skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I think I just experienced how much self-deception there is about the world.

This is not actually a proof. It is, however, exactly the kind of soft reasoning that motivates reasonable axioms. I'm not saying it's a bad axiom, I'm saying you should know what you're doing. That way when you run into a domain where it doesn't apply very well, you know where and how to back up and restart.
Google Attacks Microsoft Cyber Failures in Effort to Steal Customers
If our world-wide herculean efforts towards building a self driving robotic car have yielded mediocre results, I have low expectations for a robotic field geologist built on a NASA budget.

Also note that even with the limitations, the humans surveyed more ground. Remove the limitation by making the rover a mobile habitat and now the humans can have an even more expansive and productive mission.

Ultimately we're going to colonize space, why take 50x the time to gather the science needed for that goal, when worst-case we can spend 50x the budget and just put humans there to incidentally also gather knowledge on how to live in space.
> Would you, personally, accept punishment if (when) your government is found to have done something wrong? After all, you can vote.

That's fundamentally different. Everyone has to be citizen of some country or other, and it's difficult to change citizenships, but no one is forced to own stock in any particular company.

> And sure; but is it possible to determine when this incentive was created? If it is, can't it be stopped the moment it happens? If not, then the shareholders can't reasonably be blamed.

> Unless the shareholders are the incentive, in which case sure.

That example was meant as an illustration of using scapegoats to deflect consequences, and why the consequences have to bubble up beyond an individual doing a bad act on behalf of the corporation. I'm not sure what you mean by "the shareholders are the incentive."

My mental model for how this would work legally with shareholders would be modeled more on torts like negligence than on criminal law. So it wouldn't be necessary to determine exactly why the bad act was done to go after the shareholders, just that there was harm done on such-and-such date.
no, it was to show that the answers to basic conversions were completely incorrect
Show HN: SDK Fabric – an open infrastructure to automatically generate SDKs
Not all exceptions are checked. This kind of ruins the whole point. IllegalArgumentException for example is very common and would be what you’d use for a bad input to something like new URL(). So it’s a very common exception to see, maybe second only to the NPE, and yet it won’t be checked. What the fuck is the point then?
I saw a documentary similar to what your saying, but I believe it was on fair trade, and focused on underage workers.
> If you have success (which let's be honest most likely you won't)

My favorite part of your reply..haha

Thanks for sharing!
my opinion: it quickly gets into "the math behind LLMs" that make no sense to me

words i understand but don't really get: weights, feed forward, layers, tensors, embeddings, normalization, transformers, attention, positioning, vector

There's "programming" in the plumbing sense where you move data around through files/sockets and then there's this... somebody without a math background/education... very unlikely you'll understand it. it's just skimming python and not understand the math/library calls it makes
A billion dollars isn't cool, you know what's cool? No more dollars.
That's why I mentioned it. They claimed it improved to 1.8 in pSLC mode.
Visualizing the Effects of Predictor Variables in Black Box Supervised Models
When dealing with pure functions, there is also no ambiguity for f(g(1), h(i(2), 3), j(4)). In both cases, prefix notation removes ambiguity.
Yes, looking at big company interview processes, it can give you a huge unfair advantage if you can know what kinds of technical questions would be asked ahead of time. It's kind of ridiculous and counter-productive that employers are obsessed with selecting developers who can solve problems under time pressure.

The kind of developer who writes code quickly may also be the kind of developer who jumps to conclusions too quickly; this attitude is a huge problem in the medium and long term when working on any decent size project. Choosing sub-par solutions can trigger a cascade of negative consequences for the project over time. Often, it's better to have developers who are really thorough and don't move to the next stage until all reasonable possibilities have been considered.

The people who can solve problems quickly are often not the same people who can solve problems optimally.

The current system seems to favor fast-moving code monkeys with zero understanding of architecture or security.
> Avoiding undefined behavior doesn't buy you anything.

This is absolutely false.

Say you want to check if a mathematical operation will overflow. How do you do it with signed types?

Answer: you can't. The compiler will delete any form of check you make because it's UB.

(There might be really clever forms that avoid UB, but I haven't found them.)

The problem with UB isn't UB, it's the compiler. If the compilers didn't take advantage of UB, then you would be right, but they do, so you're wrong.

However, what if you did that same check with unsigned types? The compiler has to allow it.

Even more importantly, you can implement crashes on overflow if you wish, to find those bugs, and I have done so. You can also implement it so the operation returns a bit saying whether it overflowed or not.

You can't do that with signed types.

> If you start to fuzz test with UBSan and -fsanitize=integer, you will realize that the choice of integer types doesn't matter much.

I do this, and this is exactly why I think it matters. Every time they report UB is a chance for the compiler to maliciously destroy your hard work.
According to the article, urushiol extract is considered safe and effective by the US FDA and pills were available over the counter up until the 1970s. They disappeared from the market because of regulations regarding determining exact dosage needs and the ability to make pills containing that dosage. It is, apparently, a difficult problem. But a company claims to have solved the problem and will start doing trials shortly.

In other words, eating poison ivy absolutely will work. But nobody knows how much you should eat. And the leaves aren't fungible, so how can anyone tell you how many to eat even if they knew how much you should eat?
I consider your post a prime example of what I'm talking about rather than an astonishing refutation. A bog standard, off-the-shelf "how dare you not turn every single conversation on the internet to this important issue" reply. I could have written that in my sleep, and about any number of issues. How dare you try to turn the conversation away from whatever my opinion is about the Ukraine to distract us with this Israel stuff? I can reel off a dozen issues that I could copy and paste your message about with just a bit of string replacement.

There is no value offered by the HN community itself to argue about this. Such value as the HN community offers is precisely when it is not discussing the same things as everyone else.
Probably to what company thinks the company needs or should do? It's rare - very - when a company really needs to do something unusual, which engineers wouldn't expect.
One thing to keep in mind is that connectors are often parametric: You got some end bits, and a middle section you repeat N times. This means a lot of your dimensions are going to be "Y = AX + B", where X is just the pin spacing. If you know they're from the same family, you can extrapolate the dimensions without too much trouble.

Of course there's still a huge risk with DB-19 being a semi-custom format. Sure, it's almost certainly derived from the standard, but are you willing to bet the cash equivalent of a car that they didn't slightly tweak it for one reason or another?
While cities were smaller, I think people forget the inverse, which is that rural areas were much more densely populated. The farms were very small, required lots of labor, and were always close to the manor of a lord or parish. Which almost invariably had a bakery, brewery, and a well present. These services were very convenient to the average peasant, and I was surprised to learn how few medieval homes even had a hearth or oven for baking.

Even in the preindustrial days, you could not just grab water from any old surface stream and drink it raw without some risk (as any avid hiker could tell you). Even the most crystal clear stream will have some sort of wild animal refuse in it that could leave you sick for days.

We know that early settlers in America basically refused to drink the local water except when forced. Even going back to the Roman period, where they were obsessive about fresh water, even then the average peasant might be drinking posca (vinegar water) all day instead of water. Roman troops would make and haul the stuff around with them rather than risk local water on the march. So I think it would be weird to assume there was a middle medieval period where the water was always pristine and everyone drank it.

> Many people today would rather drink soft-drinks or a beer even when having access to perfectly safe tab water.

I mean, if you went to a jobsite today, I would not be shocked if less than a third of what people drink during the course of the day is tap water. But if I may posit something - the average person's distaste for drinking plain water is somewhat universal across time and cultures and might very well be a human adaptation.
"Sir, this is a Wendy's" is the short of it.

Hacker News is a social news website focusing on computer science and entrepreneurship.

Just because the Current Thing is the Most Important Thing That Ever Happened, it doesn't make it an appropriate topic for HN. There's always something historically important going on. Anyone can go on to one of the hundreds of places not dedicated to tech news and entrepreneurship, of which there is effectively one on the Internet.
I'd rather have 1080p at 120Hz than 4K at 60Hz. The most legible font is the one you read the most often (people had no trouble reading cursive or blackletter scripts when they were standard), and pixelation in no way compromises legibility. Blur is a problem, but that's easily avoiding by disabling antialiasing and enabling full hinting.
Author here, 10 years later -- I agree. I'd remove that rule wholesale in an update of this guide. Unsigned integer types can and should be used, especially for memory sizes.

I would still advocate for large signed types over unsigned types for most domain-level measurements. Even if you think you "can't" have a negative balance or distance field, use a signed integer type so that underflows are more correct.

Although validating bounds would be strictly better, in many large contexts you can't tie validation to the representation, such as across most isolation boundaries (IPC, network, ...). For example, you see signed integer types much more often in service APIs and IDLs, and I think that's usually the right call.
Sounds good! Honestly, I may not take this route due to the nature of my product (a self hosted CMS with Enterprise and OSS versions). But very interesting, thanks for sharing!
It is not illegal to give candidates IQ tests. There are huge firms that do so openly. The practice isn't widespread because it doesn't work well, not because it's proscribed.
Data Privacy for me and not for thee.
Yeah but no matter where it is, people are going to people and where there’s a lot of them, you’re also going to see two things: their superstitions and the knowledge problem in action.
Still a tradition in some parts of the world!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvass_barrel
i also learned this and have tried it.

the way i was taught to do it is to take just the tip of a leaf from a young plant and eat that, put it on my tongue and swallow it.
Unless you have a novel insight, let's assume that market forces apply. Yes, we all had bad experiences — and they go into the calculus. A company that creates consistently horrible experiences for their candidates will be taxed by the market.
> Easystroke is unmaintained.

> But there is a modern replacement, https://github.com/jersou/mouse-actions, which works on both X11 and Wayland

https://github.com/thjaeger/easystroke/wiki
People who get miffed at putting women and poc in space also don't want to spend more on social services, though, so its kind of a false dichotomy. It's not like if we could somehow convince the powers that be to cancel the space program they would put it all into education, jobs programs and basic income.
She should be happy she was selected as the voice of such a revolutionary piece of technology. It's a honor for her voice to be selected, she should show some humility and better social awareness in these matters.
Doctors Are Still Figuring Out Adult A.D.H.D
This would be a good comment without the first sentence, which ruins it.
IMHO if the 80-column limit bothers you in C, you're writing bad C. Quoting the kernel docs, it is "warning you when you’re nesting your functions too deep. Heed that warning".

I remember reading this for the first time as a teenager: "if you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you’re screwed anyway, and should fix your program". Twenty years later, it seems like solid advice to me.

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
Well yeah, defects are clustered so if someone is likely to be damaged in one way they're likely to be damaged in another.
It may just be a misunderstanding on my part but aren’t there treaties that make anything bigger than science outposts impractical in Antarctica?
Yeah, consider it to be as relevant as Objective-C has ever been, even with GNUStep.
'Speaking to the Sunday Times, former conservative party leader Sir Ian Duncan Smith, said: "We’ve yet again gone to China to build buses. What is the matter with our domestic production? These are iconic, British London buses. Why is it that we simply do not look for a contractor based, if not in the UK, then certainly in Europe."'

I'm not sure if he's being deliberately disingenuous with that question, but if each bus is £100,000 cheaper then they're saving £10m when buying 100 of them. Of course there are other considerations here, but that's why.
I know nothing about the subject but an idea is to use a "let's make a demo" story to, as you say, capture the important journey instead of the end result.

It takes more effort than a simple "how it works" explanation but if done correctly I think it should explain how the demo works while also capturing the magic of the creation process.
As all the classic computer algorithms are here https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/index.htm

E.g. https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/HIPR2/hough.htm
Google gave up on tape a while back. Latest Google search indicates it is only used for air gapped backups. I don't OP was suggesting using tape though, especially with technologies such as hybrid SMR.
Yeah. Especially after reading this sentence:

> Early on, it became clear they’d need more specific directions than simply “make it like a DB-9 but with more pins.”
Original author here. This is indeed a bit confusing.

You are right for the case where Firefox's PDF.js is used (local or remote file in a tab or iframe). The XSS problem however is with web-applications that themselves use PDF.js. In that case, it does not run in a separate or special origin; that is a Firefox thing.

You are also right that the PDF format supports JavaScript, but that is something unrelated to this, and indeed highly sandboxed in all cases.
> Which is problematic because you can write down the list-form of a lambda but not the actual value of it.

That's not true. Nothing prevents you from defining a serialization format for lambdas. That is in fact what all modern Lisps do.

> When you suggest the addition of an additional record type to the language

When did I suggest that? Pointing out that Bel doesn't have a record type is not the same as suggesting one should be added. Bel is intended to be a specification, not an implementation.

> Rude.

Do you think so? I was responding to this:

> I think the lesson here is really that lisp is a convenient syntax but a lousy model for computation.

Calling Lisp a "lousy model for computation" is not only objectively false -- Lisp is the foundation of all modern programming languages -- it also denigrates the work of hundreds of people over decades. Maybe that's not what you intended. Maybe you are simply ignorant. But I actually thought that mine was a pretty measured response.
Can we have similar tests for companies, some formalized employment-worthiness?
Matt Levine's common refrain [1] of "everything is securities fraud" is useful here. If as a stockholder you suffer damages to your investment because a company did illegal things and hid it, you can sue for those damages if you argue that you invested in this company because you were assured they were not doing illegal things.

These lawsuits have been decently successful as far as I can tell from what stories make it to the media.

[1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/everyt...
But this is how it works:

= definition = identity = equality = proportionality
How long until someone finds a way to maliciously SEO-ify these tools and cause remote code execution incidents? Is it less malicious if the script only does marketing things instead of more serious harm?

What safeguards are in place to sanitize the output of copilot? I ask this because of course a more experienced user might do that sanitization or sandbox testing themselves, but they probably wouldn't get much use out of copilot in the first place.
Conveniently, the great majority of those everyday people also own (via diversified retirement funds) vaguely-comparable amounts of the stocks of SleazeCo's competitors. So - when the feds ship SleazeCo off to the forced-liquidation slaughterhouse, the stocks of those competitors will rise, reducing the harm to the little folks.

Plus - reduced mass poisoning will improve the long-term prospects for the whole economy, also helping the investments of all those everyday retirees.
How long does it take you to make a demo? Might be cool to do a live streaming, or just record the process even if not live.
Punch cards you cand decode with your eyes, you don't need tech for that. Good luck with USB drives in 200 years.

Even old USB 1.0 devices sometimes struggle on modern HW.
For a long time, this feature was put off because of performance concerns. It would be helpful to address the impact the god selector had on performance, even if "no impact".
It's absolutely false that JS only serves advertisers. JS is absolutely crucial for simple things like date pickers or popovers, or replacing parts of the page without reloading the entire thing.

It's also absolutely ridiculous to think that faster JS engines are irrepevant.
Love the data driven approach through graph clustering, instead of jumping into opinionated refactoring.
You have Swift-NIO for cross platform form networking, OpenCombine as an open source implementation of Combine, and I’m not sure what you mean by file system but you can read/write files without needing any library other than the cross platform Foundation implementation
You read that quoted paragraph -- and perhaps the article -- in a very different way than I did.

It doesn't claim that it's fundamentally impossible for an AI to feel pain or emotions, but rather that it doesn't genuinely empathize with those of a human. A language model that has been tuned to produce empathetic-sounding responses has just learned to mimic empathy without actually sharing the human experience.

I don't see motivated reasoning in that. I don't think I even see the supposed motivation; I don't think the article is primarily trying to argue against the possibility of sentient AI in the first place.
> "Sir, this is a Wendy's" is the short of it.

Nah Sire, that ain't it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39161344
Not really, but it is easier to think that way.
Google does crawl your website, if you link it at a couple of places. Why do you say Google can't find it?
> Artificial gravity is easily generated via rotation or thrust.

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/1308/why-are-there...

Sure, "easily".

> It will be far easier to get materials into space from the moon than from the much deeper gravity well of earth.

No it won't, for a very, very simple reason:

Every single kilogram of stuff you launch from the moon, has to be launched FIRST from exactly that "deeper gravity well" here on Earth. Including btw. the fuel required to launch it. Because the Moon is shockingly devoid of any steelworks, factories, fuel refineries, Astronaut training facilities, food processing plants or any of the other myriad sources of stuff required in space.

So yeah, launching something from 1/6th of Earths gravity is easier. However, all this does, is add another launch to the equation.

> How do you see us developing the technology for humans to leave the solar system if we never develop the technology to visit the moon?

For the same reason why we developed radio transmission, without first inventing super-sonic carrier pidgeons.

Technology does not only advance incrementially. Ever so often, a radically new technology emerges, that is leaps and bounds better than existing systems, and often wasn't developed from these systems either.

And btw. Rocket Engines are just one such technology as it happens. Before them, the strongest way to propel something through the air, were propellers, a technology which we since improved by alot, but is still incapable (and never will be capable to) put things into space.

So no, doing what we have done before is not a reqirement for finding a much better way to do it.

> Also, you don't need to "cheat physics" to explore space.

Where exactly did I assume that? But you do need to cheat our current understanding of physics for FTL travel.
Any test that has disparate impact is in effect illegal. Leetcode at least makes this process more opaque which helps limit liability. I have edited my post to note that there is no explicit legislation making IQ tests illegal in the US.
Neeto Got a Makeover
Neeto got a makeover!

Check out Neeto's fresh new look!
FLASHIER
QUIRKIER
And GREENER

Keeping the vision to create and offer SaaS products that are as affordable as possible. Our new look reflects this vision more clearly than ever before.

Don't miss out on the new video of Neeto's brand reveal.
https://youtu.be/j9G9zPm9Si4?feature=shared

Visit our website to discover what's new. - https://neeto.link/neeto-get-things-done
Just treat it as a weird watermark. That's what works for me.
this comment made me go back to the project page. i haven't even noticed that fact while reading it for the first time. strange.
There's a range of other options for error handling between a global errno and wrapping every lines in try-catch...

Many languages make it idiomatic for functions to return a value or error (Rust, Go, modern C++) so that you can access a human-friendly error on failure.

https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/result/

https://go.dev/doc/tutorial/handle-errors

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/expected (there's also std::variant and std::optional that can get you there since C++17)
This would be fantastic for people like me that are extremely sensitive to flicker. LED lights and alarm clocks drive me insane at lower refresh rates because they leave dotted trails at night time.

I would kill for a computer that didn't show mouse trails on bright screens. If I move my MBP's cursor around on this HN page, I can count approximately how many frames of cursor I can see.

If I had any legislative power, I'd outlaw LED brake lights or headlights with refresh rates lower than 1kHz as well. :)