skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Magnific.ai (https://magnific.ai) is a paid tool that works well, but it is expensive.

However, this weekend someone released an open-source version which has a similar output. (https://replicate.com/philipp1337x/clarity-upscaler)

I'd recommend trying it. It takes a few tries to get the correct input parameters, and I've noticed anything approaching 4× scale tends to add unwanted hallucinations.

For example, I had a picture of a bear I made with Midjourney. At a scale of 2×, it looked great. At a scale of 4×, it adds bear faces into the fur. It also tends to turn human faces into completely different people if they start too small.

When it works, though, it really works. The detail it adds can be incredibly realistic.

Example bear images:

1. The original from Midjourney: https://i.imgur.com/HNlofCw.jpeg

2. Upscaled 2×: https://i.imgur.com/wvcG6j3.jpeg

3. Upscaled 4×: https://i.imgur.com/Et9Gfgj.jpeg

----------

The same person also released a lower-level version with more parameters to tinker with. (https://replicate.com/philipp1337x/multidiffusion-upscaler)
Wouldn't be surprised if this was being done by one of the U.S. defence contractors so that they can convince politicians to buy their anti-drone products.

What's most disappointing about this article is it has no actual details.

What size drones? How fast were they going? How many total? How many at a single time? Did they catch any? What models? Let's see a photo of one... and so on...
Quite well. I wrote a blog post about this a few years back: https://frank.petril.li/posts/dialup-adventures-1/
JPEG DCT Text Lossifizer
The value in the 9K sweater is not in the material. You can get just as nice sweaters for a lot lot less money. Probably 20X less will get you a very nice, very well made, very soft sweater. The value of the sweater is in the brand. Somehow Loro Piano has found out how to get people to agree to pay 9K for a damn sweater. If they can do it with Vicuna, they’ll find another material to do it with as well.
Clearly the “market”, defined as a real estate syndicator with an excel sheet and cap table knows way more than the actual people who live in an area.

It’s not like Adam Smith’s invisible finger didn’t touch the cupcake bakery mania, froyo, etc.
An unjust law, which was ignored justly.

You don't have LGBT people paying cops because they committed buggery before it was legalised.

Appealing to unjust laws for your argument is the weakest play in the book.

Uber didnt cause any damage, decades of taxi monopoly caused damage. Uber corrected the injustice.
so it's a visual pun that only makes sense in Dutch/Flemish. this is excellent!
Being pushed into a different tax bracket is something people should always keep in mind. Different tax brackets affects the calculus of which 401k to use (post/pre tax), decisions about liquidating tax deferred assets, it goes on
In theory government can do almost anything so it’s hard for this statement to be wrong…
Better selection/triaging of friends/contacts, perhaps.
Who defines more productive business? Maybe car wash is a good business for people to work for in some period of live.

USSR tries to optimize business from top but selecting what would be produced and how much. Didn’t work well for community or customers.
>this specific story is about taxi licenses which are of limited availability and costs a lot of money to get.

An unjust situation created by the government. Uber didnt pass the unjust laws protecting cabcharges monopoly.
Not at all. The only reason we support the elderly now is because they're unable to work. In a world of negligible senescence the old will support themselves.
Low-Poly Image Generation Using Evolutionary Algorithms in Ruby
The Prophet of Shroom
For someone interested in deep questions about consciousness.

[1] A 25 year wager between a Philosopher and Neuroscientist where Philosopher won (Chalmers vs Koch)

[2] A nice debate between Kastrup and Koch, where it looks like Koch has abandoned his physicalist beliefs

[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-25-year-old-bet...

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzwC7sXyhWQ
Just saying something isn't open source isn't a valid criticism, and it's not an interesting contribution to HN. You could say the same about any software at all that's not open source; it has no positive contribution to the discussion of this piece of software.
At a minimum they need to detect if the person is in the EU.
Yes, and the entire point of capitalism and why it succeeds so well is that the individual profit motive is enough for investors to, in aggregate, not invest in low efficiency businesses.

As opposed to a central planning model in which a foolish planner can cock up the entire thing because they are usually far less accountable for failure and recieve little reward for success other than continued survival.
https://archive.vn/mfAdv
This is a fair request and nice thing to do to fellow users of this forum, people should not downvote this person.
India quickly unwinds requirement for government approval of AIs
You're making up a person and being extremely creepy while doing a poor job of it.

It's at least funny, because you're doubling down on OP's bad takes, and embarrassing yourself with trying to justify it with what you thought was brilliant research and a witty
person-based argument. But, you messed up. So it's funny.

Punchline? Even if you weren't wrong, it would have been trivial while doing your research to find out half of Deep Mind followed me this week. Why? I crapped all over Gemini this week and went viral for it.

I guess, given that, I should find it utterly unsurprising you're also getting personal, and clinging to 1% as a class distinction thing and making mental images of cloistered councils in robes, instead of, well, people who know what they're talking about, as the other repliers to you point out.

"1%ers are when the Home Depot elites make fun of me for screaming about how a hammer is a nerfed screwdriver!"
You have ignored most of what I have written. I already explained why the potential notion of infinity makes more sense than the actual notion. The reason is that size comparisons of volumes make much more sense with the former.

Now you repeat the definition of actual infinity, which is highly irrelevant, because I already discussed size comparisons, a more advanced topic, which you ignore. Please read my post again.

> This doesn't look like any kind of "potential" process

There is no actual process in time anyway, there is just the property of some quantity being unbounded.

> As an aside, calculus really doesn't deal with infinite quantities at all, at least as its formulated in (e.g.) a modern real anysis course or something. Sometimes we use infinity as a convenient shorthand/slang when describing limiting behavior of functions or whatever, but the actual formal constructions of calculus are entirely about finite numbers. You don't need "potential infinities" at all.

That's completely wrong. You are operating under the assumption that potential infinity is a number. It's not, it's a property of being unbounded. Only actual infinity is a type of infinity that is a number. Or rather a collection of "transfinite numbers" of different size.

> Incidentally the stuff about discrete/continuous space-time very strongly does not matter for this point. I'm dividing your tower up into a countable infinite set of unit volumes whether or not the underlying space-time is discrete or continuous.

If you want to compare sizes under actual infinity, the discrete/continuous distinction matters. Consider the set described by the interval [0, 1]. Is it countable or uncountable? If you are dealing with real numbers, it is uncountable, even if you manage to divide it into only countably many sub-intervals. Arbitrarily dividing things is arbitrary, what matters for size is the underlying structure.

Otherwise the tower would have both countable and uncountable volume at the same time (which is a contradiction), because partitions satisfying either are possible.
How can car washes in the US still go for $10 in these inflationary times, or a fraction of that with a subscription? Here in Australia you're generally looking at A$25 and up ($17-ish at current exchange rates, more until recently).
Land value taxes aren't about destroying natural land to extract value.

The point of taxing the value of the land in urban areas is that a lot of the time places essentially squat on land that could be better used. A car wash building will have a low assessed value for its improvements compared to a biotech building. For example, in my city we have a carwash with its improvements valued at $400,000 and a biotech building with its improvements valued at $275,000,000. The biotech building uses only double the land, but pays a ton more taxes.

In my city, there are lots where they're basically abandoned. The owners know that they can just sit on the land and it'll increase in value over time even if it isn't used for a productive purpose. During this time, people need housing, businesses need office space, etc. This isn't "natural land", they're gravel pits.

In fact, lack of a land value tax causes us to destroy natural land. Instead of using land well, we sprawl and pave our way into the suburbs and beyond.

Not all land is equally valuable and land can be made non-valuable from the standpoint of a land value tax like parks and nature reserves. A land value tax isn't really meaningful in rural areas where the land isn't really that valuable due to its location. Where a land value tax is meaningful is in cities where land is scarce and we want to put it to good use.

In a city, we don't want someone keeping an empty lot for decades so they can become richer based off the hard work of others around them - productive investors creating housing and office space, workers and artists making an area more desirable, etc. They sit on their empty lot paying nothing in taxes while others make them richer. A land value tax says: put that land to good use or your investment won't pay off that well. Under the current system based on improvements, they pay almost nothing and leech off the hard work of everyone else.

Land value taxes don't destroy natural land. They'd probably preserve it. A land value tax might destroy surface parking lots in dense cities, but that isn't "natural land". They're a poor use of space. I live in one of the densest cities in the US and around the corner from a lot of 1-story retail. It would be better for the community if that retail had housing on top and a land value tax would encourage that.

The alternative to encouraging good land use is having sprawl. Sprawl doesn't preserve natural land, it destroys it. It also destroys our climate with the carbon emissions from people who then drive everywhere.

A land value tax isn't about taxing all land equally across the US. If you have land in an area where land is plentiful, then it doesn't have a high value (because it's plentiful) and it doesn't need to have a lot of value extracted from it. If you buy land in Manhattan, Boston, etc. and decide that you like it as an abandoned piece of property, that's not good for the community and there should be pressure on you to put it to better use or sell it to someone who will put it to good use. A land value tax is about taxing land in a way that prevents someone profiting off squatting on land.
What makes you think there would have been a folding@home without SETI@home?
So you’re advocating a Chinese Communist Party model or what? A central authority determines what the market should be vs. what the market _is?_
I ordered an uber from one side of the Sydney CBD to the other.

We got to talking about ubers situation in the CBD. He told me he doesnt normally accept fares in the CBD because he gets pushed around by the police. As he was saying that, a motorcycle cop ordered him to pull over for an inspection. I thanked him and decided to walk the rest of the trip.

Anyway, now armed with the reason I couldn't get an uber reliably in the CBD I found that Uber into the CBD, taxi out of the CBD was the best way forward.
That's a heavily photoshopped image for a 1771 citation.
Well touché yes the truth is somewhere in the middle
He's saying it rains and the car gets clean.

I only needed to rinse my car off once a year, max, and did that with a garden hose. It was fine otherwise. Car washes are a waste.
We at least know that the Apostles were real people since Paul’s authentic letters depict him having to haul a sack of collections money to Peter and the extant living Apostles, nevermind his arguments with them over whether Gentiles should be circumcised, a debate which would yield the universality of Christian belief rather than being an extended Hebrew sect.
iOS Notarization's Human Review
Just like lelanthra currently applies custom CSS `body { max-width: 38rem; }` to this page, if the page had that maximum width set by default, you would equally have the ability to apply the CSS `body { max-width: unset; }` to the page. So you would not be denied the option of longer lines.
To share remotely, one player gets halfway to genius, pangram forbidden, and the second player gets over the line. After that you use SB Buddy (no peeking at hints) to get to Queeen Bee.

The most annoying missing wordlist words are naphtha and caracal. An objective measure of word-use frequency should determine the words included. Probably super-obscure articles of clerical costume should not be.
Cheap workers are always welcome.
I think they may be confused with body temperature which is fairly consistent but that also doesn't make a lot of sense either.
I enjoyed your book
or using hedgefunds infinte ftd failure to deliver assets as collateral to deploy such an operation that is not as traceable/trackable. where's Jonathan Frakes? https://youtu.be/GM-e46xdcUo
OK. I dropped the data, recreated it according to the recipe, and re-ran the query. The plan is different, using the index on organization_id rather than on updated_at, but that's to be expected given that the table is clustered differently. I agree that given this new way of organizing the data, foo_organization_id_idx is a better candidate for the "best index", but that's exactly what Postgres picks. Sorry, but I continue not to see the problem.

truncate table foo; --start over

drop index foo_updated_at_idx1; --drop the partial index for organization_id = 10. don't need it.

insert into foo ( --insert the data exactly as prescribed
id,
created_at,
updated_at
)
select
generate_series(1, 4000000),
generate_series('2010-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp, now(), ('2010-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp - now())/4000000),
generate_series('2010-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp, now(), ('2010-01-01 00:00:00'::timestamp - now())/4000000);

cluster foo using foo_organization_id_idx; --cluster it by organization_id exactly as prescribed

vacuum analyze; --ditto

explain analyze select * from foo where organization_id = 9 order by updated_at limit 100000 offset 0;

QUERY PLAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limit (cost=30928.71..42596.19 rows=100000 width=57) (actual time=35.177..52.661 rows=100000 loops=1)
-> Gather Merge (cost=30928.71..69134.11 rows=327452 width=57) (actual time=35.173..49.672 rows=100000 loops=1)
Workers Planned: 2
Workers Launched: 2
-> Sort (cost=29928.68..30338.00 rows=163726 width=57) (actual time=25.208..27.079 rows=33940 loops=3)
Sort Key: updated_at
Sort Method: external merge Disk: 9808kB
Worker 0: Sort Method: external merge Disk: 5112kB
Worker 1: Sort Method: external merge Disk: 5144kB
-> Parallel Index Scan using foo_organization_id_idx on foo (cost=0.43..9592.75 rows=163726 width=57) (actual time=0.065..12.548 rows=133674 loops=3)
Index Cond: (organization_id = 9)
Planning Time: 0.173 ms
Execution Time: 55.360 ms
I’m probably biased against the idea and so I’ve not given it much thought.

I owned a place and lived in an expensive part of London and over 10-15 years, through normal gentrification, I saw the centre of the city become far less fun as communities were pushed out due to rising prices. Everyone nearby had to be in a specific socioeconomic bracket to be there, which made it a bit, meh.

I’d be worried a land tax wouldn’t be progressive and so whilst it might be an economically efficient to force highest $value use, that might push out character businesses. That happened in London as well. Chain coffee shops everywhere, no sense of community or neighbourhood. No families etc.

It might be tweakable but the reason I’m also biased towards social housing is that’s what existed in the UK and it was only after that got privatised that housing became an issue / an asset class
Name a few.
A generalized rule by definition is an analogy.

For example a rule that says do not walk on the lawn might govern a specific section of ground that has a mix of blades of grass, a pebble, one bottle cap, and some bare dirt, is analogous to "lawn" as a concept. Were it to change, at some point, it would be sufficiently devoid of grass, or the other things that make up the concept of "lawn" that it would, in fact, more analogous to something else.

That's how everything works. Are you familiar with our legal system and the concept of precedents? Basically a precedent is an analogy, and the common law is a massive collection of analogies that have been extensively discussed over time.

If you ever end up in litigation, you'll notice that basically the whole thing involves trying to figure out which analogy is more applicable to the specific set of facts in question. This is usually called the "theory of the case" and the side that more convincingly matches its favored analogy tends to prevail.

For example, we're talking about "drug prohibition" but that's not actually specific at all. Are you talking about caffeine or heroin? Both are drugs, but which analogy would you compare your policy solution for consumption of heroin with? Is it more like a coffee shop, or how we handle cocaine? If you believe in legalizing opium, do you by definition believe in legalizing Fentanyl? Or are the two sufficiently different that a different analogy applies?

And so on. It's analogies all the way down.
the "ed" and "ing" puzzles are just annoying.
Feels like 2002-2003 after the .COM bubble. During bubbles a lot of people get hired for good money who aren’t really up to the task.
No you don't, but if you wanted to host it from your gigabit office IP, you probably would want to.
>you're making custom kernels IF YOU CAN TRANSLATE CHINESE

I feel this will be a useful skill to have in the mid- to long-term future if computing keeps going the way it has been going and goes where the vocal minority wants it to go.

Lest we forget, the chief force behind RISC-V advancement has been China and China is slowly but surely also coming to parity with our latest silicon. Pax Americana and English as the lingua franca aren't guarantees anymore.
Must not be from the midwest.

Gilman and Pitcher closed because the cities could not be decontaminated.

The Doe Run plant outside Saint Louis closed because they couldn't refine clean lead economically. Much of the city around it was bulldozed off and buried.

There's a difference between "we don't what safety procedures were followed" and "there's no such thing as clean lead".
In the Bay Area I see only a few full time positions. They average literally 500-700 applicants each (1.5K for a Databricks-level company). Accepting a W2 remote contract (sometimes from a CA-headquartered corporation) seems to be the only alternative. They say it's a "contract-to-hire" but I'm rather skeptical. It feels completely unlike the fleeting setback of '08-'09.
I wish people wouldn’t say that any market interference is communism as though the US isnt Keynesian while simultaneously pretending china is even close to communist.
I've been in the open source community for about 25 years so I doubt it.

For what it's worth I would say a model should be fully reproducible to be open source, but that's not a decided consensus -- and AI models are sufficiently different than the source code / binary code distinction as to invoke discussion around defining it.
We continue to use SpaceWire where it's appropriate, and it was one of many options considered in the initial trade-study [1] that led to the creation of SatCat5. Among other things, many Aerospace-built cubesats have a laser communication downlink [2][3] that can reach 250 Mbps and up. It's not hard for raw sensor or video data to saturate a 1 Gbps link, and future missions may even need 10 GbE.

[1] https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/smallsat/2020/all2020/174/
[2] https://www.eoportal.org/satellite-missions/aerocube-ocsd
[3] https://aerospace.org/article/aerospaces-slingshot-1-demonst...
Thermodynamic efficiency is work/heat, so 0%.

But you want the heat, so it's ideal. Electricity goes in, heat comes out. One man's trash is another's treasure. The circle of life.
I haven't found direct hiring data, but the second chart in [1] tells a very interesting story - job postings in tech are now below pre-pandemic norm. I know that resignations in tech have been falling steadily the last several months as well, so it seems like hiring is likely down quite a bit.

Anecdotally, my software dev friends who are unemployed right now are having trouble getting hired, compared to a few years ago where they were turning down interviews weekly.

[1] https://www.hiringlab.org/2024/02/20/labor-market-update-tec...
> “This wasn’t a case of a guy stealing a board and soldering a chip on in his hotel room; it was architected onto the final device,” he said, declining to reveal which company he worked for at the time.

Still kind of reads like someone told us there was a bad chip on the motherboard. And there was, and it was the BMC/firmware for the BMC.

Did SuperMicro (or their suppliers) just write shitty firmware with zero security for their BMCs because that was the industry standard, or was it a Chinese Ministry of State Security plant who did it as part of an evil plot?

Did big companies pull out of SuperMicro because of poor BMC security? Sometimes, a bit, often as just one more checkbox on the way to OCP style defluffed machines; in an early revision of OCP, rather than a BMC, the NIC's wake on lan signal was rerouted to reset, to become reboot on lan. But then OpenBMC happened, cause reboot on lan isn't enough for everyone.
I was in SF for the first (2000) bubble.

There are people who have jobs and people who don't. The people who have talent, who love what they do will stay. The dead wood, the folks who are in it just for the job, for cash will move on (they already are).

The smart people, stop looking and start building. They do what they have to, to survive (shit jobs) and double down on side projects.

Some talent will move on, but the next crop of startups is already brewing in bored nerds living rooms across the bay. Good luck folks there's money on the table, and you dont need to run to the VC's any more.
You can fine tune without the pre training data too.

Mistral models are one example, they never released pre training data and there are many fine tunes.
I am not an accountant or attorney, so you should do all of your own research. However any discussion or information about RSUs that doesn't mention an 83b election is at best incomplete.
There's one of these in Vancouver, on 4th ave. It's about CAD $32.
MoE doesn’t really help with the memory requirements for the reason mentioned in the other comment. But it does help with reducing the compute needed per inference. Which is good because the M3 Max and M2 Ultra don’t have the best GPUs. A 70B parameter model is pretty slow on my M3 Max, and this model has 86B activations per inference run.