skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> you're basically reinventing government

Well, yes. The ability to spin up a government when there's the kind of problem that needs one and dissolve it when that problem goes away is indeed what I'm after.

How else are you going to resist people with enough market power to corrupt your existing government? You've got to spin up a new one. (Consider all the US-installed dictators in South America in the 80's as an example. If only the citizens of those countries had something like this and were prepared to coordinate a resistance.)

> Money... Is fungible

Is it? I've worked at enough payment provides and been through enough trainings about KYC the OFAC lists and heard enough proposals regarding CBDC's to doubt that that's true anymore. It's just that only privileged parties are allowed to use the non-fungibility of money to their advantage.

As for the Kevin Bacon thing, that's kind of the point. When I accept some fiction in exchange for parting with something real, I want it to carry enough metadata to know who I'm helping and who I'm harming by doing so. That way I can make better decisions

It's not "the" evil bit, it's annotations by people who I may or may not share interests with. It's a restoration of information symmetry.
Why bother? When you have the biggest marketplace in the world, you don't need to cater for the fringe people.
Why do you think that peer review needs the journals to function?
isn't better to have legal regulations on big servers? as i can see some abuse from hosts (that entered early it the game) & now hold multi-thousand users instance...
Seems like it's less universal than I thought, and has other meanings (but related to flatulence) in other countries than my own.
YouTube uses Spanner now, they migrated off Vitess a while ago
No idea what you’re talking about.

We use Kubernetes on-prem using MickroK8s because it was easy to deploy and allowed me to write a full API server with scalability with no prior experience.

What “potential competitors” were kneecapped here?
10b5-1 states that directors and above must trade on a scheduled trading plan. They are selling more $ worth of shares right now due to their scheduled trading plan selling X shares every month/quarter that are now worth more $. There's not much o read in insider trading numbers than that because they literally cannot trade on the moment. They must trade well in advance using a scheduled trading plan.

The article you linked is malicious in that it doesn't even mention that these trades are scheduled. The data they took this from literally comes from the 10b5-1 scheduled trading plans yet they make no mention of this and the consequences so really there's no other way than to treat this article as anything other than malicious false reporting. It is misrepresenting facts to push a viewpoint.
Same reason you can't sell your organs or sell your physical freedom / time in prison (falsely admit guilt because someone paid you to do so in order for them to avoid prison) or even end your own life. The country you live has citizens who have banded together to created laws and regulations that say these various freedom-y things, if engaged in at scale by people who might have individual reason themselves to do it, are considered harmful to society and so prohibited.
Personally purchasing buildings to rent out to the We company definitely crosses some lines. Same with purchasing the “We” brand which he generously licensed to WeWork for some $5 million.
What's hard to comprehend about the original game play mechanics?

The article does a great job of conveying the concept across.

The basic mechanics of the game play as described, and in the photograph of the slides, are:

## The Field of Play:

- A user is present with a Field of Play consisting of a 10 column by 20 row grid.

- Each square has two states, Full (Grey) or Empty (Black)

## Game Start:

- The Field is set to full size, on which all Squares are Filled Squares.

- A New Next piece is generated.

- The number of Invert Field Actions is set to 15.

- Proceed with the first play round.

## The Play Round

Each play round begins with the Piece in the Next Piece appearing over the Play Field.

A new Next Piece is generated.

For each Round of Play, the Player may take one of two actions:

- Place a Piece

- Invert Field

### The Play Round - Placement of Piece

- The Player may manipulate the piece freely in both position (Up, Down, Left, Right) and rotation (Clockwise, Anti-Clockwise)

- A Piece may only be placed onto a Valid Piece Position on the Field.

- A Valid Piece Position is one on which all Squares under the Piece are Filled Squares. That is, the Piece may not be placed if any Square on which it covers is an Empty Square.

- A Piece may be placed onto the Field by pressing the "Place Piece" button.

- All Filled Squares under the Piece become Empty Pieces.

- The Round Ends.

### The Play Round - Invert Field

- Inverting the Play Field requires a Invert Field Action.

- The Player may at any time invert the Play Field.

- When the Play Field is inverted, all Filled Squares become Full Squares, and all Full Squares become Filled Squares.

- The Round Ends

## End of Play Round

- If any row on which a Piece has been place now consists of only Empty Squares, if any row consists solely of Empty Squares, the row is removed. The Play Field size is reduced by one row, increasing the difficulty.

## Game End

- The Game Ends if the Player is unable to take an Action; no Valid Placement for the current piece exists, and no Invert Actions are available.

From the screen shot on the presentation, this was it.

From the screen shot on the article, it looks like two added mechanics exist:

## Unplaceable Square:

- An Unplaceable Square is a Square on which a Piece may not be placed.

- A Filled Unplaceable Square is represented by a Filled Square with Yellow Ball Icon.

- An Empty Unplaceable Square is represented by an Empty Square with Black Ball Icon.

- When the Field is inverted, the Unplaceable Square is represented by an Black Ball Icon.

- A Filled Ball inverts to an Empty Ball, and an Empty Ball inverts to a Filled Ball

- A Ball may only be removed from the Play Field by row removal via Piece Placement.

- All other mechanics for a Square apply.
e.g. An Empty Ball is treated as an Empty Square in determining whether a row is eligible for removal.

## Invert Field Square:

- An Invert Field Square is represented by a Lightning Bolt Icon.

- If a Piece is placed on a Invert Field Square, the Player gains one (1) Invert Field Action for later use.
The private and public seductions of the biggest pop neuroscientist
I think we'll solve that problem for LLMs before we solve it for humans. Data analysts produce a lot of garbage; data work is really hard. In fact, it isn't uncommon in my experience for the data analyst to be the only person saying "hang on, the quality of this reporting isn't good enough for the decisions you're making from it!" - because they understand what useful information looks like and the company doesn't have much of it.
> They even acknowledge the paper was actually about something else if you call them out on it.

For clarity is not really acknowledging it made a mistake. "Calling out" an LLM's mistake just leads to the next most likely text to be something that sounds like an acknowledgement of a mistake, but the same is likely to happen if the LLM generated a correct response and you respond claiming that it's incorrect.
Good find, that fits the symptoms perfectly and is more likely than not a problem with the firewall on the source end (the campus network). Did you email the author?
Showstopper Review – lessons from building NT
Meta's EU business is orders of magnitudes larger than any Italian newspaper. They should be able to afford much better legal counsel.
Not sure why this is flagged, but there's nothing actually special about atomics here, I thought this was fairly common knowledge that when using condition variables you must always couple them with a mutex to provide a critical region and avoid lost wakeup. This is easier to see with the no-abstrations pthread version:

On the waiter side

pthread_cond_lock(&mutex)
while (!predicate) {
pthread_cond_wait(&cvar, &mutex);
}

On the signaler side

pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
toggle_predicate(&predicate);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
pthread_cond_signal(&cvar);

(Note that it's safe to signal after unlock, although a bit more error-prone as you have to be careful when destroying the cvar). The mutex serves two key purposes: first is providing acq/rel semantics on observations of predicate, the second is that it provides a barrier region to ensure that the predicate is either changed before the waiter enters into the wait loop, or after the waiter has added itself to the wait queue so that signal will wake it up.

Changing the predicate var to atomic allows you to get rid of the first one (and I think it can in fact be a relaxed atomic since mutex lock already has acq/rel semantics), but you still need it to serve the second purpose.

See this SO answer for more info: https://stackoverflow.com/a/9918764
Here's a pic of the popup https://discussions.apple.com/thread/254241562?sortBy=best . To me, it sounds trivial to name your malware app "System Update", and that's probably the best thing to name it. So you can't know who or what is requesting full root access, completely out of the blue, unless maybe it says somewhere deep in Activity Monitor. My habit is to always close it, and if I want to update, go to System Update myself. Then at least I know I probably triggered the popup.
The Thames & Kosmos Chem C3000, is a pretty solid chemistry kid for a late elementary early middle school age child. I think I picked it up with an actual glassware kit from amazon ten years ago. At least in TX they have repealed the dumber restrictions on glassware. In the US the local Barnes and Noble stocks science kits, as do science museums, and the internet is a source for a lot of this stuff from places like https://www.homesciencetools.com/. Getting chemicals for some of the more "dangerous" reactions sometimes takes a bit of digging, or simply knowing how to synthesize it for your kid, who of course should probably have a parent on hand anyway.

And of course ebay and archive.org/etc is a source for the old manuals or even kits (I recently saw the SFX-4000 aeronautical lab kit in an old fashioned toy store in town BTW) if you can't be bothered to grab the manual and do a bit of footwork to restore an old kit. But frankly people have to fond of memories for those kits. For example, a good used microscope from a college can be picked up on ebay and some slide + stains for just a few dollars these days and its a far more useful tool that the cheap toy oriented kits. And while I printed and bound a copy of the golden book of chemistry some years ago, one should really read more recent criticisms of that book before handing it to your child (ex; don't go tasting lead based compounds).
Probably a lot easier and cheaper to build his own collection. Not sure paying others to do the work makes him the archivist though.
To anything, that's what "fully-general" means
One of the only things the Soviets did right was building a shit load of dense, boring housing at huge scales. They eliminated homelessness, which jumped substantially when they became the Russian federation and privitized everything.
You can write an OpenAPI spec in JSON. You can use Jsonnet to generate your spec from whatever input you need.
Ask HN: Can LLMs shed light on Shinichi Mochizuki's proof of the ABC conjecture?
I understand that LLMs can't verify correctness but maybe they can help elucidate the concepts behind it?
Maybe it’s time to build new power plants, preferably nuclear, and continue efforts to learn about and expand efficient energy sources. No society has ever advanced without ample energy supplies.
These tools are great at generating text responses, some of which are usable, but not analysis. We're actually far from that. I'm not sure why some people are out here pretending this is not the case.
Is there a better online community of smart people I can join?
I usually have to use JMESPath queries semi-regularly. Every time I do it feels like I'm starting over for the first time. I'd love something that made more sense to me, but in most cases I'm stuck with what I have due to restrictions on what I can use at work.
i had one of these and was determined to learn everything about electricity. i started building the projects in order, keeping many notes, over and over again.
it was only many years later finding the set under a pile of junk at the back of my mum's garage that i realised the manual had pages printed out of order; paragraphs missing; nonsensical translations and errors upon errors, and i felt sorry for the young me who didn't stand a chance
Those people are still gonna exist though, right…. Right…?
Why use an automobile when it can't even fly and run on solar power?
Because there is potential money in it and we weren’t already destroying the climate fast enough.
That’s already being done, and the taxes/limits on co2 pollution will be increasing. So nothing new here.

What you’re implicitly suggesting is government allowing/banning certain uses of technology because they are deemed not worthy. That is an autocratic style of thinking.
I don’t agree with you. Write a spec, use generators to generate your servers and clients, and use those generated objects yourself.

The point is twofold: you test your API immediately AND you get a ton of boilerplate generated.

So many products out there just feel like a bunch of separate things with a spec slapped on top. Sometimes the spec doesn’t make sense. For example, the same property across different endpoints having a different type.

Save yourself time and do it right from the get go.

> Maintaining specs separately from your actual code is also a great way to get into situations where your map != your territory.

So yeah, write your spec once and generate all servers and clients from it…
How aren’t there financial incentives for using less energy? The production of energy costs money.
I'm planning to test German, which also has big differences in language structure.

I expect the app still works well for reinforcing vocabulary, but less well for demonstrating grammar.
It's buggy and I use it enough to know a lot of the bugs. Lately though it's buggy when trying to publish new ads and updates to ads. It's super frustrating.
Google's AI Can Ingest Multiple Books. What Happens to All That Data?
> I never said they do not. I said that’s not the typical reaction

It doesn't take many shoppers to make a huge difference.

> because moving is very difficult

There's always a fair number of people new to the area, not to mention people whose situation has changed significantly and there are a lot of people looking for new housing.

Note that rent-control takes the latter group off the market.

Note that someone taking a "new property" off the market (regardless of reason) is exactly the same as not adding said new property. (Ie, it can't make things worse.)
Already in Homebrew, which is great for Mac.

I had to build from source to get around flatpak. Instructions here: https://practical.li/blog/build-emacs-from-source-on-debian-...
> FTX's FTT token climbed 10% on the news.

How is the token still trading? I thought FTX has already collapsed.
Man I coveted these soooo much as a kid. Along with flashy inline skates and high top trainers these were the thing I wanted most and could not afford.
The people still consume (basically) the same amount of electricity though, regardless of their employment status.

Edit: though perhaps you're making the point that the AI energy usage is a drop in the bucket compared to its overall usefulness. I agree on that.
Thinking about this, I observe that the problem of the factors of security is in fact tied to the problem of identifying someone : If you can prove that "someone/something" is "you", then you are giving "someone/something" the permissions to act as "you".
There are lots of tricks we invented to evade the problem; I am pretty sure our common knowledge (yours and mine) of these tricks includes the one about "knocking three time on the door in a specific rythm" or the one about "You will ask this specific question and I will answer with that exact sentence".
I would like to enquire about the problems of security and identification; cannot we do better than what we're currently doing, and why is it that any effort we do aiming for better resembles these tricks I talked about ?
What's funny about this problems is the fact that in the context of everyday life, you sometimes prove that you are you by showing e.g. an ID card to a police officer. If I had a twin, that twin could do a lot of things as me, he could do nice things, but he could also do bad things. What would stop my twin from being identified as me by others would be the fact e.g. he doesn't possess my ID card; but a card can be stolen (OTP).
My evil twin could also be suspected of not being me if for example, he didn't know something people know I know; it could also be mistaken for silliness, but okay. He could learn everything I know, or be spying on me enough so that he knows what I know (Password).

When no one doubts about you being you, it means that everyone agrees with the fact that you are yourself, i.e. every "party" identify you as yourself, and the fact that every other party is identifying you as yourself makes individual parties even more sure that you are yourself. But on what evidences rely the third parties confidence in you being you ? How can you trust that third parties aren't corrupted or mistaken ?
Take the most extreme case : you must tell if someone is lying or not about its identity AND if you're wrong, you die. I could trust third parties only if they brang some crucial facts; passwords and possession are unsignificant evidences in that context.
But if the quantity of third party is enough, and if each third party knows a different passord AND if you know a different password AND the person to identify gave the correct answer for each and everyone of them, it is becoming more and more unprobable that the person is not the one they claimed to be.

But I am not satisfied with this, there must be some more elegant and trustful way of identifying people. Now that we're able to imitate the voice, fingerprints, and etc... what other trick can we find that is not a trick ?
I use CFEngine to manage tens of thousands of Linux hosts. I've used their enterprise edition with their agent, which is really outstanding. I've also run it at the same scale agentless, using their community edition. I have used it for one-time configuration at system installation, and have run it every 5 minutes on every host in our plant. The speed of execution and the clarity of the language are second to none, and when I was using their enterprise edition, I found their support and engineering services to be top-notch. I've been using it for 15 years or so, across several companies. While other configuration management systems get the job done, I haven't used any as straightforward and scalable as CFEngine. Many thanks, Mark Burgess!
The DMA came into full effect this month. The EC looked at the big companies targeted by the DMA and the state of their compliance, had questions about several of those companies' compliance and so opened investigations.
I mostly agree.

I really think chess is just a terrible example though. You're really asking a lot of it but I'm honestly shocked it can do what it can. It seems to know some opening books, but falls down immediately. Which really makes sense because you'll find a lot of reading material on specific openings, but the problem space of the game is just too big to find texts about any given game state. Maybe if you have it reason about the board state and "think" about tactics you could push it farther. But we've already solved this.

We have Stockfish et al and they've literally changed the game. Asking an LLM to play chess, while cool, is like trying to train a fish to dance. I think once we have an AI that's built with a bunch of different models that specialize in different things the idea of understanding is going to get even blurrier to the point that we might even say "yes, it doesn't 'understand' things, but it's better at humans at literally everything" so the difference becomes meaningless.

I'm also of the opinion that humans are fancy automatons, so I tend to argue both sides. I'll say yeah it's thinking and so do we or ok it's not, but either do we.
I don’t think you would want to live in the world we’d have if we rolled back all of the energy expenditure done in the name of profit over the past 200 years since the discovery of oil. You wouldn’t have anything. You wouldn’t be able to cross the Atlantic lest you burn coal to produce steam.
ChatGPT cannot autocomplete a house, or the extraction of minerals from a mine.
I loved Solaris. It's a shame Oracle bought Sun.
That's kind of low ngl.
I think I have enough shoes to last me the rest of my life.
For those of us pain patients who had their opioid-based medication taken "because of the opioid epidemic" (even though we did nothing wrong and had been stable for many years or even decades) and were just told to "use cannabis" by all the non-pain patients on the internet, and when we said "cannabis doesn't work for me" and you called us liars or said we are using it wrong, this study is not a big surprise.

Meanwhile people I know have been driven to suicide as their only (legal) option to escape the pain, or spending their food money for illegal opioids that might do nothing for you at best or kill you at worst (fentanyl), instead of having reasonable lives and getting safe and known medication from a pharmacy. And these are people who did nothing wrong and hurt nobody. I suspect history is not going to look back kindly on the people who have mismanaged this in such a grotesque and inhumane way (such as politicians and bureaucrats who waved a magic wand and decided that all doctors should scale some percentage of patients down or face legal threats from the DEA or FDA and possibly loss of license), under the guise of trying to help.
“Turn into”? They were explicitly invented for surveillance and personal data mining. That’s their entire raison d’être.
> What a disaster.

Using tool inappropriately leads to suboptimal outcomes -- news at 11.

A good mental model is that an LLM is a blurry JPEG of the Internet.

You sound like a scientist, right? You reference "published research", after all.

What would your opinion be of a researcher measuring the exact values of the pixels of a JPEG image instead of the RAW sensor data?
For things working with database I mainly don’t want to expose the rpc calls or the database queries. I know people can just get it by checking dev tool but it’s one layer of labor and can filter out many people with millacious intent
The fact that you ask that is in many ways the difference. You feel there’s a limitation in your knowledge of the term “understand” and its use in this context and would like clarification before you’re more certain, either way. At some point either enough information arrives to convince you, or you decide it’s not true. Whatever that process and internal states are, is something GPT can’t do. It’ll 100% confidently produce something and be fully rewarded that it chose tokens that humans would most likely choose given the preceding tokens. There’s no “aha”.
And what if you arrive at the site not knowing it's about a font? How are you supposed to find out?
The producers of the 21st century must have run out of budget. Now they're rotoscoping Fitzgerald's Tom Buchanan.

“Civilization’s going to pieces,” broke out Tom violently. “I’ve gotten to be a terrible pessimist about things. Have you read The Rise of the Coloured Empires by this man Goddard?”

“Why, no,” I answered, rather surprised by his tone.

“Well, it’s a fine book, and everybody ought to read it. The idea is if we don’t look out the white race will be—will be utterly submerged. It’s all scientific stuff; it’s been proved.”