skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Actually, financial fraud sentencing guidelines add an extra number of years to the sentence that grows by the log of the money stolen: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines-manu...
Many YA readers also just lived through a global pandemic. Changes the expectations around "fiction", perhaps.
‘How can the Torment Matrix work without tormenting?’

Maybe AR devices fundamentally violate privacy? Maybe using them in public is wrong, or at least rude?
It is deterrence: it sends the message of don't do the same thing or you'll wind up in prison for a long time. It really isn't retribution, this kind of enforcement is meant to scare other potential white collar criminals into not breaking the law as well.
if he does 85% and after accounting for the year and a half he’s already been in prison he’ll probably get out by 50
Take a look at the Godot subreddit.
I've seen at least one or two people who made desktop tools with it.
I couldn't find anything I enjoyed in scifi and ended up moving to fantasy instead.

The number of well supported niches in fantasy is ever growing, some with business models that cut out traditional publishers altogether.
Sure, I can see the harm minimization angle, I guess I just view it like a lot of other gov-promoted weakening of security under a purported harm minimization.

Reading through the RFC you referenced ends with this interesting conclusion:

Making networks unmanageable to mitigate PM is not an acceptable outcome,
but ignoring PM would go against the consensus documented here. An
appropriate balance will emerge over time as real instances of this
tension are considered.

Perhaps this is one of the first instances of this tension, at least re: tls1.3? It also doesn't seem that the IETF is quite as uninterested in considering provisions around network management...

I find that a bit unfortunate as network management has a long history of think-of-the-children harm mgmt style abuses. Hopefully this mainly means that they're willing to design protocols in a way that facilitate management without weakening them to PM attacks.
It’s because we made it to the future, we are here.
Tech is unbelievably fantastic: GPS, wireless, lithium batteries, high end displays, etc. have given us extremely useful tools for everyday life. Tech itself is not depressing at all.

What is depressing is the current effect it has on society and a large percentage of sci-fi describes new ways humans make each other miserable. I can believe (but have no numbers) that that kind of sci-fi has become less popular.
As Michael Levin's work shows, one doesn't even need a brain or a nervous system for memory

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brains-are-not-re...
(Apologies for the very slow response; I forgot that this discussion was ongoing.)

"The dose makes the poison" and even without hormesis it can be the case that very small doses of something do you no actual harm because whatever they do is within the range your body can fix quickly.

I haven't seen a study showing that people eating blue cheese (or Brie and Camembert) have worse health; have you?

Chocolate may be "a superfood" but most chocolate also contains quite a lot of sugar, which is (tasty but) very bad for you. I am pretty sure most people who eat substantial amounts of chocolate would be healthier rather than less healthy if they ate less.

Most bacon is cured using nitrates and nitrites, which on cooking produce (slightly) harmful compounds. All red meat seems to be at least a little bit bad for you, too.

To repeat, I'm not saying that we shouldn't eat chocolate and bacon. I eat plenty of them myself. But when we do we're making a tradeoff between present tastiness and future health, and if the same's true for Brie and Camembert then that doesn't seem fundamentally different. And I would be sad if any of those things became unavailable.
What an inspiring passion project! Very ambitious first Verilog project.
I absolutely support education around digital hygiene and online security, I just see the method discussed as behavioral operant conditioning, not pro-active education.

To take the example to the absurd, should we entrap people to teach them not to commit crimes?

I'm also not arguing that it is ineffective, I just view it as morally ambiguous and sowing distrust.
Why on earth did the author even believe he needed K8s to serve 500 concurrent users? You could do that on a couple basic web servers behind a load balancer 15+ years ago. Hell, you could probably run the whole app, including the database on a single server if you don't care about availability.
I think the problem here would be figuring out how much of the brain's power draw to attribute to the multiplication. A brain is more akin to a motherboard than a single CPU, with all kinds of I/O, internal regulation, and other ancillary stuff going on all the time.
The hall monitor simply keeps track of who is breaking the rules. Presumably, that's all the cop does. They're not perp-walking them to jail or something, right?
It's "voice inversion" [1] which conceptually is just flipping the baseband signal's spectrum around a mutually-agreed upon frequency, which serves as the key. The resulting audio is difficult to understand. The UV-K5 is only capable of selecting a single key frequency; more clever schemes will have some sort of rolling code/hopping.

This is separate from CTCSS/DCS which this radio also supports, and is not a method for obscuring meaning.

You are correct that it is illegal to use on ham frequencies (which can't obscure meaning), but I wanna say it's legal to use on FRS. Of course, this radio is not type-certified for FRS, so technically that would also be illegal (although many people don't care so much about type-certification for FRS). You are correct, it has no completely legal use on this particular radio.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_inversion
This gentleman, Jean-Paul Clozel, exited to Johnson and Johnson for $30 Billion _cash_. Ex Roche, founded Actelion Pharmaceuticals with his wife in a rented lab and developed drugs for rare diseases.
The view of life through smartphone apps that have automatically adjusting skinner boxes purposely designed to get you addicted ("""engaged""" they call it) and have you churn through rage bait and """content""" is the least authentic depiction of reality that has ever existed, maybe only behind minstrel shows.

It's like when people call video slot machines "video games". No, not even close.
Your post is a series of bad ideas but it did remind me of something: every interaction with the customer through customer service costs a bank something like ten or fifteen bucks (I'm sure that figure is out of date), and God forbid if they actually take a staff member's time at a bank branch. For that reason alone pretty much everything we're talking about here is a no go. Every "what the fuck is this shit?" question the bank gets about phishing, or - to the point of your post - every "where's the bonus I was supposed to get for correctly flagging your shit?" question the bank has to respond to, would cost them real money.
Ignoring for the moment that transistors and synapses are very different in their function, the current in a CPU transistor is in the milliampere range, whereas in the ion channels of a synapse it is in the picoampere range. The voltage differs by roughly a factor of ten. So the wattage differs by a factor of 10^10.

One important reason for the difference in current is that transistors need to reliably switch between two reliably distinguishable states, which requires a comparatively high current, whereas synapses are very analog in nature. It may not be possible to reach the brain’s efficiency with deterministic binary logic.
On the power usage, the difference is that those synapses are almost always in stand-by. The equivalent would be a CMOS circuit with a clock of minutes.

On the complexity, AFAIK a synapse is way more complex than a transistor. Larger too, if you include its share of the neuron's volume. And yes, the count difference is due to the 3D packing.
Yup, apparently they're doing races in Dubai now? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn5W19sdyf4

Lots of videos of military applications, etc.
Long-Form Factuality in Large Language Models
Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir.

Children of Time by Adrian Tchaikovsky.

I like so-called "hard sci-fi", where effort is made into thinking through the details and the sci-fi bit is not just a backdrop for a regular story, or a way to validate neuroses du jour. Both of these are definitely in my top-10 sci-fi books of all time.
One life sentence and that was based largely on him paying to have five people murdered.
> EDIT: Prison should still be about rehabilitation and treating humans humanely, to be clear.

No. Prison should be about punishment combined with rehabilitation, neither at the expense of the other.

It is perfectly OK to say that punishment, the infliction of pain, for a crime, is warranted even if it has no rehabilitative value, assuming that it is not demeaning or cruel.

Why? Several reasons:

1. Punishment has it's own value for the sake of justice. A hypothetical: Imagine there was a drug, with a 10% fatality rate, that perfectly rendered the receiver incapable of murder without any other side effects. They just perfectly gain control of their emotions and reason, or something to that effect. If a person goes and murders 50 individuals, but takes the drug and lives; they've been theoretically perfectly rehabilitated and need to be let back into society, right?

If you think, "of course not," you are now admitting that punishment has a value by itself.

EDIT: Also, this hypothetical, actually exists. Imagine this case with SBF. Imagine if the only penalty for his actions, were that he could not run a banking organization ever again, or hold more than $1,000,000 in any account that he controls. Perfectly rehabilitated, my hypothetical with the drug, in one swoop. He will never be able to commit this crime again.

I think I might very well run and do a financial fraud tomorrow. At least I'll enjoy the high life for several years. You are literally telling me, in that case, I could live for years, possibly decades (if I'm Madoff), and my only punishment will be that I can't do it again. After all, it's only about rehabilitation for myself; and to do otherwise would be punishment for punishment's sake.

2. If punishment is not given out fairly, and is only contingent upon rehabilitation; you are ignoring the rights and feelings of the victims and focusing too heavily on the rights and feelings of the criminal. Victims have feelings and rights, and considering they are the harmed, their feelings and rights ought to be first priority, and the criminal's second. Otherwise, victims feel the need to take things into their own hands. Always have, always will, as part of human nature. That's how you get societal meltdown, followed by vigilantism.
> But they're neither smart enough nor quite so self-aware that it's designed to deliberately lower fertility rates

So who's doing this deliberation? Again, you're pointing to a conspiracy but also denying its existence in the same breath.
A prison sentence is punishment, not justice.

Justice would be making the victims whole.
# synapses should be analogous to # model parameters no? And # model parameters should be linear in # transistors.
Appreciate you following up! I plan to sign up over the weekend which is normally when I do my longer blocks of studying and have more questions. I think that what I mean is that sometimes if I ask for an explanation about a topic or question, I don't get the magical answer that answers my question after my initial prompt. That is to say, I typically need to ask 5-6 clarifying questions to an LLM to get the explanation that makes it click for me. This can be by asking for more examples, asking it to clarify certain points, fitting an example to another topic I know, etc... I think that while I was talking about it in the context of LLM tutors, the same logic also applies for human tutors as well. It's very hard for me to precisely formulate a question in one-shot that will get the right answer as you don't know what you don't know. And the reason I'm asking LLMs or a human in general is because I can't find a good explanation on the internet as it's typically something very niche or precise. Which is why I think it's good to have a back and forth.
some people get high on 6 years of steady employment. Are you still working there?
For Finland it seems they time their shipping by arrival date. So if arrival date is bit away, they only ship a few days later. But it will hit the arrival window.
I think most people continue to have a primitive association between prosperity and "the Mandate of Heaven." If something is good, it leads to economic growth, and this reflects that the gods are happy about that thing. Of course, I'm exaggerating slightly, but it is almost certain that some people do engage in a certain amount of guilt-by-association during bad times, versus a happier praise-by-association during good times.

See this FRED chart, which shows real median family income in the USA:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N/

Family income hits a peak in 1999 and then is stagnant or declining for the next 15 years, hitting a low point in 2014. It does not recover till 2018.

And this is certainly one of the biggest shocks about the Internet: that it did not lead to prosperity. I'm old enough to remember the optimism and confidence of the late 1990s, we were all certain that the Internet was about to usher in the biggest economic boom in human history.

Exactly the opposite happened: we experienced 19 years of stagnation of family income, the longest stretch in the history of the USA.

So, we've all learned some things, and some of the things we learned have been humbling. Deindustrialization was a bigger deal than we realized, and the cyber economy was a smaller deal than we realized, and competition from China was a bigger deal than we realized.

Between 1870 and 1970 the dramatic advance of science and technology contributed to rapidly rising standards of living. And it was fascinating to speculate about where such trends would go in the future. And that fascination expressed itself in part through science-fiction.

But what kind of science-fiction would appeal today? We've already been saturated by dystopian science-fiction, how much darker should it get? Would people necessarily be interested in a bleak science-fiction that suggests everything is going to get worse and worse forever?

I suspect real-life trends have to resume an upward march of progress before the public is again intrigued by this kind of speculative fiction.
I get the same impressions.
Well, with AI people will still likely be suffering, except those at the top of the pyramid will be doing even better. Not so great. The AI debate is not about technology per se, but more so about seeing how gains in technology / productivity only go to the top, and extrapolating how bad that will be when greed meets the hyper-productivity of AI.
And how does their fertility rate compare? Actually I'll tell you, Sweden's is 1.66, the USA is 1.64.

South Sudan, the poorest country in the world, is 4.54
I received an internal simulated phishing email to my work address, masquerading as a fake Google Play invoice - which happened to show up thirty minutes after I had adjusted payment details on a Google play subscription under my personal email.

It was obviously fake, but the timing was so suspicious, and it came in to the wrong email address - so my first thought was not ‘ah, here’s my Google play invoice’; nor was it ‘ah, a phishing test, let me report it and feel smug’. It was ‘oh crap, my phone must be compromised’ - if someone knows I just updated a Google play subscription, and they cross-associated it with my work email, the only place those come together is on my phone.

Then when I got confirmation that it was a simulated phishing email, my second thought was ‘wait, did the corporate endpoint security system monitor that I was just on the Google play store and send me a targeted phishing attack?’ - which is a significant hit to the degree of trust I place in my employer.

Turns out no, it really was just a randomly selected phishing template and a wild coincidence. But for me it says it is a very bad idea to send out phishing emails that masquerade as real services your employees might use in their private life.
He can’t get parole, but can get RDAP, halfway house, first step act, good behavior (15%), in theory a rule 35b (not sure what he knows), and whatever else gets invented in the future. Maybe a commuted sentence but probably not for a while.

Probably out in 17 years which is still a long time.

I was most surprised by the recommendation of medium security. Not sure how well Sam will do in a medium.
Children of time, the expanse series, project hail Mary, the Martian. Almost all of these were written within the last 10 years.
That one is mostly the result of how useful detectives are for alien/non-regular day settings in general. A lot of scifi stories are in part about well, the science part of the science fiction. You need a character to explore that world/explain the tech and detectives kinda exist orthogonal to the scifi societies - a detective can walk into a slum or into a rich people mansion in the same story and it would fit the job regardless. Having tech explained at them works because you can write them as knowing about the tech, but explaining it makes sense for the sake of solving a case.

That's why detectives are so often protagonists in general, but especially in scifi. The other common approach is the fish out of water, where you introduce someone not used to the scifi society at all and use them as an excuse to explain why the scifi is the way it is. That one tends to have much heavier reader self-insert tendencies though, so writers tend to shy away from it.
Why do you think that? From everything I've read, they had no idea what was going on, they just put their names on things because their son asked them to. If anything their crime was not being inquisitive enough to ask why.
Is the issue then we haven't discovered the magical algorithm run by our brain? If we discover it, then digital circuits will handsomely beat brain.
That future wasn't hard earned, it was handwaved into being (on the back of a world war against genetically engineered mutants and colonization by alien benefactors at that.) The real world is fundamentally cruel. Therein lies the challenge.

Loveable goofs and misfits struggling against the odds to live up to their ideals are relatable, and that future can actually be aspired to. A future which requires humans to be paragons of virtue that have evolved beyond greed, vice and want, in a universe of infinite free energy and abundance, is unattainable. Neither human nature nor the laws of physics can bend that far.

Also the new Star Trek series are incredibly popular, even among many fans of old Trek, many of whom seem to be able to reconcile it with the franchise's espoused values. I guess it doesn't work for you, but you seem to be in a minority among the fanbase in that regard.
They got the engine restarted, though, right? If there's a manual override for the rudder hydraulics it stands to reason that would also be located in the engine room, or at least very nearby. So I suspect this incident actually proves they could have responded to a fly-by-wire anomaly, but can't know without reading the report.
So what are you saying? That prison isn't a deterrent for financial crimes?
> This is a weird form of "privatize the profits, socialize the losses" but with the benefactors being the people intentionally avoiding all the financial laws.

No, it's, as usual, the government choosing to do the wrong thing with your tax money, because it will be bad publicity not to, because votes, because power.
General nanomanufacturing and the genius who founds a new nation in the pacific because of it, complete with geopolitical intrigue and a war because of an upset in the balance of power.

Not dystopian, not utopian, just an adventure.
And why did you thought this?

With an operator, you get HA setup with switch over etc. basically for free.

I would prefer relativly cheap managed db over hosting it myself but its absolutly fine.
I don't think we should pressure people into admitting guilt, but cooperating could be important. What more should he have done to help the people affected by his fraud?
Devika, an open source AI software engineer
The Simplest Thing That Could Possibly Work (2004)
Right it’s those legal issues that I’m trying to understand, the article says he used off-the-shelf parts which usually means encumbrances. I initially thought this was like risc-v where he’d done ALL the work, which seemed insane, the amount of work it appears he did is also crazy for a single person to do. I was just curious on how much was his own.
I was laid off in May 2023 from one of the bulge-bracket banks. Had been doing founder-focused lending on shares of private companies. I'll tell you that I've applied to probably 1,000 jobs since then (across the spectrum of opportunities), and these days rarely get even an acknowledgement of the application or even a rejection. It's basically full-on corporate ghosting.
It could be a mistranslation and just refer to DTS/CTCSS. The cpu isn't powerful enough to implement real AES encryption and the datasheet doesn't mention a hardware crypto module. It could be an inversion scrambler, that's not difficult to implement in software and even if it doesn't have that stock someone could implement it. But scramblers have limited utility now. They are really only useful to annoy others, they are trivial to defeat. Undocumented encryption capabilities are also not unheard of with Chinese made ham radios either. Seems the FCC really only cares when people make a menace of themselves and draw their attention.
Can you elaborate on how FTX's losses were socialized here?
I love HN, it's one of the few places you can get reasoned conversation online.

But this is one of those subjects where it gets weird.

SBF was directly responsible for millions, if not billions, of direct monetary loss to identified individuals. Yet the top comments on HN are all discussing whether incarceration is retribution, spite, deterrence, or rehabilition.

The USA incarcerates people for tiny financial damages at a higher rate than anywhere else in the world. $20 of theft? 5 years away, no problem. $1 billion: well we should consider what we're trying to achieve here...

If the USA is going to be consistent in sentencing then just fucking kill him.

Or reconsider and free the thousands of black dudes serving ridiculous sentences for minor crimes.
I agree with you as well, but this is a major example of how, despite this ideal, something like this can sweep up so many people that would otherwise never interact with a system like this. People who don't know who SBF is, never heard of Hacker News, who don't understand crypto, getting convinced to put money into this by, say, a younger relative. It is a real side-effect of this thing existing on this scale on a planet populated by humans.

People don't go mass free-climbing because it isn't something you do by accident. The danger is obvious. But this danger is abstract, and the ease of entering this type of system can happen with just a few clicks from the comfort of your home. And getting dollar signs in your eyes is a very psychologically influential pull.
Jamba: Production-grade Mamba-based AI model
Do you think it would be better if someone did track you down and punish you? Which world do you want to live in?
Vehicle breakdowns is a different thing. Monroe and associates is one that breaks down a lot of electric vehicles and they say it costs about $1 million for a full breakdown.

Again, that’s a physical breakdown of a product for other companies that pay tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for the full report. This company claimed to do a digital recreation. I don’t even know what that means.
50 years. What the prosecutor asked.