skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So I'm not as segfaulted as my self-check feature has reported.
If it's a kind that existed generally, then we can have a past tense.

"He laughed with the kind of booming abandon that made the whole restaurant turn around and look, in the before-times."
Or they will deconstruct the shop in flight. New version of rapid unscheduled disassembly or RUD, normally reserved for crashes and flight failures.
> Unlike on Earth, the moon will not have daylight saving time

Glad to hear that :) DST has caused my team our fair share of headaches and troubles…
People (particularly nuke bros, including some at MIT) are doing it in their arguments purporting to show 100% renewable grids are not feasible.
Breaking Down the Walls of Personal Information Silos. Connected Knowledge
Until the spares fail, in which case it gets fun. This is the case where the spare failed already.
True, both use a filler name like "god" or "dark energy" for gaps in understanding they cannot explain.

But the big difference is: Scientists are happy about "dark energy" being explained away and made superfluous. The filler being smaller or vanishing is progress. A scientist's job is to fill the gaps with proper explanations.

Theologians are the opposite, the filler is their whole reason and purpose. If you take away the filler by providing proper explanations, theologians will resist in any way possible. Progress for them is sowing doubt on all scientific explanations and spreading the influence of their filler on everything.
Copied from OpenTofu's LinkedIn annoucment:

OpenTofu Project was recently made aware of a letter by HashiCorp’s lawyers, alleging that OpenTofu was not respecting the terms of its BSL license governing its Terraform codebase. OpenTofu vehemently disagrees with any suggestion that it misappropriated, mis-sourced, or otherwise misused HashiCorp’s BSL code. Indeed, it seems that HashiCorp may be conflating code that it had previously been open-sourced under the MPL and more recently developed code it published under the BSL. OpenTofu’s maintainers have investigated this matter, and intends to issue a written response providing a more detailed explanation of its position in the coming days.
>So what's the point?

The point is if it breaks after an update you have to get into windows safe mode to unbreak your system if ExplorerPatcher causes an explorer crash loop (which it did in the past after windows updates ran). Even not-too-average Joe might get stumped by this and not immediately know what to do. The process of getting into safe mode is very cumbersome in itself if you need to do it from a system that boots into the desktop without any issue (windows doesn't consider the explorer crashing infinitely to be an issue): you need to forcefully shut down your computer three times /during the boot process of windows/ so that windows thinks "there's an issue" and gets you into the Recovery mode.

It's not like during Windows 7 and older releases where you only needed to press the F8 key to get a menu for safe mode boot. Anything that forces you to attempt to get into safe mode to fix is thoroughly undesirable and unfun to experience.
I'm not sure if the search is fantastic, but it reminds me of the results that old-web used to produce: low accuracy hits with high precision, that introduce you to fun new related things.

https://catandgirl.com/gang-of-five/
I don't think OP is right at all. Just because a company offers managed instances of any random FLOSS service that does not mean they are profiting out of that service.

From the customer standpoint, the choice is between running self hosted instances on bare VMs or use managed instances, and if managed instances are not available then they don't have a lot of alternatives. Managed instances are cheaper to run and operate, and are more reliable, thus it's more advantageous to use those services. For the cloud provider, they are getting paid either way.

It's not like function-as-a-service offerings, where cloud providers charge users a premium for computational resources that run on spare cycles and allow far higher utilization rates, thus getting paid in two or three different ways.
What is your goal ? 1) Know more about how they work on the academic side ? 2) Be able to work in a company that work on LLM ? 3) Be able to work with LLMs 4) agents ? Each of those goal may require different learning "streams"

The book "NLP with transformers", or fast.ai is good for 3). For 1), assuming you do know how they work, I recommend you start reading papers.

I find the discussions around "prompt engineering" to be rather pointless and they are quickly obsolete anyway (newer, more powerful LLMs makes it more and more obvious)
Was I being ironic?
Let's say one builds a basic LLM in python. What's next?

Aren't we limited by compute and GPU power to do anything further ?
This gets even worse in software code. When "Naming things" is hard, and two people name the same thing, they'll very likely give it a different name. A guarantee to maintenance nightmares.

DDD by Eric Evans suggests using Ubiquitous Language. Even when I don't use anything from DDD, I always add a dictionary.md in which we write down the domain terms. What is a Customer? What does a "Loan Application" mean. What can we do to a loan application and how do we call those actions?

It's one of the easiest tricks, that dictionary.md, but with great effect.
Knowing who to trust
So, what he did wrong was this: He took a great personal risk (deciding break the lock) for something that was done wrong in whatever organization this was (there was no procedure for an outage to like this) and with nothing to gain.

He should have reported the outage and the missing key, maybe recommended a suitable emergency procedure and called it a day.
> The point being that the company was extremely aware of what was happening. It was not taken by surprise. But in spite of that, it was still unable to respond.

They had the best processor on the market, yet they decided to sell Intel and Windows. I really don't underestand what were they smoking.
Redis is just one option that AWS offers. They have their own, separate technologies as well. But people were looking for managed Redis, so AWS started selling managed Redis.

Redis Inc also wanted to sell managed Redis, but they can't compete on price/features with AWS, so they instead used the leverage they bought over the Redis community to make Redis effectively non-FOSS.

AWS doesn't depend on Redis. They only have a Redis managed offering because people keep asking for managed Redis. They were also actively contributing to Redis. They really did everything right here, but it still wasn't enough for Redis Inc.

Note that I am not affiliated with either AWS or Redis in any way. I don't even use it in any of the projects I work on. I've just been following this conflict because I am interested in the way open source communities work.
The scope of the problem is such that speaking out won't fix it. Just like the string stuff in particle physics, only an external force (funding agencies) can fix the problem. Decades of this starus quo has proven to me scientists absolutely cannot fix this themselves while they live under this system.
I was making some large assumptions and reading through the lines that they have repos that track many products where particular folders / files have zero overlap with the whole. Or perhaps they have situations where they're working on configurations that can only be tested by deploying them and not by local tests. There's lots of reasonable reasons for only needing to be concerned with a portion of a repo. I'm giving the author the benefit of the doubt as the expert in their own job that they are in one of those reasonable situations.
Different budgets (in a lot of companies they don't have to do paperwork for a project that fits in the assigned budget, but monthly contracts have to be improved higher up and with the IT dep etc) and one doesn’t exclude the other; once I built it for that company I can recreate it and try to sell if I believe it's worth it. My first SaaS company actually was created (in 2001) when one of my enterprise clients said I was allowed to not only sell the solution we built for them but they would actually encourage their competitors to use it so they get new features without having to start a new project themselves. But we kept selling custom/from scratch implementations as well because some companies simply want to own things. The company still exists and sells the same product (very much changed over the years). Was built in Java.
I don't understand why anybody would commit to work that explicitly and deliberately makes other people's lives miserable.

Where do you draw the line?
I can but then it will lose the very thing that makes it really attractive. Being managed. If I have to manage I rather use a normal postgres server
Give me the same taskbar as in Windows 10 and I'll switch to 11.

Otherwise I might just purge Windows and go 100% Linux.

All the Windows games are crap anyway that are coming out in the last decade.

What was the last good Windows only game I enjoyed?

Battlefield 2042, but it sucked and still does as a game.
BG3 works well emulated.
CP2077 not sure.
Jagged alliance 3 should have no issues. (Why does my phone annoy me with always replacing have with habe?)
It falls short because you can just transpose the latents and use whatever vae you want.
OP might be concerned it's bogus untested crypto from the bleeding edge 70s. not tested crypto from the 40s to 60s we use safely on everything today.
> It doesn’t want to pay license fees.

When a business is strong-armed to pay for something, doesn't it make sense to spend the money on an alternative that is cheaper, more reliable, trustable, and preserves its control?
Windows = Adware
That second thread is really interesting — I don’t think I have to worry about blindness, but I’ve wondered how I’d adapt to working if I couldn’t see, or didn’t have use of one or both hands.
Disposable Temp Mail
Debating is difficult enough with the ambiguity in natural languages. If you don't even try and be plain what you're trying to say, difficulty will be compounded. If you were agreeing, why not say "I agree" or "I agree but what about..."? I don't know what a totemic representation is, elephant metaphors were ambiguous (obviously the civilians suffer most, I know it, you know that I know it, so what point are you trying to make?), Quoting stuff in Greek and then telling me to google it instead of saying it plainly – not wise.

You made a simple thing difficult (and yes, doubtless I'm partly to blame as well).
Not a film, but the book How Apollo Flew To The Moon is a fairly technical story of how it was done.
Is the company in the business of selling status pages ?
"scrolll" – a demo for 32 HTML scrollbars [video]
So how come, that far fewer people can role out such a feature easily, while MS cannot? "No need to offer support." I hear you say, but is that really it? If the feature just works well, because it has been developed well, and does not cause many if any support cases, then that point would be invalid. Lets take for example XFCE panels. I can stick them wherever I like. If there is a problem, then it is with panels themselves, not with their position. And for things like deskbar mode I can write a wiki article and point people to that.

I think support shouldn't be such an issue, if things are well done. And of course you can always have less-power users, who will have some issue. But they will have issues anyway, if not with a deskbar kind of thing, then with some other thing. Should MS therefore strip their OS of all features? It seems ridiculous. Why not release a "Windows for computer illiterate" version then and keep a capable version?
Another big reason not to keep this stuff is just the cost of dealing with requests from law enforcement. At some point you start getting them.

If you don't have any logs you can just always say the princess is in another castle, since you can't provide data that doesn't exist.

If on the other hand you do have the requested information, you need to determine the validity of the request, and then extract the data; or refuse to comply and possibly put yourself at legal risk. For a smaller business that's probably a can of worms you'd rather avoid opening.
Yes. Thanks for the correction. I didn’t know
Are the desktop apps usable with a controller?

Last time I tried they didn't work well at all.

What I meant was getting a media server running.
For each individual person, county, or state it wasn't even that expensive. And it allowed the entire country to come together and do something cool as a society. This has value that you should never underestimate: it improves morale, and spurs innovation and industriousness, with effects far beyond the national effort.

Unfortunately it didn't also herald in a new (and rather more ethical) era of colonization at the time. In fact we've been in a bit of a space exploration winter for a while. But new developments look really promising. This time we might end up a 'multiplanetary' species.
How I improved the loading time of a MySQL table with and20M rows
I think those differences are primarily due to Gaza being urban guerilla warfare with Hamas not wearing uniforms and Ukraine being conventional warfare with frontlines.

Look at the battles of Grozny for a more apt comparison of Russian urban warfare.
Putting a footer like that at the bottom of text makes it more difficult to read. Ironic given that the topic is communication...
Android appears to be the only example.

I don't see inconsistent behaviour on my BSD boxes either.

It's not open source that the issue here, despite it being framed that way.
Yes, IT processes significantly differ from those in other areas and can't be evaluated by the same methods - due to the complexities, hidden problems, and overevaluated expectations. For example, the known fact: adding a new member to a team doesn't linearly increase productivity.Nowadays probably AI will help here :)
And we had loitering missiles for a long while too. They are a valid use case.

> You just launch them when you have a target.

That is the magic. You can launch a loitering munition when you don’t yet have a target but suspect there might be one. This is very often the case with surface to air missile systems. If they radiate you can use that as a guiding signal to hit them, so most of the time they don’t. You launch the loitering munition which either baits them into radiating or you use something else as bait. Either way you get them to radiate and then the loitering munition already in the air homes in on that signal and destroys the radar, or if it is smarter the personel.

The reason you want these to be in the air before they radiate is to shorten the reaction time. That way you can capitalise even on short burst of activity.

In the end you either destroyed the SAM or supressed them by scarring them into not to radiate.

If this sounds scifi to you, these are weapons from the 80s. Already old news.
Related NASA blog post

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39941090
Most of the company can barely type. Many don’t speak fluent English. They will not able to write to communicate.

This may work with a well functioning team and organization where everyone has basic literacy skills, but I suspect every big co is similar.
Can‘t recommend the fast.ai course by Jeremy Howard highly enough, it walks you through building your own deep learning stack from scratch. What I really appreciate about it is that it demystifies a lot of jargon to what really are quite simple ideas at their core (e.g. „rectified linear unit“ sounding scary even though its literally only a line with a floor).

The 2022 edition isn’t so much about LLMs as about image generation with stable diffusion, but the underlying techniques are still foundational enough to be generally useful. YMMV, but for me building things from scratch, even if results don‘t reach SOTA, is the single most effective way to learn what‘s really going on.
Venmo and Uber are also episodic. Personally I'd lump D and E into a big folder, no need to constantly be reinstalling the same thing.
At its peak, Apollo was several percent of federal government spending. That is expensive, and the putative benefits you suggest are certainly (IMO) not worth that cost. Your argument sounds like the kind of rationalization a special interest puts out when their hand is found in the cookie jar.
Created a frontend for a friend and he didn't use it.
> You surely don't expect this to survive all future refactorings and cleanups?

The Win10 bar code has been there, since October 2021, though? I don't know how frequent refactorings are (at M$FT) but given it's been there for nigh three years, I don't see how that's a relevant factor.

Even _if_ it were refactored (and/or cleaned-up), it wouldn't be omitted from the release notes, right?

Unless it's on the roadmap _for_ cleanup, this change to try to "disallow" the program, purely based on the program name and no other identifiers, doesn't give me (don't know about anyone else) much faith that removal would either be executed or executed well (e.g.: legacy Win code spaghetti'd to other code that they haven't changed/fixed, yet).

If I were a betting person, new feature 'x' for cloud or advertising purposes would take priority over any modification[s] or clean-up/removal.

In other words, there's no ROI (read: profit) in fixing their technical debt, currently, and there hasn't been for almost three years (if we go with the lifetime of the Win10 bar code existing still in the Win code-base).

Why would that suddenly change?
Needs a name change. Absolute no-go in Germany, because the name means "wank".
I'm not sure if the device is currently being sold since they need to get the approval for any medical devices. For results and accuracy please check their papers from several years back [1], [2]. I think may be you are right, for transparency they need to release all the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the non-invasive glucose detection device, and from the publication title it seems only sensitivity results are currently being published. Personally I have one patent pending on non invasive ECG anomaly detection that cover both arrhythmia and ischemia with comprehensive 99% accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, and high accuracy of non invasive detection technique is certainly achievable.

[1] Microwave Noninvasive Blood Glucose Monitoring Sensor: Penetration Depth and Sensitivity Analysis (2018)

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8428850

[2] Microwave noninvasive blood glucose monitoring sensor: Human clinical trial results (2017):

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8058721
> And redis doesn't want to pay contributors. Same gist, same shortsighted take on the whole matter.

People who parrot these mindless rants on licensing purity would do well to learn what Redis inc actually is, what's it's relationship with Redis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redis_(company)
It takes time to design and manufacture chips.
The next time you're having a frustrating debugging session, comfort yourself with the knowledge that you're not debugging a hardware issue on a computer built 50 years ago where it takes 45 hours to produce the output of every single command, and where failure means the loss of one of humanity's most important scientific relics.
Give it time my friend. Give it time. Now, if the headline is that Voyager 1 has been mysteriously upgraded and is transmitting a 5TW signal and appears to be heading back, then do please do the 'aliens' thing.
I should have added to my original comment that I wasn't criticising the article, which I really enjoyed. Glad it was taken that way!

It's really interesting that those early systems really did deal with deltas. Unbelievable that ideas from systems that have been and gone before people's lifetimes still prevail today. When was the last time users needed to know about deltas? Possibly skipping ahead impatiently here...
Face to face communication is very underrated nowadays, probably because of the negative connotations associated with meetings. Talking to someone is by far the fastest way to convey information. I often prefer a quick chat than spending 30 minutes writing Slack messages back and forth. I agree that writing has other benefits and it's better in certain cases but we need to get out of the mindset that writing/async is always better.
I'm sure NSA has tools to attack air gap computers too.
> “He laughed with a booming abandon that made the whole restaurant turn around and look.”

Don't the people in the restaurant actually turn around in this sentence, whereas they didn't in the original, because it's just describing a kind of loudness with an example?

> “He laughed with the kind of booming abandon that makes the whole restaurant turn around and look.”
But a different spelling
Accepting connections, yes, but for a client that is dependent on being able to establish ssh connections that is not enough. They would want to be notified on the ability to make successful connections.

Keep in mind that this is only a problem in special situations, almost no regular Linux servers carry any services that care about being able to establish ssh connections, that cannot reconnect and use appropriate socket options. For other services than ssh, such as databases, this is much more common. And for those, it is not enough that the server has opened a listening socket.

When building distributed systems, this is something you need to think about. Not so such with local systems. But the same principles apply. And the only robust way is to poll for readiness. Signalling readiness is both complex, when the dependency chains are non-trivial, and prone to error, when readiness signals arrive out of order or are dropped or fail for some reason. This could be because of operations failure but make for hard to debug cases. Dependency chains that mysteriously stop because of permission problems with out of band traffic is both classic and unnecessary problem.

All of this complexity go away when polling. This is why you should adopt this design in the somewhat unlikely case you have clients that depend on being able to make ssh connections.
That’s not infrastructure as code means. It means engineers wouldn’t have ability to run terraform on laptop at all. They have to make a PR, get it reviewed and the code lands in some prod level branch where CI would run terraform for them.

And if things got messed up, revert the commit and we are back (mostly - May need backup restores).

It means your infrastructure is a commit that you can see history and forward/reverse.

Git represents your infra. If it’s not in the repo, it’s not there.
Maybe we should try LLMs to generate documentation.
That's the algorithm side, you also need training data. Can experiment with different data.
Playing "7 minutes in heaven"
>I've seen nothing but Redis thrown to the wolves for daring to ask for money,

Reducing it to purely "asking for money" is not what the criticism is about. The issue is the changing of licensing terms and not the money.

Other open source projects that also have commercial paid products/services include SQLite, Bitwarden, TrueNAS, etc and yet there isn't endless arguments about those projects "asking for money" because their licenses have remained stable and don't change. GPL, AGPL, BSD, public domain, etc. doesn't matter; they didn't change the license.

That's what the whole "rug pull" arguments have been about.[1] One can choose to side with Redis Inc over Amazon but you can't mischaracterize what the debate has been focused on: changing the license.

Did Redis Inc have legal right to do that?!? Yes. But the debate wasn't about their legal right.

The following 2 types of timelines have very different reactions from the community:

- start with SSPL license on day 0 and never change

vs

- start with BSD license and keep it for 15 years and then change to SSPL

[1] 2018-08-22 >, this is Yiftach, CTO and Co-founder of Redis Labs. First, let me assure you that Redis remains and always will remain, open source, BSD license. -- from
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17819392