skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>foo : &int * 8;
>bar : &(int * 8);

while just about anything is better than the original, we could certainly do better. I am curious how you expected to handle function pointer syntax, as that is the usual bear of C typing.

let's aim to make the types unambiguous, simple to read and write

all C types can take at most one parameterizing type, so prefixing works unambiguously.

force const and volatile to be exclusively prefixing as well, sorting the weirdness trailing consts would allow.

() can represent a function-pointer, with its return type following

your examples would be

ptr : *int
rgb : [3]float
foo : [8]*int
bar : *[8]int

that would leave

complex : a [](int, int)**(int,int)*const*volatile*(int,int)[][]*[][16]*char ;

vs

char *(*(* volatile * const (**a[](int , int ))(int , int ))(int , int )[][])[][16]

I couldn't have written that second one without https://cdecl.org/

Of course, this simple prefixing is also exactly what Go did to improve the types, with some syntactic sugar to help the reader along.
I note form the demo that there's a "Flat" button that looks like normal text. This is a mis-feature and should be removed; controls should look different from things you can't interact with.
> MSO probably had security problems at least as large.

Down in the parser and such, no doubt about it. But it would have also lacked much of the attack surface of IE, such as, oh, ActiveX. Granted that specific example would be easy enough to disable, but that's just one mine in the whole field. They definitely should have wrestled IE into shape, but the IE team clearly wasn't taking marching orders from the Office team. Organizational dysfunction manifested in sofware.
> Regardless, expanding margins is only attractive up to a certain point. The higher your margins, the more attractive your market becomes to would-be competitors.

This does not make sense to me. While a higher profit margin is a signal to others that they can earn money by selling equivalent goods and services at lower prices, it is not inevitable that they will be able to. And even if they are, it behooves a seller to take advantage of the higher margins while they can.

Earning less money now in the hopes of competitors being dissuaded from entering the market seems like a poor strategy.
I wouldn't say looking forward to it, more, anticipating it and the vast social change that it will bring.

Corrupt police officers are allowed to operate with impunity because there's no pressure from above to stop them, and the pressure that came from below has been crushed by the technological advancements that allow police to coordinate with radios and computers for searches.

It will be interesting to see what happens when that sort of pressure comes back in the form of drones. I figure you'll start to see sentences for police brutality increase after a few cops who are let free get droned a few feet from a courthouse by the vengeful family of the victim.

There might just be enough pressure from above to put these corrupt cops in jail, if only for their own personal safety because it might just stop being safe on the streets for them.
With an ever expanding AI everything should be quickly commoditized, including reduction in energy to run AI and energy itself (ie. viable commercial fusion or otherwise).
I would also add Tauri to the list as they now support mobile as well https://v2.tauri.app/blog/tauri-2-0-0-beta/

I think all cross platform frameworks come with some kind of drawbacks and in most cases, learning about the underlying native platforms is unavoidable (like widgets, visionOS support etc).

So I wouldn’t worry too much or get into a FOMO decision block - I’d pick the one that feels most fun and fits your use case.
> I would pay someone to operate relayers using cash, gold, diamonds... something hard.

Side remark: diamonds are not hard, see

Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Diamond?

> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-yo...

> https://web.archive.org/web/20240510011736/https://www.theat...
As a single person, making Chipotle at home (which I've done) is both time consuming and inconvenient.

Chipotle's menu has a _lot_ of fresh ingredients. You can't really prep any of it more than a few days ahead of time, with the exception of the proteins and maybe fajita veggies/pureed salsas which you can freeze.

Everything else has to be fresh, and it would take at least an hour or two to prep + cook: the lettuce, cilantro lime rice, guac.

Or, I can just go to Chipotle and pay $15 (unreasonable for many, but I've prioritized healthier eating) for a meal.
Iceland to follow with hákari.

Malaysia and/or Indonesia with durian.

Italy with pizza, of course.
The intro is really cool!

I have a feeling that the game idea is really cool.

But as other mentioned, I don't seem to understand what I should be doing. And there is only one font size (Firefox/Linux). The instructions hint otherwise. I also get the same list of suggestions every time.
>Everything you outlined applies to US politics too :DD

What? that Canada made an alliance with soem other neighbors so the evil USA would not invade them ?
1. The PROTECT Act provisions have repeatedly been upheld by both appellate the Supreme Court as constitutional as long as the CSAM in question meets the Miller or Ferber standards. Either the law is constitutional, or you’re proposing that the courts are illegitimate, the latter of which is conspiratorial.

2. You are right that there is a campaign to limit access to open source generative AI models, but it is not an initiative led by the government. Companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google are leading the charge when it comes to emphasizing the danger of open source models and are lobbying every day to limit access. The executive and legislative branches are following suit with what industry executives tell them because they are deferred to as experts.

Industry policy teams have invented vague, ill-defined terms such as “frontier models” and equate these models as having the same power as nuclear weapons. They have a vested interest in being the sole controllers of this technology.

If you want to counter governmental efforts to limit access to such models, start by countering the FUD pushed by industry in this space.
Previous discussion about the RD280U model without the arm:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40385371
> no making stuff up

"Hey, turn on Sucky-Chan"[my robovac]

"Sorry, I couldn't find a device called Study-Jam"
The entry point is probably looking at how Penrose Diagrams describe black holes.

Recent Veritasium video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6akmv1bsz1M

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_diagram
Post author here. Just wanted to link to a talk that I gave which expands on the ideas in this essay and shows a couple evocative demos to make it more concrete:

https://youtu.be/bJ3i4K3hefI?si=BCrqvyZiFFur3W9p
He would have had to spend even more money to buy paper.
There used to be a group that organized Capture the Flag games in FiDi, in lower Manhattan. It was a ton of fun, even though I was always worried that some overzealous guy with a flag patch and a machine gun would get antsy about a bunch of people running around.
Simple, I basically wrote a script to figure out probabilities for gambling ( I won't open source it since I don't want someone angry at me when they lose money). Then you basically have the UI layer call the script.

It's really hacked together, but it works.
This depends on you not using crazy plugins specific to Obsidian that require you to write custom Markdown.
Non-technical people should be stopped.
It's hard to guage exactly how much credence to put in that letter due to the gag contracts.

How much was it in support of Altman and how much was in opposition to the extremely poorly explained in board decisions, and how much was pure self interest due to stock options?

I think when a company chooses secrecy, they abandon much of the benefit of the doubt. I don't think there is any basis for absolving Altman.
To clarify, if I'm not mistaken, out of 422 shoulds in the document 420 are in Chapter I, "General Provisions which:

- spells out more-or-less in layman terms why the law exists, its scope and applications

- definitions that will be used throughout the document

There are two shoulds used in the rest of the regulation, in Article 47.1(j). IMO that has to be shall, too, but it's in a large list of other binding corporate rules, so it's not too bad.
Please stop linking to the mobile version of wikipedia.
> People also come up with "plain interpretations" of the laws of physics that allow them to construct perpetual motion machines.

But you don't (typically) get into trouble with the law enforcement agencies if you don't/didn't understand the laws of physics correctly.
Clearly we don’t know when/if AGI would happen, but the expectations of many people working in the field is it will arrive in what qualifies as ‘near future’. It probably won’t result from just scaling LLMs, but then that’s why there’s a lot of researchers trying to find the next significant advancement, in parallel with others trying to commercially exploit LLMs.
That's an example of it not working. The feedback clearly indicates that it failed & why, then you can try again. I fear with an LLM voice assistant it will constantly hallucinate 'success' responses.
Regarding the "for some reason":
Java Swing (and JavaFX, and Windows Forms for that matter) all suffer from lack of integration with modern web browsers. It is near impossible to find a way to combine these model-view-controller based user interfaces with the DOM in a reasonable way.

Horrible as it is, web browsers have managed to provide a common platform for user interface delivery. The browser wars have been fierce, and getting this foot between the door has cost several companies a lot of money. This technological monopoly is far from optimal, but I fear that we are stuck with it, as we are with QWERTY keyboards, USB thumb drives that must be unmounted manually, and the hopeless misery that is Bluetooth.
I think the real problem with the OP's straw-proposal interpolation method is that it's stateless and doesn't need to be. I would instead record the start position, then interpolate along a function F(t) to the end position. F(0)=0, F(1)=1, F'(0)=F'(1)=0 just so the ends aren't jerky. The curve can even overshoot 1 to give the animation some bounce.

I'm sure somewhere on the Internet somebody's written down some good choices of curve; hopefully someone else knows what to search for.

(I don't know what to do if another change interrupts the first but it's a rare case and can probably be handled imperfectly.)
I’m not sure what to expect. Apple is better than average at finding good applications of technology for regular people.

On the other hand, Apple is below average in integrating network functionality (iCloud’s many early problems, frequent performance issues with Music and the App Store).

Finally, they had a huge lead with Siri but never settled on a path for growing it.

I’m hopeful they’ll do some really interesting stuff here. I also wouldn’t be surprised if they miss the mark.
Interesting that OpenAI has completely destroyed their reputation over the last year. For me, they've gone from an admirable company to cringe-worthy. I really think that the best outcome here is for OpenAI to collapse and get absorbed by Microsoft, where adults can continue some of the good work that is being overshadowed by ego and cult-like vibes.
I know that Google is ten thousand companies under the umbrella of one, and it's silly to complain about them releasing some goofy, useless thing while other things like Google Drive search is terrible, and yet I will complain. This hit millions of people's phones; it almost certainly took a lot of resources to get the green light. Those resources could have been spent in so many better ways.
> the expectations of many people working in the field is it will arrive in what qualifies as ‘near future’

It was the expectation of many people in the field in the 1980s, too
This is not a complaint. For people that downvoted, may I ask why? To be clear, I'm not asking people to _explain_ the downvotes; I am only asking the people that actually downvoted.

Here are some guesses:

- Are my questions too harsh or unfair? Off-topic?

- Do you not like that I openly admit my priors?

- You hold it against me that I don't think science journalism is very good?

- Do you think Quanta is of high quality?

- ... unique? Not worth challenging?

- ... doing all it can?

- As a point of comparison, have you looked at how many IX people and data scientists other news organizations have?

- Am I expecting too much?

I'm genuinely curious. Persuade me that I'm missing something. I'm open to it.

For what it is worth, I've attended many events associated with the Simons Institute; I've never found an organization like it. But I don't hold any organization up as above criticism. I have a feeling that Simons could be doing much more with Quanta.

To me, the downvotes without comments (above) are likely informative, but not for the reasons you might think. They suggests people want to express disapproval, but think a response is not warranted or would take too much time. But why?

My hunch is that I've struck a nerve. When people are uncomfortable, they often downvote. Sacred cows. Confirmation bias. Both are strong, even when you know that these things are cognitive errors. All in all, the downvotes may well suggest that people have huge irrational responses and/or blind spots around this.
> "better"

That's the issue.

You may be unable to Google examples of your own culture you disagree with, and the ones from "other" cultures you disagree with, you consider yourself enlightened and "know" your take is better, so they don't count as good examples either.

That said, I imagine you could imagine yourself role playing as, say, an authentically devout member of the Taliban, searching online, and finding examples of "worse" and "better" that don't match the ones you here are finding.

Now, you'd likely argue the Taliban believer is misinformed, and that "better" is some universal thing. That's all well and good when "better" seems modern and "worse" seems archaic.

It's more problematic when the differences are not what UN calls "universal", but values system based, from a value system that is internally coherent however different.
> in your argument here you're not talking about a "more compelling evidence of personhood", but rather discriminating towards some specific identity. A preteen non-native speaker is just as much a person, with just as much personhood

It's not about how much of a person they are, but how much evidence of personhood responding in a particular way gives. If you were the interrogator and gave some challenge you think only humans can solve, and got back one "asdfghjkl" (no real evidence either way) and one correct answer (evidence in favor of personhood), your beliefs should be adjusted towards believing the latter is the human. Always giving bad answers just because humans can also give a bad answer is already a failing strategy with low success rate when the test is carried out as Turing specified, with no requirement to imitate a specific characteristic added in.

As an analogy that may or may not help: You have two boxes, one containing a rabbit and one containing a turtle. One box is perfectly still, offering little evidence either way (rabbits and turtles can both trivially stay still). The other box is bouncing up and down (something you have reason to believe is difficult for turtles). Which box more likely contains the rabbit?

> In other words your version of the test doesn't involve solving many "X"s at all. In fact it only requires one - the one which simplifies the domain so much as possible.

I think the key you are missing is that it is up against a real human. It does not just have to pass the "well both humans and bots could theoretically respond in this way" mark by giving gibberish answers, but instead get chosen as human when the second player is likely satisfying many of the interrogator's tests.
I want to learn the basics of how humans work
Looking for resources: I want to learn the basics of how humans work, so that I have a better understanding of what tasks I should be delegating to AI and other people (so I don't become really stupid)

For context, my goal is to be a startup founder in the future, and in that type of job, you don't have the time to learn everything. Speed and delivery are more important than learning.

For example, I'm learning Blender and game development currently. And I got stuck on something I was trying to implement. Instead of trying to solve it by myself, I posted questions on forums asking how to implement it, and I then went on to do other stuff.

I'm worried that if I always do that, I will lose my ability to think and solve problems, if I'm always delegating stuff to AI and other people.

Ideally, there would be one book or a few articesl that I could read that would help me understand how humans work (and especially learning) so that I can decide what to do about this^
I'll chalk that up as a win for the New Jersey camp.
Show HN: Route or process Calls/SMS/Email the way you want, with just a prompt
Hi HN,

I created a runtime framework for handling Calls, SMS and Email. And you can use the AI Assistant to create
a custom or personalized "communications system". View example scenario/prompts to get a feel for what it can do.
If you have something specific in mind and need help with the prompt, just email me.

You can ask for a phone number in any US or Canadian city. Not porting numbers yet.

Just tell it HOW you want it to route or process calls, sms, email.

Looking for feedback on what you would use it for - company phone system?, 24hour voicemail line? SMS Auto respond to questions? Routing calls (or sms) to different people at different times of day/week? etc.

NOTE: after you get a new virtual number, please enter that number as "Existing Virtual Number" when you enter new prompts. That way we don't waste numbers.
Incoming email processing: virtual#@parse.projectone.ca (ex: 5147770000@parse.projectone.ca)

Hope you find it useful,
Joe
joe@project1.ca
The way they vectorized the PDF could be less efficient than simply extracting the text and dropping it into context as text. If it's a 100 MB PDF then it's probably a scanned PDF, and OpenAI is probably using an OCR model to vectorize each page directly. It seems an opaque process with room to be inefficient. So I would be interested to know if we could save on token/vector fees by preprocessing the PDF to text with our own OCR.
Nor on current Android Chrome.
China also makes a huge amount of pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, electronic components, and parts for capital equipment. Decoupling from them would be very painful.
My favourable interpretation is that seeing the dissatisfaction that comes from drinking indicates that it is out of line with God's will.

Whether those drinking realise this is another matter.

I suspect there are more people who have tried alcohol and no longer drink than have read Milton. Perhaps we need some data on that!
Not sure what exactly are you looking for. Bunch of info is on FAA website, for example:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html...
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/acf/medi...
After reading the title I was hoping to find something about third time, same as third space: time that's neither work nor rest. That would be something!
All art is propaganda. Not all propaganda is art
I really want to like games like this, but it's not really clear from the UI what direction you should be going. There's a list of suggestions, but I guess that's just a starting point? And a few words in it just ended the game.

The previous versions of this game were _okay_, but semantic similarity is so fuzzy and the UIs just don't work for this yet.

The intro is super cool tho, kudos for that.
The overwhelming majority of the population you're defending supports the killing of Israeli civilians. This is according to their own polls.

False.

The PCPSR polls (the only ones anyone is talking about) do show broad support for the statement that the Oct 7th attack was "correct". But overwhelmingly (91%) they do not believe that atrocities against civilians occurred during the attacks. 81 percent also said they did not watch videos published by international organizations showing atrocities, for a variety of reasons.

Which is still troubling, of course. But the reality of what these people actually said is entirely different from what you're describing.

Unfortunately some news outlets (such as the Times of Israel, AP) chose to present misleading characterizations of second poll in particular, which of course then got pasted all over social media.

The IDF is doing a great job.

Meanwhile there's plenty of denial going around as to atrocities committed by the IDF as well, of course. But this is a different topic.
http://archive.today/ulZsu
No, because I shared the "friend link" which shouldn't have a paywall?
Another semantic distance guessing game is https://semantle.com/
We'll need universal basic income – Geoffrey Hinton
> a former NixOS user

Why did the author stop using NixOS? This is the first time I'm hearing about a veteran NixOS user giving up on it.
Parental experience influences behavior and neural structure in generations
The story of the "YC mafia" takeover of Conde Nast era reddit as summarized by ex-ceo Yishan who resigned after tiring of Altman's constant Machiavelli machinations is also hilarious and foreshadowing of future events[0]. I'm sure by the time Altman resigned from the Reddit board OpenAI had long incorporated the entire corpus into ChatGPT already.

At the moment all the engineers at OpenAI, including gdb, who currently have their credibility in tact are nerd-washing Altman's tarnished reputation by staying there. I mentioned this in a comment elsewhere but Peter Hintjens' (ZeroMQ, RIP) book called the "Psychopath Code"[1] is rather on point in this context. He notes that psychopaths are attracted to project groups that have assets and no defenses, i.e. non-profits:

If a group has assets and no defenses, it is inevitable [a psychopath] will invade the group. There is no "if" here. Indeed, you may see several psychopaths striving for advantage...[the psychopath] may be a founder, yet that is rare. If he is a founder, someone else did the hard work. Look for burned-out skeletons in the closet...He may come with grand stories, yet only by his own word. He claims authority from his connections to important people. He spends his time in the group manipulating people against each other. Or, he is absent on important business...His dominance is not earned, yet it is tangible...He breaks the social conventions of the group. Social humans feel fear and anxiety when they do this. This is a dominance mask.

A group of nerds that want to get shit done and work on important problems, who are primed to be optimistic and take what people say to their face at face value, and don't want to waste time with "people problems" are susceptible to these types of characters taking over.

[0] https://old.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the...

[1]https://hintjens.gitbooks.io/psychopathcode/content/chapter4...
Oh, looks like querystring removed automatically...

https://medium.com/@erayalakese/paid-299-instead-of-500-for-...
> I can assure you that random guy next desk will not care about your "this is a top-posting-thread" header and bottom post there.

We should move away from having a single mutable body for email. It should be a series of immutable messages that reference the message that it is replying to. Each message can contain a hash signed by the private key for the domain that wrote it. Then when you write your message it just gets appended to this chain.

How it is shown is up to the email client so that it can be done in the best way for the user.