skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Typing `./configure` wont work but something like `./configure CFLAGS="-Wno-error=implicit-function-declaration"` (or whatever flag) might work (IIRC it is possible to pass flags to the compiler invocations used for checking out the existence of features) without needing to recreate it.

Also chances are you can shove that flag in some old `configure.in` and have it work with an old autoconf for years before it having to update it :-P.
As much as I love Mazda, if the only thing they'll have for them is fun, they are dead as a mass manufacturer.
Assuming the original maintainer wasn't in on the con, someone should check on him. Apparently, he already got issues and being gaslit, manipulated and deceived on this level for years, considering the potential consequences and harm caused/barely averted, the unwanted attention, possibly police investigation following... all that may be a bit much.
We've been using Guacamole everywhere after OpenText EOLed Exceed OnDemand and tried to charge way too much for their replacement, FastX. The little bastards even demanded to know what our internal architecture was before they would give us a demo copy to test.

We told them politely where to stick it. Ever since then, we've been using Guacamole everywhere and even created an extension called CHIPS. The developer had a good sense of humor for that.
Who Cares if it Scales? (2022)
Down to one bit but that’s taking the 2.62 bits and then applying the redundancy factor.

What’s cool is that the differentiable activation function is important—-to avoid the linear, perceptron limitation—but the weight scaling can be so simple, at least for LLMs.

It makes me wonder whether the extra layers are effectively compensating; in other words, can the number of layers or hidden neurons be trimmed down if we then add more bits to each weight and still see equivalent effectiveness?
>So if one of your peers pulls a fire alarm or blasts an air horn in your work place, while you're on a call or engaged in some other highly focused task, the appropriate response is to just shrug and think "I need to be such a highly emotionally controlled person that I can only passively deactivate the alarm, contact an authority who won't even be here before the culprit leaves and just move on with my day"?

why are the two options angrily telling someone off or silently and submissively accepting the situation?

the way mature adults react to interpersonal trouble is by quelling instinctive emotions and calmly communicating
Or it should require an unusual and awkward action to open, like having to reach up and break something: https://cdn-01.media-brady.com/store/stuk/media/catalog/prod...
[Below, keeping your choice of metric signature (+,-,-,-)]

> t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2

Off by a constant factor (c).

> distance = [above]

distance^2.

This is still not quite right since we're interested in how coordinate changes affect the spacetime interval. So take distance -> S, the spacetime interval instead of the Euclidean distance, and then sprinkle in the deltas: dS^2 = c dt^2 - dx^2 - dy^2 - dz^2. That is the Minkowski metric (the flat metric of special relativity) in Minkowski coordinates.

The right hand side can be positive (for a timelike spacetime interval), negative (for a spacelike spacetime interval), or zero (for a null spacetime interval). Massless particles, when not accelerated, travel on null spacetime intervals, as do other solutions of massless wave equations. Light is rarely accelerated. However a null interval does not mean no distance, it only means that there is an exact balance between the spacelike portion of the spacetime interval and the timelike portion of the spacetime interval. An object moving against the t and x coordinates at speed "c" will (choosing units for clarity) tick off one second along the t-axis for every light-second it travels along the x-axis. A timelike trajectory ticks off more than one second per light-second along the x-axis; and a spacelike trajectory ticks off fewer seconds per light-second along the x-axis.

So, with light always in inertial motion, and always moving at "c", the spacetime interval for an element of light (classical or quantum) will always be zero. That does not imply in any way that the element of light does not travel at all. Also it does not imply that if we split the spacetime interval into timelike and spacelike components, that we find that the photon experiences "no time".

The confusion arises frequently because the usual way one splits a timelike spacetime interval (e.g. for a massive particle) into its timelike and spacelike components is to use the proper time interval (and that leaves us with proper lengths). Proper time is a specific affine time which can be caluclated for non-null spacetime intervals, but not for null spacetime intervals. We can use a different affine time for those instead (leaving us with affine lengths that are not "proper lengths"). But even so there are changes in coordinates (e.g. (t=0,x=0)->(t=10,x=10); the photon is ten seconds older and ten light-seconds further away along x).

[Experts who already know about invariance under coordinate transformations etc. should also know not to pick too hard at that last sentence. The point is that if we do c \def = 1, then 1dt^2 - dx^2 = 0 for arbitrary photon displacements along x and this is true at least up to rescaling.]
Pretty much proof that OSS != automatically more secure. And proof that OSS projects can get backdoored. See this for more ideas on this issue: https://seirdy.one/posts/2022/02/02/floss-security/
Not a shortcut persay but I love setting alias’s in my .zshrc file to make all my common commands a few key strokes.
A bear stealing human food in no way shape or form suggests that there's not enough food for them in the wild. Stealing human food is just generally easier and tastier.
SportsNGEN: Sustained Generation of Multi-Player Sports Gameplay
This deserves a black bar. He was a pioneer in computer security and was essential in kickstarting the important field of security economics. So sad to hear about this.
Remember people are willing to do just about anything if someone in a position of authority tells them to. New engineers have little "intuition" of what is an isn't appropriate, we rely on the experienced engineers to learn this, along with experience we get along the way, as school mostly teaches us how to learn, not the particulars of whatever job we end up in (speaking mostly of aero's/meche's). You hope you end up in a good place that will train you well but often you are just the newest meat to enter the grinder.

And yes, we often do worry and feel responsibility if something goes wrong or could go wrong. I remember working on a job where I was incredibly out of my depth, where no one in my group had any experience to check what I was doing, which would have had serious implications for peoples lives if my work had an error. I was so stressed I got grey hairs. I know many people who've been in similar positions, or positions of trying to meet impossible deadlines, deal with an unreasonable amount of work that makes doing it correctly unfeesable, or be put in a position where they have to accept practices that they would never put up with later in their careers.
Americans are YOLO spending more but savings hits lows of Great Recession
But nobody was suggesting doing to this to an entire human. Pointing out that doing this would be lethal is a strawman. It's just research to move our understanding of how this works forwards a bit.

Some possible future applications that could arise from much more research were preserving tissue for organ transplants, or maybe in slowing down aging. But not using the current technique.
Looks like the Jia Tan OpenPGP key was replaced a few months ago as well: https://github.com/tukaani-project/tukaani-project.github.io...
Doesn’t training need higher precision to avoid getting stuck at local minima, at least with back propagation style learning?

Maybe something alternate like evolutionary algorithms could work in a domain like this, but so far those have proven to be less efficient.
There is also the OpenEEG project[0], the boards are way cheaper (sub 100eur[1]) and also they are both open source and open hardware.

[0] - https://openeeg.sourceforge.net/doc/index.html

[1] - https://www.olimex.com/Products/EEG/OpenEEG/
Notably that was a "no-one-but-us" backdoor, that requires a specific secret key to exploit. We'll see when someone analyzes the payload further, but presumably this backdoor also triggers on a specific private key. If not there are ways to do it that would look far more like an innocent mistake, like a logic bug or failed bounds check.

I can see some arguments that might persuade the NSA to run an attack like this

- gathers real world data on detection of supply attacks
- serves as a wake-up call for a software community that has grown complacent on the security impact of dependencies
- in the worst case, if no one finds it then hey, free backdoor
Suppressing boredom at work hurts future productivity
why 50 ?
The internet pollution is being done by humans. They're only now using AI to do so.

> In other words, significant numbers of researchers at A.I. conferences were caught handing their peer review of others’ work over to A.I. — or, at minimum, writing them with lots of A.I. assistance.

AI is the lazy tool at the moment, but the internet was already polluted by humans using other means for other reasons besides publishing papers.

Every technological convenience or economic cost reduction has similar effects: email spam, SMS, automated calls, ...
And that's not what I mean. I understand the linking issue. What I'm saying is that the GPL does not force or require someone to relicense their code. Their code is theirs. They only have to license the distribution as a whole with the GPL to be GPL compliant.

You can look at any Linux (or BSD) distribution for hundreds of examples of BSD/MIT code linked to GPL code. The BSD/MIT code packages are not "relicensed" as GPL, but the Linux distribution, as a whole, is distributed as GPL.
I haven’t worked with him but it’s quite clear from his CV alone that he is very technical (ex. programming an entire commerical game at 17) and I doubt there are many things he struggles with. The quote you mentioned is just driving home the fact that he is an extremely high level polymath, a jack of all trades.
The mid-90s RX-7 was sexy as hell.

But the RX-8 just wasn't.

A cool engine still needs to be wrapped in a car that people want to drive.

The MX-30 doesn't quite fit the bill... just seems so mundane to look at.
Well now that's just plain false.

> If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service

Which boils down to "if the program is included in your service"

> you must make the Service Source Code available via network download ... “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service,

Which boils down to "you must release not only the program but also everything that interacts with it"
I left the trades for programming. Your body can't maintain that type of work unless you stay fit. Then there is the risk of injuries which is inevitable. Working on concrete is hard on your knees, hips and back. You eventually have to do something different like management.
And probably unrelated polish beer zubr.pl
CLAs in those cases may be more to cover their ass in case of disputes about authorship, the future of the project, or in case they forget attribution.
Just because there are not forfeiture orders does not mean the FCC field agents sit on their ass.

There are a number of technical violations across many licensed services that the FCC finds and organizes resolution. They don’t fine for honest mistakes and failures, only repeated willful violations. You have to be a real jerk to end up with a fine.

In a most boring sense, they are usually component failures or mistakes in maintenance or operation.

I have been involved in several notices from FCC field offices on technical issues in the first half of my working life, some of them pretty awful ideas and yet none of them resulted in fines when cleaned up in a reasonable amount of time.

Even when an errant AT&T microwave transmitter took out the lower half of the 3 GHz band in Detroit for three weeks, the FCC stepped in, confirmed the source, found who was responsible and the interference solved. No fines, no PR, just a days work.
Since-fired SF Apple employee used work iPhone to leak to press, suit alleges
Looking at your statements from a Hungarian perspective, I think you are wrong

1. The USSR always discriminated non Russian speakers.
2. Collectivisation and military occupation was used as a large scale wealth transfer. In addition forced reeducation camps and population swaps were used to put Russian observers into positions where they were first amongst equals

Russian imperialism has always been the core of the Soviet union.

When people rised up against Russian occupation they got slaughtered in Hungary in 1956 and later in 1968 with the Prague Spring Russian oppression continued
Uhh, read it again, definitely was.
Who is "we"? Are you from the US by any chance? Do you mean that the US government should rewrite every piece of core architecture (including Linux, Ssh, Nginx...) from scratch? Because they are all "contaminated" and actually were created by non-americans.

If that's the case, you do you. Do you also think that all other countries should do the same, and rewrite everything from scratch for their government use (without foreign, for example American, influence)? And what about companies? Should they be forced to switch to their government's "safe" software, or can they keep using Linux and ssh? What about multi-national companies? And what even counts as a "core" software?

So yeah, I don't think it's a good idea.
A recent paper used a single ternary "trit" ~1.5 bits per parameter for training. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39535800 They said it would be difficult to apply this technique to pre-trained models and had to be trained in 1-trit from scratch.
Was Debian 12/stable unaffected? Only sid?
Which like, also wouldn't be totally weird if I found out that the xz or whatever library maintainer worked for the DoE as a researcher? I kind of expect governments to be funding this stuff.
Interesting, haven't seen one of those yet. With public video+audio models getting much better that will only get way worse over time. Excited to see what YT/Google decides to do about it.
In that odd metaphor the dressing started disgusting and you're watering it down in order to make it palatable.
> direct the force into destroying the ship

> You put it ahead of the pylon so that even when the dolphin or bollard is destroyed

Dude, seriously? That has nothing to do with what I was replying to.
Benefits and Calculations of Financial Returns using Pandas and NumPy
1. Simple Returns vs Log Returns:
- The key benefit of using financial returns instead of prices is normalization, allowing measurement and comparison of all financial instruments and assets.
- Pandas and NumPy are used for calculating simple returns with the pct_change function and log returns with the numpy log function.

2. Advantages of Log Returns:
- Log returns can be easily aggregated across time, unlike simple returns.
- Log returns are symmetric around 0 and can range from minus infinity to plus infinity, providing a wider range of possible values compared to simple returns.

3. Realized Volatility:
- Realized volatility measures the magnitude of daily price movements, regardless of direction, over a specific period.
- It is calculated as the daily standard deviation of log returns of an underlying asset, index, instrument, security, or ETF with an assumed mean of zero.

4. Realized Variance:
- Andersen and Bollerslev introduced the concept of realized variance, an ex-post observable measure based on the sum of squared intra-day returns.
- This measure provides further insights into the volatility of financial assets.
You don’t even have to be this conspiratorially minded to believe the NSA is a legitimate suspect here. (For the record, I think literally every intelligence agency on Earth is plausible here.)

You kind of lost the thread when you say, “act against the interests of American citizens and companies”. Bro, literally anyone could be using xz, and anyone could be using Red Hat. You’re only “acting against Americans” if you use it against Americans. I don’t know who was behind this, but a perfectly plausible scenario would be the NSA putting the backdoor in with an ostensibly Chinese login and then activating on machines hosted and controlled by people outside of the US.

Focusing on a specific distro is myopic. Red Hat is popular.
Which day.
Not my area of expertise but I'd assume it becomes a decision tree or something.

Edit: lol https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39868508
I've always found these types of roles working with external recruiters. Places like Robert Half, etc.
Thanks, in my haste I misread. I removed the part claiming it didn't do what it says, though I maintain the changes made simultaneously is very suspect as there is no apparent motivation
So there's no performance gain for quantization enabled by the transformer architecture? It seems very strange that quantization works so well since in most of my experiments, the internal model weights of mlps look random.
What about it?

There's an implicit "always" in their second sentence, if you're confused by the wording. They aren't positing the equivalent of the guard that only lies.
It is quite rewarding knowing that that many of the gears I made between 2015-2020 will still be in use in the year 2100.

However, the pay and the commute across Chicago sucked.
just take a closer look at the analysis https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4

then try to understand the pattern. they backdoored by modifying the build process of packages. now consider the $XZ is also from a backdoored build and the call recognizes in the same way with parameters --robot --version and the shell environment with the hint "xz_wrap.sh" from the piped process. a lot stuff to recognize for the $XZ process that it run as part of a kernel build.

Maybe they put advanced stuff in a backdoored $XZ binary to modify the kernel in a similar way they modified lzma based packages in the build process.
Alot of bright, energetic people out of school sign up because they are doing something unique and cool they truly have a passion for it. So even though the reviews of the place are terrible they will always have a line of talent at their door (atleast until they have more competition). If you are attracting the top tier talent every year, that can solve alot of problems, even if they aren't that experienced.

That being said you are still leaving yourself wide open for failures. Engineering failures often involve people being overworked, not having adequate experience, and working in areas with high churn. See Boeing as an example.
Possibly decades. The ext3 driver, which the ext4 driver is a fork of, could also mount ext2 filesystems.
Not an answer to your question, more bolstering your comment, hoping someone else will come along and be encouraged to answer. Trying to learn about this on the internet is a nauseating series of blogspam.

Edit: Although, this particular article doesn't seem so bad: https://mirasee.com/blog/direct-response-copywriting/
You have two options:

1- You teach people critical thinking and how to read the Bible within the historical context.

or

2- You assume a lot of guess work as facts that support your already pre-conceived opinions and hide the fact that you are possibly wrong.
the definition of scolding is "angrily rebuking or reprimanding someone". in my understanding of human psychology, that is something people do not do to people they see as equals. more specifically it's a behaviour a person is extremely unlikely to participate in if they feel the other person has enough social, physical or economic capital to punish them for it.
Hmm, that's interesting. I've been getting a lot of Instagram and Tiktok reels with the robotic TTS voice nowadays, I've just been assuming that it's a funny thing that people do so that they don't have to record their own voice.

Wondering how / if we should be filtering out this content now that you can make TTS voices that sounds like they're completely real
So I went really cheap and got a Thunderbolt dock for a gpu and a secondhand Intel nuc that supported it. So far it has met my needs.
My assumption is they can’t adjust on the fly because they don’t know which items have a specific time they must be done, like an appointment or meeting, vs a todo item that happened to get a time block associated with it. They also don’t know which items can simply be dropped if time becomes a factor.

I tried Structured and gave up on it almost immediately due to the rigidness. Some people can follow a calendar that closely, but I’m not one of those people.

I put items that must happen at a certain time in my calendar. Everything else is a todo item. If I want to, I could schedule blocks of time on my calendar for working on the todo items. During that block of time, I’d work off the todo list, not the calendar. If the time isn’t important, and the tasks just need to be done in order, then why force an artificial time into the mix? It seems like needless complexity.
OK people. We've enjoyed the "google cancels everything" quip for a decade or so and it's totally based on truth and they totally deserve to be beaten around the head with it.

But can maybe not every comment here be a witty attempt to restate the same joke?
MorphoSource: Find/View/Download3D Data from natural history/science collections
No, this is my work (see the link in my profile). However, I should thank CHEF-KOCH for the post, as I should have done it months ago...

While you are here, have a look at the doc: https://apparmor.pujol.io It is not stable yet, but it is promising.
Example: search for "MSI G27C4X" on YouTube, for me at least both the first and second results are fake robot reviews. There are a couple of real impressions videos by real people but for some reason YouTube sorts them below the AI spam. One of those spam channels is posting multiple reviews per hour, with >11,000 videos and counting.
>and I don't want amateur contributors.

And you're free to not accept amateur contributions to the OS projects you maintain. Hell, you can require security clearance for your contributors right now, if you want.
The more cringe you can bear the faster you can improve.

Record yourself saying stuff and play it back to yourself, and then imagine saying it in a normal conversation. Does it mesh with the context, does it seem fitting. Is your vocal tone or cadence upsetting or reassuring? Compare it with the way known charismatic/comforting people speak.

Generally emotional intelligence is putting yourself in other people's heads and understanding the way they'll react to circumstances and the things you say and do. It's also understanding that people vary, and mental states vary, so the way you approach any interaction has to factor these things in.
Undoubtedly they do. This is an example of why defence in depth is important. Things fail all the time for intentional and non-intentional reasons. A single point of failure can’t be allowed.
> I really don't think some random guy wants to weaken ssh just to extract some petty ransomware cash from a couple targets.

Which is why there's probably nothing remotely interesting in them logs.