skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
People want to believe in something more when it comes to ancient Egypt even if they know it is not reality. To me, it is obviously linked to the beauty and other worldly feel of the ancient Egyptian iconography and art.

If you just had the pyramids in the desert with the entire civilization lost, while impressive there wouldn't be other worldly explanations that sounded palatable. It would obviously just be the engineering of a lost civilization.

It is really a testament to the power of ancient Egyptian art that it can still inspire the imagination to such a degree thousands of years later and across cultures.
This does not hard-crash on an empty array[0] but can still cause bad UB and eventually crash should it point past allocated memory page or to other random data (spec allows to have a byref that would point to the last element of array if it were one element longer, but such dereference out of bounds is still UB).

Covariance is unfortunate choice of arrays of T where T is class and is widely considered a mistake today. When you pass Memory<T> or Span<T>, there are no covariance checks involved as they disallow it.

It is also less of an issue in .NET in general because quite often T is a struct instead, which does not have covariance in the OOP meaning of the word (old-style int[] to uint[] casts are just reinterprets, they are frowned upon luckily and few codebases use them).

[0] https://sharplab.io/#v2:EYLgtghglgdgNAFxAJwK4wD4AEBMBGAWACgs...
Go, and F# do almost all positional arguments. I think Rust too. Java, C#, C, PHP are also positional only or 99% of the time. I assume Dart too.

We are talking named/keyword/etc.

Personally I find positional arguments to be an anti-pattern in all but a very specific set of circumstances.
Let AI take notes for you from your phone
Having a design background, I agree completely. To explain why design matters in this case, we simply need to look at ergonomic factors: literally the “economy of work.” That’s why I pointed out the "end to end" claim as a lie because it’s impossible to assert such things without thorough testing of the applications and continued analysis of its effects on the whole supply chain. Most of those AI byproducts will likely be laughable in the coming decades, similarly to the recurring weird-form-factor boom surrounding whatever device is in vogue. Refer to the video linked in [1] for good examples of weird PC input devices from the 2000s. It takes considerable time for the most viable form-factors to be established, and once that’s achieved, then the designs of the vast majority of products within a category converge to the most ergonomic (and economic) one. What bothers me most is not the advent of novelty and experiments, but the overconfidence and overpromises surrounding what are merely untested product hypotheses for most of AI applications. The negligible marginal cost of producing derivative work in software, fueled by the high availability of accessible tooling and lack of rigorous design and scientific training, is to blame. Never mind the hype cycle, which is natural and expected. In times like these, it is when we most need pragmatic skepticism. I wonder if AI developers at all care to do the bare minimum due diligence required to launch their products. Seems to be a rare thing in SWE in general.

[1] https://youtu.be/Sbtgc6mi44M?si=X2e0DSlxZjC7_YOf
Having the same instruction set available across mobile and desktop might present a shift back to native application.
It's even easier if you can afford the lawyers to bend rules, break the spirit of the laws and in some cases the actual letter of the law - just long enough to achieve dominance and then you can help write the laws to stop others competing with you.
> I'm sure that a lot of us really don't like the idea of invasion being rewarded with territorial negotiation

I don't like that either, but we have to deal with the world we're living in. Almost every conflict in history ends up with territory changing hands. If you're the weaker side, you need to do everything possible to avoid direct conflict. You say US diplomats tried to find a diplomatic solution , but that's such a one-sided view. Do you think the other side didn't try at all? Do you believe that the Russians are bloodthirsty and looking for war no matter what? We need to stop looking at other countries like Russia, China, and even India, Brazil, Iran etc. as if they're ignorant, warring nations whose only concern is to cause trouble in the world. I would call this view childish, but because a lot of serious people seem to hold this cartoonish point-of-view, I need to use another term, I suppose... perhaps victim-attitude? It's always the others who are causing trouble trying to make our lives hell, it's never our fault, it's never us who are the problem?! America is involved in almost every conflict in the world right now, not just Ukraine and Israel, there are dozens more! Maybe it's not everyone else who is wrong?
> One of the leading hypotheses for the Ordovician mass extinction, the second largest ever, was a stray gamma ray burst.

Wikipedia currently characterizes it as more of a trailing hypothesis:

A minority hypothesis to explain the first burst has been proposed by Philip Ball,[100] Adrian Lewis Melott, and Brian C. Thomas ... Although the gamma-ray burst hypothesis is consistent with some patterns at the onset of extinction, there is no unambiguous evidence that such a nearby gamma-ray burst ever happened.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Ordovician_mass_extinctio...
What's a "fair" charge? Students don't pay all of the costs to run a university even in the US, and certainly not outside the US. Students don't pay any of the costs to run a public high school, after all. But a big problem nowadays is that students are paying a greater share of the public university costs, since the government is subsidizing a smaller share of the costs. If you go back 60 years or so, it wasn't the case. That's why Boomers brag about paying for their college education by working summer jobs and such, because they could! Unfortunately, college costs have become less socialized and more privatized.

Different degrees do have significantly different costs, though. To some extent, market forces govern professor salaries, and professors in different departments can make vastly different salaries. Still, universities distort market forces by bundling all of the "goods" into one big package. Imagine if there were separate universities for each department instead of one university covering every department. For example, there would be separate engineering and philosophy universities. The engineering university would have a much higher price, not just due to the higher costs of engineering professors and the materials required by the department but also due to demand for an engineering education. The payoff of a degree with greater economic prospects makes the students more willing to pay a higher price for the degree. (EDIT: One might argue that public universities artificially inflate philosophy professor salaries, for example, beyond what they could command without the help of the other bundled departments.)

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that universities should be run according to market forces. On the contrary, I think higher education should be mostly subdizied just like high school and lower education. My point is that "costs" are not inherently fixed. They're subject to economics, both supply and demand, and you can't ignore demand as a crucial factor. Thus, when we think in terms of the costs and price of a university education, I think it's very fair to consider the ROI.
Study: UK firms more likely to offer higher wages to those who have studied AI
By academic definition in the Science of Culture school of thought that I align with.

Art is roughly self-expression or interpretation of reality performed with symbolic means.

It's a debatable definition of course, as aesthetics are nebulous, but most others are far too broad and therefore lose their meaning and usability, at least in the academic context.

> I'd say flyers for shows are art. or movie posters. or book covers, for that matter. Or trailer music? corporate jingles? They're all art.

They are not if we're talking in generals, though there can be conditions where a specific piece can be viewed as such, of course. All the things you mentioned are products of craft most of the time. Crafts belong to the wider sphere of aesthetic culture of course, but it's not art. Of course, I know some artist/illustrators closely collaborating with authors/musicians for their posters and covers, but it's more of an exception to the rule.

Roughly speaking, the need to tailor a creation to align with the desired brand image or marketing strategy inevitably conflicts with honest self-expression.
why is this guy online? shouldnt he be behind bars and without computer?
Those periods of "Ma"[0] really make the film for me, and their absence was a big part of of why I didn't like the 2017 Scarlett Johanssen version (I walked out of the theater I was so disappointed). They give you time to think & reflect on the implications of the scene that just ended, and how it will affect the forthcoming actions of the characters.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_(negative_space)
Given that women generally avoid dating lower-paid partners, there's a good chance you wouldn‘t or that those people would be outliers.
“So long and thanks for all the fish”
I remember at least ten years ago somebody online went around proclaiming that they finished an entire MIT CS degree in less than one year using their online content. For some reason that whole episode reminded me of Cal Newport and I don't know why. So I searched online to find that person:

https://calnewport.com/mastering-linear-algebra-in-10-days-a...

So the person was actually Scott Young and that link is basically Cal Newport giving him a platform. Why would you promote content like this that is obviously bullshit?
Ask HN: What monitor(s) do you use?
I've bounced around a handful of monitors over the past few years; haven't seem to found an ideal one yet. Though i'm thinking maybe LG C-series OLED 42" could be fun. Nice big canvas, 120hz, built in speakers, clean look.

What do you all use?
Mortgage rates where I am are basically always within 1-2% of the risk free rate and less than most investments return over time so this isn't really true.

You have a very small opportunity cost, which reduces your risk of default to near zero.

Holistically, you can then take greater risks in other areas and end up longer term positive.

To me your argument is like saying that an airbag, or a crumple zone, or a seatbelt, increases the weight of your car, and therefore fuel consumption, and therefore it's expensive. It's true but only in a pedantic way, when you need it it suddenly goes from being "expensive" to a huge net positive no brainer.
The AI isn't doing math, the AI is curating the textbook material. In the same way that you have a host of different faculties that enable you to excel in all that you excel at, there is more to math (and math pedagogy) than arithmetical consistency
> is the increased yield really worth all the issues I hear about these tractors

It probably is. If you can increase yield by a few percent that could be the difference between a profitable crop or not. Corn is a commodity, and the market is absolutely cuthroat. That's why farming has changed from something a family could do to something that requires a huge amount of land and expensive equipment to realize the economies that are required to do it profitably.
Javascript. Works in the browser, which includes a great REPL.
I don't think you can do this for a low cost.

If you figure out how, sell it. People will pay $50 just beacuse its fun.
Climate isn’t the biggest risk to some species. Some orcas (which are technically dolphins) don’t have enough supply of the fish they eat. Issues like river and fishery management or dam removal or ocean overfishing don’t get enough attention, but would be important to fix even if climate wasn’t an issue.
Wind power produces more at night. See eg here for an explanation: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/10mvxm4/comment...
> the available robomowers all have tiny razor blades

I was concerned about this as well when I deployed the first robot.

After having a bunch of stumps removed from my yard, all my wires were messed up. So I actually switched to a big zero turn mower for about a year.

You know what I found? The cut quality was worse, even with a sharp blade and perfectly leveled deck.

The powerful traditional rotary mowers kick up a ton of dust, the wheels are much higher impact on the grass, and being a manual process it isn't practical to do every day or multiple times a week.

We realized that we actually liked the "robot grass" much better, so at that point I fixed the wires and now the yard is better than ever.

The reason the robot grass is much better is because it can cut much more frequently. I have them going daily in the AM and the yard is perpetually freshly mowed like a golf course. I just string trim about every other week.

I'm not worried at all about the little blades (and we have a fairly rough yard being in a clearing on a mostly wooded lot on a hill).

They recommend replacing them every month, but I get good results only changing them once a year.
Seems like the NYT found a way to fuck with archive.is. There’s a gigantic overlay blocking a ton of the content.

Boo.
> (Just to dispel the impression that you can join Google/FAANG by acing the interview, and then coast along. Fake work with zero impact is very obvious.)

A good engineer can do all that's needed of them in 20-30 hours a week. It's not quite coasting, but it's not difficult either.
What You Aren't Hearing About Marijuana's Health Effects
BTW that was a very interesting interview... I kind of agree. However, in order to automate something, you need to know the subject. For example, in digital circuit design, we use these EDA tools, but on top of that we create a lot of custom tools to automate all kinds of phases of the process. You definitely have to know the field you're working on.
That's the thing with ideologies, it colors a person's views to the point where they don't realize they are trapped in it.
So to check your keys, you are asked to grab a pip package.

That is OK, but I heard there were lots of security issues with pips too. From one issue to maybe another ?

If you are worried, I would just recreate your keys.
That justification seems a bit behind the times honestly. We've now seen actual academic fraud on a massive scale with extremely little in the way of a correction to fix this, while at the same time we've seen Wikipedia handle abuse extremely well. The academic fraud is a threat to Wikipedia, more than using wikipedia links is a threat to academia.
If you're like me and want to some actual evidence,
here's a video where they scanned and uploaded STL files from pre-dynastic Egyptian vases.
https://youtu.be/QzFMDS6dkWU?feature=shared
Absolute capitalism doesn't work. Every modern economy is its share of socialist policy. The question today isn't whether you support socialism, but rather where you draw the line.
Go and succinct aren’t really in the same universe.
Russia knows [war is costly], why would it want to make things even worse?

Because its leadership is deranged, and is willing to put a large chunk of its population through a wood chopper (and endure decades of blunted growth and economic estrangement) in order to indulge its geopolitical fantasies. Which is why it started the current war in 2014 in the first place.

Ukraine losing some territory is NOT the end of the world

The literal "end of the world", no. But it would lead to a very bad long-term situation in Europe and throughout the world if Russia's aggression were to be validated in this case.

Especially if it were to be awarded -- as you appear to be advocating -- permanent sovereignty over the territories it is currently claiming.
https://archive.is/uH0oT

The interviewee tweets at https://twitter.com/madras_bertha

`For starters, she says, the “addiction potential of marijuana is as high or higher than some other drug,” especially for young people. About 30% of those who use cannabis have some degree of a use disorder. By comparison, only 13.5% of drinkers are estimated to be dependent on alcohol. Sure, alcohol can also cause harm if consumed in excess. But Ms. Madras sees several other distinctions.

One or two drinks will cause only mild inebriation, while “most people who use marijuana are using it to become intoxicated and to get high.” Academic outcomes and college completion rates for young people are much worse for those who use marijuana than for those who drink, though there’s a caveat: “It’s still a chicken and egg whether or not these kids are more susceptible to the effects of marijuana or they’re using marijuana for self-medication or what have you.”

Marijuana and alcohol both interfere with driving, but with the former there are no medical “cutoff points” to determine whether it’s safe to get behind the wheel. As a result, prohibitions against driving under the influence are less likely to be enforced for people who are high. States where marijuana is legal have seen increases in car accidents.

One of the biggest differences between the two substances is how the body metabolizes them. A drink will clear your system within a couple of hours. “You may wake up after binge drinking in the morning with a headache, but the alcohol is gone.” By contrast, “marijuana just sits there and sits there and promotes brain adaptation.”

That’s worse than it sounds. “We always think of the brain as gray matter,” Ms. Madras says. “But the brain uses fat to insulate its electrical activity, so it has a massive amount of fat called white matter, which is fatty. And that’s where marijuana gets soaked up. . . . My lab showed unequivocally that blood levels and brain levels don’t correspond at all—that brain levels are much higher than blood levels. They’re two to three times higher, and they persist once blood levels go way down.” Even if people quit using pot, “it can persist in their brain for a while.”`
It’s also arguably the most beneficially productive imperative in those domains that are shaped by iterative change towards an idealized conception.
Researchers create dataset to advance AI solutions for carbon capture
Such relationships exist. But in no way are such anywhere as common as those relationships in which men earn more than women. And that disparity is primarily because, as IdiocyInAction said, women don't want to be in relationships with men who earn less, not because men don't want to be in relationships with women who earn more.
Beyond “foreign policy support”, how exactly does Israel support the US? Not asking a trick question - please educate me if I’m missing a big rock in front of me. Thanks.
If you find this topic interesting, David Imel put together a fantastic deep dive. He spent four months of research, went to Japan to interview the creator of emoji, and put together a very good video on the topic[0].

[0] https://youtu.be/g-pG79LOtMw?si=htnop9jpjmE3kQ75
It worked great in France, which had a majority renewable grid back in the early 1990s. If the rest of the developed world had invested in nuclear power during that same time frame we would have much more developed nuclear technology today. More importantly, we would’ve started emissions reductions decades ago instead of waiting for solar to become viable. We are still waiting for fundamental breakthroughs in grid-scale battery technology that will likely come too late to avoid 4C warming.

I’m not presenting environmentalists as powerful. I’m presenting them as innumerate feelers. Unfortunately that’s contagious.
At this point nuclear is effectively dead; this SMR stuff is just the corpse twitching. Anyone investing in nuclear is making a bet that renewable/storage technologies are going to immediately run into a brick wall, or even get more expensive, while nuclear gets considerably cheaper.
I think the whole point/perspective of science is that claims have to be provable with evidence. Scientists don’t make claims without evidence.

I am sure that there were a lot of preconceived biases that blocked scientific research from occurring in this space, but it might also be that we didn’t have the tools to examine evidence until recently.

Scientists are generally very curious, open to exploration, and absolutely want to prove the unproven or refute the previously proven with new evidence. It’s how they make their stamp in their field.
OP is in fact about doing your best to detect encoding without proper tagging. It is not perfect and you won't have 100% accuracy. But it can get pretty decent (OP is literally about the techniques used to do so, statistically etc), and is necessary because of the actual world we live in. If just refusing to do it would get MS to export in UTF-8 by default that would of course have happened a long time ago!
Downside is contrast is worse than e-ink.
Canada plus all of Europe is only 1 in 10 people.

Global problems need global solutions and most people are not in nations near the poles with decades old nuclear plants they can coast on.

They need to build new energy plants, and live in areas where solar plus battery beat nuclear on multiple dimensions.

That's why every prediction has solar accelerating past nuclear deployment and heading for multiples of nuclear output.
I suspect the sheer amount of technology coming out of Israel might help.
On top of what everyone else has said, even if you are able to train your tokenizer on exactly your training dataset it wouldn't remove all these issues.

The way BPE works you can end up with very rare tokens if they get merged with another token. Imagine you have tokens X and Y, and it happens that almost every X is followed by Y. Then the BPE process would make a new token XY but wouldn't remove the old token which would now be undertrained.

I guess to solve this we'd need to use a more sophisticated merging algorithm than the greedy one.
It's just drivel stemming from guilt over the past.

Ironically, by unconditionally supporting Netanyahu out of guilt, Germany is again choosing the dark side of history. The victim has become the perpetrator.

It's really terrible what was done to the Jewish in the past, and what Hamas did recently. But it doesn't justify the civilian casualties Israel is causing (and to be fair, they had no business making settlements in Gaza anyway)
Coal emits twice as much co2 as natural gas. It also emits mercury, which makes it to the United States.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09080-6

By the way, Carl Sagan predicted the China coal problem in 1985

https://youtu.be/Wp-WiNXH6hI?si=_PwDnBnOwwqCRBGX
The problem I've seen when I've looked at this is signalling to the user that the session has ended. Sure your EBF filter stops passing traffic, but the user as to know that they need to visit a page to reauthenticate

That requires integration with a client, which is a massive pain to integrate
It's obvious Egyptians could carve granite using stone instruments. What is worth more investigation, is how they carved symmetric granite vases within 1/100th of an inch precision.
If we could (we probably can), we'd have a fluent LLM that would generate sounds that we still couldn't understand.
Yes, you are accurately describing the pro-nuclear side there. The nuclear skeptics, we can point to objective market evidence. The pro-nukes have to invent conspiracy theories to stave off cognitive dissonance.
What? This makes no sense, if you want to have money in case of economic trouble you obviously do not invest it. This is just contradictory, so you have to actually have the money in a savings account.

Over the decades you are paying off your loan you pay tens of thousands of dollars for having that savings. Each month of having that safety net will cost you money, the result will be that it takes you many years longer to pay it off.

I am not saying that in moderation it is a bad thing, but it certainly has serious downside, especially if you are tight on money.