skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
it does for minors once they become adults?
See also: the Texas "water breaks ban", which actually superceded all county and municipal employee protections in a wide array of classes that exceeded the state minimums.
That sounds like a popular misunderstanding of the mutual accusations before the 1990 invasion between Iraq and Kuwait of overpumping from the oil field that crosses their border (which did not involve “slant drilling”).
Bloop – AI Legacy Code Modernisation
I'm old enough that I can no longer hear high frequencies such as CRTs, but my life long tinnitus is still with me. It is also high frequency, and similar to a CRT whine, but I never mistook one for the other.
Iran has the option of not inciting violence.
Because they want to milk you twice: your data and your wallet.
fwiw this series of steps worked for me
I think that general feeling -- of playing a game where the majority of players know the rules and you don't -- is something most people have felt at one point or other. I've certainly felt like that in foreign countries or at new jobs. Friends report a similar feeling while starting the process of buying a house, or getting married, or re-entering the dating scene.
>I'm not saying anything "avoids" inflation, I'm saying they're exaggerating the problem.

I can see why you might think that, but the problem isn't that they're stating it wrong. If they had $1000 that now buys $700, that is literally 30% less. You're bringing a bunch of tangential factors into this to try to say that the problem isn't that bad, but it is.

>A huge portion of your text is acting like it's a binary bad/not-bad, and then acting like I said it's not bad. I'm not saying that.

Well, your intention is certainly a binary for/against this idea. You're being extremely pedantic and persistent about saying essentially "It's not as bad as you think". Well, it actually is as bad as I think, and I have been thinking about it almost daily for like 4 years now.

>If you talk about what your "money" can buy when complaining about inflation, that's not literally the $500 in your checking account. It's not a complaint that you lost a few hundred dollars, one time, and nothing else changed. "money" in this sense is also talking about the bigger group of income and assets.

You're wrong to count other things besides currency as money. Inflation stats are specifically about currency. Roping anything else into it is a red herring. So far you have done two things that are distracting from this:

1. Grouping other assets into "money" that may go up because of inflation itself, or because of other factors like risk or business operations.
2. Wage or benefit increases that may or may not come, and certainly aren't guaranteed.

>Yes, "different statistic". That's my fundamental argument. My entire point is that ein0p was conflating "inflation" with measurements of how much they can buy when those are different in a few important ways.

There are too many individual circumstances to account for to come up with a statistic like that, and at that point you're measuring properties of individuals and not the monetary system. Even CPI, which measures sampling of prices in many categories, is very complicated. It is also heavily manipulated IMO.

>And by "schemes" I'm talking about a couple things that together affect the majority of people, not edge/corner cases.

I think you might have good intentions but ultimately you're ignoring a number of circumstances that do affect most people differently, as I have pointed out. The only thing that applies universally to all people is prices, and even then prices in different categories affect different people differently. I think the sampling for CPI is supposed to represent the typical consumer already.

What is the goal of these "better" stats which dodge the root of the problem for a majority of people, if not to understate the harm of reckless monetary policy? I'm of the opinion that the statistic that you want is pointless and would also be harmfully misleading if it was created. It might be ok if buried in some report for economists, but it isn't relevant to most people.
A lot of propaganda from both sides but figures being thrown around put some numbers to guestimate bounds in less than credible manner. Given Iran at least could coordinate mixed salvo of ~300 ordnances. May or may not have shit industrial base with 50% dud rates. Israel+Co, missile defense on ballistics largely works. Which should be expected if one follows US FTM interceptor tests. Subsonics being completely vulnerable should also be assumed, TLAMs has been shot down with reliable consistency in last 10 years, including by RU.

Rough interpretations depending on how pessimistic/optimistic one is of each side's narrative. One end of spectrum is coalition took out 95% (evidence of ~10 hits) of ballistics assuming no duds and all arrived in IL airspace. Other end of spectrum is coalition took out 70-75% assuming allegations of 15+ hits if only 50% made it to IL. High Iranian duds makes ABM performance worse. Also don't know if penetrations happened because interception failure or they ran out of interceptors - i.e. coalition had ~100 interceptors with "99"% interception rate but ran out of interceptors which allowed tail end of salvo to land uncontested. Was Iran competent enough to calibrate strike to just overwhelm IL defense? That seems to be in keeping with narrative that IR wanted to signal they can hit Israel without massive escalation. Plus now IR has data now on most of IL missile defense network for follow up strikes assuming IL +co can replenish interceptors in time.

Take away is defensive has equal or greater missile defense coverage as the entire country of IL + co, one of the densest network of missile defense : geography size ratio in the world, with uncontested assets in region to intercept, multiple days of warning, a ~100 garbage-adequate ballistic salvo timed with subsonic used to draw magazine fire, is large enough to slip through and potentially hit target(s). Iran's attack validates notion that 10s-100s million of drones/missiles can deplete billions in missile defense and take out strategic target worth billions - good chance ~5 missiles kills/mission kills a carrier. This is bad (but not novel) news for countries less capable than Iran, and good news for countries that's more capable.

IMO what we have seen in UKR, Red Sea and Israel is missile defense can reliably be saturated by 100s of ordnances, given proper ISR, which TBF only less than handful countries is capable of delivering in a coordinated package. Even then US DDGs can't reliably prevent Houthis from hitting ships. How many assets/locations has as much missile defense as Israel + multiple in theatre US/UK basing and multiple DDGs? Arguably none.
That's, uh, not how it works actually. Everything is cost benefit trade-offs. We can't guarantee total safety.

NASA, for instance, estimates the risk of a civilian being killed by reentry , and has a formula that says how much money they can spend to eliminate how much risk.
Armaments for the last war. I have no idea why anyone thinks the expensive-pilot-in-expensive-platform is going to survive the drone swarm paradigm shift.
Re-established in this case means, dissolve the existing boards and reconstitute them with the appointees. Review boards already exist in Florida.
I don't think they want to enter North Korea with a US passport.
Even getting a Passport from St.Kitts or Dominica they will state you are not a born national(They state your place of birth).
Good luck entering with that being born in Kentucky USA. It would be straight to their gulag equivalent for you as a "US spy"
No, it means that the boards have their power stripped until their membership is replaced by the new, captive appointees that can be relied on to not be independent of the agency they are notionally overseeing, at which point their powers are restored.

That's what “required to be re-established” means.
Also from Martin Kleppmann is this lecture series and accompanying notes: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLeKd45zvjcDFUEv_ohr_H...

I also have the book, and can recommend both!

Anything from Martin is good; he bridges the academic and industry worlds, having worked extensively in both. He’s a big part of “Automerge” if you’re interested in Conflict Free Replicated Datatypes (CRDT’s) which is a relatively new development in the distributed space. The video on Google Spanner is also extremely interesting for a modern New SQL style database.
They look similar but there's a difference.

His primary goal wasn't to hurt those people, his primary goal was to make money. the hurting people was a side effect.
Have used this a bit on personal projects. Being runtime agnostic was the selling point for me. Wanted to try Bun as the runtime but not use APIs that are Bun specific, in case I ran into issues and had to move to Node.
This approach is already useful in functional genomics. A common type of question requires analysis of hundreds of potentially functional sequence variants.

Hybrid LLM+ approaches are beginning to improve efficiency of ranking candidates and even proposing tests and soon I hope—higher order non-linear interactions among DNA variants.
Turbo Tax Home and Business. Might be evil DRM and Windows and Mac only, but it is easy to use.
>The interesting part is why it worked in VS2013 but failed in VS2022.

I thought the explanation he came up with was interesting but such a change could have easily been brought about by changes to reallocation parameters in the implementation.
I've done a bit of NES programming and really enjoy trying to cram stuff into such a tiny system.

One benefit of developing games for these old systems is that they are not moving targets. For hobby programming, you probably don't want to keep testing and recompiling old stuff to keep up with OS updates.

Even better, you'll have a small army of emulator developers making sure your games will work forever on every new platform. That includes browsers, since there are Javascript emulators for many systems. If your games are particularly tricky to emulate, that's no problem. They will probably be added to everyone's test suites.
I got down voted. How do you down vote (not upset just don't know).

In the parable workers work all day and are paid the same as workers that work for a very short time. As a parable it does not work very well without the content of the disciples questions but it is still a very old story about not valuing those that work more.
All 'Reporting from Ukraine' channels are being deleted by YouTube
Can anyone from Google help?
> You’re forgetting the development of the entire vast interior of the United States

The Midwest really gets screwed in this retconning of US history. They didn’t have slavery like the south; they didn’t have banks that profited from the slave capital like the northeast. Half of them came over as indentured servants themselves, and then tons of them died fighting in a war that didn’t have anything to do with them because they were morally outraged by slavery. Now they’re lumped in with all the other “white people.”
It most likely needs maintenance. It needs fixing up. This is a deal that Trump used to get on condos.
There’s a difference in having a subjective opinion on an OS and flat out denying physical phenomenon like the photoelectric effect. What kind of nonsensical analogy is this.
Assume free-associations = hallucinations. Assume hallucinations are exactly what makes LLMs useful and your question can be rephrased as "Can you list some examples where LLMs were useful to you?"
> This is like saying Earth has produced far more life than any other planet: where's the competition? We don't have a non-capitalist control society to test against ever since Colonialism exported Capitalism to every corner of the globe.

This is false - we've had many attempts at alternative systems to free markets - all of which have failed because they don't work.

Also, bringing "colonialism" into this shows that you're not interested in seeking out the truth - just pushing your own political agenda onto other people.

> This is a whole lot of words that says precious little.

Funny, I thought the same about most of your comment.

> you'd be hard pressed to find any technological advancements especially that don't have their roots in defense projects, grant money, other such institutions

Turns out that a decent number of technologies had their fundamental research funded by "defense projects, grant money, other such institutions" - which doesn't mean anything, because (1) many innovations are not funded in those ways (2) the vast majority of modern technology's commercialization was done exclusively by "capitalism" and (3) as we've seen with communist countries, the government can fund as much research as it wants, and it doesn't matter for any purpose except weapons development if the private sector doesn't go through the process of refining it and making it cheap enough that consumers can buy it.

> Horseshit.

That perfectly describes your next paragraph:

> The entire open source community disagrees with you

No, they don't. The open-source community does not encourage innovation in any way. It encourages free clones of successful products whose innovation was performed by another entity (literally a parasite on the economy) and ego projects. A large number of successful open source projects (e.g. Netscape/Firefox, OpenOffice, Llama, Inkscape, Blender, Eclipse) are reactionary projects that were started several years after a piece of proprietary software started to become popular, and often copy the UI, features, and workflow of those programs - the literal opposite of innovation.

> Massive volunteer organizations like the internet archive disagree with you

No, they don't. The internet archive does barely any innovation at all - in fact, they perform significantly more theft and copyright infringement than "innovation".

> Food pantries disagree with you

No, they don't. Food pantries are not models of innovation.

> Humans have worked for one another for things besides money since long before money existed, and that very much includes innovation

I never claimed otherwise - but only someone speaking from a position of extreme ignorance would claim that anything except money has been responsible for the vast majority of innovation across all of human history (and especially over the past several hundred years).

> If innovation required financial benefit, we'd have never left our caves.

Strawman argument - I never claimed this. Quite a silly strawman, too.

> Would love a citation on this

Software and genetics are patentable in the US, purely as a result of corrupt regulators - there you go.
Computers have kind of "converged on boring". This isn't a bad thing, obviously; a computer is a tool and you generally want your tools to work as expected without surprises. Basically any computer with any operating system you would use in the last fifteen or so years works basically "as-expected", more or less. The security models work alright, they don't really crash, and do their job.

This is boring though! I remember when I had an early Windows 95 machine, I genuinely kind of had fun figuring how to break things. I mean, hell, when I discovered you could click "cancel" on the login screen and get a default user so I didn't need to get my parents to unlock it, it felt like I was accessing forbidden knowledge. I think even at the time I knew that was a bit janky. That was kind of the 90's computing experience though; everything was kind of held together with ducktape and prayers, and it kind of worked.

It's probably weird to have nostalgia for a time when everything was a little broken, but what can I say?
Just discovered it today -- simple and cheap, as painless as one could hope for (save for the taxes themselves). Never again will I give Intuit a dime.
Another vote for visualping.io
They hate being called SovCits because they know it’s associated with crazy behavior. I watched a video recently of an arrest where one said that term was like making a racist comment. She and her husband both used some other nebulous term, but they were part of the same belief system as SovCits. But you’re right, I’m going on a single statement from LEO. Though I wouldn’t expect them to use that term pejoratively if it wasn’t true and they wished to discredit him. They’d make a claim having something to do with a law violation.
There is no indication or mention that key exchange was compromised. SSH has forward secrecy, so compromising the authentication keys does not compromise the encryption keys.
Then you need to understand it from a theoretical perspective first. Firstly, when people use the word "god" they honestly ought to define what they refer to by using that word, and what the abilities of that god are supposed to be.

If we're in a physical universe with energy, then it's been explained that a creator-like god can be argued to have 'created' the principle of existence, itself, on which all other things then evolved with energy. So then, what is that principle, stated concretely? Modern physics has already found out almost everything about it.

What is left of an entity if it becomes capable (at least beyond some meaningful threshold) of functionally discarding / disobeying the influence of untruth?

Is someone (in properly controlled circumstances) going to be more or less perceptive of 'what is' when they are more truthful?
Not to mention the spending that the President and Congress do. It adds to the debt and ruins the bonds.
Duplicate of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40047698
A.I. Has a Measurement Problem
Nice clickbait. I actually expected to see a description of an unexpected bug or exploit that crept in due to the default branch name change. Instead, I'm not even sure what this is trying to say. "There was a change and I went along with it and now I don't like it any more because something something slippery slope"?

Personally, I thought the change was a bad idea because it seemed to be based on a mixture of parochial USA politics and a fear of twitter mobs, rather than any real evidence of a high benefit to disruption ratio, but what's done is done, we can't change the way the world works.

Is there more context that is missing from this 173 word gripe?
Related to your unrelated, I also used Free Tax USA this year. I ended up having to use TurboTax to complete my taxes because FTUSA didn't handle calculations for a Schedule K-1 correctly and did not support all information provided by said K-1 (as confirmed by their support staff).

I thought it was a great product, but alas, I need it to handle those things properly if I want to dump TurboTax. I would actually be happy to pay for FTUSA if the features worked.
True, they're a joy to cook in but one thing I love about my ratchet high carbon pan (which has been everywhere with me) is I can use metal on it.
Looks like Firefox needs a `dom.webgpu.enabled` flag set in `about:config` to enable WebGPU support
Exactly, vote with your dollars. Email is important and worth paying a few bucks a month for solid service.
I have a fantasy that someone reverse-engineers the tape data format and is able to render new maps to it. For the 2 etak systems still operational out there...
Well that’s not true- I frequently access the Tesla while it’s doing an update.
I read this comment yesterday and keep thinking about it. That final token really must "comprehend" everything leading up to it, right? In which case longer context lengths are just trying to pack more meaning into that embedding state.

Which means the embedding model must do a lot of the lifting to be able to accurately represent meaning across long contexts so well. Now I want to know more about how those models are derived.
I got lucky in that I have a pretty good network of ex colleagues. One coffee with a ex colleague led me to reach out to another ex colleague who sang my praises to a recruiter. Once that happened I did my best to crush every interview through to a very good offer. Cold applying just doesn’t work unless you can be one of the first to apply and be seen by a recruiter when they first look at the queue. Networking is the #1 way to go.
The benefit of EC is not speed, it is much smaller key sizes.

Roughly speaking, an RSA key has to be 8 times as large as an EC key for the same security level.
I thought the same thing. I’m sure he’s the primary investigator of this case, but I still wonder how he came to suspect the ISS for a solid soda can ripping through two stories of his house.
A group of PhD students at Stanford recently wanted to take AI/ML research ideas generated by LLMs like this and have teams of engineers execute on them at a hackathon. We were getting things prepared at AGI House SF to host the hackathon with them when we learned that the study did not pass ethical review.

I think automating science is an important research direction nonetheless.
I don't really disagree, but Python is complicated because the language existed before all of those others for the most part and got quite popular before them too. This means the various use cases for Python got spread about long before the packaging tools really started to try and catch up. It used to be a technical problem.

This means trying to fit all the various use cases for packaging has been like herding cats. It's certainly not a technical problem anymore, the newer ecosystems/languages have figured it out, but it is a community/human problem. Thankfully there is now a small dedicated team that has been working on the problem for years, and progress has been made. For the most part if you stick to a single tool(poetry or rye for example) then most of your problems disappear as long as you stick to their blessed way, whatever it is.
Build systems are not available everywhere, like in many online playgrounds. There's no reason not to have a browser-loadable package by default these days.
He lives on Florida.
Post WWII, imo, there is a view by the "public service" class that being anti-immigration, in the West only, is morally akin to Nazism. I don't feel like the US's immigration policy, official and unofficial, is really democratic. Especially over the last few years. It feels like it was crafted by judges, lawyers, and people with a vested interest in more immigration to achieve a certain outcome and that plan has worked tremendously well for them. I am not sure what the future will bring from this. It's probably unprecedented in history.
I use the phrase virtue signalling pejoratively to refer to things like https://www.shell.com/sustainability/nature.html. It's precisely because of the existence of real virtue that virtue signalling is able to be differentiated.
Because most people don't equate "order" with "oppression by the wealthy", they understand it to mean "the stability that allows me to live my life without fear", which is a pretty unambiguously good thing by most people's measurement.

We can argue about whether the police deliver what the slogan offers, but your inability to understand why the slogan is popular stems from your very weird take on its meaning.
You can make millions in only a handful of careers. Even in software development, making it to principal at a FAANG is much harder than simply meeting expectations at 3 senior engineering jobs.