skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I assume the GG, being a viceroy, can sign these things on the king's behalf?

Apparently not. According to a 1946 edict of Buckingham Palace (whose text does not appear to be publicly available, although there are public documents referencing it), the procedure is (a) request is approved by Prime Minister (for national orgs) or state Premier (for state-based orgs)–in their sole individual discretion, (b) PM/Premier advises GG/Governor to submit request to Buckingham Palace, (c) the King/Queen signs it and returns it. Although theoretically either the GG/Governor or the monarch could veto the request, it is almost inconceivable they ever would. I think, theoretically, Buckingham Palace could delegate the power to sign them to GG/Governor, but they likely worry that not having the monarch sign it personally would deprive it of its magical properties. Also, in 1983, the federal government adopted a policy that the PM would no longer consider applications for the title "Royal" from national orgs, so now only state-based ones can get it. Any future PM could decide to change that, but in over 40 years nobody has. Even Tony Abbott, who was such a devout monarchist that he had to (briefly) resurrect knighthoods, couldn't be bothered.

> If you're going to cast a magic spell you've gotta get it right.

As I mentioned in a sibling comment, there is a notice on the Privy Council's website saying their list is not exhaustive, and please contact them to report any omissions. So, a few hours ago, I contacted them to query whether the College of William and Mary's omission is intentional or a mistake. I'll see what they say. It helps they have a copy of their charter on their website: https://scrc-kb.libraries.wm.edu/royal-charter
I think it should be a fundamental right to pay for goods with cash.
I was hoping that we would be able to post a voice message :(
I think it's okay to want the freedom, outsized reward and even the status of being a successful founder, with all the risks attached. I think it's also fine to want the benefits and stability of being an materially comfortable employee in tech with a good career progression. They are different paths and different strokes work for different folks.

But I think it's fair to say you have to pick a lane. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you haven't succeeded as a founder, it rings ironic to proclaim "4 year vesting with 1 year cliff is just simulating what FAANGs were doing 10 years ago but out of touch tech wannabes are imagining is normal now" or that "we only took non-dilutive capital, nothing that converts to shares - people need to use their imagination."

Do you think it's fair for someone would to ask whether if you were really serious about succeeding as a founder, you should've invested a little less imagination into the capitalization strategy and a little more imagination towards identifying the ideal customer problem to be solved? After all, it's not like there's any dearth of founders who have built successful businesses with the standard VC backed approach. Especially those who were facing bear markets for what they were building.

Lord knows VC could use some competition. The issue I've observed is that everything else (except bootstrapping for very specific kinds of businesses) is purely worse for a founder who isn't already independently wealthy, which is ultimately just a different kind of bootstrapping.

I'd love to be proven wrong if there is, empirically, an alternative.
> Create a time standard for not-on-a-celestial-body

I mean, you can do this. We’ll still need a separate standard for each body. Particularly as they get farther apart.
Virtue signaling. Let’s see the unintended consequences.
The local Walmart expanded self-checkout and it works surprisingly well (the bag scale seems to be very loosely calibrated or off). I wonder if they're doing things differently depending on how much product walks out the door.
It wasn’t pointless, they were training an AI that never fully worked. It’s ultimately the same kind of thing as people monitoring self driving cars, a boring task that may be pointless or possibly remove a lot of drudgery longer term.

According to The Information, 700 out of 1,000 Just Walk Out sales required human reviewers as of 2022. This widely missed Amazon’s internal goals of reaching less than 50 reviews per 1,000 sales. Amazon called this characterization inaccurate, and disputes how many purchases require reviews.
The paper[1] seems promising, is there a fine-tuned model available? Or will we have to fine tune Llama-7b or Mistral-7b ourselves?

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.05657.pdf
Anthropic's Prompt Engineering Interactive Tutorial
Also the hook still has to hold
It's really tunable and some stores are tuned to "Fort Knox" where even a fly landing UNKNOWN ITEM IN BAGGING AREA.

Others are so loose that you don't even have to take things out of your cart, scan and pay and go.
I implicitly ignored encoding schemes like base 36 and 32 (and 16, referenced elsewhere in the thread) because they're not as good as the schemes referenced in the post. The best you can get that's fully URL safe with Alphanumeric is a hypothetical base 39, referenced in a footnote, and only using 39 of the 45 possible characters has 3.9% overhead (even ignoring the 50% overhead of the https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9285.html encoding).

I've added an analysis of many more bases to the article: https://huonw.github.io/blog/2024/03/qr-base10-base64/#fn:ot...
Totally off-topic, but in that video you have some preview view on the right-side of your code window in VS where you can scroll visually through a large file. How the hell do you switch that on? I've been using VS for 30 years and never seen that, but it would be really helpful for the shitty apps that I write for my own use which are single-file monsters.
(I've added an analysis of this and other bases to the article: https://huonw.github.io/blog/2024/03/qr-base10-base64/#fn:ot...)
In this youtube video example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fjixBNKUbM

you demonstrate adding the new icon to the page and then modifying it with a hover alternative color. But the rest of the compare/diff/review workflow only focuses on the change between non-highlighted -> highlighted.
To me, the important part is the addition of the icon to the page, and as a reviewer it would be of upmost importance to see the visual diff of the page before and after, rather than just an icon and it's hover alternative.
I do not. But I have been musically inclined in the past. Just wish I had more free days to get back into virtuoso
As far as I can tell, every Uniqlo has this. And you’re right, this is by far the best checkout experience. It’s what Amazon wishes they’d built.

I can’t imagine there’s that much untapped profit in the grocery business that Amazon could turn a profit with such an expensive and unreliable mess like Just Walk Out and I find it’s so typical Amazon to find out that the man behind the curtain is actually a bunch of offshore workers in India.
we've been pretty happy with just a Clickhouse DB and sending metrics directly from api servers to Clickhouse HTTP https://clickhouse.com/docs/en/interfaces/http . Hook up Grafana and you have a nice raw SQL (our team loves SQL) Grafana dashboard.
Well, it's a specialty item that can substitute for a very popular mainstream one in a number of popular use cases.

And come close to substituting in a number of cases that might still lead to a bit of rapid adoption.

More ideal as an incremental acquisition for many of those who already possess the mainstream merchandise. Not so much desirability for those that would have to choose one or the other. So that's a smaller subset of the niche.

Then there are those who find the novel solution is superior for their particular needs, an even smaller subset, but more enthusiastic.

Seems like the behavior would be to fly off the shelf until the subsets of the mainstream have been saturated, then plateau at the rate that the mainstream becomes amenable to replacement.

At the smallest of scale, like with handcrafted items, it can occasionally be easy to do well financially as long as you can sell all you can make. This can happen when they're "flying off the shelf" so there can be relentless pressure to just make more, and the pressure can seem unending when there is a multi-year timeline for any scale-up activities.

If the market matures at a less-giga-than-anticipated level, and you end up in the process of building more than you can sell on an ongoing basis, you have reversed the financial opportunity that was supposed to accrue by building more to begin with.

One day when you wake up and can no longer sell all you can make for some reason, it's a whole different ball game.
[Submitted on 21 Mar 2024]
On the Conversational Persuasiveness of Large Language Models: A Randomized Controlled Trial

https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14380
Gotcha. In the latter case, would file globbing through bash/whatever suffice? Been trying to avoid opening more cans of worms than I need, but if I really do need to add file globbing then oh well : v

EDIT: Scratch that, I'll just add file globbing since I'm that close to covering most use cases anyway.
With BGP, you are usually only peering with a couple entities unless you are yourself in the "big boys club". It's a relationship business, but you only need a relationship with the handful of engineers who are on the other side of your own links.
> (And one schism further led to the church I grew up in.)

If you don't mind me asking, which church is that? Church schisms is just one of those topics that may seem very dry to most people, but I personally find fascinating
You started this by asking

> Have you seen any positive discussion of Apple here?

strongly implying that you think there's no positive discussion of Apple here.

> I see absolutely no reason why the null hypothesis should be that a randomly selected social group would be unbiased about any particular issue by default. If you think about it for any length of time you should see that as implausible on its face.

Wikipedia: "The null hypothesis is a default hypothesis that a quantity to be measured is zero (null)."

You're looking for an effect, in this case "bias for or against Apple", and claim not only that it's nonzero but that it has a certain sign. The only reasonable null hypothesis is that there's no bias, because without doing an actual study, there's no way to say whether any bias that might exist is pro- or contra-Apple. And "I never see anything good said about Apple" only counts as extremely weak evidence, given how incredibly prone to confirmation bias humans are.
yeah i always feel like these subreddits are off like its an echo chamber for jaded gaijins who can't handle seeing happy gaijins

glad to hear so many ppl having a complete opposite time
To put that in perspective: PETA's revenue is about $66 million. So they've got about $10 per animal per year. Even if PETA would only take care of 10% of animals, that means $100 per animal per year.

It's hard to say how much an "average dog" would cost to feed because there is so much variety, but ~$25/month seems like a minimal baseline. So that's $300/year in food alone, for a small dog with cheap food. Larger dogs can easily be $600/year.

And that's just food, not counting vet costs, housing, cost of things like toys and whatnot, staff costs (this sort of thing can't really run on 100% volunteer work), etc. etc.

"PETA has a lot of money, they can just set up a sanctuary" is one of those arguments from ignorance that only makes sense if you spent less than 10 seconds looking at it.
Now that you say "combined with an asserted DNT bit" I can see where your confusion comes from. Incognito mode doesn't imply DNT. But I can see many non-technical users (as well as technical users who purposefully muddy the waters) equating Incognito mode with the DNT bit, and equating the DNT bit to be a legally binding request to the website not to track them.
Haha, that's an interesting way to put it. We didn't benchmark Version 3 because 2-Phase Commits are pretty rare and Version 4 because parallel apply of in-flight transactions don't extend to non-postgres targets.
FYI Creo is already the name of a pretty popular mechanical CAD tool.
> Though it seemed completely automated, Just Walk Out relied on more than 1,000 people in India watching and labeling videos to ensure accurate checkouts. The cashiers were simply moved off-site, and they watched you as you shopped.

Wow - I did not know this. This makes it all a whole lot less impressive and interesting that it was just people off shore watching you.
> And all for slightly faster shopping.

Wanted to comment on this part -- Prime itself was nothing more than faster shipping, though yes the difference between 4-6 weeks standard vs 2-days was massive (not just slightly faster). But the point is, Amazon excels at identifying friction points that others have just accepted as industry norms, but which, if unblocked, could actually meaningfully shift consumer behaviors.

Go might be a failed experiment, but "slightly faster shopping" is probably an unfair trivialization of what the experiment hypothesis was really about. A core thesis of Amazon in general is basically, to fanatically remove any unnecessary extra steps/friction/bureaucracy/etc., between a consumer and their act of purchasing.

For another example, think back to why Amazon cared so much about the 1-click patent -- legal validity aside, the idea that you can have 1-click checkout, was pretty revolutionarily customer-obsessed, compared to the average online shopping experience of the early 2000s.

And in fact, the natural progression from 1-click, is of course going down to "0 clicks", which is what things like, subscribe-and-save, memberships/subscriptions, or Alexa/Echo styling clothes for you, are meant to do -- they are meant to shift the consumer's mental model of shopping away from emphasizing the build-up from browsing into the climax moment of then clicking to purchase, to instead make the actual purchase decision more of a hidden-in-the-background/automatic thing, instead of a foreground conscious choice.
If you don't like going to the grocery store pay someone to go get them for you. Thousands of people remotely "following" you around and scanning things for you, just so that you can avoid using self checkout sounds ridiculous and excessive.
Ha! :-D

Too late to edit now, but I decided against writing that last sentence but apparently I failed at deleting it. I was thinking to say "I don't know how they can expect their children to act decently when they model such indecent behavior" but it felt a little too harsh.
People here are really dying on the weirdest of hills
It really depends what value the project is bringing to the world. LLMs are using tons of energy but no one say it's waste because it's bringing values to the world. I think the right question to ask is are the crypto projects meaningful.
California introduces 'right to disconnect' bill that allows employees to relax
Total investment into Latam startups dropped 81% from 2021 peak
My concerns about this were theft, mistakes, cost to operate, and opportunity costs.

Theft is an obvious one. It happens in self checkouts in many ways. We had people come into our store to just leave with baskets of stuff, load their pockets, take stuff from one box to put in a cheaper one they bought, or even put raw eggs and meat in their pockets. That was with a ton of workers in the store looking out for thieves.

Errors could result in us being charged for what we didn’t buy. The amount could be lower or higher. Some people go through their whole receipt double checking it. Many of us just watch it as they ring it up, deal with it there, and stop thinking about it once we leave. Could this impact peace of mind?

Cost to operate seemed like it might be high. Aldi and Costco show a traditional self-checkout can be cheap to operate on top of serving high-end customers. (See theft/shrink, though.) I figured the machine learning alternatives would cost thousands to tens of thousands a unit for combinations of cameras, servers, and licensed software. They’d also need to be monitored and/or trained by humans which this article just confirmed.

I was also worried about fraud. My company bought a solution that monitored customers with infrared cameras, monitored checkouts, and predicted how many registers we needed. That was a terrible system that hurt us more than it helped. We were required to act like it worked to please those who spent hundreds of millions on it. I wondered how often such dishonest referrals helped the supplier sell them. Made me skeptical about more AI.

Finally, the human touch that comes with good cashiers increases customer satisfaction. Our customers often looked forward to seeing us. For some, we were the only or best social contact they got that week. Others liked getting out of the house for a long period of time. Sometimes they’d have us push products and services which, normally a negative for all, is largely how they drove up credit card use and feedback on the customer tracker.

For those reasons, I advised against using AI for anything other than helping employees do their jobs more easily. If for that, that it would be a support tool instead of trying to replace skilled, decision makers. Then, simply invest those millions to hundreds of millions in the employees. Worked for Costco and Publix. :)
apps are a new thing. before, when it was just a phone number, 867-5309 in the us would usually work to get the discount while being usefully trackable
Well, the threat model here is that a maintainer themselves is the saboteur.
That wasn't the unary plus, it's the international exit code
A Gentle Introduction to the Art of Mathematics
2+3=5. In general, the weight idea is impossible. For any two items, you can find the LCM in units of the precision of the scale, and then you won't know if they got LCM/a of one or LCM/b of the other.
Good point! I've added an analysis of this and other bases to https://huonw.github.io/blog/2024/03/qr-base10-base64/#fn:ot...
Yeah, I don't get it. Assume I have a standard URL with query params, the web browser doesn't understand the decimal encoding – right?

Let's assume... this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=39907672&goto=item%3Fi...

The special encoding is just about sending data to the backend?
Any ideas whats stopping it from becoming much cheaper? RFIDs on everything seem like a good move in the robotics age.
Solving the problem of having a transactionally consistent subscription on arbitrary data joins / fetches is hard, but it's so nice to have. If you haven't checked it out yet, Convex provides this out of the box. A blog post on how it works just landed today: https://stack.convex.dev/how-convex-works
Show HN: A Product Hunt Alternative for Indie Makers
So often, there is so much unnecessary packaging, box in the box, in the bag in the bag in the box, I wouldn't mind if a product or food is packaged much simpler
Good catch! I should've tested. I've added a paragraph to https://huonw.github.io/blog/2024/03/qr-base10-base64/#extre... about this.
Sometimes at work I’m concentrating so hard my Apple Watch logs a sleep session…

Definitely not 100% accurate but as someone who checks their sleep log (and time in each stage using the Pillow app) daily, it seems pretty accurate and I can correlate how I feel on a given day back to that day’s sleep report with pretty good correlation.

Definitely not perfect but better than nothing.

If you’ve ever been on medication that suppresses REM sleep, Apple Watch detects REM rebound very clearly.
How Ramp automated receipt processing with fine-tuned LLMs
Orders of magnitude more than existing barcodes which are practically free due to being printed on the packaging. A 10c RFID tag would be 10% of the cost of many products, which im sure is unacceptable to grocery stores which I can't imagine have great margins.
Say goodbye to the future! The one that IBM promised us 18 years ago in this advertisement: https://vimeo.com/29120357

In fact, that ad also shows how awkward the concept is (or maybe the fact that we're still not ready for it). It's a really fun well-made video but a thoroughly unconvincing advertisement.
I would have agreed with you more readily a year or two ago. Here’s a quote from the current Sherman lawsuit against Apple:

As Apple’s executives openly acknowledge: “In looking at it with hindsight, I think going forward we need to set a stake in the ground for what features we think are ‘good enough’ for the consumer. I would argue we’re already doing more than what would have been good enough. But we find it very hard to regress our product features YOY [year over year].”

It sounds to me like they think their products are too excellent, and they want them to be worse actually.
Right click the scroll bar and choose "scroll bar options" then under "behavoior" select the 2nd option with the source overview set to "wide"
There is some degree of that in these apps already, for example I believe both grubhub and doordash will group up orders so one courier can do multiple deliveries back-to-back in a single trip.
> Most bug reports you get in the wild are more along the lines of

Since this fixes 12% of the bugs, the authors of the paper probably agree with you that 100-12= 88%, and hence "most bugs" don't have nicely written bug reports.
It's entirely up to the store how sensitive (or if it cares about weight in the bagging area at all).

And how that's set usually has more to do with the store's location than anything else.
I disagree with this especially when they launched their "new" platform in 2020:
https://developers.hubspot.com/docs/api/overview

> HubSpot’s developer platform is a core part of our mission to empower organizations to grow better. Our APIs are designed to enable teams of any shape or size to build robust integrations that help them customize and get the most value out of HubSpot. All HubSpot APIs are built using REST conventions and designed to have a predictable URL structure. They use many standard HTTP features, including methods (POST, GET, PUT, DELETE) and error response codes. All HubSpot API calls are made under https://api.hubapi.com and all responses return standard JSON.

I'm getting a bit more estate transfer implications in their old docs but barely

> The API is built to allow you to create a functional application or integration quickly and easily. We know from experience - these are the APIs that power the HubSpot application. The ecosystem of developers creating integrations on top of the APIs is strong and diverse, ranging from webinar providers to CRMs to social media.

Not really sure where they mention it as a state transfer service. Not to mention even if it was, their lack of support for over 50% of their workflow/sequence/queue automations products make state transfer impossible anyways even for internal teams.
I think you'd need to be a few rungs up the Kardashev scale to even contemplate this.
Not forking. There are systems for internal dependency management. You can have an internal npm or maven or whatever with only approved packages and versions.
I always thought that "flash" memory was named for EEPROM's erase speed compared to EPROM erase speed (less than a second versus 20+ minutes).

EPROM has erase as the first word in the acronym, so everyone just said "erasing" the PROM when they put the chip in the UV eraser.

Wikipedia lists finer differentiation between flash memory and EEPROMs.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEPROM#Related_types