skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The vast majority of search results surfaced for me by Google, Bing, or DDG are blogspam structured to alternate between one paragraph of text and then a square ad of about the same size, which is essentially a half screen of advertising saturated into the content and the meat of the content has moved from the top of the article (as in traditional journalism) to the bottom (to maximize ad exposure).

Depending on how the ads are being served, it's either a bunch of blank squares in those space because my ad block strategies successfully stopped them from loading or its a wash of color noise and bold graphic design demanding my attention.

Then, there's almost always either a GDPR compliance popup over the bottom 50%-75% of the page or a "subcribe now" call to action popup over the whole thing, or (most often) both.

I would so much prefer to have access to whatever Internet you do. Please tell us where to find it.

In the meantime, I just avoid exploring the internet through search engines as much as I can.
i'm down with solar robots, but this is definitely one of those problems that's only a problem because of overly restrictive immigration laws. installing panels is pretty easy, there are tons of people who would be delighted to come to the US and install for $20/hr.

source : have a solar engineering firm in Kenya, and have never had problems with panel installation labor (QA is another story).
I dislike Rust, too. Not really for technical reasons, but just because I find it a very unpleasant language to program in. That's not a dealbreaker -- I regularly use several languages that I dislike using. But this fact:

> There was not a space for discussion with the Rustaceans - despite the inclusion discourse on the book on Rust, the community around the language felt awkwardly aggressive and exclusivistic.

ended up actually being a dealbreaker for me. The community around Rust is even more unpleasant than the language itself. It's hard to interact with a subculture that is constantly shitting on everyone else. In the end, it's why I've decided not to continue to pursue programming in Rust at all.
If you have a source or are referring to something specific, please enlighten us.
Wow, not that old.
Thanks. Moreover nobody would use an epigenetic clock to refer to chronological age, because it's inferior in every way for that purpose.

The purported use of an epigenetic clock in humans is that it predicts either aging effects of remaining life span in some sense; neither of these have been proven to be biologically true because in the first we don't necessarily have the definition of aging, and certainly don't have it down to a single axis, at best it is understood along many different dimensions, many of which are not captured by epigenetic measures.

And second sense, predicting remaining life span, is completely unproven. Even more speculative is whether measures which change a person's epigenetic age will result in changes in remaining lifespan.

There's a chance that epigenetic age becomes useful for something, but it's just a chance. It's not established science.
Design patterns for extracting from REST APIs
You hit the nail on the head on BOTH points.

They do not trust me (why would they) and they think it's a sales tactic. I couldn't be purer in my intentions, but people are on the defensive.

And your pain point is actually one I've heard firsthand. Got a few ideas and connections in this area.
> Your graphs do not address affordability.

If the homeownership rate is 66%, that means people are able to buy a home. That's how I define affordability.

> This data is highly variable depending on location. California as a whole may be fine -- how about it's most populous counties or cities? How much does the rural divide skew the numbers, if any?

California's rural population is <20% of the state[1], so that's not a big enough number to skew the results big way. E.g. an urban county like San Mateo has homeownership rate >60%[2]

[1] https://dof.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/352/Forecasting/...

[2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HOWNRATEACS006081
Yes, the usual denial arguments I hear are on the form of "the climate has always been that way", "it's variance on the solar output" and "volcanoes are the ones emitting most of those gases".

All are patently bullshit, of course.
I early tested this and it’s quite original and great! The technical aspects (how smooth the experience is) are fantastic, but it’s really the bit bonkers interactions and funny ways of “winning” that stand out.

Recommended for the novelty and very well produced content
In some cars the transmission is also controlled electrically.
Oil prices jump about 3% after explosions reported in Iran
This feels really amateur-ish. I am a customer of Kagi and I wish them to succeed.
So what were they doing up until now? Tax fraud?
Paying for search is uncommon for regular folk, I was hesitant to pay for it as well but $10 felt like a good spot for the value I'm getting. If the price hikes again and gets to $15 area, I'm switching back to DDG (I have no use for AI features so it's not a big differentiator to me).
It's been pretty fascinating. ChatGPT clearly has a very small Norwegian corpus, but it can not only translate to and from both Norwegian written languages (they're more like dialects - they're mutually intelligible) but can make a passable attempt at translating into at least some highly localized dialects, and can explain key differences between certain sociolets. And it took only a slight explanation to get it to give a plausible translation into this weird sociolect constructed by the circle around a fringe Maoist group from the 70's that wanted to sound more working class and adopted a bunch of affections that does not match any "natural" Norwegian dialect (several members ended up as prominent authors, and so it spread wider than the size of the group otherwise would have allowed for).

That said, English and Norwegian are pretty close. How well it will handle languages with more significant differences without larger amounts of tokens is another matter. Even for pretty small language groups there ought to be enough, though.
You're matching with the result of the expression inside the switch, and in case of an exception the result is something being throw, not something being catched, so the chosen approach seems correct to me.

given the code

Future<Box> f = ...
switch (f.get()) {
case Box(String s) when isGoodString(s) -> score(100);
case Box(String s) -> score(50);
case null -> score(0);
case throws CancellationException ce -> ...ce...
case throws ExecutionException ee -> ...ee...
case throws InterruptedException ie -> ...ie...
};

I read the above as

"if f.get() is a Box(...) then ..."

"if f.get() is null then ..."

"if f.get() throws ExecutionException then ..."
The issue is that the limit is in a different place for different people. One person's performance is degraded by hour 6 as much as another's is by hour 10, so it makes no sense to limit them both to 8 hours -- the first presumably shouldn't even be working 6.

There is also the question of where to stop. Suppose that the average person's performance is degraded by 5% after 4 hours. Should everyone stop after 4 hours then? They're not at peak performance anymore. But 95% is often good enough. And maybe 90% is good enough. Maybe 80% is good enough. Maybe 75% is good enough and one person is at 75% after 8 hours. Maybe only 90% is good enough but it's a different kind of work and then the same person is still at 90% after 14 hours. Maybe you're at 85% after 8 hours but get back to 90% with a cup of coffee.

There is no one size fits all.
Maybe I don't want a Rosey the Robot after all
I believe they're right about there being only one single electron. I tried to start my Pathfinder yesterday and it was dead as a doornail. None of the dash lights lit and there was not even a click from the starter. Someone else must've been using that electron though since I tried again a few minutes later and it cranked right up. I had my turn with it so I'm not mad at all.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology

It seems the paper made mistakes, using a non-standard model of the CMB that failed upon replication. It's an interesting theory thoughb.
1100AD lines up well with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_colonization_of_North_Am...

It's not my paper, and I'm not a climate scientist, just found it interesting myself. This except was striking:

"According to the study, a spike in plant life was responsible for up to 67 per cent of a significant drop in carbon dioxide levels between 1520 and 1610. Carbon had been transferred from the atmosphere to the land surface through photosynthesis.

Previously cored Antarctic ice samples were investigated. Researchers observed that 7.4 petagrams — or 7-billion metric tonnes — of carbon had suddenly disappeared at that point in time."
I've used prosemirror enough to have written custom nodes, commands, and custom code around its collaboration model. I got good results with all of this and I don't know any other platform that could have matched it.

The docs are thoughtful. There's an up-front learning curve to understand the architecture. When doing highly customized things, I referred to the source when needed.

For standard rich text, there are a lot of options. Prosemirror shines when you want to build on it as a platform.
But not when they are not sure the result would be of quality, in the arena which is used for ranking.
But don't you think it would be the Texans white washing the slavery aspect than the northern states? That's my point of confusion.
Like, that app is the only one you're allowed to use? Because it seems like most or all password manager apps provide the functionality.
The moment we ask why, it has to have a reason. However Vedānta for example, would argue that brahman or the entity that is the cause of all causes, is causeless in itself. There can be no other explanation.

If something has a cause then it's ruled by cause and effect. If something is causeless, it not only does not need a reason to exist but is also the entity that puts forth cause and effect in motion. Kinda similar to Aristotle's concept of the prime mover.
Well, even then, it's massive progress that we've reached the realm of mammals. Only 2 more orders of magnitude to go.
Wrt winning: Open is the least worst way of doing things.

With the xz kerfuffle people say "aha! So much for your security now!" when the alternative is someone tampering with code on an unsecured ftp serve i.e. it's the devil you can see
And Larry himself was the butt of most of the jokes.
The updated license has also a goodie that seems to have been overlooked in the discussion so far:

"i. If you distribute or make available the Llama Materials (or any derivative works thereof), or a product or service that uses any of them, including another AI model, you shall (A) provide a copy of this Agreement with any such Llama Materials; and (B) prominently display “Built with Meta Llama 3” on a related website, user interface, blogpost, about page, or product documentation. If you use the Llama Materials to create, train, fine tune, or otherwise improve an AI model, which is distributed or made available, you shall also include “Llama 3” at the beginning of any such AI model name."
For starters when the commission part is a heavy percentage you could just skip the akward process called interview.

If the person is not qualified it won't hurt the company and avoiding the interview process enables for a more organic way to develop a relationship, as the interview is the immediate signaling to the employee that they are a subordinate.
Yep, until folks see it they cannot understand the scale of these things.

It isn't just Crown in Melbourne, which for most folks is more like the traditional Vegas casino. All my local RSL's/Pubs are all about 50% pokie machines.

And yep, that complimentary bus is not there to bring the old folks in for a pot and parma.

Funnily enough, while it isn't the most pervasive, in New Zealand is where I have seen folks that are betting the highest. The wave of depression that hits you when see a lot of people all down on their luck betting $10 a spin every few seconds is just wild! I mean, yeah the Christchurch winter is bad but not that bad!
> There's also the widening inequality gap (quite pronounced since 1965), meaning you should be looking at medians, not averages.

Homeownership rate being 66% means median household owns its home. I don't know how averages are related here.

> And this thing the rental market, which you're not looking at all.

I am talking about homeownership rate and data. Why is rental market relevant here?
I do not want to incentivize people to give me BS feedback just to get paid. If they need money or a gift to tell me about their pain point, it's not a pain point.
What moralism is interesting to you?
I still remember "reading" his entire 1000-page C++ book for the sole purpose of finding an error on it, for which I was handsomely rewarded with a $32 check from Bjarne. Still not cashed. Good times...
Pretty flat since 1965 it seems.
With the release of Quill v2, I went away from TipTap + PM to Quill. My use case is not super complex. I just want a decent editing experience (for trusted, technical people, not average end users) and solid HTML I can save to a db.

Quill has `getSemanticHTML()` which is great for my implementation.

PM is great, but expansive and overpowered for my needs.
As long as we only see one birth, that's probably fine. It just implies a stable time loop.
2024 AI Misinformation Elections Tracker
The adoption of this motto by a company employing thousands of people provides a great example of why we need more engineers versed in the humanities.

What is evil? If it's violations of the law, then why not "Don't break the law"? (That certainly gives off stronger "already answered my t-shirt" vibes).

Does 'Don't be Evil' mean not violating any principles of Sartrean humanism? Those are all perfectly clear, right? Does it mean keeping the Judeo-Christian decalogue? The Confucian analects? Good thing there are no ongoing debates problematizing those! Or maybe it requires performing Utilitarian harm reduction calculations before all decisions? That's easily calculable, though, isn't it? Or, perhaps it involves abstaining from all meat, alcohol, and cigarettes? Some Jains wear special shoes to avoid accidentally crushing insects while treading, while Mormon ethics require the donning of special undergarments. Will corporate provide either of those?

Aside from the fact that the existence or non-existence of metaphysical evil is still debated both in secular-rational and theological contexts, it's unavoidable that many ethical ideologies fundamentally contradict one another. One can either choose one and rule out all others, hoping that the chosen model proves internally consistent and unambiguous, or one can accept that, as Philip K. Dick once said, "We are all doomed to commit acts of cruelty or violence or evil; that is our destiny, due to ancient factors. Our karma." Neither choice sounds ideal!

Friedrich Nietzsche's theory on the inevitable "transvaluation of all values" lends some weight to the impossibility of retaining this maxim in Google's corporate code of conduct forever. Reading into Google's abandonment of 'Don't Be Evil' this uncharitable idea that leadership has decided "evil" (whatever that is) is ok now, actually, leaves one with the unsatisfactory feeling of missing some perspective.

Instead, I think, the decision shows us that even the most simply worded of slogans, with the best of intentions, are inadequate as frameworks to think deeply about the often impossible contradictions of our beliefs and commitments. Ethical action requires deep thought. It's not a consensus, and it's not majority rule either (probably!). Not doing evil is complicated, and hard. It's not something that every preschooler inherently understands at playtime. And even if we follow through on the most informed decisions, supported by the all-true suppositions and ironclad logic, we may still find ourselves doubting that course of action years down the line as new outcomes are disclosed.
> I think there's a real grievance to be had by projects that were formerly open source, solicited contributions from non-paid volunteers, and then change licensing models.

It's definitely possible to take advantage of volunteerism, but in this case I don't see the real issue. The project remains just as open as it ever was, even upon licence change. It can be forked, and the project might change name, but that's all. It's not the nicest outcome, but it's the same as if a sole owner just decides to stop working on a project. The only thing to do is fork and move on.
Eastern philosophy understood it quite early, you can only go so far with cause and effect.

Brahman, Prime mover, are great explanations as to why there must be a causeless entity, something that is not ruled by material nature in order to be the causeless source of it. The cause of all causes that is causeless itself.
The article itself is rather, hmm... Melodramatic? Not sure that's the right word, but it is close. That said, the overall idea that "open source" projects that are controlled by a single vendor have problems is true.

I think that having a for-profit company controlling an open source project is a major conflict of interest. Open source does not always result in profit. Often the opposite. And I think we've seen the results of that with all the different open source projects that have re-licensed into pretend open source licenses.

There are ways to run open source projects that support both the open source culture, and allow for for-profit companies to make a profit. But most of those ways mean allowing competition. Which is where the single vendor project conflict of interest becomes apparent. Yeah, big tech will leech off any successful project. Yes, that means less money for the "single vendor". Yes, that is not fair. But I'd say re-licensing is worse than leeching, so...

The other side effect of "single vendor" I've run into a lot, is simply that their paid options are always priced for organizations with very deep pockets. So the smaller orgs (and individual developers) that jumped on the bandwagon early because the project was open source (and they actually could jump on the bandwagon), have no chance at supporting the project. And end up have to find something else because the project stops supporting open source.
Advertising. Now you and your friends star in the streaming commercials and digital billboards near you! (whether you want to or not)
Operators with precedence rules frequently appear in top-down parsers. I agree that pure-LL form doesn't make this easy, but most languages I have seen use Pratt parsers that allow precedence parsing within a top-down framework. It doesn't require full LR.
This is a topic that has come up a ton on HN, in submitted articles[1] and practically once a day in comments[2]

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
A C implementation of tic-tac-toe in a single call to printf
Show HN: An open-source API Gateway for front end applications
Hello Everyone,

I'd like to share a project I've been working on: an open-source API gateway that simplifies the integration of frontend applications with third-party APIs, particularly for those APIs that require confidential handling of API keys, without the need of developing your own backend.

This gateway utilizes an Express server, which can be configured through a YAML file. It allows you to establish proxy endpoints that manage requests to external APIs, incorporates secret keys into these requests to safeguard them from exposure on the frontend, and supports various policies including CORS, JWT authentication, API authentication, and rate limiting.

I'm eager to receive feedback and perspectives from the community regarding this project, thanks!
Peirce, apparently, did develop a equivalent form of truth table earlier, but it would be misunderstand the history of computer science to attribute them to Peirce. Just because someone had the idea first, doesn't mean that work is the source of the idea going forward.

I think it's pretty clear that Wittgenstein's truth tables are those that guided the development of computer science.

>In a manuscript of 1893, in the context of his study of the truth-functional analysis of propositions and proofs and his continuing efforts at defining and understanding the nature of logical inference, and against the background of his mathematical work in matrix theory in algebra, Charles Peirce presented a truth table which displayed in matrix form the definition of his most fundamental connective, that of illation, which is equivalent to the truth-functional definition of material implication. Peirce’s matrix is exactly equivalent to that for material implication discovered by Shosky that is attributable to Bertrand Russell and has been dated as originating in 1912. Thus, Peirce’s table of 1893 may be considered to be the earliest known instance of a truth table device in the familiar form which is attributable to an identifiable author, and antedates not only the tables of Post, Wittgenstein, and Łukasiewicz of 1920-22, but Russell’s table of 1912 and also Peirce’s previously identified tables for trivalent logic tracable to 1902.

PDF of Anellis's paper: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1108/1108.2429.pdf

>But even if that conclusion is challenged, it is now clear that Russell understood and used the truth-table technique and the truth-table device. By 1910, Russell had already demonstrated a well-documented understanding of the truth-table technique in his work on Principia Mathematica. Now, it would seem that by 1912, and surely by 1914, Russell understood, and used, the truth-table device. Of course, the combination of logical conception and logical engineering by Russell in his use of truth tables is the culmination of work by Boole and Frege, who were closely studied by Russell. Wittgenstein and Post still deserve recognition
for realizing the value and power of the truth-table device. But Russell also deserves some recognition on this topic, as part of this pantheon of
logicians.

>In this paper I have shown that neither the truth-table technique nor the truth-table device was "invented" by Wittgenstein or Post in 1921-22. The truth-table technique may originally be a product of Philo's mind, but it was clearly in use by Boole, Frege, and Whitehead and Russell. The truth-table device is found in use by Wittgenstein in 1912, perhaps with some collaboration from Russell. Russell used the truth-table technique at Harvard in 1914 and in London in 1918. So the truth-table technique and the truth-table device both predate the early 1920s.

PDF of Shosky's relevant paper: https://mulpress.mcmaster.ca/russelljournal/article/download...
I tend to agree. Having done a bunch of DSL's over the years, and becoming extremely fluent with Bison+FLEX, I have to say that a hand-written LL parser with a couple of mutually recursive table-driving functions to parse expressions via precedence climbing is the way to go. Precedence climbing (or I think it is also called Pratt parsing?) is super simple and flexible. But the BIG bonus is in error reporting, and let's face it, most of the user interaction with your parser is with the error messages, otherwise it is push 'enter' and forget. Getting a reasonable error message out of an LR parser is about as much fun as poking yourself in the eye repeatedly with a sharp stick. With LL, you know what structure you are trying to build... with LR, you have to rummage around in parse stack looking for obscure clues.
For comparison, the standard text in Great Britain is exactly as follows:

Warning
Do not trespass on the Railway
Penalty £1000
If I'm LARPing as a layperson then you've lost me in the first sentence.