skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I could not agree more! Python in particular, is so painful to work in, and the addition of insult to injury of other Python people definitely gets under my skin. I think one of the most disappointing realizations I've had is the truth in "the best product doesn't win," which is especially apparent when it comes to programming languages.

I've been doing Elixir for several years and have tried to get others excited about it, and the frustrating chicken and egg problem of "there's not a good pool of programmers to hire or ecosystem of libraries" often seems to kill it in its tracks. Especially painful when it comes to machine learning where Python has de-facto won.
Apple Stores Now Stock 14-Inch M3 MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM
Start here? https://computerhistory.org/
No, reversible abstractions are just one kind of abstraction. For instance, a machine code sequence to a linear sequence of assembly instructions is a reversible abstraction. Not every machine code sequence is expressible as a linear sequence of assembly instructions, but every linear sequence of assembly instructions has a trivial correspondence to a machine code sequence.

However, consider the jump to a C-like language. The key abstraction provided there is the abstraction of infinite local variables. The compiler manages this through a stack, register allocation, and stack spilling to provide the abstraction and consumes your ability to control the registers directly to provide this abstraction. To interface at both levels simultaneously requires the leakage of the implementation details of the abstraction and careful interaction.

What you can do easily is what I call a separable abstraction, a abstraction that can be restricted to just the places it is needed/removed where unneeded. In certain cases in C code you need to do some specific assembly instruction, sequence, or even function. This can be easily done by writing a assembly function that interfaces with the C code via the C ABI. What is happening there is that the C code defines a interface allowing you to drop down or even exit the abstraction hierarchy for the duration of that function. The ease of doing so makes C highly separable and is part of the reason why it is so easy to call out to C, but you hardly ever see anybody calling out to say Java or Haskell.

Of course, that is just one of the many properties of abstractions that can make them easier to use, simpler, and more robust.
You forgot that Tampermonkey itself is an extension and has the same problems that you mentioned
So you claim they also made up all the photos of that journalist training on an ATGM?
https://twitter.com/AvichayAdraee/status/1756728159158812921
What? They only get package and stability because they include the runtime. If they just went with a compiled language they could distribute native binaries and have actual packaging and stability.
I don't. I barely have a need to print to begin with but just enough that I have a printer. Printers aren't continually iterating in what and how they can print so I can survive on 10+ year old printers.
The potential fines aren’t peanuts. From memory, they are up to like 12% on global annual revenue (not profit), or something.
Hardware enclaves are never 100% impenetrable, it comes down to making the cost of attack greater than what an attacker expects to gain. Traditional card payment terminals use nominally secure hardware and yet struggle with that tradeoff to this day, and I'm not convinced WorldCoin will do any better.

The SoC they're using, the Jetson Xavier NX, is a cousin of the very thoroughly pwned (secure enclaves and all) TX1.

Further, they don't describe how the busses connecting the sensors to the SoC are encrypted and/or authenticated, which leads me to believe that they are not.

Intel gave up on shipping SGX in consumer devices because (imho) shipping secure enclaves directly to "adversaries" (the consumer being an adversary under the SGX threat model) proved too difficult to maintain.
> It also makes me think that if most of the applications I have worked on haven't been attacked and easily exploited is because honestly nobody bothered.

This is my view of the things I create as well, and the fact they are not released to the public and are not generally public facing. Building internal tools does have a bit of freedom. However, I do things to the best of my knowledge "best practice" and don't intentionally do stupid things just because. But it is rather reassuring knowing that it's not that exposed to show how small "best of my knowledge" really is
s/SwiftUI/UIKit, doesn't matter. (though I'm happy to have someone else point out SwiftUI has...some growing pains...it would have felt unfair for me to do so)

Point is its DOA for UI on non-Apple platforms.

Either you:

- attract current Swift programmers and keep up with $APPLE_UI_FRAMEWORK with no assistance.*

- attract no one and make a brand new framework in Swift.

- bind to some other UI framework, alienate current Swift programmers*, get all the people who have been dying to write Swift yet didn't build a UI framework for 7 years

There's just no universe where using Swift to write UI on non-Apple platforms makes sense to any constituency. You have to be simultaneously obsessed with Swift and don't care about platform-first UI, or want to maintain two separate UI frontends.

I hate being that absolutist, but that is what 16 years of experience on Apple platforms has taught me.

I'm surprised by the # of people arguing there's a possibility something else coudl work. I guess what I'd say is, if there is, where is it? Swift was on Linux eons ago, I believe before I started at Google so 7+ years.

* People used to try this to do iOS/OSX cross-platform, those projects are dead. One could argue this is just because Catalyst exists. Sure, but, let's just say you need at least N / 2 engineers, where N = the number of engineers Apple has on an arbitrary UI framework, in order to keep up with it. That's a lot.

** I've been in Apple dev since iPhone OS 2.0, and while in theory this could work, in practice it doesn't. Ex. Qt won't appeal to Apple programmers. It's antithetical to community values.
Well you’re right. There’s a super small highly political motivated group of people who will celebrate the deaths of Russian journalists.

The vast majority of people don’t
> Didn't keep going.

Hence your confusion. Read the footnotes. The 1.5 is actually > 2 if you fulfill the criteria, that's all it depends on. It's not that complicated, you just need to spend more than 30 seconds on researching it if you really want the cash back.

As for the 2.5 one, it's 10k per billing cycle, I believe. That's a $120k/year limit... if you're putting that much, well, you're in the minority, so to speak.
It isn't lmao. I've always seen people say pretty much what they want on Twitter unless it was super bigoted and even those posts were allowed at times. The only different is nazi content and that's a fact. Hence the reason why most of the banned users with the most followers were literally nazi/extremist users.
to be clear this isn't reversing T2 diabetes. Rather, it allows you to manage it. But the physical damage causing T2 diabetes generally remains
I am not in puter team, so I may not know some details.

But.

I don't really care how sign-in is implemented. If it is a popup, but simple for the user - that is ok for me. Probably they will change how it works in the feature because they Puter team was listening for my feedback with puter.js SDK.

Right now, I don't pay Puter. As I understand their long-term plan, eventually, they will monetize the users directly, for example, users will pay for bigger cloud storage.

For now, I don't have access to users. But I already spoke with Puter team about, and they told me they will have a full user management dashboard.
> The phrase doesn't mean what the author intends

Perhaps dramatically ironic, but this is precisely the kind of thing that a LLM would help with. The opening paragraph uses "from scratch" which is a more appropriate choice also.
It's not weird in the sense that people are known to trick other people into opening the browser's JS console and pasting various things they don't understand. Things like "open Facebook then open the console and paste this to see whether your crush is stalking your profile" and people would actually do that. Of course the pasted script actually exfiltrates to the attacker a bunch of your private information.
> As much as I love terminal, its just so limiting when it comes to browsing and filtering through more content.

What terminal-based tools are you thinking of when you say this? Just tail/grep/less?
Polite way to say that. Self-preservation almost always outweighs transparency regardless of the whether the truth is good or bad
How to argue for something without any scientific evidence
> Companies are totally allowed to have no conscience

I don't think companies are going to form a conscience any time soon.

We need to deal with the fact that they're best viewed as being inherently sociopathic and regulate them effectively.
Great too see you on here. Love Latent Space podcast.
It's not that actively moderated. dang uses a pretty light hand here.
I have better life expectancy then them.
If the law permits thousands of innocents to be slaughtered, then maybe it needs to change.
> It is the first and foremost goal of every language choice in rust.

It ... just ... isn't, though.

I mean, I get what you're saying, it's certainly foundational, Rust would look incredibly different if it weren't for that goal. But it just isn't the case that it is "the first and foremost goal of every language choice in rust".

I followed the language discussions in the pre-1.0 days, and tons of them were about making it easier and more ergonomic to create correct-if-it-compiles code, very often in ways that had zero overlap with safe memory usage.

Traits don't "muddy that goal", they are an important feature of the language in and of themselves. Same thing with the way enums work (as arithmetic data types), along with using Option and Result for error handling, rather than exceptions. Same thing with RAII for tying the lifecycle of other resources to the lifecycle of values.

The memory safety features interact with all these other features, for sure, and that must be taken into account. But there are many features in the language that exist because they were believed to be useful on their own terms, not in subservience to safe memory usage.

And it's not just about "providing types and generics to the language", it's a whole suite of functionality targeted at static correctness and ergonomics. The ownership/lifetime/borrowing system is only one (important!) capability within that suite.
When it comes to international law, i think human rights groups are more like the "prosecuter" than a neutral party. They have an interest in this conflict that is not the same as Israel's.

When HRW says Israel is bad, i think its a bit like when a cop says the person they arrested is bad. It may very well be true, but i wouldn't put it as a sure thing until some sort of trial is done.

P.s. in regards to "porportionate" - keep in mind that has a special definition in international law that is different from how people use it in normal conversation.
I think it’s a great idea, but what kind of file size range should I expect?
No. I'm declaring that you either can't read or don't understand that there's a difference between "gen AI" and LLMs. LLMs generate text. They don't generate images. Are you just a troll or not actually reading my messages? The question you're replying to asked about LLMs. I don't understand what's so difficult about this.
That's absolutely not a reasonable comparison.
First of all, it's very hard to make a printout that looks like the real thing to a camera. Images stored on a computer capture a lossy representation of what the camera actually "saw".

Secondly, I believe that the protocol is based around the idea that the operator is trusted, i.e., they won't allow such uses of the orb. If an operator isn't trustworthy, I guess there needs to be a way to revoke the validity of all their scans.
An analogy is an abstraction, and abstractions leak.
I do this with just a prompt setting context of the meeting if we have it, explaining this is a spoken meeting between n people, and asking to correct based on the entire context, acutally works decently out of the box.
Nope, annoying forced update stuff goes in my trash. Already said bye bye to Windows for this reason. If your thing is gonna update itself, it can't disrupt me or make itself worse.
> how can you be sure that alternative app stores won’t just be booted off by Apple for $REASON?

The EU law allows for consumers to sideload other app stores on hardware they control. It has no provision that compels Apple to continue doing business with a company in their own app store.

Yes, it is a business decision you need to make to offer a sideload app store and opt-out of the Apple app store. Does it suck for Epic? Yes. But this is the path they chose.

Edit: If you read the Apple letter Epic cites it refers to App Store Review Guidelines, clearly they are terminating an App Store developer account. Nothing stops Apple from minting a fresh Developer Account with only Marketplace capabilities if they apply for a Marketplace account.
It was only faster because of the shorter encoding, something that doesn't matter when the CPU itself is generating the address like on an interrupt. On the 6502, there is a single vector for maskable interrupts, and another for NMI, both of them at the top end of address space.

The 8086/8088 microcode that handled interrupts used a special "segment 0" to provide the address, I don't think it would have been difficult to have some other hardwired value instead of 0. And on later x86 chips there is an actual register for it (IDTR) that can be changed by software - even in real mode, though for reason of backwards compatibility this wasn't usually done.
Kerry is the best. Take us for a spin again and let us know if you're still encountering issues!
Dexcoms also have small cell phone like devices you can use. I've never put a wifi password in I can recall.
Worth noting that you can use "invisible text" to give instructions to LLMs without it showing up in the chat box. So all you have to do is get someone to copy/paste one of those messages into their chat, and there are lots of ways you might be able to do this ("omg I figured out a cool new jailbreak that makes the model do anything you want!"). See here for more details:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39004822

https://twitter.com/goodside/status/1746685366952735034
Yes, mr. President
I thought the same thing at first. Then I realized Google already has this info about me and more. So I just split up my searches between Google, DDG, and Kagi.
Show HN: Elodin – A better framework for physics simulation
Hey HN! We are the co-founders of Elodin (https://elodin.systems/), a code-first physics simulation framework. We just open-sourced our core libraries on Github: https://github.com/elodin-sys/elodin

Have you ever wondered what happens when a satellite is first placed into orbit? It turns out that often, they tumble out of control, end over end, in a miraculous fight against stability. Check out our demo here of a control system attempting to rectify this: https://app.elodin.systems/sandbox/hn/cube-sat

The spacecraft does not appreciate tumbling: deploying solar panels and antennas might not work, and doing anything worthwhile is out of the picture. So what are you to do about this? You'll equip your satellite with reaction wheels (or magnetorquers), but now you have a second problem. What commands do you send to the reaction wheels?

We created Elodin to help solve problems like this. These problems are firmly in the realm of GNC (guidance, navigation, and control) engineers; they are traditionally solved with MatLab / Simulink, a bunch of Python scripts, and/or a tool like Gazebo or Basilisk. While building the flight software for a deep-space mission, I tried all of these tools and didn’t like them. In particular, I found that running Monte Carlo simulations in the cloud was painful.

So we set out to build a better framework for physics simulation. You might call it "Tensorflow for Physics." The name fits for two reasons: we use XLA to accelerate your math, and we've built an extensible framework for creating new physics engines. Most physics engines are fixed-function. For example, something like MuJoCo (https://mujoco.readthedocs.io/en/stable/overview.html) is great for traditional robotics, but GMAT (https://gmat.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/GW/overview) is far better for orbital analysis. No single physics engine can solve all problems, and it’s hard to integrate multiple engines. Our framework allows you to easily compose different physics algorithms.

Space is hard enough—let’s not have software make it harder than it needs to be! We are still early in building our stack, so we’d be grateful to hear any feedback that you have.
Almost, yes, but not quite.

Curation and integration by a trusted party is a valuable service, and I very much appreciate Mozilla, Debian and others doing this work and enforcing their inclusion policy, e.g. the Debian Free Software Guidelines and whatever Mozilla's technical review involves. Debian's onerous rules in particular are great for the user – I can rely on packages to be appropriately licensed, to receive security patches without breaking my system with incompatible changes, to be compatible with the rest of the packages in the distribution, etc.

Some important differences from "marketplaces" provided by various for-profit companies are 1) the user can choose whatever curator they wish, or opt to install whatever they want at their own risk; 2) the service doesn't usually involve payments, selling, shopping, etc. which would usually be associated with a marketplace.
The permissions to run scripts in the context of a webpage (i.e. full access, what tampermonkey does) are gated on a per-site level.

E.g. here's the "bypass paywalls" extension requesting permission to inject content scripts into particular domains sites: https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome/blob/c6...
> The thing that gets most on my nerves is the ridiculous "protecting users security and privacy".

There's a distinction between "secure for users by default" and "secure from users"

Apple (and Apple fans) really like to muddy the two.

You can build a perfectly secure ecosystem by default... that still has an escape hatch (covered with warnings) that the user retains the right to use.

Apple chose in its mobile ecosystem, and continues to choose, not to do this.

Ergo, what they're really in favor of is "security from users"

PS: To head off the 'users are the most insecure part of a system' apologism, (a) we're talking about personal devices, not managed ones & (b) with great power comes great responsibility.
It's a variation on the temporarily embarassed millionaires.

HN is full of temporarily embarassed walled garden magnates.

The say I don't want oligopolies or walled gardens punished because one day I could own a walled garden money making machine!
$2M for your idea with no equity– writing my first SBIR application
Well, we thought we had that. Then came Putin, who wants to go back to the 19th century.
> But anyway I've written Apple out of my life a long time ago.

I love my iPhone and my Mac. They are great devices. I’ve been using Apple products happily despite having pretty few acquaintance with the Apple brand (which I feel incredibly arrogant).

All of those stories about the DMA and the total lack of good faith from Apple when it comes to respect the rules are making me strongly reconsider buying new Apple products in the future. In fact I’m starting to regret my investment in a Air M2 last year because while it’s not new that Apple consider my devices to be their own, they are not even trying to act like it’s not the case anymore. They are actively and publicly fighting against my (their customer) interests.
This if the ToS problem. Tell me, of the many services you use and products you own, how many ToS have you read? 3%? 10%? Probably less than 2%. Changelogs and release notes have the same problem. They take time to create, edit and review and no one who matters reads them. Why would they spend their time on it?
They’ve already approved others for third-party App Store implementations:

https://mastodon.social/@rileytestut/112039139930789909
Technically, if you buy anything in volume from Microsoft, they have the right to audit you: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/licensing/learn-more/complia...
> learning of the technological and bureaucratic obstacles that led to unnecessary mass casualties in the past

Still going on. American firefighters widely use outdated helmets that haven't changed much in two hundred years. https://www.ctif.org/news/texas-joins-other-progressive-us-f...

Europe uses much more modern, safer, lighter ones.
Epic is unable to make their own app store without a developer account.
Sure, that's also a factor but I'd say it reinforces my main point.
Glad someone noticed that
Is there a metric you use for this comparison? Any reason you'd expect Circleback to have context or info that's better then Zoom?
I really think everyone is over estimating how much people know or care about OpenAI or any of the people involved.

Half the country doesn't even understand Instagram is owned by Meta.
That's still the response though. You can simply say "Well, we expect an error rate of X with this new test, so in the absence of other risks factors we predict the actual odds of the condition are Y".

Then you can decide whether a test makes sense or doesn't make sense, given the tradeoffs of radiation and cost vs. the risks of harm.

In the real world, information absolutely can lead to harm, but it's still all in the response and how medicine and patients use information.

But as information gets cheaper and more common we can develop ways of dealing with it. If it was difficult and expensive to test for fever you'd see people in the medical profession warning against it because it could lead to overreaction.
It’s a FAFO suggestion, nothing more, but I have not seen anyone consider (or care?) whether Apple’s EU customers support the various decisions, which is the point that interests me.
> Wondering how this affects Apple employees. Back in the day, working for Apple seemed cool.

Most employees are trying to pay bills and keep ar roof. Especially in today's tech job market, people are trying to avoid getting laid off. Very few people have the luxury of being able to think about apple seeming like a cool place to work or not.

So I would say this doesn't affect most apple employees in anyway.
>especially given how most modern consoles are basically PCs.

people always obsess over the hardware in these arguments when the value is in the software. You probably can eventually run windows on a PS5, but that's not what people buy a PS5 for. They don't advertise it as being able to install whatever OS you want (they made that mistake on PS3, took it back, and then got fined for taking it back), and the value for most customers is playing PS5 games. The onyl non-gaming thing you can do these days on a PS5 is watch streaming services. So at best it's a media center

Just because you can install doom on a pregnancy test doesn't mean a pregnancy test is a general purpose computer.
The science behind Ozempic was wrong. It is more a brain than a gut drug
This actually varies on the control of the situation. If it’s an active battleground due to ongoing hostilities this does not apply and it is considered invaded rather than occupied with different standards.
Greenlight Coverage
This is really gonna put a damper on my hobby of reading the daily admonitions of wannabe CEOs who haven't held a real job in years but insist that all the best collaboration happens around water coolers in offices.

Anyone ever considered building a network attached water cooler with mic and speakers for remote workers?