...guess not.
About two decades ago when I was a young programmer C was used as an example of a functional programming language because functions are first class citizens.

But according to interviews I’ve had in the last decade I guess functional programming actually means languages with a pattern matching syntax and immutable data types.
That's typically what backups are for. No business should be so negligent as to ever need to pay a ransomware group in order to get their own data back.
I see. It almost seems to be starting to make sense. That even brings clarity to:

"But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program..."

No matter how you distribute them, they never formed a "work based on the Program" anyway so the GPL doesn't spread.

If all that's correct, it seems to leave a loophole that I mentioned where you can fork the original program to make it specially compatible with your proprietary program and redistribute it under the GPL. Now when you combine them you're not modifying it because you (or your friend if need be) did that before you obtained it and the modification is none of your business.
> The Dart compiler knows if I do a null-check, it can treat following references as safe, instead of if let x = x etc.

Does Dart bind a new variable 'x' for the if-statement scope or does the if-statement scope refer to the same 'x' from the outer scope?

The reason Swift and other languages bind a new 'x' variable (if let x = x) is because the original 'x' can be assigned a different value elsewhere, like in another thread or a closure. If a closure captures and assigns null to 'x' and there is only one binding of 'x', then that means the 'x' within the if-statement will become null _post null-check_ which is type unsound. I believe TypeScript has this "problem" as well.
Datalog is great, but you don't need it. You can have relations as datastructures in more conventional languages and still reap many benefits.

I programmed professionally in a system that was a dialect of Haskell that had relations as a standard library data type. Expressing business logic in them was very pleasant.

I've also toyed around with adding relations to Python; that also worked just fine. (My toy library wasn't very fast: all operations were implemented naively. But it was still expressive.)
Asymmetric encryption is very computationally expensive - there's a reason that it's typically only feasible to use for signing a hash or as part of a key exchange to agree upon a shared symmetric key.
A Tale of Two Airstrips
I agree but the government could try and solve this problem at the source by mandating the teaching of personal finance in public schools. It may not actually do much good, but we should at least _try_ it.

Then again, the federal government is rarely successfully at addressing problems at their source so I won't hold my breath.
Yeah seems pretty cut and dry. It'd feel pretty bad to see OpenAI doing what they're doing now after saying things like "My probability assessment of OpenAI being relevant to DeepMind/Google without a dramatic change in execution and resources is 0%."
Off topic: isn't "uniformly random" a contradiction of terms?
Your boss either doesn't pay as much attention as you think or you should consider getting a new boss if possible. Life is too short to not indulge on curiosity.
So Kreb's comments and a bunch of others so far talk about "don't trust criminals" and "no honor amongst thieves" etc, but putting aside the atrocious moral angle musing on this a bit I think there's a broader point that applies to legal communities as well, which might be something along the lines of:

>Beware the change from an ITERATED prisoner's dilemma game to a SINGLE game.

Or perhaps alternatively to remember the difference between a "salary" and an "exit". Particularly when there is a long history of iteration people have gotten used to. The interesting HN discussion that comes most immediately to mind was last year's implosion of Silicon Valley Bank and the Stratechery article [0] about it. Classic game theory points to major differences in any ecosystem where the players are playing iterated vs single games. Iterated games encourage thinking about the longer term health of the overall ecosystem, not burning bridges, etc. The optimal strategy isn't pure defection but more cooperate+punishment.

However, the ransomware ecosystem, like the startup ecosystem, seems to have followed an arc from small to large where the amounts of money start to pass an inflection point where they hit "set for life with a single payday" amounts. Ie, groups can chase "unicorns", hit one, and then at least from a pure economic standpoint potentially burn all bridges and reputation and be done forever. That in turn pushes towards short term thinking and extracting maximum value as fast as possible even at the cost of future returns.

It being a black market certainly accelerates this further, because a lot of traditional controls to help push more towards iteration (from information symmetry to flat out physically coercive criminal punishment). But at least in terms of idle hot take contemplation, it seems to me there are parallels in a lot of different industries through history.

So yeah don't pay ransomware anyway due to it funding a host of evils, encouraging more, governments should punish companies that do etc. But from a pure cold realpolitik standpoint it's perhaps also worth thinking about what the person on the other side can do afterwards. If a company is effectively paying them a "salary" class money, as if it was a $1000/hour pen tester, so a 100 hours of work attack is $100k, they may be more likely to be treating it as a "job" where they'll be doing it again and again. Which is bad here, but also perhaps more reliable, they have reputational skin in the game and an interest in the "health of the ransom ecosystem". But if the company is paying them "founder exit" class money, tens of millions of dollars, the odds of someone being ready to take the money and run, and having the amounts needed to make that possibly work, are probably going to be higher?

Anyway just interesting to think about a bit.

----

0: https://stratechery.com/2023/the-death-of-silicon-valley-ban...
That's funny, because I thought it sounded a little too romantic in the other direction. Perhaps Australian family farms aren't old enough to count as peasantry, but from what I remember the men and women who worked then spent less time complaining about being enpeasanted and having big hands, and more about perfidious farm gate prices and not being able to take a holiday in three years because there wasn't anyone they trusted to run a dairy.
No Flesh Shall Be Spared – Remembering 'Hardware'
> Distros have system package managers that are checked by the distro maintainers. And by definition you trust the maintainers of your distro.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Most C/C++ software in business use isn't pulling its dependencies from distro PMs, it's pulling them from some monstrous dark web of Visual Studio projects and opaque git repos. And on the other hand, Rust software that's distributed in distro PMs uses distro dependencies like any other package. Equally, as you note, the reverse exists. None of this tells us very much about Rust or C/C++ as languages.

> Rust projects tend to statically link random code from hundreds of dependencies nobody ever reads

'Tend to' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence, and doesn't seem to be based on very much more than 'I saw it a few times'. Well, I've seen my share of nightmarish C++ dependency trees. Is that a good argument against C++? Not really.

You're picking up on real issues - unnecessary and untrusted dependencies - except you're then erroneously drawing some imagined line in the sand where Rust bad and C/C++ good, which is where a rational argument seems to collapse into vibes. On the whole, there's a lot more C++ projects out there guilty of this than Rust projects.

> Sure, you can do it right with Rust. But you can also write good code with C/C++.

You can hammer a nail with a broom, but that doesn't make it the best tool for the job. The safety advantages of Rust can't just be hand-waved away. C is a fine programming language when safety is less of an issue. If you're writing a Nintendo emulator, sure, C, why not. If you're writing business logic that handles health data, maybe not.
Well, std::list is something you can create with C++ code (and likely is in most implementations of C++?), it doesn't need any special support. So I can see why someone might not treat std::list as any more special than a tree datastructure supplied by a different library?

However, algebraic data types really make your life easier, and more languages should have them.
> shut down an enormous illegal economy overnight.

Despite not owning any Bitcoin, I find it quite comforting to know that there is a currency that exists outside of the purview of a central bank or a government that can devalue or outright take the accruement of my labor on a whim.
I and shinokaro maintain a working fork at https://github.com/Largo/ocran/
No snark intended. If you're software engineer with tight schedule due to young kids or ill family member or whatever, but you still want to slowly move the needle when it comes to career and your own knowledge then you don't "gravely" need the algo book, but you would benefit from reading one, it's just a question of what will give you the best ROI (ROI here being both financial but also personal satisfaction etc).

English is my second language so my thoughts often come across differently than intended - thank you for replying instead of just down voting
"Free as in beer" : I doubt anybody is expecting OpenAI to give away their work for free or give free credits/tokens forever. Even when they do, it is no different from a free tier of any other *closed* commercial products.

"Free as in speech" : I'm not sure which part of openAI's actions show commitment to this part.