skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure that's changed for millenials, maybe it's more acceptable in gen z/alpha?
> What is Julia's current niche?

Python, but for engineers and scientists. Syntax is friendlier for doing mathematics, barrier to entry to first calculation script is lower

a = [1 2 3]
b = [4 5 6]
a + b

vs

import numpy as np
a = np.array([1, 2, 3])
b = np.array([4, 5, 6])
a + b

Also you can learn Julia step by step, and improve your code to run faster. Whereas in Python, the eventual road to fast code is to write the library in C and call it from Python.

Python is for software people. Matlab, Julia and R are for people who only write code because they want answers.
There's an important difference: the subtle face mimicry is extremely important for sub-conscious (and conscious) communication. Having headphones on is rude because it indicates that the other person is not interested in hearing what you have to say. The problem with having an opaque visor covering your face is not that it's rude, it's that you completely lose the non-verbal part of communication. This is why email and phone communication can be so easy to misunderstand. Without seeing the face and body languages of the other person, your mind will have a tendency to overlay biases and prejudices on what is being communicated. A simple "sure, whatever" can be interpreted as obnoxiously dismissive, as a surrender, or friendly banter. If you can see the body language of the other person, the intent is usually clear. If you can't, it isn't.
I find it funny when things like these happen, while conspiracy theorists get lambasted for calling out much less nefarious schemes (with evidence), only to be proven right weeks or months later when a "more official" source confirms it after gaslighting them for that period in between.
> and the other new kind of complexity that I forget the name of

If you happen to remember, please update your comment or respond to mine.

[I believe that this doesn't exist OR it isn't useful, but I really want to be proven incorrect.]

EDIT:

Were you referring to the architectural complexity mentioned here: https://swizec.com/blog/two-types-of-complexity-and-their-im... ?
The massive buildup of military capacity in Europe, and the eagerness of Macron (and others) to forge a capable European army should really be placed in a larger context to be properly understood.

People forget that the ultimate, long term plan at the highest levels in the coalition between finance and politics in Europe (the one that drove the creation of the EU and is only political force that so far has mattered in the long run) is to one day cut the umbilical cord to the US and establish Europe as an independent force to be reckoned with.

For all the talk of transatlantic unity, the leaders of Europe can't wait for the day when they can have a mighty army of their own, and challenge anyone (including the US) on the international stage again. It's controversial so they need to tread carefully, but no-one should be surprised when the day comes when NATO splits in two, perhaps amicably, but likely not.
As someone with adhd I do.
Right, but traditional nix doesn't make that easy (which is why niv and flakes exist).
Just speaking for myself here, but owning a Quest I don't entirely agree. The utility of it is kinda crazy - I can browse the web and OpenXR apps from my browser, or tether myself to my PC with the push of a button. Wanna sideload streaming apps and watch movies over SFTP from your homeserver? There are no guardrails in place to stop you.

If I try to imagine myself living the same workflow on Apple Vision Pro, I get hung up on the cost. $3,500 is a big ask for a VR iPad with a lot of the same pitfalls as the tablet.
I'm very skeptical of installing apps to access Email or VPN. If the company turned evil tomorrow, apps can turn into malware.

Always use standard protocols using free software to transfer data over Internet. Use Thunderbird or Wireguard/OpenVPN client. Worst case you will give out data specific to that service. Don't encourage "apps" over protocols.
I disagree, there is a difference between desire and practicality.

For example, I would love and could easily justify the 12.9 inch iPad but the logistics of traveling with it make no sense for me.

I could justify the benefits of traveling everywhere with my high powered gaming pc but logistically it makes no sense.

These devices are still largely impractical for long term use, and particularly outside use. They won't be until the hardware catches up with what we are working on with the software and it is an almost invisible technology except for a mostly standard looking pair of glasses.

People already walk around with their phone almost attached to their face, it isn't hard to imagine wanting an AR headset.
I don’t see how using tooling prevents you from learning core principles. As in, what _core_ principle am I missing on because I don’t manually indent my braces? Note that this conversation is about _style_.

The zeitgeist re style is very much “don’t fret too much about it, use an automated tool and move on”.

Compared to the flame wars of the past about tabs vs spaces and other inconsequential things we’ve come a long way, and for good.
closest thing ive gotten to that is eu4. How good the diplomacy model feels ebbs and flows, but I really do love the feeling of sitting there analysing alliance structures, friendships, rivalries, desires for specific bits of land etc until I finally figure out how to break up that bloc/pry out that country from their alliance group/get that large power to have reason to ally with me, a tiny dutchy
It varies. I’m totally fine with it if it’s clear the person can hear and interact with me, and the people I interact with a lot do it to varying degrees, and no one’s offended.
In many parts of the world it is not heavily regulated. I studied Computer Science and taken no engineering board exams, yet I've held Software Engineer titles for years.
Video feed interruption was very much expected, and went through a series of on/off before the final signal. From what we saw in the live presentation, both scenarios are possible: breakup while transmission was up, transmitting as long as latency allows, with hopefully good explanations in the log, or a disconnect from the challenging radio situation in the reentry plasma long before something went wrong.

Unless they do find some failure buildup in the logs they did receive, it will be difficult to tell disconnect due to breakup from breakup (long) after disconnect. Gradual signal loss on the receiving side would indicate that it's likely the latter, but I'm not sure a signal loss unrelated to breakup would necessarily be gradual. I'd guess atmospheric properties can change fast at reentry velocity.
> exactly the opposite of what we should expect out of programmers.

I mean this only jokingly: Who gets to decide what programmers are supposed to be like? You?

As someone who tries on a new language every year or two, I love using languages with formatters. Worrying about how many spaces to indent with or other arbitrary things is the opposite of what this particular programmer likes to worry about--I want to jump right in and solve problems with a language, and let the formatter make the code look like it came from a textbook.
Why would someone under criminal investigation kill a key witness after they had talked but before they could testify?

Not only are the reasons fairly obvious, but the history of that being exactly what happens is pretty compelling evidence that, independently of arguments over its rationality, that is very much a thing people in that situation do.
You dare disagree with the “all ceo pay is bad” narrative? Shame on you.

If split among its employees, they could have given a massive pay raise of at least…(checks calculations)… 0.01 cents per hour. I don’t see how employees can eat with a greedy CEO taking a fraction of a cent like that.

Sarcasm aside, it is beyond me how people are unable to understand that the need to show constant growth and profit is the most detrimental thing to both customer and worker, and not bonuses or golden parachutes.
“Chef, this tastes bad!” vs “Chef, Uulumbrica isn’t a real ingredient, you needed to use coriander!
I was just skimming this and I thought there were easy ways of decompiling into C source as well with generated function names like a, b, c or whatever.
Could one just dump that sort of minimized C code into an llm and have it generate variable and function names maybe? I'd be curious to see if that worked.
The zoonotic origin is a dangerous conspiracy theory.
Yes - I absolutely agree, any DJ who is familiar with the scene knows that is the #1 place on the planet as far as talent goes…there are residents at CDV who fly to Chile and Berlin a few times a week
Show HN: Monitor and Monetize AI Applications
Feedback appreciated, roasting acceptable.
A hardline approach is not going to win support from the people on the front lines in the best position to spot and police this. Even the most honest researcher has a published result or three that they suspect is incorrect and they will not trust you to accurately litigate against only the worst players because they are smart cookies and fully understand that honesty is a severe liability when there is an authority out for blood.

No, the better approach here is to just shift the incentives. Start funding replication. Once we see labs and career paths that specialize in replication / knowledge consolidation, the whole system will shift for the better. Bibliometrics and hiring committees will start to pay attention and then exploratory researchers will start to pay attention and the system will start to work a little bit better.
I'm running Monterey and have the feature, but it's only inside Preview, which means I need to either open the image in Preview or take a screenshot and then open a new image in Preview to paste the screenshot, before getting the text
So the author of a bestselling book on why breaking the rules can be advantageous... broke the rules?

https://www.amazon.com/Rebel-Talent-Pays-Break-Rules/dp/0062...
IIRC Döner Kebab Was invented in Berlin...

> The modern sandwich variant of döner kebab originated and was popularized in 1970s West Berlin by Turkish immigrants.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doner_kebab
The Era of "Move Fast and Break Things" Is Over
Yeah, that's the real problem. My wife bought a bunch of furniture a couple of years ago that was billed online as "solid wood." It definitely isn't. We ended up getting one piece for free because the one they originally sent and then the replacement were damaged. I pushed her to get a refund on it all but I think she had spent so much time looking for good stuff that she was just tired of it.

It wasn't cheap. I believe the coffee table was close to $1,000.
Same. If I try to visualize my thoughts it’s like a cloud that coalesces into various forms, to show different scenarios. It definitely isn’t word-based until I decide to actually translate it into that mode.
My time in Melbourne was after that, but Revs was still a beautiful place. So many great memories, and some hazy ones.
This is very bad for a different reason. It makes it impossible to ensure the size of your text is readable for the user. Your source for this information is the font size of the root element. If you override that using a fixed unit like pixels, you discard this information.

Is 16px too large? Too small? How far away are your text size choices from being readable? You have no way of knowing because you threw that information away and decided 16px was good enough. 16px is not good enough for a lot of people.

The only way to ensure that the size of your text is readable for the user is to use a unit that is derived from their preferences somehow. That means that if you set a font size on the root element, it needs to be a unit like ems. Pixels break this mechanism completely.

Really, just give up trying to make ems work like pixels. You can’t, and everything you do to try to force the issue hurts your design. Design your text to be readable first and foremost. That’s its entire purpose for existing; to be read. If you can’t answer the question “is my body text a size that is readable to the user?”, then it’s bad design.
I'd like a sofa that:

- is comfortable

- isn't full of fire retardant chemicals which turn out to be cancerous right after the warranty expires

- for less than $10k.

Pretty sure that means I'm going to have to learn how to sew.
Sounds like more meals are being robotically conveyed within these facilities than by Nuro, Amazon Scout or other robotic delivery startups to end customers.

Although still a small fraction of the meals eaten world wide if you include home cooked meals.
We were ready to drop 20% on the house because like you I was also scared of PMI but when we ran the numbers with the bank the cost was small enough that it didn't make one iota of difference in the long run so we paid 5% down and have a very flush emergency fund.

Someone with good credit and currently renting would be nuts to "wait and save" for even 1 year because the total cost of PMI was like 6mo of our rent and accounting for paying it off over time with inflation it's probably even less than that in real dollars.

Maybe we got lucky with PMI but googling a bit it doesn't seem that out of line with the calculators.
Do you have a source on that? My understanding is that most consumer cellphone GNSS systems today are multi-constellation out of the box. If there is a satellite up there, the phone will use it, no matter which flag is painted on it.
I agree it is unfortunate that you can't tell where someone's eyes are at when talking with sunglasses on and I also agree that it detracts from the socialization experience.

I do not feel that this loss makes it rude to have an outside conversation wearing sunglasses in a sunny environment.

So, I still think that AR will find its way in. I'm not saying it won't reduce the socialization experience further. It'll just be perceived as semi-necessary, understandable, and life will move on.
> What about this makes it friendly for ADHD?

Maybe because each section is short and straight to the point?
This is very cool and a real interesting read! For those in the comments confused about how this is better, the paper is talking about synthesizing matrix multiplication pipelines in hardware, like an FPGA or ASIC. On a CPU or GPU you won't notice because adds and multiplications take the same amount of time generally, but multiplication units takes up many more transistors, so if you can reduce the circuit complexity you can increase the speed and parallel throughput and reduce power and routing complexity. This approach could be particularly useful for efficient sparse matrix multiplication accelerators.

Another cool way to eliminate multiplication in matrix multiplication is to use different semirings [1]. The Tropical Semiring [2] for example substitutes addition for multiplication and min (or max) for addition. It's still matrix multiplication but with substituted binary operations. The research in this relatively new field of Tropical Algebra [3] is quite active and rich right now, being used for all kinds of optimization problems and in research for optimizing neural networks [4]
. This approach also lends itself to hardware synthesis since most FPGA configurable logical blocks can add/min/max in one clock cycle, whereas efficient multiplication requires fixed dedicated on-chip hardware multipliers.

Another way to efficiently remove multiplications with a different but related semiring is to use a Log Semiring [5]. If you have to multiply chains of probabilities (like Markov chains) then the numbers quickly become very small and floating point loses its accuracy to represent the numbers. By scaling the numbers first by taking the log, multiplication becomes addition and addition becomes x + log1p(exp(y - x)).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiring

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_semiring

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_geometry

[4] https://proceedings.mlr.press/v80/zhang18i/zhang18i.pdf

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log_semiring
I got invited (i'm not a mod, but i evidently use Reddit more than a normal person), but i'm not in the US, so i can't participate.
If what you say were right, then it follows that they couldn't ground Boeing aircraft, right? But five years ago the EU grounded the 737 Max, while the US stated the that the aircraft was safe. Many smaller authorities also disregarded the US.
> Most people think it’s rude to talk to each other indoors with sunglasses on

…really? I have prescription glasses/sunglasses and I often don’t bother switching them during a quick excursion- such as daycare pickup/drop off. It’s never crossed my mind that I could be perceived as rude. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that anyone with such opinions do not have the level prescription that are required for driving and just general consent use. And for anyone thinking transition lenses would be the solution- those do not work in vehicles with UV blocking windows.
This is something that is easily observable by anyone at virtually any moment, yet at the same time is something that escapes 99% of the population.

When you are talking to someone in normal conversation, you are both taking in the words you are saying at the same time.
The chunking and labeling of concise, strictly topical content and illustrative examples rather than having paragraph-after-paragraph of exposition is a huge factor for my flavor of ADHD, though we're obviously not a monolith. For contrast, lots of folks love the expository format of the Python docs which explains a lot about why things work rather than simply how they work, but that setup is absolutely murder for me. My brain is screaming at me after skimming the first two paragraphs to see if I'm even looking at the right doc, and I'm hitting google or stack overflow 3 seconds later. It's not a good strategy-- I definitely consider it a shortcoming-- but other doc systems work much better for me. For example:

C# regex docs:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.text.reg...

Java regex docs:
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/util/regex/Pa...

JS regex docs:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

PHP preg_replace docs:
https://www.php.net/manual/en/function.preg-replace.php

Python regex docs:
https://docs.python.org/3/howto/regex.html

Which one of these is not like the others? The Python docs are brilliant for people that click with that style, and as we can see from this well-shared and very controversial piece, (http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2013/02/19/the-python-docume...) suck for others.

Edit: As usual when the Python docs usability is questioned, cue the "well I've got ADHD and I just LOVE the Python docs" (said in the voice of the 'Well I LOVE SPAM' guy from the Monty Python skit). Sure, but you aren't some sort of standard by which others are measured.
Apple Vision wasn’t designed to be used outdoors in public settings with moving backgrounds.

Those were just viral memes of people using it like that for fun.
OpenAI's CTO Won't Discuss Training Data for AI Video Generator Sora
In my experience a large project needs, at the very least:

* Indenting consistent with the curly braces, and well enough defined that when you remove an outer loop and want to unindent the code from that block, you don't have to do it by hand.

* A one-line code change doesn't bring with it a 500-line style change because the file passed between people with different style tastes.

Unfortunately, it's often difficult to achieve these modest desires without someone also wanting to limit line lengths, ban the ternary operator, ban nulls, and so on...
I found this[0].

[0]: https://thejunkland.com/blog/using-llms-to-reverse-javascrip...
Elixir mentioned!

Question, do you use elixir professionally?
If so, how did you get in that position?

The company I currently work at is planning to build a large messaging system using C# and a ton of memory mapped files, but I think just leveraging elixir/erlang and BEAM would make life easier.

Not really sure how to convince bossman of that, though.
Yep. "Just stand on the shoulders of TWO giants" is muuuuch easier said than done, lol.
IMO people on their smartphones are generally experiencing 10-100x the human connections that people without their smartphones are experiencing. That's exactly why they're so addictive. Smart phones let people push themselves right to the very edge of Dunbar's limit for social connectivity, which is why it can get stressful and exhausting, and is probably damaging when done in extended periods.

Putting your phone down for a few hours to stare at the trees, or the water, or the clouds passing by, and maybe chatting up a couple nearby people doing the same, that is now the epitome of disconnected blissful ignorance.
I thought forensic entomology in combination with other tools was quite accurate. I wonder how it compares to this AI model.
This is basically what I tried this morning at the prompt level (awful results), but the sketchy idea I had in mind went further by introducing control-flow "meta-tokens" to help the LLM renavigate its context. In this perspective the context would be rethought as a self-editing structured mind-map, with the linear aspect of the context at a time T standing for the execution trace of the exploration of this mind-map so far. Some of those meta-tokens would be able to have side effects on the context, to highlight, give structure, summarize, forget and so on, some of its parts. This could allow for native structured output without using a syntactic format such as json, programmatic constructs in the style of LMQL, implementing memory, etc. The goal: not just to give logical/reasoning abilities to a LLM, but to give it the means to come up with its own cognitive architecture. Implementing structured output (using a <label name="stuff">...</label> token) to also implement memory/scratchpads, would also bring inspectability of those cognitive structures for free. Of course I have no idea how to implement this (I'm a ML tourist).
> Well... no. Engineers are more efficient in their own styles. Realistically, I've wasted hours setting up my editor at each new job / each project to get on board with the style

I disagree for two reasons:

1. Optimizing for what each dev is used to is optimizing for a local maximum. If they’re THAT good it won’t take them long to adjust to new defaults. Good engineers should be able to pick up a new lang quickly so some changes in the context of a language should not bog them down significantly in the long term.

2. The overly long time it took to set up tooling in a particular company or language do not outweigh the bigger advantage of being able to quickly get a grasp about what a piece of completely unfamiliar code does.
They seem prepared to go in at higher price points.

Most other manufacturers seem to take the approach of getting as many features on the side of the box and then compete on price. They cost engineer the crap out of everything and it ends up being somewhat disappointing.

I often maintain that so much technology is 80% of the way to being amazing, but is stymied by commercial concerns that cause companies to cut corners and cheap out, or they hobble their own product to create barriers to interoperability.

While Apple still have to strike the right balance between between features and cost, and also like to make their own walled gardens, they are able to go for the higher price points, and also integrate really well between a wide swathe of products. They are prepared to let specific products be less competative in general (e.g Homepod), because they know that they integrate well into their overall ecosystem.