skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm typing this after reading their section on page 6 about the "pentagon axiom". They write that RxR^2, R^2xR, and R^3 are isomorphic, but not literally equal under different constructions, because (a,(b,c)) is different from ((a,b), c), and that this is a problem. I feel like math kinda gets this wrong by treating sets as meaningful objects on their own. Physics gets it closer to correct because it tries to be "covariant", where the meaningful answers to questions have to either have units on them or be totally unitless e.g. irrespective of coordinate system.

The two spaces Rx(RxR) and (RxR)xR have many isomorphisms between them (every possible coordinate change, for instance). But what matters, what makes them "canonically isomorphic", is not isomorphisms in how they are _constructed_ but in how they are _used_. When you write an element as (a,b,c), what you mean is that when you are asked for the values of three possible projections you will answer with the values a, b, and c. Regardless of how you define your product spaces, the product of (a), (b), and (c) are going to produce three projections that give the same answers when they are used (if not, you built them wrong). Hence they are indistinguishable, hence canonically isomorphic.

This is exactly the way that physics always treats coordinates: sure, you can write down a function like V(x), but it's really a function from "points" in x to "points" in V, which happens to be temporarily written in terms of a coordinate system on x and a coordinate system on V. We just write it as V(x) because we're usually going to use it that way later. Any unitless predictions you get to any actual question are necessarily unchanged by those choices of coordinate systems (whereas if they have units then they are measured in one of the coordinate systems).

So I would say that (a,(b,c)) and ((a,b), c) are just two different coordinate systems for R^3. But necessarily any math you do with R^3 can't depend on the choice of coordinates. There is probably a way to write that by putting something like "units" on every term and then expecting the results of any calculation to be unitless.
There’s enough food in africa where even today going out to hunt an elephant demands a brush gun and a white superiority complex, and is not how most hunt the bush.
Systematic literature review of AI models' impact on security of code generation
So video games and quick stimuli make you smarter? :)
> my personal right to consumption

What if we simply stop telling people what they should buy every time they visit a website et cetera?

Would that help to keep Earth's temperature down?
Some of those interview questions have ridiculously short time constraints.
You need to be perfectly rested and well practiced in order to finish the exercises in time. Some of these tests seem to select for cheaters because only cheaters who either knew the questions ahead of time or who used AI to solve the problem could finish them in time.
I could probably buy a realistic sex doll that looks better than the girls that would date me but I’d rather hump the real thing.
I love cheating!

> You could have a language that uses "?" as sugar for the more wordy try-catch-return code that you've written here.

I do! (it's ">>=" though, not "?").

> These examples aren't really showing the semantic difference between errors as values and thrown errors, which is the implicit propagation across multiple code locations.

Well here's where we can start to go in circles. I like errors as values, and I dislike Checked Exceptions. But I've seen others argue that Result and Checked Exceptions are completely equivalent. Different people have different ideas about what the semantics are.
Me too. But even though the page was 95% english Firefox asked if I wanted translated from French. Edit: I see that page has <html lang="fr-FR"> at top.
Ironically, the SNES's SPC unit was essentially a very resource constrained ROMpler. While it was capable of synthesis like the NES (in fact, many early third party SNES titles used this, as devs migrating to the platform were more familiar with making music in this style), the ability to load samples and play them back is why so many folks hail it as the console with superior sound of its generation. The YM-2612 in the Genesis did indeed enable composers to create some legendary soundtracks of their own (Anyone who doesn't know Yuzo Koshiro's work for example might enjoy Charles Cornell's dive into the OST of Streets of Rage [1]), the best OSTs for the console were in styles that lent themselves to embrace the sound of the chip, where the SNES, leveraging the ROMpler model, allowed it to make rich music across many more genres.

Speaking of ROMplers and the SNES, these inexpensive ROMplers from Roland and Korg were what much of the music of these consoles were made on, with many of the SNES soundfonts bing made up of highly truncated versions of the ROMpler's samples. The sound of second, third, and fourth generation Final Fantasy games as composed by Nobuo Uematsu heavily used the Roland SoundCanvas SC-55, with the final title he was lead composer on, Final Fantasy 10, essentially using fully rendered tracks using the platform, with then-modern arrangement and production techniques instead of the soundfont + tracker-style music programming used on the SNES and PS1 titles (the PS1's SPU is essentially a souped up SPC700, hearkening back to its roots as the SNES CD, allowing developers to make music in much the same way, albeit with higher resolution samples, more channels, and more effects).

To your point though, the the Genesis' YM-2612, in Yamaha's OPN family was a similar chip to the Yamaha OPL-family chips used by the SoundBlaster platform, albeit it featured complex FM operators that wouldn't be seen on SoundBlaster cards until the versions with "OPL 3" chips became prevalent, which was inconsistent on the SB16 family.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cx73EOaGWU
Is 'mold' the right word here. Looking at the connectors, I would assume they are stamped out with a die or something similar.
tl;dr: There are amounts of lithium in fracking wastewater that can be retrieved.
It's amazing that as long as it isn't "easy to get on camera" corporations can do harm for decades with no penalty. Just imagine if instead your Teflon frying pan were to emit a cloud of yellow gas that makes your throat bleed just a tiny bit every time you use the pan - would have been addressed back in the '70s.
This is great, I think I may go down this path. Thanks for sharing!
> This is the crux of our disagreement.

No it's not.

There is an observable and testable probability that an LLMs output is correct or false.
There is an observable and testable probability that code created by humans is erroneous.

There is a third category where human code is malicious.
You will need to guard against all three cases.
Guarding against a possibly faulty LLM output that is passed to ffmpeg is significantly easier to realise through defensive prompting and simple sanitization techniques, than to protect against a malicious state actor that is capable of crafting sophisticated supply chain attacks that took years to develop and roll out (again see the xz backdoor).

The idea that you can blindly trust an open source project just because "their development happens collaboratively and in the open" is naive.
Some open source projects people are building their whole infrastructure on are maintained by a single developer in their spare time.
The attack surface is huge and has been exploited time and time again.
Just because a project like Debian has signed packages and a security team doesn't guarantee that the underlying code doesn't have some malicious backdoor or some grave bug that creates a big attack surface.
But that CEO account would be marked as (guest/unverified) in Teams or Zoom.
> We're going to have to be smart and solve this ourselves by reading papers and experimenting and trying things out. How would you do that?

By reading papers and experimenting and trying things out? Throw in a few books for good measure?

Why are you answering the question you are asking yourself?
How is this hard to imagine for you that heat loss can be minimized to the point of being effectively zero? Even with present tech we have a variety of heat loss efficiencies. No energy needs to be destroyed this is just what you convert in this case all converted to work.
>
Even if 90% of the punishment ends up distributed across the richest 7% of Americans, I’m not sure what that would do to discourage corporate misconduct.

As a passive investor, you generally hope that active investors, who have very large stakes in a company's stock, and who care about their own returns, will steer company boards responsibly.

It seems to mostly work, if it didn't, there'd be waaaaaay more fraud in the SP&500. It's noteworthy that the overwhelming part of bad corporate behavior is stuff that doesn't get seriously punished.
This is exactly the "specification by universal property" that the author is talking about. In your case, it's saying "a 3-dimensional vector space is a vector space with three chosen vectors e, f, g and three linear maps x, y, z such that each vector v equals x(v) e + y(v) f + z(v) g". But as the author points out, not everything follows from universal properties, and when it does, there is often several universal properties defining the same object, and that sameness itself needs to be shown.
My guess is that they’ve received a cease and desist letter. It’s not a hill they’re willing to die on, so they removed the voice and issued a public statement.
Chrome extension that starts a Google Meet call with one click
I didn't realize I had more than a 100+ users for an extension I made for myself. Thought it'd be useful to many more.

Here's instant meet, it creates a new Google Meet call and takes you straight in. If permissions are provided, it also copies the Meet link so you can instantly share it!
Oh wow, I'm a Sentry customer and didn't know this! Thanks for sharing!
> I guess my question here is that what else that you have experienced that worked/not worked. Also what would be the dream solution.

Can we think of decoupling job seekers/employers first and initially having an intermediate who'd assess basic skills and requirements of job seekers and match them with companies passing the filter? I guess we'd need some standardization in how those skills and needs are formulated. A bigger problem is to have that intermediary. Uber for job matching?..
Simple text to short video script using moviepy, Python
Sweetgreen Infinite Kitchen
I do not see, how this is a _huge_ problem, though. Maybe a nuisance. I tend to lay out my map function anyways, as i have to test those. And there i can have my error handling right away and return an optional or a record imitating maybe/eitheror. Annoyed i was with IOexception, from which i can not recover anyways, but this has long been addressed by introducing UncheckedIOException.

Nah, i am happy with Java. At least in my domain.
They are cargo cutting, I was about to make the same point. I am more likely to get a leetcode quiz from a small company trying to emulate a FAANG company than I am from an interview with an actual FAANG company. Leetcode is part a costly signal given the study that has to be put into it, and part IQ test. I think part of the proliferation of leetcode is due to the illegality (edit: in effect even though not explicitly) of using IQ tests. But if someone could have a certified IQ test they could reuse that one test result for the entire job market improving liquidity. It would be no worse than leetcode as the IQ part of leetcode is in effect already an inefficient and arduous IQ test that people have to take repeatedly. The costly signal was supposed to be university but the academies have sold out their responsibilities. I think the effort to democratize university education, instead of lifting people up, has instead dragged universities down. The reason I think the solution is difficult is that we have to chose between a more fair world where just about anyone can get a degree and IQ tests are illegal but we have to keep taking these leetcode tests. Or a less fair world where an IQ test / SAT score and a university certificate is sufficient.
Knowing the space that you're working in when you're a contract recruiter is far less important than being a good salesperson.

I don't care how many technically aligned recruiters you've read articles from over the years, the simple fact of the matter is that the people who are at the top of the leaderboards at these companies couldn't give two shits about the technology. Their job is to land asses in seats, and they are ultimately in a vastly better position if they focus and refine their talents on selling and networking as opposed to learning about the problem domain. I still keep in touch with people from my recruiting days, and the high school dropout with 3 years experience when I joined a company is still a senior manager over the Cornell grad. They both make excellent money, but the dropout is easily the better salesperson.

When you've interviewed enough people, you can sniff out the bullshit artists, and virtually all decent to great candidates have a certain cadence to how they describe their roles and responsibilities regardless of the tech stack. I don't need to know the ins and outs of SAP AR and Treasury, I just need to know that the candidate has a consistent work history, is up to date, and can confidently describe their work. Client managers are more likely to go back to recruiters who can consistently put candidates in front of them, which is yet another reason why the numbers / networking game is more important.
I lean towards late-stage capitalism. It plays out the same in many industries. They buy a company doing well, saddle it will millions/billions in acquisition debt instantly making the company not profitable. They then need to do increasingly desperate things to balance the budget leading to failure and collapse.
That tracks reasonably well. We have a fair amount of success at hiring college grads, which we obviously have to train to professional proficiency.

We have some success stories, but much longer search times and far more interviews per start when we hire for experience-required roles.
If the US were truly engaged production would scale up like it did in wwii. We can always go back to a centrally planned economy.
Young Blood-Mediated Rejuvenation
The Problem is though, iPadOS is basically iOS, there isn't much difference. So it's basically a phone with a bigger screen.
Plenty of things can be prototyped over a weekend, but many will require months and even years to get production-ready, feature-complete, and useful, especially at scale.
I think Cory nailed it
iPadOS needs to be replaced by MacOS, and then this will be of some use: like a MacBook air 11, the best computer Apple has made (hands down). Simple, fast, relatively cheap but capable of everything.
Yes. His kid is an adult now and he is reportedly single now too so that makes it a lot easier to do this. The daily life of a family is a large time-consuming responsibility and many can’t lock themselves into a hotel for a week for that simple reason.
watch/mac/iOS are all the same platform just with a different window manager.
Yes, I would love to learn more. So, how do you manage the code between core and non-core versions? Do you copy from one to the other via automations or is it some other way?
> I'll learn whatever anyone wants, I like doing that ... no honestly I do.

The trouble is that _everyone_ will say this during an interview, but few have the ability or interest to _actually_ learn on the job.

How to tell the difference?
Heh I did a coding interview for one the Ai companies that post here all the time(Imbue i think it's spelt) and when I got rejected I was wondering if it was just some AI training thing...
False Sharing
There is a plastic part in the middle to hold the pins which would need a mold. But you are correct that the outside would probably be formed with a die
From [3]:

> Further, in developing these models, we took great care to optimize helpfulness and safety.

The model you linked to isn't a base model (those are rarely if ever made available to the general public nowadays), it is already fine-tuned at least for instruction following, and most likely what some in this game would call 'censored'.
That isn't to say there couldn't be made 'uncensored' models based on this in the future, by doing, you guessed it, moar fine-tuning.
> As a psychologically informed philosopher, I define genuine empathy [...]

Psychology actually recognizes different kinds of empathy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy#Classification
I've actually tried that on Twitch, it was fun for another reason: viewer involvement. But as a format I found it didn't really work well because for my most impressive demos 90% of the time I'm just staring intensely at tiny fragments of code and trying to rearrange and run it in my brain - this is not interesting to watch believe me, I suppose one could condense the video to only show the ends of those segments and just talk out-loud about the concrete thought that has coalesced at the end of it and the actions that are now being taken.
C is the worst at naming length since everything is in the global namespace unless you're working on a teeny tiny project. So everything gets clunky prefixes to use as pseudo-namespaces or overly descriptive name to avoid conflicts.

Local variables sure, be short and terse. But that's common in most languages.
Don't use pixelation for redacting text (2022)
Very droll and astute. We always knew rounded corners hide the sharp
edges underneath.
The people I have meet who were slower to learn things generally had factors that could be overcome. Burnout is a huge one. If I'm being told to learn this new tech every 3-6 months and not given enough time to become an expert in the thing I previously learned, then why should I put in the effort? Its not a building block in my career. This is how it is for me (plus a disability). It never benefits me, so where's the incentive?
> "If there isn't a gem, I don't think it's doable, or maybe we should wait until it's done".

Yikes. But I have also known many people with this mindset (and it appears to be workable for a certain subset of the tech industry)
It seems to me like it is yet another study which refutes the idea that we're able to scientifically measure "general intelligence" (or "cognitive intelligence," using the author's term). Instead of anything which can be called intelligence, these tests keep measuring the same wrong thing. This thing is clearly amenable to short-term improvement with practice, and possibly assistance from a trained psychologist. And I don't think it has much to do with the actual problems human brains have to solve. The fact that human brains can be trained to solve IQ test problems or math problems is interesting. But surely it's a tiny slice of what human brains can do.
That doesn't work because there are only four primitive types: symbols, pairs, characters, and streams. You can't add more. Bel is supposed to be a specification, not an implementation.

So pairs are the only compound data type. That is all you have to build more complex stuff out of. Even lists are puns on pairs. So there is no place to hide any adjunct data without violating the spec. This is one of the many reasons that an operational spec is a bad idea.

I am as big a fan of Lisp as you can hope to find (just look at my user name) but PG's infatuation with McCarthy's original definition of EVAL is badly misguided. McCarthy's EVAL was NOT a formal spec of anything, it was an illustration that CONS, CAR, CDR, QUOTE and COND were a really good choice of computational primitives because you could write EVAL in a few dozen lines rather than the pages and pages required to do the same thing for a Turing machine.
Very insightful, thank you for sharing!
> grow and get bought by corporate, focus changes from good food to profit and consistency, food quality craters, customers depart.

While the broad strokes about the loss of a restaurant's soul under corporate influence rings true, according to Wikipedia, Red Lobster was purchased by General Mills in 1980 and then went through its massive growth and expansion phase.

That reflects my own memories of the place during that time. They certainly weren't losing customers after their corporate acquisition.

However, food culture and trends change, and the US has undergone a backlash against chain restaurants in general, with the perception that they are synonymous with low quality food.

My theory is that this is even worse for a seafood chain, where perception of freshness is a make or break criterion for diners. Once that perception is out there, it is very hard to recover the brand's image.
> categories such as tattoo design

It's wild that this is a thing when the tattoo artists job is literally to create the artwork for you
You're getting piled on, but you're absolutely right. We don't even have the capability to permanently inhabit Antarctica, which has 1. an atmosphere of breathable air at the right pressure, 2. survivable temperature range, 3. abundant water, 4. a magnetic field and radiation shielding, 5. safe transit to and from. How does anyone think we can inhabit Mars, which doesn't have any of these?

Build a city of 100K on the northern-most habitable tip of Antarctica and have it (physically, socially, and economically) last 10 years, and I'll be convinced that we are ready to at least attempt Mars.
Show HN: Legalpad – free AI Legal Drafting
The situation is bad enough that even for a moderate-sized codebase a newly hired employee is expected to contribute within increasingly (decreasingly?) short time. Getting familiarity with existing codebase is one of the most specific levels of training "on position", yet even that training is deteriorating to shorter and shorter times.
I know its not really related but I've noticed something that is making me feel out of touch. Lately there seems to be this increasing merge of tech with weeaboo culture. I may not have the term exactly right but I am talking about the anime girl in the OP's blog post. Its not everywhere but I've started to notice, so it is increasing. Did I miss something? Is this replacing meme's in tech speeches? (I was never fond of that either so I guess I'm a curmudgeon or perhaps my ADHD brain just finds it too distracting)

The post looks informative I hope to learn something from it later tonight. Thx
This is why nearly all ocean exploration is done via remotely-piloted vehicles instead of the massive yet cramped submersibles they started with. The explorers still get to do the science they love but they do it from a comfortable surface ship in shifts.
Unless you're looking to be hired in the US and live in a US territory, in which case you'll be hard pressed to find any employer who will hire you.
"the vastness of the universe and never be able to touch any of it in person."

No matter how much of the universe we touch it will always just be a vanishing sliver.
Do you have the link please?
A recent one used around these parts is "hallucinating". There have been multiple pro/con threads on using it when discussing the failing of LLMs.
The AST type represents the syntax of the language.

Each instance of the AST type is a representation of an individual program in the language.
Hah, I have the same concern. When I started in my career path the leetcode stuff wasn't even a thing, and despite having a long career behind me now I know if I was thrown into the job market I'd need a lot of practice to get past the stuff.

It's one thing that we senior (in both senses of the word!) developers should definitely keep in mind about the job market, and indeed I value stability a lot more because of this. The equivalent position that we were hired / promoted into a while back might very well immediately weed us out in 2024 because the interview standards have changed!
Psychology recognizes compassion as one element of one kind of empathy. Sometimes it even separates it into it's own separate type of empathy, compassionate empathy.