skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"cannot fathom how these kind of languages got so much adoption"

The other options built into your UNIX (maybe Linux) machine were:

- C

- C++

- tcsh/ksh/bash

- awk

- TCL

What would you have chosen?
I have been thinking about this, but for a while now, I have settled on using ChatGPT's GPT-4v's multimodal capability to generate a text file containing the titles and pages based on screenshots of the TOC. After that, I used a pikepdf-based Python script to bake the TOC into the PDF I had.

The upside, compared to Krasjet's approach, is that this works not only for text-based PDFs but also for scanned PDFs, even old scanned journal papers.

The downside is that, before baking the TOCs, you need to make adjustments to the PDF as sometimes the empty pages are not included. You also need to calculate the offset for the prologs, cover, etc. I have a script for this kind of adjustment, but there always is manual intervention involved.
It gets used a fair amount in the weather data space. Forecasting and climate reanalysis grids are typically large (gigabytes) N-dimensional arrays of float32 values and Blosc provides enough tunable knobs that it's fairly easy to find a combination that performs acceptably without writing a bunch of custom handling code to keep track of which underlying compression schemes and settings were used. Additionally, it supports byte- and bit-shuffling filters which can really help boost the compressibility of certain data sets.
Outperform in what way? There's some distinct things it already does better on like multi-hop and aggregate reasoning than a similarity context window dump. In general, tool-assisted, of which KG querying is one tool, does pretty good on the benchmarks and many of the LLM chats cutting over to it as the default.

> if your goal was to directly support graph queries, you could accomplish this with a vanilla database much easier than running a specialized graph db

Postgres and MySQL do have pretty reasonable graph query extensions/features. If by easier, you mean effort to get up a MVP, I'd agree, but I'm a bit more dubious on the scale up, as you'd probably get something like Facebook and Tao.
> AI can’t write its own prompts.

What makes you say that? One model can write the prompts of another, and we have seen approaches combining multiple models, and models that can evaluate the result of a prompt and retry with a different one.

> No improvements to AI will let it read vague speakers’ minds. No improvement to AI will let it get answers it needs if people don’t know how to answer the necessary questions.

No, but it can certainly produce output until the human decides it's acceptable. Humans don't need to give precise guidance, or answer technical questions. They just need to judge the output.

I do agree that humans currently still need to be in the loop as a primary data source, and validators of the output. But there's no theoretical reason AI, or a combination of AIs, couldn't do this in the future. Especially once we move from text as the primary I/O mechanism.
I don't think it is naive, and it matches my experience. It is very rare for a company to try to develop an inferior product for many reasons, but most of all it is impractical.

Without superiority, it you will struggle with investors, trials, approval,and then convincing doctors to to switch to it.

Everyone can come up with an example, and point to per due, but the FDA processes 10s of thousands of device and drug submissions per year. Most are in cutthroat markets with competitors.

If we are talking about individual company actions or statements, and not products, then the numbers are even worse. There are literally millions of actions associated with a product, and I would again argue that >99.9 are made in the favor of patient interest.

Making a inferior product and scamming your way to profit is an exceedingly rare strategy because it is both extremely difficult execute successfully.

I think it is clear that new product development doesn't prioritize optimal patient benefit, but that is a different topic. It needs to be good enough to sell, then it becomes a question of how good vs how much money.
A tough pill to swallow that I think a lot of students and very junior engineers fail to realize is that bringing on a new grad and/or someone very junior is quite often a drain on productivity for a good while. Maybe ~6 months for the "average" new grad.
Maybe AI exacerbates that timeline somewhat, but engineering teams have always hired new grads with the implicit notion that they're hiring to have a productive team member 6 months to a year down the line, not day one.
> preventing it from distributing the plaintiffs' books, except those for which no e-book is currently available

Wait. Does this mean the IA can't lend books that the publishers currently sell ebooks for?
> the new meaning is the opposite of the original meaning

From a certain point of view. Or:

The original meaning is a negative reaction.

The new meaning is a neutral reaction.
Reads like LLMs are slowly getting better at math.
There's a pretty huge range. It's a function of how much you load into context and how long the task is. So if you dump an entire directory with 100k tokens into context and then proceed to do a task that requires 20 steps, that will cost you a lot. Maybe >$10. But a small task where you're just making a few changes and only have a few small files in context (say 5k tokens) won't cost much at all, maybe like $0.10.

I haven't done too much digging into exactly how much people who are using Plandex Cloud are spending, but I'd say the range is quite wide even among people who are using the tool frequently. Some are doing small tasks here and there and not spending much--maybe they're on track for $5-10 per month, while I'd guess some other heavy users are on track to spend hundreds per month.
Main takeaway: write more documentation and end your day by updating the documentation (reflecting).

At least that's how I read the article. I've personally experienced a significant benefit from changing my software development habits to always writing documentation first. A sort of hybrid TDD approach where I try to stub everything out in either comments or tests before writing code. It's just a shift in viewing the documentation as a critical part of the end product. The goal being to create great documentation that happens to also have functioning code vs the other way around.

This approach is especially useful for entrepreneurs who also code. As long as I have good documentation, I can replace myself as a developer pretty easily. But if I just write code and no docs, I'm effectively just building technical debt.
What's the status of trustworthy reproducible build systems for deploying open source code to apps on Android?
I really don’t get this trend “it’s my device I should be able to do whatever I want with it.”

No! There’s literally absolutely no reasons why this should be true. As long as you’re not lied to and that the situation don’t change, you buy whatever you want, but don’t go complaining later that you cannot do what you want with what you bought.

Apple has always be very clear from the start: they have a closed ecosystem (which is being pried open by the EU currently, which I find baseless as per my previous §, and that I dislike very much as one of the reasons why I buy Apple devices is because of the close ecosystem, not despite it).
I'd thought gammon was a clear reference (in GBBO tradition) to a "swiney hiney".
On point #3, as far as I can tell, the bill criteria defines a "covered model" (a model subject to regulation under this proposal) as any model that can "cause $500,000 of damage" or more if misused.

A regular MacBook can cause half a million dollars of damage if misused. Easily. So I think any model of significant size would qualify.

Furthermore, the requirement to register and pre-clear models will surely precede open data access, and that means a loss in competitive cover for startups working on new projects. I can easily see disclosure sites being monitored constantly for each new AI development, rendering startups unable to build against larger players in private.
Work for free on open source whilst we train our Nustom AI model to replace you
Mr Tan forgot to disclose that he is an investor in AI companies like nustom.com and is providing this horrific advice to CS students / graduates just about to enter the tech industry workforce, to work for free on open source and continue 'making things for fun' to get jobs.

Only for their open source code to be used by AI models and their jobs eliminated by the companies he's already invested in.
Razer settles with FTC, will return $1.1M to consumers who bought RGB face mask
It's dead for now. The time isn't right. But will there be something like a "metaverse" in the future? Certainly. There will be many and they'll be cool.

Will it be called that and come from a company with almost no innovation and even less imagination? Certainly not.

In other words, Meta is dead. The idea, well, it's too early to say.
jojobas said, 'in "deep future" where all metals have corroded away', and was talking about aluminum casting. given that we have lead artifacts from level ix of çatal höyük (about 8000 years ago?) and that aluminum seems to be even longer lasting than lead, they are presumably talking about a 'deep future' of tens or hundreds of thousands of years in the future, if not millions to hundreds of millions. the 158 tonnes of steel you're talking about will almost certainly become 226 tonnes of hematite long before that. (the oldest surviving iron artifacts are only 5400 years old, the gerzeh beads, and those are entirely oxidized despite being meteoric iron and preserved in dry egypt¹.) 200 tonnes of hematite is not a massive deposit; the minas rio mine produces about 23000000 tonnes of iron every year from a single deposit, and it's far from the world's largest, so a 'massive' deposit of iron needs to be billions of tonnes, not hundreds

your hypothetical rusted pipe is an especially rich deposit, and perhaps an especially accessible one, and maybe (if kept away from oxygen, as you point out, or from water) one that doesn't require smelting, but not a massive one

the massive deposits, if human-created rather than things like untouched banded iron formations, will be things like landfills rather than oil pipelines or fleets of 100 tonne+ trucks. the apex regional landfill in las vegas currently contains 50 million tonnes of waste and may be close to a billion before it's full, and larger landfills can be built in the future

______

¹ rehren et al. say, 'The ToF-ND testing for grain size and crystal lattice structure of any metallic phases present in the beads found no metallic form of iron in any of the three beads. (...) typical for the corrosion products of iron,
and the absence of metallic iron above the detectable minimum
mass of about 10 mg indicates that the samples are to more than [sic]
99.9% corroded, with virtually no metallic form of iron remaining.
The noticeable magnetism of the beads is probably due to the
presence of magnetite(...)'
Good luck!

I tried to put a password on a device I contracted to do. Just the serial number, the installer reads it off and types it into their phone. Simple! Different for every device!

The manufacturer said Too much trouble for the installers! Just leave it open.

Sigh.

I compromised, made the bluetooth connection work for 10 minutes after power-up, give the installer time to connect (it wouldn't shut down as long as there was a connection), initialize the device.

See, now it wasn't 'open' for more than 10 minutes total. After that you needed physical possession of the device to connect again (power-cycle it).

They accepted that. It was something, not the same as security but at least the window of vulnerability was smaller.
Zediva tried essentially this. DVDs, players, internet.

Aereo was significantly different, because there was no copyrighted material being rented. They were renting out servers, and the servers made per-user recordings. Aereo got super screwed over too, because the supreme court said they were 'basically' a cable company, and then they weren't able to get cable company style mandatory licensing either.
What could someone possibly do with this? It's cool as hell but 8 years old.
I use a homemade non-split "ortholinear" variant. You can make all sorts of changes in the name of optimization, but the truth is most optimizations have very little chance of catching on because they are opaque and confusing to normal people.

I have some of my own principles for making a keyboard that embraces change while still being usable to someone passing by. Yes they might hate it, but at least they could use it in a pinch.

1. Label your keys. Yes it's nice to have your layout memorized, but they have labels for a reason. That reason being that not everyone who approaches a keyboard has the layout memorized. And this is especially important for mission-critical keypresses. (And guess what's difficult to label? A chord.)

2. Don't replace mission-critical keys with a chord. Function keys (like F5) can do bad things when pressed accidentally. Requiring a chord for such a key is asking for accidental presses.

3. Try to keep your keys generally where they are with a standard keyboard. I bend my slanted columns into vertical ones, but for the most part the keys can be found near where you'd normally find them.

I also question whether some of the optimizations claimed by people are truly optimizations. Were you really getting carpal tunnel by occasionally holding the Ctrl key with your pinky? Probably not. Most of the strain I observe comes from simple overuse. The only times I've ever felt fatigue were when doing typing tests repeatedly.

I'm not trying to "yuck" anyone's "yum"; I just think we should be honest and admit that most of the keyboard changes we make are more about having fun, and less about practicality. I use some chords and I have fun in doing so. But I also know that all of that nonsense will be completely rejected by most people sitting down to actually use my keyboard, unless they happen to be slightly adventurous like myself.

I like to imagine keyboards that could perhaps (however fantastical) eventually catch on with the general public, given enough time and attrition. Those are the kinds of keyboards I build and use.
It turns out my actual question is "Do we really need this many different Linux distributions" and I'm sure this will sound even more wrong but it really feels like the answer is no.

OK different ones for different hardware devices, sure.

But I asked ChatGPT of the difference between openSUSE and Debian (since you mentioned those) and everything listed seems like it could be just variants within the same OS not a fundamentally different OS

> Package Management:
> openSUSE uses the Zypper package manager and supports the RPM package format.
> Debian uses the APT (Advanced Package Tool) package manager and supports the DEB package format.

This comes back to my original question - they need different package managers because the OS's are different, the OS's aren't different because they wanted different package managers

> Release Model:
> openSUSE typically follows a fixed release model with regular releases of a stable version, like openSUSE Leap, which has a predictable release cycle.
> Debian follows a more flexible "when it's ready" release model. There are three main branches: stable, testing, and unstable.

you could have unstable, testing, stable, and then on top of that have a predictable stable release cycle. These aren't incompatible with each other.

> Philosophy:
> openSUSE is known for its strong integration with the open-source community and its adherence to the principles of the Free Software Movement. It emphasizes stability and ease of use.
> Debian is known for its commitment to free software principles, as outlined in the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG). It prioritizes stability, security, and freedom.

This just feels like a ChatGPT hallucination. It sounds like both are focused on Free Software. That said, I suppose noone is stopped from creating a Linux OS extremely focused on FSM, a commercial one not-at-all interested in FSM, and one somewhere in between.

> Default Desktop Environment:
> openSUSE offers various desktop environments, including KDE Plasma and GNOME, but its default desktop environment may vary depending on the edition (Leap or Tumbleweed).
> Debian offers a wide range of desktop environments, including GNOME, KDE Plasma, Xfce, LXQt, and more. Its default desktop environment is GNOME.

Like the package manager, inverted cause and effect.

> Community and Support:
> Both distributions have active and supportive communities, offering forums, mailing lists, documentation, and other resources for users seeking help or guidance.

> System Configuration:
> openSUSE uses YaST (Yet Another Setup Tool), a comprehensive system configuration tool that allows users to manage various aspects of the system through a graphical interface.
> Debian relies more on manual configuration files and command-line tools for system administration, although there are also some graphical tools available.

I wonder what YaST uses underneath, I bet it's a series of...configuration files :)

No reason why both couldn't work on the same OS.
> To me it is the same thing as the La La Land fiasco.

You mean the movie? What was the fiasco? I haven’t seen the movie but hear good things.
I understand that this discusses recognizing paint splatters as characters with a given "optical character recognition" program, which seems disposed to almost always recognize pain as some combination of characters. Of the many possible ways this could be realized, this is absolutely welcome and in the spirit.

However, it did give me the initial impression about other possible ways to do this, such as taking patches of color and empty space as 0s and 1s, and the totality of it as a program. I think the vast majority of those cases would be pointless noise.

So there's two extremes, one with mostly noise, one with mostly meaning. I suppose the game-within-the-game here is to find what form of interpretation does the most to credit paint splatters with the most possible meaning where, to the greatest extent possible, the meaning truly comes from the structure and not from how aggressive the rules are at choosing to see meaning.
I used Safari’s reading list.

In the past I’ve used Instapaper. If you’re a Firefox user, it comes with Pocket. There are dozens of services to solve this problem.
One person's waste is another person's value. Both stances are correct.

But you would have hated having me as a parent. My kids didn't get to watch TV as a habit at all when they were young. They did get to watch TV, but only selected programs and only as a family activity.

As adults, they have all expressed that while it may have angered them sometimes when they were young, they came to appreciate my stance as adults.

If smartphones existed then, there's exactly zero chance that I would have allowed them to have one.
Maybe instead of paying lawyers to enforce copyright these corps should pay the authors more.

Its so frustrating that copyright claims provide riches to the middlemen while buyers/consumers and authors/artists get screwed over again and again.
People create various stories just to escape concept of void. But if one does not seek those lies, there is no need for nihilism. Because even if our consciousness was not relevant - it is only thing we have. It is relevant to us. It is us till we meet the void.
They're ASICs. Likely a direct copy of Zilog's design but I'm sure re-implementations also exist.

I've never received a counterfeit Z80 that outright didn't work, but one thing to be keep in mind is that despite often being branded as CMOS 20Mhz (aka Z84C0020), half the time the chips I've received were lower grade or even worse, NMOS.
Is it gone already? I can’t select it anymore.
> I don't think IA will or should win, but I do hope that their loss shifts the needle of public opinion a bit toward actual Fair Use.

I find it extremely bizarre the people make posts like this, essentially conceding that controlled digital lending should be legal, but then claiming that they shouldn't win. Why shouldn't they win? They're doing something reasonable, meritorious and not at all clearly prohibited.
So, leaving aside the implicit value-judgement over which side of the US civil war ended up in which spot... Kinda?

> *Pretend that Hawaii was already part of the USA prior to the civil war for better apples/apples-ness.

Was briefly concerned about that, yeah. 1865 it was the Hawaiian Kingdom, an nominally independent monarchy, and I don't think either the Union or the Confederacy believed it was "part of the nation" or had revanchist plans to make it that way.
True, but they certainly didn't encourage me. Too busy with their own activities.
The British empire cira 1721 was, at least according to the venerable Adam Smith, operating on the modern principle of drafting non-owners into funding and fighting for the security of colonial enterprises they had no stake in. In all likelihood the Russian Empire was the same (it did have North American colonies after all), but I can agree that being the same means treating the adjective Russian as anything but the location is wrong - it's reasonable to speak about Imperialist practices carried out in Russia, not "Imperialism with uniquely Russian characteristics."
For the last several decades, every English speaking country has used the short billion (1e9).
>It was a test to see whether or not this LLM might actually be useful to me

AKA a Metric lol.

>using this chatbot for real work is at best a huge waste of time, and at worst unconscionably reckless.

Keep living with your head in the sand if you want
What a library is today is so different. I'm not sure I would leave my kids alone in one like my parents used to. There was always the homeless element, but now there's rampant drug use in and around, anti-social behaviour is ignored or tolerated and it's not really about the books (digital or paper) but the free internet to troll your social media. Libraries used to be accessible jewels of knowledge, now they're generic community spaces.
correct vs. incorrect encompasses so much more than memory safety and types that agree. You could spend a ton of time making the ADA or Rust compiler happy only to discover your program doesn't solve the problem your customers want solved. That's why Python is still so very popular