skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Halo 2 can run at higher resolutions on a 360, so clarifying that this was a modding project on the original Xbox is helpful.

This isn't true. It renders exactly the same as it does on the Xbox 360 but the scaler chip handles the higher resolutions.
Look at drone tactics deployed in Ukraine. It's shocking. Not in the future but right now, modern warfare is a swarm of <$100 jerry rigged recycled devices flying around delivering a few ounces of explosive whatever head or body can be accessed.
>Your concern isn't a resource issue

I don't like that way of framing it. I prefer to say that the US would need to spend additional resources (which seem prohibitive to me) to ensure that the nominal resources reach the intended recipients.
That's the case whether or not it's public.
"There's a very specific reputation I want to have on a team: "Nat helps me solve my problems. Nat get things I care about done." That's the reputation that's going to get me the results I want in next year's performance review. That's the reputation that's going to get me a referral a few years from now."

This works for a referral, but it is a career killer. I did this for 20 years in different departments. Every time they wanted to keep me there to solve their problems, but this never puts you on the promotion list. I had a colleague that retired after 40 years, he was the go-to person for any problem, but he was never promoted, he was way more competent than any of his managers and their peers. He was the ace in everyone's sleeve, rarely recognized (it was considered to be "normal" that he solves any problem) and never rewarded; his performance was considered an expectation, while the rest of the people at the same level had a much lower bar. In the last performance review, his manager said that his performance is compared with his goals and targets, not with peers. I was told the same by a different manager, so it is not an accident.
Generative AI is a necessity for the metaverse to take off. Creating metaverse content is too time consuming otherwise. Mark really wants to control a platform so the companies whole strategy seems to be around getting the quest to take off.
Yes. Llama 3 8B outperforms Llama 2 70B (in the instruct-tuned variants).

"Chinchilla-optimal" is about choosing model size and/or dataset size to maximize the accuracy of your model under a fixed training budget (fixed number of floating point operations). For a given dataset size it will tell you the model size to use, and vice versa, again under the assumption of a fixed training budget.

However, what people have realized is that inference compute matters at least as much as training compute. You want to optimize training and inference cost together, not in isolation. Training a smaller model means your accuracy will not be as good as it could have been with a larger model using the same training budget, however you'll more than make it up in your inference budget. So in most real world cases it doesn't make sense to be "Chinchilla-optimal".

What Meta is saying here is that there is no accuracy ceiling. You can keep increasing training budget and dataset size to increase accuracy seemingly indefinitely (with diminishing returns). At least as far as they have explored.
Yes you can do that and it will work. But for future-proofing you should use tag names with a dash in them (like <foo-whatever>) to avoid colissions if html adds an official <whatever> element in the future. (The html standard promises to never add an element with a dash in its name)
True, I should have remembered to express it as Non-exhaustive testing cannot...

I also consider formal methods not testing. But model checking (e.g. with tlc) is something in between, and sort of takes advantage of the "This usually isn't feasible, but it's nice when it is.": when you limit your domain enough, it becomes feasible, yet exhaustively checking each small-world scenario gives a pretty good confidence on the model being correct.
>In any case the companies are turning profits in the billions of dollars which means Americans are overpaying for worse outcomes.

Have you accounted for billions in extra taxes? I'm sure their system wastes plenty as well as ours. Not all insurance profits are "waste" either man. A lot of that "waste" profit funds individual retirement plans through the stock market.

>What matters is outcomes, and Canadians live longer than Americans.

You have yet to prove that they live longer specifically because of their healthcare, ir longer in general. Maybe they just aren't as fat, or the cold weather helps.

>The fact of the matter is the US government can’t figure out how to get healthcare to people, so instead sells them excuses and propaganda for why not fixing the problem is actually acceptable.

It's not their job to get healthcare to people. The US government does do healthcare in some cases but in general it is an individual problem and not the duty of the government. You can argue about whether it should be (with someone else!) but the government is not obligated to solve all your problems.
This is where the article is insufficiently clear. Lists of people who are under investigation for fraud is definitely something banks keep quiet, for the reason you mentioned. But as a sibling comment says, sanctions lists are public, as are records of people convicted of relevant crimes in most (all?) jusrisdictions. So what kind of lists are these? Because the article's line about "individuals who were sanctioned as recently as this year" is hardly exciting - the UK sanctions list has people sanctioned today, 18 April.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-sanctions-...
Don't nickle and dime yourself on tools that save you time. If there's a SaaS offering that can reduce your workload, just pay for it (unless it's a truly ridiculous amount).

Every so often there's a post on HN where a someone lists their income and expenses and the comments are always full of things like "why are you paying $100/year for Notion when you can just use org-mode for free?" Don't listen to them. Your time is worth more than any reasonable subscription fee.
This version doesn't have web search and the image creation though.
> It's fun to be able to retire early or whatever, but driving software engineer salaries out of reach of otherwise profitable, sustainable businesses is not a good thing.

That argument could apply to anyone who pays anyone well.

Driving up market pay for workers via competition for their labour is exactly how we get progress for workers.

(And by 'treat well', I mean the whole package. Fortunately, or unfortunately, that has the side effect of eg paying veterinary nurses peanuts, because there's always people willing to do those kinds of 'cute' jobs.)

> Nor is it great for the yet-to-mature craft that high salaries invited a very large pool of primarly-compensation-motivated people who end up diluting the ability for primarily-craft-motivated people to find and coordinate with each other in pursuit of higher quality work and more robust practices.

Huh, how is that 'dilution' supposed to work?

Well, and at least those 'evil' money grubbers are out of someone else's hair. They don't just get created from thin air. So if those rimarly-compensation-motivated people are now writing software, then at least investment banking and management consulting are free again for the primarily-craft-motivated people to enjoy!
Just tested this. It does squeak at me.
I'm shocked that a company subscribes to the means justify the ends approach to problem solving!
yeah, fair. I posted in a sibling comment two more reasons imo. advertising fits with brainwashing, namely that it:

Is done scientifically and at huge scale by powerful entities

& is non-consentual, almost everyone would rather not see ads or internalize their ideas. (Coors beer is cool and if you drink it women will like you more, yuck, who wants to believe that)

But yeah, you're right that just influencing thoughts is not the only part of the definition. And really past a certain point anything is impossible to define, so these arguments are always a little weird. Eg. I challenge you to give an airtight definition of what is a chair.

Calling advertizment brainwashing is certainly a little provocative, & in my opinion perfectly correct given the scale and goals. But I can see how it can be annoying in retrospect. Glad we agree that spending that much on it is sad
and ubuntu is a bit heavy..., and yes removing xorg can be faster(but it depend if your compositer is more otimized than xorg*
Perhaps sqlite-vss? It adds vector searches to sqlite.

https://github.com/asg017/sqlite-vss
The key thing is that voice has low discoverability. Having a big announcement, “We’re replacing Siri with Iris” will make people who’d given up on Siri give it another try even if Iris is just a continued incremental advance that would have happened without the name change. The key thing is to not do this until you’ve got an incremental change that really is a broad improvement.

Mostly I use Siri to do things like start workouts (currently semi-broken—it won’t correctly do anything other than a timed walk last I tried), timers and set alarms. Other than the workout issue, it mostly works, although I’ve found that Siri will tend to time out if I’m at the edge of my wifi network (like if I’m at the alley about to start a walk). There is also the challenge that there’s no convenient way to direct Siri to a particular device so I had to set my phone to only respond to “hey siri” while my watch will accept “siri” so I can force workout starting to be on the watch (if the phone gets it, Siri becomes confused and asks me what app to use). I’ve disabled voice wake up for Siri entirely on my MBP and iPad for this same reason. It’d be nice to specify different wake words for different devices (even better, custom wake words so I can address my phone as Renfield, but that’s just me). But without there being some compelling reason, I’m unlikely right now to expand beyond my basic Siri usage or even discover if they’ve finally fixed that d—n workout bug or not.
Ask HN: Please help to understand "Things don't just happen; things happen just"
Dear native english or even american-english speaking colleagues.

Jim Rohn said "Things don't just happen; things happen just."

Beside of my many years of usage of english as a second language, I just can't understand the meaning here.

Could you give me a clue what he ment by this sentence?

Thank you in advance.
I've used Linux before. I like Linux. But, Windows is my native language, so to speak. I've been using Windows since childhood and quite frankly I'd like to stick with it. I know there are variations of Linux that get really close to emulating the Windows experience but it's just not the same.

It's going to take a lot of straw to finally break the camel's back.
This was even covered in our school. Test your program on your classmates, and then the rest of the school. This was way before smartphones though, it had to be in the computer rooms.
A custom name like <whatever> is not any worse than <span> - both are semantically neutral.
> There's still no proven correlation between race and intelligence here.

If you take race as just a grouping trait for a collection of individuals, then this is just plainly false. Black/White as a grouping trait does in fact correlate with measured average IQ differences. This result is not in doubt. If you're taking race as some abstract ideal then there is no evidence that the abstract concept of race correlates with IQ scores. But this just changes the subject.

>Saying "blacks are stupider than whites" is a statement that is lazy to the point of being racist. It is definitely not "accurate and mild".

If the argument is that he didn't take sufficient care and sensitivity to an issue he knew or should have known is highly inflammatory, then you should just say that. But this just sounds like a vibe check to me. Which is fair, but at least be honest about it.
Been working on this one for 25 years. One day it'll stick!
> Boeing has been beaten up here for their planes, rightly so, but that mess has made itself know with Starliner as well.

And the Air Force One contract, and the KC-46 contract, and...
There's also the third way, of going for intermediate-size cloud providers, you get the lack of Capex and actual hardware to deal with without the AWS premium. I don't understand why so many people act as if the only alternative was AWS or self-hosted.
I don't know anything involved in the process, but I hope this doesn't make it any harder for regulators to break them up when the day finally comes.
On the right side of the Maps UI, there's an audio icon. Tap it. You can have it be completely silent or only announce important alerts.
Those weren't my reasons, actually — I am old-school and prefer information-dense layouts designed for use with a mouse (though Thunderbird needs a lot of work to be usable via keyboard). I posted another comment with my actual reasons.
Any particular recommendations for agencies?
> which is a meaningless tautology, as the entire argument is about the definition of vaccinated used by the public health agencies.

The ONS mortality stats linked to by kadkadels at the start of the thread contain data related to people who received at least one COVID vaccine (counted from the day they received it, subdivided by time since reception and number of boosters), as well as an unvaccinated category who never did. This is clear to anyone who read the link that kadkadels posted.

Both you and armchairdweller falsely claimed that the unvaccinated category included people who received the vaccine less than N days ago, presumably because you believe that some deaths caused by the vaccine shortly after people receive it are hidden by these stats. But in fact, the vaccinated category starts from the day of vaccination, the unvaccinated tended to die more back when COVID was new, and the ASMR for unvaccinated and vaccinated converged by about the end of 2022, presumably because we've nearly all had COVID at least once so being vaxed now isn't doing a whole lot of good. Both the "vax did more harm than good" crowd and the "we should still be wearing masks" crowd are wrong.

Fenton is in HART, and HART are off their collective rockers, as we knew pretty early on when their internal chats were leaked. See https://www.logically.ai/articles/hart-files-anti-vaccine-my... and https://twitter.com/_johnbye/status/1421397013078360064 for example, and my own small part in pointing out that all the astroturfing groups identified by Neil O'Brien MP were hosted on a single IP address (HART almost immediately moved, lol): https://twitter.com/nameandnature/status/1352998804832870402

Though the prime mover, Narice Bernard, seems to have moved on to newer conspiracies involving "climate lockdowns" and "15 minute cities", people who conclude that nothing HART say on COVID topics can trusted are well within reasonable bounds.
I don't think these campaigns are very comparable. During WW2 we were island hopping, which created an urgency to all actions. With Taiwan, China has a single isolated target. They also have major geographic advantages. Taiwan is 80 miles from China, and nearly all of their important infrastructure is not only coastal but also on the Chinese facing side of the island - most of Taiwan being uninhabited mountainous regions.

They are also a very non self-sufficient island in many forms of production, including food. If China wanted to attack Taiwan, they'd likely just carry out a naval blockade, and it'd probably be unstoppable. In WW2 this was not [regularly] possible, because blockades can take months to years to achieve victory. But when they can be done, they're relatively cheap and extremely effective.

But I doubt China wants a military solution, even if they are 100% certain they would be victorious - because that would not solve the underlying problem, and could even exasperate it. War will probably only happen if Taiwan declares its independence or starts pursuing nukes or relationships that would grant them defacto access to nukes, like e.g. joining NATO. And neither of those seems likely.
I believe I speak for everyone when I say: As long as the AI does something helpful I don't care how you structure the team.

But the current generative craze with "AI generated backgrounds" is a dead end.

Give me better AI autocomplete, AI image correction, AI noise cancellation...
I've kept a series of notebooks for my career starting prior to dot com 1.0.

Looking back, over all that time, all of my notebooks tend towards WTF.
You could say the same about Google, couldn't you?
This is a very low bar, but when a journalist at Fox News (not the opinion shows, just their regular news outlet) is fired, disciplined, calls out issues, whatever…

How many times do you recall seeing coverage of it on Fox News itself, whether on TV or their web site? How many times have you seen a similar piece of self-reflection on OANN? Or Newsmax? Or CNN?

Most of the time, news outlets clam up and you read the articles about them on other outlets.
When did you join Google?
> I often get comments saying “[720x480]’s not not a 16:9 resolution” or “that’s not real 480p”, but “480p” encapsulates a range of resolutions and aspect ratios and 720×480 is the resolution the Xbox considers to be 480p (so take it up with Microsoft, not me…).

Take it up with some ITU dudes in the 1970s actually: https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_304-rec601_wood.pdf

“The February 1980 note further suggested that the number of samples per active line period should be greater than 715.5 to accommodate all of the European standards active line periods. While the number of pixels per active line equal to 720 samples per line was not suggested until the next note, (720 is the number found in Rec. 601 and SMPTE 125), 720 is the first value that “works”. 716 is the first number greater than 715.5 that is divisible by 4 (716 = 4 x 179), but does not lend itself to standards conversion between 525-line component and composite colour systems or provide sufficiently small pixel groupings to facilitate special effects. Arguments in support of 720 were provided in additional notes prior to IBC in September 1980.

[…]

As noted above, Rec. 601 provided 720 samples per active line for the luminance channel and 360 samples for each of the colour-difference signals.

When the ITU defined HDTV, they stipulated: ‘the horizontal resolution for HDTV as being twice that of conventional television systems’ described in Rec. 601 and a picture aspect ratio of 16:9. A 16:9 picture ratio requires one-third more pixels than a 4:3 picture ratio. Starting with 720, doubling the resolution to 1440 and adjusting the count for a 16:9 aspect ratio leads to the 1920 sample per active line defined as the basis for HDTV [9].

Accommodating the Hollywood and computer communities’ request for ‘square-pixels’, meant that the number of lines should be 1920 x (9/16) = 1080.

Progressive scan systems at 1280 pixels per line and 720 lines per frame are also a member of the ‘720-pixel’ family. 720 pixels x 4/3 (resolution improvement) x 4/3 (16:9 aspect ratio adjustment) = 1280. Accommodating the Hollywood and computer communities’ request for ‘square-pixels’, meant that the number of lines should be 1280 x (9/16) = 720.

Therefore, most digital television systems, including digital video tape systems and DVD recordings are derived from the 4:2:2 basic standard format. The 720 pixel-per-active-line structure became the basis of a family of structures (the 720-pixel family) that was adopted for MPEG-based systems including both conventional television and HDTV systems.”
He does a lot of research before his interviews, so comes with a lot of good questions, but then mostly let's the guests talk. He does have some impromptu follow-ups, but mostly tries to come back to his prepared questions.

A couple of his interviews I'd recommend:

- Dario Amodei (Anthropic CEO)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nlkk3glap_U

- Richard Rhodes (Manhatten project, etc - history of Atom bomb)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMdMiYsfHKo
I dual boot. I spend most of my time in Linux, but need to use Windows to use my soundcard for music production
Even small changes by a $2 trillion company with billions of daily users are a big deal.
One of the reasons for me to use Windows (still) is Photoshop.

Besides actually playing the games, I use Photoshop to make skins for my cars when simracing.

There are several options online now, that implement almost all the features from Photoshop that I use.

I have used Photopea, and while it runs slower than native Photoshop, I am genuinely surprised about how good it is, and how feature complete it is. I recommend Photopea over Gimp ten times out of ten.

There are others like Pixlr I have yet to test, but now I am convinced graphic edition can be done without Photoshop.
It's a silly but spooky thought that this or similar interactions may have been the butterfly effect that drove at least one of them to take their company in a drastically different direction.
Which specific GPT-4 model is this? gpt-4-0613? gpt-4-0125-preview?
They're sharing it for a reason. That reason is to disarm their opponents.
Via Microsoft Copilot (and perhaps Bing?) you can get access to GPT-4 for free.
It's mostly about lock-in I imagine. Default save to OneDrive in Office apps goes right along. In the future, Windows itself will be running in the cloud, further locking you into their ecosystem and subscriptions.
It's so frustratingly close to being there, too. A few games with anti-cheat are non-functional, but Proton works great for the majority of non-native titles. Even my WMR headset is close to working (technically the headset is working, as long as you don't need controllers).
And then grab some people off the street to test your product. Let them play with your app. Treat them to lunch, interview them while eating :-)
Do you seriously care?
I heard this year is the year of the Linux desktop.
Love how everyone is romanticizing his engineering mindset. But have we already forgotten that he was even more passionate about the metaverse which, as far as I can tell, was a 50B failure?
> People don't generally read hacker news

Twisting your words a bit, but it’s been my experience that “indeed”, people don’t read the articles here. Lots of upvoting from just the headline or a quick skim. “I don’t get it but I’m curious what the discussion will reveal for me if I upvote”.

The guidelines here don’t really have a problem with this attitude either. You can make an uninformed upvote, just not an uninformed comment. In practice, both are somewhat common.