skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Good suggestion. We do not used the data for training. We will clarify that in FAQ.
Thoughts on Group Dynamics Pt.1
This was the first thing I thought of. Why the heck would the admins read random notes sent by users? Obviously there is the potential for abuse for this kind of service, so from a liability perspective you'd be better of deliberately ignoring all messages.

Or rather, even if the admins were knowingly facilitating crime, from a liability perspective they would be better off reporting/rejecting any users that say they're committing a crime and only do business with criminals smart enough to wink wink nudge nudge.

I can only think of two scenarios where someone would tell a mixer the money is dirty:

1. They are law enforcement

2. They have already been caught by law enforcement and are being used as bait, either knowingly or not
JIT WireGuard
Hopefully a future LLM can illuminate semantic questions.
Thank you, Microsoft, for making this possible!! :-/
> It's biologically the same as meat (unlike all the plant based alternatives)

While I disagree about being same, I agree on it not being a plant based.

> In this way, you get people to become vegan without actually having to make them change their behavior

Why do we have to get people become vegan?
I noticed this most recently when having selected "restart and update" for a system upgrade, and seeing the white apple on a black background with a progress bar, I bumped the play/pause key.

Sure enough, music.app launched in the background somehow and started playing!
Article definitely lacks quality, however I get the idea that GAMM bad open source good
The tool is not perfect. Sometimes it does not fully understand the image content. Also, right now, the image is slightly watermarked, but perfectly fine for using as coloring page.

And it seems personalized coloring page is very popular, we actually just decided to make the coloring pages free of watermarks, as our minor contribution to education. Will change the code to make that happen soon (in a few days).
But what would be your odds of success? ;)
Chatting with Strangers,the Safe Way
We have built a web app which connects people one to one with strangers,But as we chat with strangers people can get exposed to contents that is unsafe,so to keep our users safe we block chats that have unsafe contents by the use of AI.Can i get some feedback on this web app?
link is http://www.relchat.com
Im not a physicist. I am not selling a theory that needs to answer to a simple challenge. Cosmologists are, it is their responsibility. Moreover, if I did, it would be a huge waste of time because dollars to doughnuts I get gatekept and no one believes me, and, if anything it could make challenging the CMB worse because this model gets filed away as "that one crackpot throwawaymaths idea don't listen to it".

Back when I was a hard scientist it was MY responsibility to show that I had done all the controls correctly. And trust me that was hours, weeks of grueling manual labor. A pity if physicists aren't held to the same standard.

Imagine this exchange.

Reviewer: Did you run this control?

Scientist: No, you run it.

Good luck publishing.
it is fine the first 6 months then bore out hits and you will be miserable.
For those lamenting the writing style: I agree that this article could use some editing, but in the same way the author laments the passing of the Unique Web, I too am saddened that an off-beat tech rant like this is hard to find these days in a sea of SEO-optimized or AI-generated content.

I don't necessarily agree with the author's conclusions, but I absolutely loved the writing style here:

Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta (GAMM) now own most of the steel and glass that makes the internet go vroom. Google, Amazon, and Microsoft control seventy-five percent of the cloud computing market. Meta and Google own half of the fiber optic cables supplying internet services across continents. Most of our favorite productivity apps, retail websites, and social media platforms are beholden to proprietary infrastructure controlled by these four corporations. They own the most heavily trafficked server networks, all the GPUs, and gigawatts, and whatever.

They call it the cloud, but really, that’s just the internet.

So, what we know as the cloud doesn’t actually exist. It’s a euphemism that obfuscates the consolidation of critical infrastructure. The cloud is metaphysical porn for wild-eyed technocrats in Allbirds who say things like “I’m making a dent in the universe” without a whisper of irony. It’s bullshit. It’s fugazi. There is no spoon, Neo. The cloud is a lie.
1) Good point about the "Humans in the circuit". I think that when people talk about process manager they are referring to long-standing processes
2) I'll take this to be the frontend part
3) I'll take this to be the database part
4) I'll take this to be one component of the frontend part
5) I'll take this to be tool for designing long-standing processes

So what I gather from your post is that you are describing one class of low-code designs. Maybe in your post the "backend" is within the process manager, but in BPM engines the process manager is actually more complex entity in a system what a "normal" backend would be.

So to me this is a lot more than what I want to focus on, which is the backend part in:

User <---> API <---> Backend (business logic) <---> Database
The parent post never brought up Wayland, and it’s off-topic, but the security of having input only going to specific apps and not every X client is a massive win and one reason I’ve used sway since 2018.
Location: Addis Ababa, ET (CET timezone)
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: Not immediately
Technologies: Typescript, Next.js, React, Node.js(Nest & Express), Spring Boot (Java), TailWind
Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-Fz4RVD_hk4XmXEX5QBIBQSeYmGq_2Ih/view?usp=drive_link
Email:yosephten@gmail.com
Site: https://yoseph-tenaw.vercel.app/
Refusing to humor the claim that digital privacy is even possible in the modern era merely recognizes the existence of mass surveillance.
I really do appreciate the criticism. You're factually correct, of course!

I also see now that statement about means comes off as more definitive than I meant it to be. When I find the time to I will try to soften the wording and make it clear that it's not strictly true.
If the cellular structure is the same, the benefits would be identical. Just because something is traditionally made a certain way doesn't mean it couldn't be made better, as we understand the scientific processes that made them. Flight, for example, comes to mind, where birds traditionally fly but we, having understood aerodynamics at a deeper level, can make planes that fly faster, farther, and longer than birds ever could.
Those coloring books are generated by text prompting. Here we let you create coloring pages from your own photos. Related but different.
The headline is clickbaity of course. It wasn't .NET that was costing him his job, but working in a shitty environment with incompetent management. So essentially, he dodged a bullet.
"Just fire discs" well that's easier said than done, and there's probably a tons of reasons nobody uses discs. One of them is already that we have no experience building or using disc-shaped bullets, especially compared to the trove of experience for... bullet-shaped bullets. So that's not a solution as much as it's an indication that this defense mechanism wouldn't be perfect given an adversary with enough time and will. That being said, nothing is ever perfect, and "arms race" are named this way for this exact reason.
I agree. It’s similar to the discussion of saving emergency by not using AC. No thanks.
> it'll still down your service and damn you to a crashloop.

Nope. Your service will be structured such that it is subdivided in tasks, each task being wrapped in a `catch_unwind`[1], such that a panic merely kills the task it occurs in, not your service.

[1]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/panic/fn.catch_unwind.html
It has to do with that your feet or legs are not super accurate machines that can keep the pedal at 0 regen and 0 acceleration for long enough time.
Why would you disagree that it's the same?

For your second question, you don't have to, of course, but the vegan philosophy is to reduce animal suffering and to improve emissions. If that is something one believes in, it behooves them to make more people follow their tenets.
One of the first things I install on macbooks is this app that prevents iTunes or Apple Music from launching

https://github.com/tombonez/noTunes
It survived for quite a few centuries so maybe that says something about projects that live on despite severe flaws.

San Francisco has its own leaning tower that's costing hundreds of millions in repairs and continues to discover new problems despite being only a little over a decade old, so it's a reminder that even today we sometimes screw things up.

Coincidentally I'm taking a train to Pisa a few hours from now so it'll be nice to see it for myself.
Why would it not be nice to have lower emissions?
Near as I can tell this system/paper/post thing is a hybrid between a database proxy and an (allegedly) strictly serializable log tailer sitting squarely at “CP” in conventional nomenclature, e.g.

https://mark-burgess-oslo-mb.medium.com/using-promise-theory...

I haven’t done heavyweight distributed systems theory in a few years, and so who knows, maybe @aphyr shows up and Jepsen-stamps this thing, but after reading the paper and going over the commercial website personally I’m a pass. I’m one of about a zillion people on HN who have dealt in petabyte and trillion event days on logs as mundane subsystems for years on end and it’s just almost always: “there’s the lock, didn’t see it right away because of the bespoke nomenclature”.

History is replete with misunderstood geniuses who weren’t appreciated because they were so far ahead of everyone else (Galois is my favorite example personally), and we might all end up eating crow over it, but this has a wink and a grin vibe that I’m going to regard as great satire rather than hyperventilating. I suspect the object of the satire would be blockchain.
I've worked pretty extensively with custom low-code stuff, but not for anything particularly technically ambitious.

I use it for simple unambitious systems in room escapes and similar, in situations where you want to be able to monitor the state of a system and make changes on the fly. The low code framework adds lots of debugging, monitoring, and logging hooks.

The system is very explicitly not meant to ever support any real programming.

You can't even create reusable functions, there's just IFTT style rules and Excel inspired =expressions.

Anything beyond that, Python already does, and I don't wanna design a new DIY general language.

I think low-code has a lot of potential, as a way to connect pieces of existing code. Things like VVVV and Excel are really nice.

But when it tries to be as general as code, it has to be careful not to just become.... code. I'll choose the common well known language over the "just right" special purpose language every time.

To me, Excel is the premier example of low-code success. It covers it's range of use cases very well with just a few high level primitives.

The interesting part isn't exactly the language although the way that they have a fairly standard and compatible batteries-included library is nice, it's the premade structure and tools optimized to work with that structure.

It's real "software" not a pure diy software kit.
"It's that, before Tarski and Gödel, no one clearly distinguished syntax and semantics"

I think this is right, but Hilbert came already close much earlier.

But "Before this, logic had been strictly syntactical and proof theoretic" is at
least misleading.

Traditional logic was more conceptional. Frege's "formalism" was a great innovation, but he remained within the conceptual tradition (Frege-Hilbert controversy).

"What Hilbert offers us, in 1899, is a systematic and powerful technique that can be used across all formalized disciplines to do just this: to prove consistency and independence. In doing so, he lays the groundwork, in concert with various of his contemporaries, for the emergence of contemporary model-theoretic techniques."

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frege-hilbert/
I want to see the benchmarks that showed try catch as more efficient. It will certainly be Legendary or WTF category
A model 3 is no heavier than a 3 series.
That sounds a bit like the gambler's fallacy to me.
Thank you guys for your explanation.

From what I understand on this thread, the header of the firmware is 0x400 long. A page can be up to 0x800:

```
int size_to_write = Size > 0x800 ? 0x800 : Size;
```

So it would appear the firmware has a header of 0x400 which is buffered during upload but discarded if the firmware fails the checksum at the end of the upload.
Not sure sorry, I only have nvidia :<
ICLR 2024 Score Distribution
> it becomes incredibly unlikely you are just the worlds luckiest guesser

And yet that is still more likely than the idea that you can predict the future.

In any case, we are not talking about _you_ becoming the world's best guesser, we are talking about _somebody_ becoming the world's best guesser. That is going to be someone, so no need to be surprised when they emerge.
Sorry, but this is a really terribly written story that completely skips over the critical part. One moment they decide to use .NET for a proof of concept, and the very next sentence has a consultant come in to criticize the tons of code that they have already written. One moment the author is apparently driving the team to adopt a new technology, and in the next sentence it is all someone else's fault that the team has used that technology inappropriately by writing clumsy code that goes against the paradigm. He talks about having these double-workstations set up for pair-programming sessions, and yet somehow the team (not org) culture allows a lone developer to create utterly crazy code without anybody else on the team every reviewing or sanity checking it. None of this story adds up. None of this is caused by .NET. The title should be more like "poor leadership allowing my team to shoot themselves in the foot cost me my job."
Botulism is extremely rare, though. According to Wikipedia, it's 145 cases anually in the U.S., and 15% of those are foodborne.

Compare that to millions of cases each year, in the U.S., of foodborne illness, in general.

That's why I'm saying: It's a risk calculation, and government standards on food safety definitely prefer to err on the side of mandating too much processing of food over allowing too much foodborne illness.

Maybe, some of those risk calculations need to be revisited, and there needs to be a societal-level debate about how many cases of tummy-ache we are willing to trade off for how many basis points of cancer risk.

Incidentally, it stands to reason that the same kinds of things we do to kill off pathogens also kill off a lot of the microorganisms that may be useful to the body. To the extent that we're talking about additives, if we ingest them, then it seems likely that they might also kill off (or inhibit the growth of) useful parts of the microbiome already in the body. Of course, all of this I say in a mode of "cocktail party speculation" rather than peer-reviewed science, but there are just tons of unknown unknowns there, when it comes to the microbiome, and it actually offers one possible action mechanism (surely there are more than one), about how exactly it is that relying mostly on highly processed foods would be unhealthy for you.
I see your point, but all those comparisons are quite a stretch. One can care less about naturals diamonds vs lab ones, but for something you consume and something that eventually gonna become building blocks for your body one may exercise different approach.
> why are all of the browser teams who have some of the best C++ developers in the world and significant resources adopting memory-safe languages?

They aren't. Even Mozilla abandonded their Rust-in-Firefox project.
Google's Ban on Election Queries in Gemini AI Sparks Debate
There is also that code no one understands and everyone is afraid to touch : - )
I can't edit anymore so sending a second reply.

That reddit link is actually showing the problem to be worse. It's not that someone forgot, it's that the committee are absolute goddamn clowns.

Incredible.

Since the committee is a reflection of the larger C++ community, it's not even a case of a few bad apples spoiling the bunch, it's more like there are a few really good apples that are being bombarded with fungal spores on a daily basis by the rest.

Their justification for not having .at() makes absolutely no sense! Contracts, had they made it in, would have been for fixing []. Since that didn't happen, .at() was pretty much mandatory to have (and the clowns are adding it in C++26).

Severe attitude problem.
I created this site for more visualization during the paper review. Please let me know your thoughts about it.
Ok cmon be nice it’s hacker news we all hate Boeing here - that’s why we’re Hackers :)

Yeah it’s relative and the line between “large airliners” and “all passenger aircraft” is somewhat arbitrary, I agree. But I stand by the distinction. The market for large airliners is by far the most important market in aerospace, and it has two companies in it, and the one that’s been doing a decade of record cost cutting has way more safety issues than the company that didn’t. I’d love a higher sample size ofc, but as far as clarity goes that’s pretty damning.

Plus what are we fighting about? Whether it’s fair to describe Boeing as being in “not a huge industry”? I mean I’ll just give that one to you lol, I care little about the exact phrasing of that comment. Honestly if it bothers you just drop the whole paragraph!

Big industry or small, I have been informed by trustworthy journalists that this is not usual behavior for an aerospace company. Much less normal for an aerospace company that used to be prestigious for its engineering excellence…
I had no idea about stallman's programmer tax - that actually sounds kind of awesome!

I think that ends up in a situation similar to The sciences - if you want to take on pay as a free programmer, not only does your work need to be open source, but it needs to take on a genuine need as defined by the rest of society. I imagine a market of sorts, where programmers are able to shop for valid "jobs". Jobs may even be defined by organizations of some sort. No jobs in this market are designed to help exploit users, and the generated code belongs to the legacy of all of humanity. You start getting paid once you start sending accepted PRS to established projects. And you can start your own projects and get them accredited.

It's not a perfect plan by any means - after all the sciences are already funded by about 4% of federal spending, and they use a similar accreditation process. But they too are struggling due to misaligned incentives and capital structures, such as publish or perish and the academic publishing industry. The resulting replicability and accessibility crisis is a serious inefficiency in turning science into a benefit for humanity.

It's quite hard to put the finger on the precise cause of all these misaligned incentives. But it is getting very very critical that we do. The ever increasing urgency of the matter will capture our best minds, I believe. I know it has guided my work as an open source commune director, open source contributor, open source mentor, and mathematician.
Seems like a really, really good way to create a really, really boring website.

ETA: Rereading this, that is probably not a very helpful HNy comment, so let me elaborate.

Maybe I am old-fashioned, but one of the things that the internet is most useful for is exploring places and ideas you would otherwise never encounter or consider. And just like taking a wooden ship to reach the North Pole, browsing around the internet comes with significant risk. But given the opportunity for personal growth and development, for change, and so on, those risks might well be worth it.

That model of the internet, as I said, is somewhat old-fashioned. Now, the internet is mostly about entertainment. Bluesky exists to keep eyeballs on phones, just like Tiktok or Instagram or whatever. Sure, Bluesky is slightly more cerebral -- but only slightly.

People are generally not entertained by things that frustrate them (generally -- notable exceptions exist), so I can understand an entertainment company like Bluesky focusing on eliminating frustrations via obsessive focus on content moderation to ensure only entertaining content reaches the user. In that sense, this labeling thing seems really useful, just like movie ratings give consumers a general idea of whether the movie is something appropriate for them.

So in that sense, wonderful for Bluesky! But I think I'll politely decline joining and stick with other platforms with different aims.
I was recently thinking how every neural network is equivalent to a lookup table where the input is all numbers up to what can be expressed within the context window and the output is the result of the arithmetic operations applied to that number. So every neural network is equivalent to T = {(i, f(i)) : i < K} where K is the constant which determines the context window and f is the numerical function implemented by the network. Can someone ask a neural network if my reasoning is valid and correct?

The main practical issue is the size of the table but I don't see any theoretical reasons why this is incorrect. The neural network is simply a compressed representation of the uncompressed lookup table. Given that the two representations are theoretically equivalent and a lookup table does not perform any reasoning we can conclude that no neural network is actually doing any thinking other than uncompressing the table and looking up the value corresponding to the input number.

Modern neural networks have some randomness but that doesn't change the table in any meaningful way because instead of the output being a number it becomes a distribution over some finite range which can again be turned into a table with some tuples.
Do it?

Or maybe I should just accept that not everyone likes me or is comfortable with me. I'm not saying this as to be an asshole, but you can't jive with everyone and it's futile to try.
Sanitizers without runtime, i.e. -fsanitize=bounds -fsanitize-trap=bounds, can be used in production? And I think it can be used on existing projects by refactoring. Catching this at compile-time would be better, but Rust also can't do it and it is not needed for memory safety. And I think the solution C converges to (dependent types) actually would allow this is many cases in the future, while this is difficult without them. I fully agree about your other points.
Sorry but this idea that the old internet is dead is just people hand wringing that nobody will read their boring blog. It's the mistake that people make about democracy. Most assume that democracy is about the right to be heard. Wrong. It's the right to be peacefully ignored. Nobody, not even GAMM ( did he make that up ) is stopping me spinning up a web server on my cheap 50MBit up/down connection, writing a blog and doing whatever. If nobody comes to read it and nobody is kicking down my door to punish me for writing it then the system is working about as best it can. That others choose to consume their content elsewhere is just a sign that I am not as interesting as I think I am. But that is most of us.