skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yep, my wife did a masters degree in a program "for professionals", which was very clearly designed around people between the ages of 22 and 25, with empty evenings and weekends and definitely no children :)
Seems like quite a project. And very useful.

Australia is the perfect example of when too many well-meaning people who think they can solve everything with more government power are given too much capability to see their vision through to its logical conclusion. It ends up making most of the problems it tries to solve far worse, and nobody has the guts to pull the plug on the programs that aren't functioning.
We also shouldn't allow non-residents to profit off the pain of people who actually live where the infrastructure is.

Sir, this is the entire point of a suburb. Suburbs exist so their residents can take advantage of the infrastructural, entertainment and commercial benefits of a city without having to contribute to said municipality. Do you really lack that much self-awareness? By virtue of living in the suburb in the first place, you, yourself, are engaging in the very activity that you are decrying.
It would be interesting to know what other solutions exist in this space and why they weren’t chosen.

I know of at least one, GeoMesa, which seems like it could at least provide the building blocks to achieve what they are trying to do.
> If you discount Heathrow, Europe doesn't even have one in the top 10, whereas the US has 5 in the top 10.

What a silly statement. "Europe doesn't have one in the top 10 if you remove its one entry in the top 10."
Why Postgres Is the Best Database Engine
ADA: Accelerate Data Analysis with AI
Ask HN: I'm a freshman in college pursuing a CS degree, what should I aim for?
I coded throughout HS (3 years Java + SQL) and want to set my focus on lining up a strong career. I'm interested in knowing what paths/certifications I can take in order to get an advantage in the job market.

All advice is appreciated!
Hi HN community,

I wanted to share with you Ada, an open-source tool to accelerate data analysis using AI.

In short, it's a (very) lightweight mix between ChatGPT and Metabase.

I have been working around this idea for quite a while, in my spare time. The goal is to make data analysis fun and fast... just like when Tony Stark discover a new element with the help of Jarvis (https://youtu.be/Ddk9ci6geSs?si=Y6sBvZZn8779nPV8&t=32)

I'm sharing it because, while imperfect, I now use it quite regularly in my professional life, and I just learned that a Vietnam company is using it internally. So I figured some of you might be interested, and I would love to have your feedback.

I invite you to install it and try it yourself (https://github.com/BenderV/ada)
Or you can try a demo at https://ada.universaldata.io

Best,
Ben

PS: Since it’s currently based on OpenAI GPT4, you will need to have an OpenAI API Key.
This fork is LGPL. Does anyone know of a fork that remains BSD? I’m sure this is fine for many people, but it isn’t ok for what I’m working on.

Update: it looks like KeyDB is a good one.

https://github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB
Right now it's easy for me to buy a look-alike domain name for a bank, host a page on that domain that looks like a bank's login page, and pass through to the real bank to take over someone's account in an automated fashion. TLS doesn't prevent me from doing that.

What TLS does do is ensure that when I communicate with a third party on the internet, that communication can't be intercepted by any intervening switches or routers. TLS per se does not have any other properties. However, we've constructed a system of chains of trust using TLS certificates and trusted third parties. That system is not a technical system and TLS does not have the innate property of enabling you to trust or not to trust someone.

It's an important distinction because the PSTN and our system of TLS Certificate Authorities is a social solution to a social problem. And so suggesting that TLS somehow magically has a property that it prevents fraud is hard for me to follow, because fraud is also a social problem and you can't use technology to solve social problems. Technology can be used to lubricate, to bring people together, and to ensure that conventions are followed and that peoples' solutions can interoperate. But the real innovation in TLS from a fraud perspective is actually the network of companies, nonprofits, third parties, and government agencies who have collectively established root Certificate Authorities and who have ensured that those CAs control who you trust. None of that is specified in any RFC. It's entirely something we humans made up after someone created an enabling technology.

As for problems with PSTN, there are similar technical solutions, but largely PSTN fraud and spam are a social problem and require social interventions. This is why we have the FCC in the US, for example, because when the scope of an intervention becomes large enough it has to be administered by someone. When you say PSTN doesn't work because of fraud and spam, in my mind what you're saying is that the FCC does not do enough to prevent fraud and spam.
What do you have against Dan?
> a vehicle with a Hilbert Curve position of 0.34 is really close to one with 0.35 and really far from one with 0.89

But points with a large difference in their single curve coordinate can be either far apart or close together. E.g. on this 16 point Hilbert curve

__. .__
__| |__
| __ |
|__| |__|

the '.' marked points at 1/16th and 15/16th along the curve are adjacent.
Of that list, the only ones I’ve ever seen in practice are i18n, a11y, l10n, and k8s.

Three of those are (ironically) related to making content legible to everyone.
I can see you've never been to Nashville.

I'm not a country music fan, I hate the music. But I lived down there for about 5 years and it's amazing how many incredible musicians live there. You can walk down the street and it won't take long to find some musician just singing for cash putting on a professional level performance. I can't state it strongly enough, just jaw droppingly good musicians. Playing for friggin quarters and dollars.

It probably has more to do with the music economy which is massive in Nashville than any political ideal. I'm not sure that's protectionism, seems like common sense. They'd be stupid _not_ to do this.
I am planning to make the s-expr form the on disk format.
You're projecting memes from a prolonged national culture war onto a state with practical challenges to address.

It's not like "very right of center libertarian type state" is the Tennessee state motto or something, it's just a label you've attached for your own convenience in online debates and at dinner parties. That this action seems incongruent to your image of Tennesee is a sign that your stereotype is shallow and incorrect, not that Tennnessee is hypocritical.
Exciting times ahead. It wouldn't be real art if people such as yourself weren't clutching your pearls over it.

Go ahead -- make your rules, pass your laws, drive it underground. Throw the rabbit right smack-dab into the middle of that briar patch.

(Yes, I know, don't feed the trolls...)
You raise a good point on how people like us enjoy leveraging ambiguous philosophy for our own amorality. If the philosopher fails to take a stand — something is good, something is bad, something is wrong, something is right — their ideas are easily repurposed for rationalizing, even absolving, immoral acts.

People like me want nice-sounding, undemanding ideas that makes them look good and feel good. We desire ideas that shift with words, ideas that lack solid form and the logical consistency that would ward off our own desires.

Like you said, it's dangerous because people think ambiguous philosophy as a vitamin, when really it's an intellectual candy. Tasty and sweet, but no nutrition for the soul, and certainly it gives no energy for its exercise.
I haven't read the actual law, but the description of it sounds like it's limited to things like imitating an artists voice. Certainly it makes sense to not allow a recording that claims to be Luke Combs singing, oh, say his new song "Fast Car"[1]. But, does it mean one couldn't create a voice that sounds a lot like Luke Combs as long as it's well labelled as AI-generated?

[1]Yes, I know it's a Tracy Chapman song.
This just makes me wonder about a purpose-built train that allows airport luggage carts.
It really depends on a number of factors:

* Age of the city

* Natural boundaries (rivers, mountains)

* How government is setup, in some countries (and in some areas of countries) many things are done at the city level, others bump a lot up to county, state, or even country government. The USA manages schools at the city or below, and so city boundaries become well-fought over.

Whenever you see "Unified" you're seeing something built out of smaller, usually city-related, parts.
If you look east of the Mississippi, the overall population densities aren't really that bad, and should be able to support high speed rail easily.

...except for the fact that within metro areas, US cities are designed in a very sprawly way that's hostile to public transit. This is an entirely unforced error that has nothing to do with geography and everything to do with culture. We deliberately chose to make our cities sprawly as fuck through various regulations.
Maybe they used to be better. I love my Surface Pro 2. Paired up with Linux, it's a kick ass little machine.
Ah - I've used S2 in the past. Great work. It scales really well for larger datasets.

Interesting that you mention the use of multiple hilbert curves as well. We also experimented with two Hilbert Curves, rotated by 90 degrees. This helps to get around what we've dubbed the "Hilbert Equator" problem where two objects are quite far on the curve because they are placed close to one of the major fault lines in the fractal (for lack of a better word)
Effectiveness against zombies is not depicted, for anyone wondering.
You make money with if you have useful data others don't have, or you have better algorithms that others aren't using.

When these become publicly known and used, your system doesn't work any more because the prices now include whatever signal you had for yourself before.
As long as you are willing to prove it in court. Sure.
Understanding a problem before implementing an idea is usually a good strategy.

In this episode, I share the strategy we followed to conduct research interviews for our project Growth Board

This process and insights allowed us to validate the problem we are tackling and find the best angle to approach it.

I will share more about:

- Why we decided to focus on research interviews
- Which type of questions we ask and what methodology followed
- How did this process change our initial hypothesis
- My conclusions on research interviews
Yes, antitrust laws have been largely ignored in most of the western world for decades now. I'd argue that's a bad thing though, not an argument in favour of continuing to ignore and not apply antitrust laws.
This headline is infuriatingly backwards and offensive.

Extending the government-enabled monopoly power of the establishment media to prevent new art, technology and creativity from competing should not be treated as a good thing or as "protecting" them.

Rather than extending copyright to unprecedented new levels to strangle AI in the crib, we should be overjoyed that billions of people will now be enabled to use new tools to create art, music, poetry, and literature tailored to their specific desires.

We could be on the cusp of a new utopia, of empowerment of the average person and incredibly diversity of the creative arts... or we could watch as a handful of corporations get laws passed to give their cartel exclusive control of what music, film, art and literature gets published.
It's an important point. We've ended up using two Hilbert curves, rotated by 90 degrees to tackle this problem. If it is close on either, it is close in 2D space
So hypothetically, if someone looks or sounds like an individual then are they in violation?

Suppose they’re identical twins.

AI can’t be a free-for-all and I’m perfectly fine with what Tennessee is doing here.

It’s the stated Libertarian position that I have questions on.
Use the search filters.

> Add ^ to show only matches in your browsing history.

> Add * to show only matches in your bookmarks.

> Add + to show only matches in bookmarks you've tagged.

> Add % to show only matches in your currently open tabs.

> Add # to show only matches where every search term is part of the title or part of a tag.

> Add $ to show only matches where every search term is part of the web address (URL). The text “https://xn--ivg or “http://xn--ivg in the URL is ignored, but not “file:///”.

> Add ? to show only search suggestions.

You can select the search constraint in the dropdown if you don't want to memorize the list.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/address-bar-autocomplet...
If you're writing cryptographic routines you should either use the platform cryptography libraries, or follow the documentation:

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/writing-arm6...
It's not the the second statement follows from the first; I'm asserting that models can't think, and that what they're really doing is prediction based on context.

The fact that chain-of-thought reasoning yields significantly better results is your hint: that means that the model doesn't think like a human does when it comes up with responses. If it's not in the context, it doesn't exist. You can't ask a model "why did you answer that way" without it generating from whole cloth a plausible retroactive reason. But there is no memory, so it can't really tell you.

> What if that's all thinking is?

I think that this is roughly true. But we actually have memory outside of what we say, so when we think, all those intermediate steps are persisted in our brains. For a model, the context is the memory. If you delete your question from the context and ask it "why did you answer that way", it will have no idea what you're talking about.
> I don't know any religious person who thinks they believe without any evidence.

That is what faith is by definition. You can't redefine the term, whether you have faith or not.

Subjective experience is not empirical evidence i.e. evidence, colloquially used. Even on the individual level there's a willful interpretation involved. They might play the semantic game of calling it evidence, but it isn't.
It seems unlikely that a law intended to prevent AI from impersonating existing human artists would prevent a human artist from doing anything other than using AI to impersonate another human artist. However other laws related to copyright infringement might still apply, given that in context, "sounding a lot like a previous AI artist" means "sounding indistinguishable from an existing human artist."
Lazarus Group hackers appear to return to Tornado Cash for money laundering
Not if you are a dominant company.
The UK has a long history of trying to distinguish itself from Europe.
Even before Brexit.

Had I not said what I said, I would have just as likely have had angry Brits in my comments.

You're also really missing the forest for the trees here.
-I- would be entirely fine with an airport with those transit restrictions.

mdk (Shadowcat's resident responsible adult / business person) however has three kids, and two adults trying to wrangle three children as well as luggage makes trains much, much less attractive as an option.

So I think "fantastic to imagine, DOA as an idea in practice" applies, I'm afraid.
Nitpicking, according to Wikipedia, PSRAM is Pseudo-SRAM[1]. The fact that it's accessed through SPI is an implementation detail.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_random-access_memory#P...
I am from a non-religious background as well, and I would love to be able to have religious faith.

I like the comparison with having faith your wife, but it also shows the gap of reasoning between you and the post you are responding to, no?

You start by saying

> This may come as a surprise to you but I have "religious" faith because of evidence, not lack thereof

What is that evidence? Are you sure you are not playing on words here? Because faith has positive effects on you?

I like the argument about humility stated in another thread. For me, humility really seems to be the core value of religion that I find helpful.

Another point you make I don't quite understand:

> Certainly the objection would be that that is entirely subjective, but that is where objective arguments can then be laid out in addition to my "experience" of God in my life: philosophical arguments for God, historical arguments for God's actions in time and space, etc

What are these arguments that are not debunked? As far as I know, proofs of God and arguments for His/Its/Her/Their existence are very indicative of the time and author's reasoning system.

But there are none that I know of that have stood the test of time - be it Aquin, Kant, Descartes or whoever else?
Are you using Obsidian? Check out [Smart Random Note](https://github.com/erichalldev/obsidian-smart-random-note) or [Advanced Random Note](https://github.com/karstenpedersen/obsidian-advanced-random-...)

The former lets you "random note" search results, so you could query the tag and then random note it. The latter allows for similar customization of the random note feature.
"America Against America" - Wang Huning
Making a runway longer only lets bigger planes land.

To really expand an airport, you need to add parallel runways, and that is a ton of land.

And if you have too many parallel runways, you end up with too much time spent taxiing around.
When the evidence you present is defeated and you respond “that’s where you have to have faith”, that is literally “belief absent evidence”.

That’s not even counting the types of “evidence”. Like “ nature is beautiful” and “bananas fit in your hand and angle toward your mouth”.
"Cameras are ubiquitous" seems like a slippery slope to AI based surveillance with cameras outside every home. Didn't roll your trash can up on time on the 14th? That's a ticket.
Probably it's the same person/web agency casinos go to ? Or all the sponsors are entities from a larger casino/betting group and the inside dev./web agency uses bulma et voilà.
Sure, I would say that it's not an article of faith to say that, I don't know, transistors work as expected, because obviously I can very clearly demonstrate that by sending this very message.

But "science" isn't a monolith. Most science is stuff I don't really understand with any kind of intimate detail. Pretty much anything involving chemistry, biology, health, or physics is over my head; I'll try and read the abstract of a paper in those subjects and I feel like I generally understand it well enough, but I don't know enough to actually criticize anything.

If we take the Jan Hendrik Schon scandal from about 22 years ago, I know I would have read the papers and just taken on faith that the paper writer wasn't lying. I'm not equipped enough in physics or chemistry to call bullshit on anything being said in there and I probably would have trusted it. I also would have been wrong.

Now the Jan Hendrik Schon case isn't a great example, because of course he was caught, and it's tempting to say "see! Science is self-correcting!" and I think it broadly is, but at the same we really have no way of knowing how prevalent these cases of fraud actually are. Maybe other scientists are just better at covering up their tracks.

Of course this is getting into the bigger "replication crisis" in science, but I generally believe a vast majority of scientists are honest with their results, and I generally believe the results of their papers are at least truthful, but at some level that's an article of "faith", or maybe just an article of "intellectual laziness" on my end.

I guess I might argue that there's not much of a difference between the two.
What happened with Commodore/Amiga and Atari/ST is an amazing bit of history. It really happened, of course, but it seems like it could have been the plot for a show like "Halt and Catch Fire".
I dunno why you linked to the specification repo, since reading over it and its included sample made it seem like the "current editor in chief"'s fever dream of JSON all the things

Only by going up to the repo listing does one find the actual implementation that alleges to replace pkg-config however <https://github.com/cps-org/cps-config#status> seems like "well, good luck" for the problem they're trying to solve. I mean, they couldn't even write down what does or doesn't work in order to know if I should bother learning its snowflake json schema? Not even a $(cps-config --import) to port over the bazillions of .pc files out in the wild
This video seems like it was made just to give the guy an excuse to visit Japan and play around with katanas.

It seems a bit weird to me that people are still making steel as shown in the video, even though part of the process has been modernized to require less manual labor. Maybe it's more about preserving the cultural significance of the event rather than trying to optimize the manufacturing process.
#1 (processing notes) got me through a big chunk of college. After classes, I'd go through and rewrite, organize, and otherwise reprocess the notes to make them more readable, understandable, studyable, etc.
A better idea: Tear down the old MCAS Miramar and build housing and parks. Rebuild the airbase in Nevada or the California desert. Yes, it was bad planning to allow so many residences to be built near an airbase, but too late to undo it now.
Again, this sounds smart until you think about it. Apples apps such iMessage use a protocol which Apple developed. Its not even secret how it works, people have reversed engineered it multiple times and are ready to use it in other apps so people can chat to iPhone users with no issue.

The only thing stopping this is Apple saying no. It wouldnt take any extra work to allow this, they just need to say yes and then everyone in the world can talk together no matter what platform or app they are using.

Its not about creating a free and open platform, its just about saying yes to letting others play with your toys.
Perhaps all religious and metaphysical argument can be abstracted away into the simulation hypothesis - i.e. that we all live in a perfect simulation, running on a substrate somewhere else. The key point in this argument is that no experimental or observational evidence is capable of proving or disproving the existence of the simulation, since it is a perfect simulation.

This is logically equivalent to the statement that a supernatural being is continually intervening in the world, but only when nobody is watching, and only such that no evidence of intervention is left behind.

Similarly, nobody can prove that a person who claims to hear the voice of a supernatural being in their head (and that's the inspiration for writing a holy text which forms the basis of a religion) is actually just schizophrenic, rather than having had their neurons plucked like strings by said supernatural being.

This view seems to upset atheists more than anyone else, since it places their certainty about the fundamentally mechanistic and non-simulated nature of reality in the same bin with religious evangelicals, but the religious people don't like it much either as there is no clear basis to choose one religion as superior to another, other than the purely utilitarian arguments about which one provides the optimal moral basis for a healthy society.

Hence the mysterious unknowable nature of reality: some questions cannot be answered. Even the mathematicians agree on that these days.
> its to do with what you do with that belief

No, that is simply what follows from having faith as is demanded of adherents. Faith in itself does not mean that. Faith is to fully believe by choice, and if one does, then it necessitates that they do what is demanded of followers.
Elusive form of carbon tougher than diamonds created in supercomputer simulation
Whatever Happened to Teen Babysitters?