skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, that's definitely true. I find that I'll often be excited about an idea and immediately start putting in the time to build a rough prototype. Once I realize the true scale of the effort involved I second-guess my commitment to the idea - is this really something I want to spend the next year+ working on? I think having that clear vision and enough conviction that the results will be worthwhile is very important and definitely something I struggle with.
My next car must have CarPlay...
I hiked about 500 miles on the Pacific Crest Trail and lost 5 pounds. I went low carb for a month and lost 30 pounds. Diet is just a far more effective weight loss lever than exercise. IMHO that's because it's far more about hormones than calorie balance. It's very hard to out-walk insulin pushing fatty acids into your adipocytes.
VGGSfM: Visual Geometry Grounded Deep Structure from Motion
> The vast majority of sales is still paper books.

Do you have numbers for this? I wouldn't be entirely surprised if paper book revenue dwarfed ebook sales, but given that the latter has no marginal cost, I expect that profit from ebooks is still a very large slice of the pie.

Anecdotally, with my two self-published books, ebook and PDFs make up a pretty large slice of the pie even though my books are known for prioritizing the print experience (careful layout, lots of illustrations, etc.).

> Some do. Most don't. Especially new authors. Publishers are playing a risky game of trying to figure out the tradeoff of how much to invest in developing an authors brand in the hope that future books will cost less to sell.

A new author with no established celebrity or audience is basically dead in the water. There was a world where a new author could:

1. Write a book that was good on its own merits.

2. Convince an agent to represent them based on that book's merits.

3. The agent convinces an editor at a well-known publisher to take it.

4. The publisher prints it and gets it on bookshelves in stores everywhere.

5. People looking for books stumble onto it and buy it.

That world existed when people had a lot of spare time and attention and relatively few things vying for it. That world no longer exists. You can consume media 24/7 and never come close to running out, all without spending a penny.

The days of just having to write a great book and get in front of two people to be successful are dead and gone.

> From what I see, most authors (myself included) would rather not deal with most of what publishers do. If anything, most authors would prefer it if publishers did more of the sales effort, but it's not economically viable in most cases.

There's a lot of stuff most people would rather not do, but unfortunately, sometimes the economic systems don't enable that.
To appropriate a quote “you’ll take my guns from my cold dead hands”.

There’s only one thing the agree on in DC: defense spending is the most important line item, and everything else is secondary.

Also, turns out when you have the ability to take virtually anything by force the concept of “deficits” is a bit fungible.
They've fixed it, but when I bought mine they didn't have Find My integrated yet lol. Was a little worried walking home carrying that bag
My personal belief is that translating an informal proof from a paper to a proof in Lean, given that the prerequisites are already formalized, is an O(n) operation where n is the length of the proof. It's just translation. Right now the constant is something like 10-100, but I think with more work on matlib and AI assistance it can be brought down to maybe 1-3, meaning formalising proofs right as you write them becomes feasible. In fact the constant may go below 1 as formalization in Lean can prevent unseen errors from slowing your progress.
Phenomenal article, very entertaining and aligns with my experience as a prominent search "outsider" (I founded the first search intelligence service back in 2004, which was later acquired by WPP. Do I have some stories).

The engineers at Google were wonderful to work with up to 2010. It was like a switch flipped mid-2011 and they became actively hostile to any third party efforts to monitor what they were doing. To put it another way, this would like NBC trying to sue Nielsen from gathering ratings data. Absurd.

Fortunately, the roadblocks thrown up against us were half-hearted ones and easily circumvented. Nevertheless, I had learned an important lesson about placing reliance for one's life work on a faceless mega tech corporation.

It was not soon after when Google eliminated "Don't Be Evil" from the mission statement. At least they were somewhat self aware, I suppose.
It is highly unlikely that iPads or AVP will ever natively run Mac apps. At best, you would be able to run MacOS as a VM with some clever maintenance/windowing/storage tweaks.
Then why be surprised that demand dried up?
Automatics used to have torque converters. These days they've got multiple clutches are are mechanically more efficient and have more gears than a manual transmission. I still like my manual transmission car though.
GP is (I think correctly) stating that a system that can "prove" its own consistency is definitely inconsistent. Inconsistent systems can "prove" anything; if a system can appear to prove its own consistency, it isn't.
> is netanyahu good for you? Maybe he underestimates a little.
https://www.politico.eu/article/israels-netanyahu-says-he-wi...

I get the feeling there'll be no response to this hard evidence.
https://clin.larvol.com/all-data
you could simply do: "display: grid; display: masonry;" and all not-supporting browsers would skip the second declaration.
my work id has a 0 and a O in it and it drives me crazy. i only remember it due to muscle memory on the keyboard
What is Frutiger Aero, the aesthetic taking over from Y2K?
Ballmer has gone rogue since the 80s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgJS2tQPGKQ
NFTs are a (highly problematic) attempt to do this without a central authority: there's no reason not to have an authority, so we can use regular old public-key cryptography.
Increase range somehow and send it to Ukraine for testing.
Apple has released dev kits before. Most recently the apple silicon devkits. Those have pretty much universally been explicit and have come with a requirement to return the devkits once consumer hardware capable of being development hardware is released.

They were hoping for consumer (or industry) acceptance. They visibly did not get that.
Seems like a great tool for back burns when fighting wildfires. I wonder how far it can get in the hour long battery life.
Oooh it supports mobile? I have to try this.
The article even mentioned the difference involved. You buy a warehouse you might need 50 or 100 KWh. Everyone planned for that when the facility was built.

Want to charge 200 vans? Now you’re talking megawatts. You have to talk to the utility about upgrading their lines and stations and such.

“Hi. PG&E? We want to 100x our overnight power usage! That’s good right?”

That’s not a normal call they’d have had to do before.
This is like asking about the practical applications of chess. They're probably mostly nth-order effects.
I don't think I said anything about making people illiterate.

Undermining literacy means so they are not as literate as they could be to improve their lives.

For example, there are more than a few studies on literacy and education levels of the political spectrum for better and worse.

India is a different world. The crime against humanity that is the caste system all but forbade 1-3% of the population to be permitted to learn how to read. 95-98% of Indians were not permitted to learn how to read, and had to rely on the interpretations of the less populous castes.

Ironically it is a minority that largely broke this logjam and helped push literacy for the many forward.

I'll gladly take the downvotes for speaking the truth about caste being a divider between people and society.
I'm not sure I see why slow projects are a problem when you're being paid for labor. You just set expectations, and keep the customer updated on the honest status of the project (give them code they can run, even if it doesn't yet do everything they want).

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "risky"? I can only think of projects that don't yet have a customer. In that case, you just don't build it until there is a customer need for it. Architects don't speculatively design buildings hoping to find a customer who wants it. I think we would be better off if the same was true of software.
Why wouldn't they? It costs about the same to make an ebook as a physical copy, and provides better value to those who read using ereaders.

As well it makes the purchasing decision much easier for consumers.
the diversity and anti-bullying are selling to the parents, not the kids.

the bigger problem is the chromebooks.

also, if you're "touring different schools in different districts" you're playing a game that's way different from the average US kid. most schools are funded by local property taxes and in poor areas that means they get what they get.
I feel like we're reaching an inflection point where tech-companies are about to discover whether humans are willing to live in an all-digital world, or if they would rather just continue physical reality with digital-enhancements.

Tech companies keep pushing towards all-digital because they carry a lot more power in a world of their own making. They keep trying to get away from solving real-world pain points (e.g. being able to talked to loved ones) to solving for manufactured pain points (e.g. dopamine addiction to short-form content).
Apple is a predatory partner

Every partnership Apple enters must result in Apple winning and the other party simply being a subservient cog

So, no one wants to do business with them in new markets where Apple doesn't have leverage

This is why they couldn't get a manufacturing partner for the now-dead Apple car...no one wanted to be the Foxconn of cars (they do all the work, Apple gets all the credit)
I perhaps did not explain myself well.

The areas I want to improve in my life mainly pertain to my career. I believe it is important to note that I am not a Type-A, career focused, go-getter kind of person.

I am a developer like mainly others on this site. I am also quite unfulfilled and unsatisfied in my current position. I am grateful to be employed, but when I describe my position to others, I am generally met with a response like, "Run! Now, and never look back."

So, in order for me to get out of my current position, I am going to have to put in a lot of work in my free time. That's not necessarily a bad thing, of course. However, say I land a new job due to my efforts. I seriously do not think it will be fulfilling nor increase my happiness in the grand scheme of life. I seriously think where ever I end up will be a different round of the same "game" with different players, so to speak.

I do not feel that my motivation to change comes from some internal burning passion, but rather some obligatory "should" feeling i.e. I should find a better job, I should study <insert topic>, I should work out more, etc..

Though, you are right -- gaming has no bearing on my real life. The rewards from any game are, more or less, fruitless. Though, I guess my point is that real life is pretty damn fruitless too. If anything life just feels like chasing a carrot hanging from a stick. I have lived my entire life with this concept of an ever moving delayed gratification. There is no end to the real life grind, no clear guaranteed steps on how to progress, no checkpoints, no redos, etc.. Seriously, what am I missing? What I am grinding for?
Not surprising considering a $500 Quest 3 gets you most of the way there and has a much better (and much more open) ecosystem.
For your growing civil disobedience needs?
Parasites do the same thing: hijack a piece of hardware and use it to reproduce. Computer viruses have even formed a kind of symbiotic ecosystem with blackhats: the scammer provides resources to help the virus reproduce, and the virus provides access to the scammer in turn.

In a way, all life hijacks hardware (the material world) that it doesn't create to reproduce itself.
This proves that there are at least 400k die-hard-price-insensitive Apple enthusiasts who are willing to spend that much for Apple’s latest gadgets. If I was Apple’s executive, I would double down on more high-priced novel products, even niche ones, that integrate in various ways to the Apple ecosystem.
Need this incase of bad neighbours.
I was hyped to buy one until I tried the demo. Just needs to be a bit lighter. Being cheaper couldn't hurt either.
CarPlay mostly works, and although it has issues it's definitely user-focused.

CarPlay doesn't prevent car makers from tracking vehicle activity.

In the end, consumers don't give a shit about the in-vehicle infotainment. It sucks, or it's AA/CarPlay. The first generation of iDrive showed that rich people people will buy cars in spite of the in-car stuff. In fact, most car infotainment sucks, yet people still buy cars.

Let's turn the question around: why would car makers want to spend millions of dollars a year rolling their own infotainment system? So they can make incremental revenue selling ads and user data? So they have control? Control over what, exactly?
> Instead you would have to somehow beam or guide the full power of the sun towards the moon for several minutes.

So what you're saying is... we need to build a Death Star.
I was visiting Jaipur in the early 2000s and recalled the new law allowing heritage liquors had passed.

So I went to a local "wine shop" (which sell spirits, etc.) and asked for some "local liquor". The man handed me an Indian version of whiskey.

No, I said, I don't want IMFL; give me something that's traditional and local.

He sighed, reached down behind the counter by his feet, and pulled out a half liter bottle of a clear liquid which did not even have a label. It was about 25 rupees (around $0.30 today). And sure to blind anyone who partook in it.

No thanks, I said, and passed on that quest.
> At certain company sizes, the direct output of entire divisions ceases to be visible to leadership.
> What they receive instead are reports that filter up through management.

Yeah but it doesn't have to be this way. I put in these details that are summarized in 1 or 2 easy to read bullet points, but asked to remove them because 'leaders are thinking about things on a strategic level'.

And don't get me started on promotion. If I find/do something that improves the teams performance by 10x, "that is just doing my job, please don't bring up stuff like that to management." "you need to have impact across teams". So every team is trying to make every other team take on their 'product' and no one wants to take on other teams product because even if it improves their quality / productivity, they don't get anything for it.
Bit of context here is that Hashquery started as an internal tool and as a way to power our headless BI offering, so it still has a few bits tied to our infrastructure we're working to fully separate.

For folks wanting to hack around more with Hashquery in the meantime, Hashboard accounts can be created for free and we don't have plans to charge folks just using the Hashquery stuff (but we probably will bother you for feedback ). You can sign up here https://hashboard.com/getAccess
Once you get over the hilarious nature of the product it immediately takes on a darker turn that similar devices could be turned on people in the near future. There is even a reference to government procurement at the bottom.
Thinking politics can be removed from any company is wishful thinking.

The "best" they can do is mirror status quo and avoid confrontation.

This is sometimes wrongly referred to as "neutrality".
Humans contemplate "reality" on top of various models of it, as well as various other processes (cognition) and phenomena (culture), thinking they are contemplating reality itself. And the whole world runs on this. It's kind of funny if you think about it.
Meh. I think it's about the right price for the quality.

However I can't think of any actual applications for it that would have a return on investment which means it's not worth spending that money. Literally everything it does can be done better elsewhere for less money.
This sounds an awful lot like the Boeing story, even including the “[engineering] class traitor” running the failing division.
What a great article.

I've long since given up on trying to learn( Mandarin is slightly easier for me, while Korean is even harder) , but I'll always be fascinated by Japanese.
Every language has various out-of-band features (gestures, etc). I was asking if any of them are similar to the (written) furigana usage described in TFA.
What do you think you've done to sway my opinion on the matter? There's a finite amount of money, and more pressing needs than letting people checkout paper books.

Let's look at it like this: Current budget: $100; $90 going to library, $10 going to feeding the needy. We can assume that even the entire library's budget won't overcome the shortfall in feeding the needy.

You're choosing to let more people be unfed in order that a handful of people can read Harry Potter or whatever is popular these days. Bad trade off.
AVP actually erodes the brand value given the price and value proposition if seen together.
It’s $3500.
I give up, word games to avoid acknowledging the same happens.
> Krakauer points out that humans and chimpanzees share nearly 99 percent of our genetic code. “Imagine I gave you Hamlet,” Krakauer says, “and I changed less than 1 percent of the text and I said, ‘What’s the play?’ and you said, ‘It’s Hamlet.’ And I said, ‘What have I changed?’ ‘I’m not quite sure…I did see a few typos.’”

I can’t stand this comparison, I mean, sure if you got Hamlet with 1% errors you’d recognize it as mostly Hamlet. But if you got a computer program with 1% of the instructions switched out, I bet you’d get a non-working program.

Also Hamlet is ~30,000 words long. If you randomly distribute errors, sure, it will look like Hamlet. If you give somebody 300 words to change Hamlet, I bet they could come up with something. Put “actually Hamlet was a ghost the whole time” at the end, I don’t know, I’m not M. Night Shyamalan.
Why are NFTs highly problematic? I'd argue that a central authority is highly problematic as it will end up looking like the existing Google / Apple marketplaces with no ability to resell, etc. Removing the central authority would allow organic resale markets for form, etc rather than "approval" blocking any real technical progress.
> So, assuming you've read that too, the answer to your question is: everything I say (and I do mean everything, including what I am saying right now) is a hypothesis.

See, was that so hard?

Is there some reason you do not adopt a more sophisticated approach? I mean, you seem smart enough, and you certainly have the self-confidence.

> I will say this though: I'm pretty sure you are confusing motte-and-bailey on the one hand, and the appropriate levels of precision for different social contexts on the other.

Would you like to try proving out your hypothesis while I shoot holes in it, like one shoots fish in a barrel?

In this case I would start here:

"pretty sure"

"you"

"and the appropriate levels of precision for different social contexts"

"the"

"appropriate"

Presumably you can see the vast complexity that underlies these symbols (which we throw around daily as if they are simple trivialities), if you put some effort into it?

Maybe that's the thing though: if one puts little effort in, discerning reality is easy, whereas if one puts effort in, it becomes much harder. This is only one of the many ways in which reality is fundamentally paradoxical, and also funny (it is funny to watch people think they are thinking about it....which they are, but not in the way they think they are....which is funny. Funny upon funny...the gateway to all understanding? Now that would be funny!).
to the original poster,

the universe is a boolean algebra in NF: sets have complements, there is a universe.

The number three is the set of all sets with three elements (this is not a circular definition; it is Frege's definition from way back); in general, a cardinal number is an equivalence class under equinumerousness, defined in the usual set theoretic way, and an ordinal number is an equivalence class of well-orderings under similarity.

When you look at objects which lead to paradox (the cardinality of the universe, the order type of the natural well-ordering on the ordinals) then you discover the violence inherent in the system. Very strange things happen, which are counterintuitive. None of this depends on my proof to work: these are all features of NFU (New Foundations with urelements) which has been known to be consistent since 1969, and one can explore what is happening by looking at its known models, which are far simpler than what I construct.
> I think this will make an important precedent

It's worth noting this is not the first time things like this have gone to the community for feedback. They did the same for nested CSS selectors, which ended up working quite well feedback-wise: https://webkit.org/blog/13607/help-choose-from-options-for-c...
Certainly cheaper than having a human paint themselves into a corner a flamethrower...
When the Nintendo DS released, all my friends wanted me to try theirs. Same goes for the PSP, and the iPod, later the iPod Touch. Collective, ad-hoc enthusiasm is to be expected for major innovations and paradigm shifts in technology. This is why I was surprised, and somewhat let down, when the Apple Watch was released and none of my friends offered to let me see it, and poke around with it. Of course, times have changed, and devices are more personal than ever, but this still occurs; when the Oculus Rift was new, all my friends wanted me to try their new "VR". When 3D printers were first kicking off, I was receiving emails and messages from friends, some long estranged, asking me to come see it, and try making some small prints.

When the Vision Pro released, nothing. Radio silence. Even after some time passed, I haven't had any offers to try it. I'm not sure anyone I know even cared to buy one.

I'm convinced Apple has fallen behind the curve and no longer innovates in any substantial ways. They refine existing innovations now; they haven't actually surprised me since M1. And even that, was simply a refinement to an existing innovation. ARM desktops were pioneered by Raspberry Pi, not Apple.
Consider spending a bit more time on the search ? That one will be hard to spell.
+ tax + a case for it puts it at over $4k.
Man they used to drop some awesome stuff: Google Maps, GMail (remember the hype over Gmail invites?), Google Earth... then they just stopped improving stuff and started releasing multiple versions of things and abandoned them all, over and over again. Very strange.
This model has nothing to do with ChatGPT other than transformers. And as someone that could desperately use some advances in gene editing, this lowbrow dismissal is frustrating.