skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, I didn't want my comment to be a criticism of Kuzgesagt - like you say, they're usually very upfront when they do their more speculative videos. But I think sometimes people see the Kuzgesagt name and are like "oh, that's the informative science videos, this must be true", whereas a lot of the Fermi paradox stuff is closer to speculative fiction in nature than some of their other videos.
What if a young person wants the old internet back?
> This project was not in my plans for the weekend. I’m not going to put that work in right now—so “SQLite C extension for vector similarity” will be added to my ever-growing list of half-baked ideas that LLMs helped me prototype way beyond what I would have been able to do on my own. So I’m going to blog about it, and move on.

This resonates SO strongly. I feel this way about so many various little half-baked ideas and shower-thoughts over the last year, that cGPT has helped me evolve to just the same point you describe. Then, reality hits, and I have to move along.

I'm so grateful this technology exists now to help develop my half-baked ideas to a more fleshed out state, but it's overwhelming.

It reminds me of an Ask HN post from a few months ago, which essentially conveyed a breathless "Is anyone else just exhausted from trying to keep up with all of this?!" And I really just understood that person. It's not just that the LLMs have gotten this good, it's that for a certain type of mind that's constantly cooking up various ideas, there's currently no playbook for how to adapt to this new power-boosted exo-brain.
Thank for your comments. I'll try to respond to some of them, just for interest, but bear in mind I'm not trying to convince you of anything, so please just take them as intended - a hopefully friendly and stimulating exchange of points of view.

> I'm not sure that what you describe as "reasons" actually qualify as reasons.

I'm assuming you don't believe in God, so I'd be surprised if you did think my reasons qualified as reasons! But they do for me. I wasn't trying to put forward my best arguments in order to try and convince someone.

> This is a variant of a common creationist argument, often promoted by those who prefer the term "intelligent design" to "creationism." But so-called "intelligent design" is just a variant of hard-core creationism.

I'm not exactly sure what your point is. To be clear, I don't think that God made things with a wave of a wand. There seems to be good evidence for the physical mechanism for the creation of lots of things. I think these mechanisms might be thought of as the tools of whoever created (and presumably architects) the universe. But who knows, I'm just speculating. To be honest, the details of the mechanism of creation don't seem very important to me right now.

> This conflates two very different senses of the words "feel" and "feelings." Hunger is a biological sensation; your "feeling" that there is a God is not and is a very, very different kind of "feeling."

Assuming you are an atheist, then I'm surprised you think there is any kind of feeling _other_ than biological ones.

What type of feeling is my sense that there is a God, if not biological?

Personally I have no clear opinion on what the origins of this feeling are, but all I know is I have it.

> Consider this: if you had been left alone on a desert island as a child ... But you almost certainly would not have the "feeling" you have now that there is a God

I don't know if there is any evidence to back this up, but I'd be interested to hear it.

> and even if you did, that God would even more certainly not have the characteristics you ascribe to it now.

I don't think I really ascribed any characteristics to God.

But I do think it's interesting that different and unconnected people across the world, and through time, very often come to the conclusion that something/someone created the universe.

> This is not really even intelligible.

"I feel like there is a God, so I go and eat." was meant as a metaphor. People often say they "hunger" for things that are not food. Similarly, if one believes that there is a God to hunger for, then God is the food, and to accept this is to eat from God.
For anyone curious about the buried mini-monument:
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/washington-mini-monument
IN already has a different meaning. BETWEEN 1 AND 10 is exactly how a human would describe it to another person.
Cyberpunk is when people buy cocaine. Like the 19th century
Why wouldn't Spotify just do it themselves then? As they are doing: https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/14/spotify-confirms-test-of-p...
>so change your years into months instead and multiply by rand(2)... and change the hire-backs into more startups doing more things...?

I disagree completely. But I should note I was referring to medium to large scale companies. Nothing in those companies happens in "months" these days.

Maybe some startups rise from being first to market much faster, but given the huge legal issues I'm not seeing it. Microsoft et al. can afford A lengthy legal battle and make backup plans. A startup can't.
A few other nice simulations on that repo, but this is by far the best, and most amazing Life idea I have seen for a long while.
If you are overthinking how to start, you will never start with it.

Just get coding and start prototyping.

More importantly, you are building an open source project for yourself. If you are building it for others, you won't be happy with it.

Always try to solve your own needs and problems.
Scythians Between Russia and Ukraine
You are making an assumption that shared libraries have to somehow be compatible with the C ones and use the C dynamic linker: you can 100% have your own dynamic linker and have your little ecosystem work the way you want it to work for your language, and you also (to be clear) absolutely can do this without having to be Apple and controlling the "system" dynamic linker (which again is itself just a convention really) to add features as they do with Swift/Objective-C. (Hell: even just having an alternative C standard library on your system demonstrates a separate linker ecosystem as the C dynamic linker is effectively shipped as part of the C standard library.) The only thing that matters here is not the disk format or the mechanism but how it would be packaged and the tradeoffs on when time has to be put into baking them.
Insurance is based on risk. Past actions can be reversed but have made some areas less risky
> Cloud definitely has downsides, and isn’t a fit for all scenarios but in my experience it’s great for situations like this.

At least as I read it, this contains the assumption that that‘s not how you deploy your applications
Note that Brave New World (1932) already started to address the problems of plenty.

> "The ethics and philosophy of under-consumption …"

> "So essential when there was under-production; but in an age of machines and the fixation of nitrogen–positively a crime against society."

(My headcanon is that it is sold as a dystopia largely because it presents a future devoid of english teachers; the savage proves his savagery by committing suicide, despite having been offered the islands: the Rumspringa of the world After Ford)
Agree. Actually I’m feed quite feed up with Spotify, and this week decided to get a proper HiRes audio and buy music from places like BandCamp or the CD edition and ripping it.

I miss curating my collection and playlists. It seems that the convenience of having almost all music available in a couple of clicks is making the listening experience less valuable.
Doesn't one increase a system's attack surface area/privilege escalation risk by pre-installing tools such as these?
Samsung pledges seven years of updates for S24 series
But at least drag racing is a spectacle. Not my thing, but it is a spectacle.

This? You push a button and a number comes up.
> The issue is that the Schoor algorithm requires that the error rate of the qubit operations scale exponentially with the number of qubits.

So… traditional silicon computing scales exponentially in time, but QC computes in constant time(!) with the minor detail that it scales exponentially in error.

> If the error rate of the qubit operations decreases by 20% every year and we have exponential progress, the usefulness of the Schor algorithm taken on a log scale would be linear.

Right, which is exactly the type of leeway you need, no? 1-2 qubits per year will take many decades to break ECC or RSA. It’s the same Moores law-style assumptions baked into traditional computing getting faster.

> This is why IBM only uses five qubits in [3], although they already had a hundred qubit QCs at that time. It just produces meaningless results when used with more qubits.

So IBM has this really cool gf, but she’s at a different school so you won’t know her. Half joking, but putting error propagation in the footnotes seems very off to me as a complete layman. Like thinking we can accurately predict the weather 5 months out with a bit more compute.
the majority of people can't handle hard drugs, they will ruin their lives and their kids and their families lives as well
'startup founders' like him are idiots
Just to chime in here, I don't think that the complexity of life is a clincher for existence of God.

I don't think that humans are in a very good position to judge the complexity of things. A more intelligent creature might think the universe very crude and simple, and a less intelligent one might think it terribly complex.

From a scientific point of view, I don't think we can judge how intelligent we are, so arguments around complexity don't necessarily help.

As for evolution, well, I've seen it happen in the lab. I think it happens, and I think it's plausible that evolution is how all life as we know it today arose. I don't think we have really hard evidence for that yet, and just because a mechanisms _could_ have done something, doesn't mean it did.

I can imagine a that evolution was a tool used to create life procedurally. If I was creating a universe, then I think I would use procedural generation! But here I am slipping in to assuming God created things in the same way a programmer creates games and simulations, which of course is pure speculation.
But that’s basically the same that the big music companies do with mainstream music.
D2 Playground
Nvidia announces AI-powered health care 'agents'
I would assume this is part of Spotify's business model.
If 10% of the music played is from their "preferred" artists, who get say 5% of the commission that Brittney Spears gets, they make more money. Right? That the guy is based in Stockholm is even more evidence this is the case.

They don't need to collude to do this - if Spotify and the guy follow self-interest, you get this outcome.
Wait, isnt that sort of the exact opposite?
I used AS to write the program, and it is my "reference assembler" for the one I am writing. I just wanted to see if I could write a working retro assembler.
Actually, can you explain more why you think P is not implying N?

EDIT: I may have been using P incorrectly when I meant FC=rules. See below.

---

P = Our universe is regular to a high degree of accuracy.

P is a provisional truth. It is true and no one can deny it today. If there is a God, no one deny that He chose to create a universe that is regular. But the fact that it is true today doesn't mean it will remain true tomorrow.

Question: what FC is able to cause a universe whose observers see P.

There are probably infinite possibilities, but let's focus on the two interesting ones to us:

A1: FC=base_rules. P is emergent out of base_rules. N is true.

A2: FC=God. He chose to actualize base_rules. P is emergent out of base_rules. M is true.

In both cases, FC is a brute-force Truth.

The book claims that only and only A2 is possible. I'm claiming that A1 is also possible.

If P were not true (unicorns popping in), then it will harder to justify A1, though not impossible as you pointed out. But since P is true as of today, positing A1 is more straightforward.

I'm further claiming that as long as P is true, A2 is in fact unnecessary as it is adding one extra thing when it is not needed to explain P, but we don't need to get into that. I'm content just showing that A2 is not the only logical possibility.

--

I'm not saying we observe regularity and thus FC=rules. In a sense, I'm saying the opposite. In any universe where FC=rules, its observers will definitely observe P. Thus our observation of P makes FC=rules a good possibility. And I think then it's clear that FC=rules is mindless N.

--

The book is making a claim of logical truth: W -> M, that is, if "the observations of our world" then "FC has free will", because only M can explain what we see => N is impossible.

But something is shown to be a logical truth only when all other possibilities are eliminated right?

Is N, i.e, a FC without will, able to explain everything we see? My answer is yes, since we would definitely observe P in a universe where FC=rules. And if my claim that this is a valid possibility is correct, then W -> M is not true.

So a concrete goal for natural theology is to be able to find at least one observation of our world that FC=rules cannot explain, even in principle.

Apart from the foundational examples such as resurrection, I think last frontier in this regard is consciousness, but of course here too I think rules is all there is, even though we have a lot way to go in being able to say how.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this point. You have already raised some good questions: "how can we explain lions but not unicorns" or "why these rules and not others". I think I have good answers to these at least to my satisfaction, if not yours. But would be glad if you can raise more pinpointing issues against FC=rules that will reveal a gap in my understanding.
Portfolios for Long-Term Investors (2022)
GitHub Action to bump semantic versioning based on releases or tags
if your controller has such loose timing that you can't match a 10ms window reliably, you're doing something very wrong.
'
> How much Röhr, who has worked as a conductor on pop stars’ tours and on TV, has earned from his agreement with Spotify is not known. However, his private company reportedly made 32.7mn kronor (£2.4m) in 2022, when it had a record year.

Doesn't look much
You can definitely cause problems by spilling an entire dewer into a smaller room.

Had to calculate this for the safety part of a LAN party event application. Fortunately we had a very big room.
Is this similar to Devin (https://github.com/OpenDevin/OpenDevin)?
GP still correct though. Unlike other planet, so far no life like earth, all those hits made earth better. There has been life on earth for millions years.
What do you suggest? Kneecap the most competent company executing in AI hardware to help laggards compete?
Coca leafs have legitimate uses for medical and naturopathic purposes. Only in America will we twist such ancient traditions into a degenerate narrative.
> the vast majority of Kubernetes clusters are just hanging out on the public

How does the author know that? Doesn't "not public" mean not visible, and therefore not countable?
> China blocks use of Intel and AMD chips in government computers

With ME and PSP there, this is no wonder. Why took them so long ?
Fans quitting Spotify to save their love of music (2022)
> Doesn't look much

It’s a life changing amount of money for something like 90% of humanity.
It wasn’t just, or even primarily, the Trump administration.

It was hordes of social media personalities trying to sound Very Smart and establishing themselves as authorities during a time of crisis.
The main feature of interval parsing appears to be that it can jump over content such that a later part in a file does not depend on knowing everything that comes before it. Has Dogma similar expressiveness?
Can you elaborate on why ipv6 is so shitty?
Why do you think if human finally settle on Mars, there won't be any war on Mars?
Are they not human anymore when they settle on Mars?
Oh wow, I remember these, barely. I never used one though.
“Just the wrong people are making the money.”

I couldn't agree more
I question the governments decision to include this in the complaint. Surely Visa's 2-3% fee has a greater impact on the wider economy than Apple's 0.15%.
I have some grasp of travel having working in global scale geophysical exploration and mapping and having visited a majority of the 190+ countries as a result.

The journeys described by dukeyukey as part of the spread of humanity across the globe took place over many many generations in short stages.

The longer journeys you describe all occurred in or post the European age of Expoloration.

Columbus had an idea of how long it would take to reach the Dutch East Indies, it was based on an incorrect idea of the radius of the earth.

Reid Stowe's 1,152 days at sea "without resupply or stepping on land" wasn't quite a voyage to Mars - fresh water condensed and was collectable, fish swam by and could be eaten, his pregnant co-sailer got off the boat after 306 days .. and the journey was possible without propulsion, fuel, and a massive radiation sheild.

I'm not saying that Mars is impossible, I am stating that no comparable journey has been undertaken by man .. the journeys by Europeans across the globe were journeys from where humans lived to other places where humans also already lived across oceans that supported life.
https://archive.ph/2024.03.23-200424/https://www.theatlantic...
Yes, the `offset` function does this by specifying a bit-offset to branch to. For example the ICO `dir_entry`, which is a directory list of icon resources in the file. https://github.com/kstenerud/dogma/blob/master/v1/examples/i... - It's using image_offset*8 because everything in an ICO file is a byte-offset (8 bits)

It's also needed to parse Minidump. For example https://github.com/kstenerud/dogma/blob/master/v1/examples/m... and https://github.com/kstenerud/dogma/blob/master/v1/examples/m...
Benchmarking hardware has been a thing forever, and applies to a vast swathe of things.
Graphics cards, ram, hard drives, network cards etc.

Then you look further and see that it’s done with coffee machines, motors (of all sorts), and just about any other device you can find, make or name.

Wanting a fast/strong/powerful/quick X is a fairly common thing for many of us.
I don't think visibility is important, since you want autocomplete to work both in public and private methods. It would be a crappy IDE experience if you couldn't autocomplete on private methods within other private methods.

And sure, multimethods are too complex for naive autocompletion. But it's useful for people to have tooling that can say "given an input tell me what outputs are possible" because that's how we write code.
Simplify Sharing: Learn to Create a Simple QR Code Web App
Burning a zero day on an internet spam bot sounds even more insane! Theres no way they make any real money doing that, especially when there are valuable diplomats/large corp execs to target
Lack of any viable alternatives
This. There is something timeless about the '90s internet. Personal websites were invitations to visit someone's digital home and have a look around. The designs were quirky and personal, not standardized and sleek.
It has a pretty well defined spec. It's just not XML, and I think that's okay.

Do you have any examples of undefined or linient rules?

I'm a big fan of optional closing tags that HTML5 has. Can do stuff like:

<h2> Todo List
<ul>
<li> Do task A
<li> Do task B
<p> Dear Diary, ...

Almost as easy as markdown. Couldn't get this working with XML.
> Of course it would not support USB, favouring a proprietary connector so your printing can start 0.1 seconds faster.

The company that shipped the first laptop to go all-in on USB-C in 2016?
This is a good example of why chatGPT is just useless for so many things.

* Why even create a use-time script, when the whole point of the original article is how these tools should be pre-installed, because the system may be in a state where disk, or network io, or load, prevents easy install of anything, during times of instability/issues

* Why bother with a 100+ line script, when you just "apt-get install thing" then use the blasted thing

* Who's going to maintain this script down the road? Why are things on it? Why even spend time looking at it, debugging it?

It's literally creating extra work, whilst doing nothing useful.

Please people. If you don't understand what's going on, or why things are to be done, don't hand it off to chatGPT. Just learn, learn, learn or if you can't/won't learn, go find a job in a different field.
They can't wait to go legit
Then that isn’t nostalgia
Agree with you about needing to click the site and about reading comments. I always read the comments first to see if the link is worth the click (paywall, waste of time, huge banners, scam site, etc.) Big shout out to those folks who are reading the articles and leaving comments for the rest of us. I am guilty of not commenting much on this platform mostly because even with all my experience rarely will my comment add to the discussion.

I have made the game of life at least a dozen times in every new language I learn and am already thinking about how this is done. Even having a few example patterns the user can start with is sometimes a hassle depending on the implementation. This site has almost still life’s, oscillators and spaceships combined into an infinite number of layers (not sure it has all did not verify). The pattern does appear to be repeated but just getting the base layers is very impressive.
the majority of people cannot handle a bunch of things. doesn't mean these things have to be illegal
Stop: Disable the scanning of documents by Adobe AI solutions
Lmao yep.

$2.4mil puts you in the top 2% of Americans.
This basically means 'we're migrating everything to linux'.

The outcome will probably be good for the opensource world.
Try 99.99%
Sure. Let Adobe AI scan all of your documents. What could go wrong?
I did this 6 months ago.

I’m now using a service called Roon to stream my local library, any other track I don’t own gets streamed from Tidal via Roon.
How Do Particle Accelerators Work?
Maybe if it's intentional. Making a statement by hitting the algo buttons.

And I'm not saying he's not.

But do we call it art if it's fraud?

Isn't a lot of HN readers against AI generated spam and SEO spun content?

I don't call those art, and I'm not sure yet what to call thos composer.
I don't know about easy, but hundreds of people have accomplished this as a hobby project using the Farnsworth design, including a handful of very disciplined teenagers.
So do I have this right for the current situation?

Eastasia - own production of h/w and s/w
Eurasia - focus on h/w to make h/w;
otherwise imports from Oceania
Oceania - s/w in the core, h/w at the periphery;
currently attempting to re-centralise h/w production

(it is a sad day when the FT —a british rag— offers but a single word mentioning Arm?)
Smaller revenue share with these SEO artists.
I am more bothered by the part with having over 650 different artist names that hide their link to each other (unlike Prince/TAFKAP, Kanye/Ye, etc).

I mean: your gripe is basically Spotify's entire raison d'etre. On the other hand, there is absolutely no reason to hide your true identity to such an extent, except to be able to act as your own competition.

That is, I think this person knows very well that by using different artist names, he will get Spotify revenue the listeners think is going to different artists.
In the maxima computer algebra system[1] which was ancestrally based on lisp it has a single quote operator[2] which delays evaluation of something and a "double quote" (which acually two single quotes rather than an actual double quote) operator[3] which asks maxima to evaluate some expression immediately rather than leaving it in symbolic form.[4]

[1] https://maxima.sourceforge.io/

[2] https://feb.kuleuven.be/public/u0003131/WBT23/wxMaxima/wxM_i...

[3] https://feb.kuleuven.be/public/u0003131/WBT23/wxMaxima/wxM_i...

[4] although (in my limited experience) maxima sometimes refuses to evaluate anyway even if you do the double quote thing