skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is why I don't like working with Ruby teams. Of course you can write straight-forward Ruby code and I encourage it, but Ruby does seem to attract developers who like to write "dynamic" code and use "meta-programming" (what we would call "reflection" in other languages, where it's made intentionally difficult). I think it's mostly the influence of the Rails framework that leads developers towards "magic", although it doesn't help that Ruby makes this kind of programming especially easy.
Why would they need to keep it secret if its a review and internal-only?
See Waits vs. Frito Lay.
I'd say it also heavily depends on the code style that's internal to the project. Case in point, for heavy toolz users:

list(toolz.pluck("name", records))
I remember seeing some calculations about how we already almost have the tech to build a Dyson swarm with thin sails. The material needed is already within our industrial capacity to produce and the only thing in our way is international cooperation.

Meanwhile interstellar travel still require several tech and engineering leaps.
At least in my experience in the C++ world there is a general expectation that you learn the "standard algorithms" and prefer them over the alternatives unless you have a specific reason not to.

For example: outside the C++ ecosystem, most people probably would stare blank faced if they saw `std::rotate` in a codebase but it's basically a meme at this point in the C++ space.

Ex: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZmeDQL4LaE
Why would you not use std::sum(x) ?
RIP. I loved the Computer Museum as a kid. It’s probably one of those thing that had a much bigger impact on me than I realize.
Oh I don't know, trying to make a country with twice the population, 50 times the area, and allied with a superpower a pariah state?
Related: https://vgel.me/posts/representation-engineering/
Let's take a parallel situation from around 20 years ago, and see how you feel about it. I'm going back that far as a reminder of what was long considered OK, before AI.

In the movie The Seed of Chucky, Britney Spears gets killed. You can watch the clip at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3kCg5o0cHA. It is very clearly Britney Spears.

Except Britney Spears was not hired for the role. They hired a Britney Spears impersonator for the scene. They did everything that they could to make it look like Britney, and think it was Britney. But it really wasn't.

Do you think that Britney should have sued the Chucky franchise for that? If so, should Elvis Presly's estate also sue all of the Elvis Presly impersonators out there? Where do you draw the line? And if not, where do you draw the line between what happened in Chucky, and what happened here?

I really don't see a line between now having someone who sounded like the actress, and then tweeting the name of one of her movies, and what happened 20 years ago with Chucky killing someone who looked like Britney, then showing a license plate saying "BRITNEY1", and THEN saying, "Whoops I did it again." (The title of her most famous song at the time.) If anything, the movie was more egregious.
Reality:

This is mostly because mid-level dev needs to justify their existence in order to not get laid off or PIP and is worried about losing their H1B and having to uproot their entire family in 60 days notice. Hyper-optimized, hard-to-read code that only they understand is one way to increase reliance on them while giving a reason that can be put into a promotion doc. Mid-level jobs are worried about maintaining their job.

Junior dev doesn't care because they can go wherever, they aren't worried about the uprooting, and well-written code is a ticket to a multiple new jobs.

Senior dev doesn't care because they have saved enough money, have permanent status, and if the company doesn't want them they aren't worried about there being better opportunities. They have enough online evidence of their competence and don't need to prove themselves.
The classic example of why whitespace in identifiers arguably causes more problems than it solves is https://www-users.york.ac.uk/~ss44/cyc/p/fbug.htm.

Since the space of valid syntax becomes so much larger, typos are more likely to result in valid but incorrect programs. Especially in dynamic interpreted languages like python.
I resonated with this urge to dig into the material a lot.

For me, two use cases of "digging" come up a lot: 1. I want to know how the concept I'm learning can connect with other concepts that I'm interested in (i.e., related concepts); 2. I want to know what other materials are available out there that can provide different perspectives (i.e., related resources). So I ended up building a map visualizing concepts (https://afaik.io/) where the proximity indicates relatedness and under each concept there are various resources attached.

In addition to those more "objective" connections, I think what AI could really help is to find a more "subjective" connection that's very user-specific and utilize those connections to build a personalized tutoring experience, hence the adaptability. For now, I think the barrier to realizing that level of adaptiveness is the high hallucination rate.
I've worked in a statehouse and watched an industry representative (actually a single company representative) literally deliver corporate written legislation to a specific individual lawmakers offices which was then passed into law with zero input by that legislator. How's that work for your "shape public policy" question?
Eh, it's still untested because they don't really do anything involving humans anymore. So how are they better at quantifying risk? Smoke.
I'm not sure. Pretty much all but 0.000001% of us tech peeps go completely unnoticed by the general public no matter how awesome our contributions to tech without regard to race, religion, sex, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or ethnic identity...
Big layoffs coming to TikTok this week
I have so many things I use daily that is local, huh?
With a slight difference that junior dev tends be proud of the code they’re added while a senior will be proud of the code they’ve removed…
The internet is disappearing, study says
I imagine he feels invincible at this point and gets off on displaying power.
For bonus points, some menu web sites also do that on their desktop web sites. I have seen many of them that show like 10 items on a 27″ 1440p desktop monitor.
Is anything ever truly “deleted” or just presented to users as such? I imagine once an image has been synced to the cloud, it’s stored somewhere forever, for reasons you hinted at.

I work for a large internet/tech company, and all images uploaded by users must be permanently retained somewhere per our legal policies, even if that means sending it to long-term storage after it’s been “deleted”. And if law enforcement submits a request asking for your files, we can pull it back up.
In this specific case I asked ChatGPT, which said "Walter Bright is the creator of the D programming language. He's a talented programmer!", so maybe he specifically won't be forgotten. Most of the rest of us probably will, though.
When I hear of the preference of form over function for data, I think about the sinking of the SS El Faro. The captain relied on weather data from a Comercial service because they were pretty. On the "black box" one member of the bridge had said something about the weather stats and another person mocked "oh, but that's not a pretty graphic" (the captain was below sleeping). They had tried to get the captain to agree to change course many times, but he always refused telling them to come back if things got worse, unaware of how bad it already was since he was below deck. He had never bothered to notice the data his service provided was several hours old, and ended up sailing right into the eyeball of a hurricane.
These are really interesting cases, and the opinions give a lot more detail.

Midler v Ford: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/849...

Waits v Frito-Lay: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/90...

One interesting thing is that these cases are really deep in common law. They are quite far removed from statues, and statues are cited in the opinion only to argue how they don't apply.

In these cases, the voice was "distinct", and they intentionally copied it. It's possible these don't apply to ScarJo, although the fact that they negotiated with her is a bad sign, since that was also a common fact in the prior cases.
IANAL, but I think the mistake they made was constantly referencing the movie 'Her' when talking about Sky.
Thank you for bringing up recutils and ndb. I had seen them years ago but didn't make the connection when writing this paper. But there are some great connections, and I will definitely be updating the post with a section and links to them.

I am reading through the source and will have more to say soon. If anyone has any links to massive plain text datasets based on these (or other similar tools), I would appreciate more pointers.

I can tell you now (subject to change), based on my preliminary read through the source is that the two systems you mentioned missed some highly important details that I have presented in my paper, with order of magnitude impacts. Not to discredit them at all, rather I think my work gives them credit, in that they were on the right track, and we just have the benefit of some recent innovations, and get to stand on their shoulders (and the shoulders of others).

Edit:

I have updated the paper with a reference to Recutils. Thanks rakoo! https://github.com/breck7/breckyunits.com/commit/71b706d296e...

The added text:

GNU Recutils^recutils deserves credit as the closest precursor to our system. If Recutils were to adopt some designs from our system it would be capable of supporting larger databases.
https://www.gnu.org/software/recutils/

^recutils: GNU Recutils: Jose E. Marchesi
https://www.gnu.org/software/recutils/
- Recutils and our system have debatable syntactic differences, but our system solves a few clear problems described in the Recutils docs:
- "difficult to manage hierarchies". Hierarchies are painless in our system through nested parsers, parser inheritance, parser mixins, and nested measurements.
- "tedious to manually encode...several lines". No encoding is needed in our system thanks to the indentation trick.
- In Recutils comments are "completely ignored by processing tools and can only be seen by looking at the recfile itself". Our system supports first class comments which are bound to measurements using the indentation trick.
- "It is difficult to manually maintain the integrity of data stored in the data base." In our system advances parsers provides unlimited capabilities for maintaining data integrity.
> Your comment seemed to convey that employees are powerless over their own actions

The main point I was making is in the first paragraph.
I was responding to what was essentially a call for random individuals to be identified and harassed because of their potential connection to some user-hostile software.
I politely recommended/requested to not take such actions.
I think if you have an opinion or concerns about a software/product/design/practice you should try to turn it into a meaningful contribution and express your thoughts in some way that you deem appropriate and helpful.
If your preferred method of expressing your thoughts is shaming and harassing people, or other generally violent and harmful acts then you should keep your thoughts to yourself.
The same applies to calling for others to act in such a manner.

> People should not do things they believe to be unethical. You do, as an employee, have the autonomy to say no to unethical tasks. You are therefore not blameless when you perform unethical tasks, because you chose not to say no.

You're not really disagreeing with anything I said (other than in intensity) but I'll respond to this directly.

People generally don't go out of their way to do things they believe to be wrong ("unethical"). People do tend to cross their own boundaries more easily when under pressure.

Different people have different levels of autonomy in life and at work. It's normal to find it difficult to say no to your manager.

Playing a part in some project does assign some responsibility to you. The smaller the part, the smaller the responsibility.
Blaming an individual contributor for systemic problems with a project is unfair and a bad way to fix the problems.

Scale and context is important. Many/most things are issues of degrees. Applying your extremely rigid framework to a scenario with the scale of a single employee at Microsoft is bizarre/comedic.
The problem is that there is no bette alternative.
EDIT: Originally I just looked at the website. Looking at the GitHub repo, I see it's a fork, which makes sense (I also didn't notice the other replies!) Either way, it's cool. I'll probably end up using this myself. I was unable to find a way to store notes in a folder or in encrypted Gists though.

This seems nearly identical to Heynote[0], which was also on HN[1]. Even the example blocks share some content with that used as an example in the screenshot on the Heynote homepage (and I think in the app too)

[0]: https://heynote.com/[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38733968
If you can paste the URL in a browser and copy paste the next, why is it bad that a third-party agent can do the same? It's no different than a remotely-hosted browser you control via natural language, or asking a human assistant to do it and email you the result.
Her was a movie with an AI assistant who talked like a normal human rather than an intentionally clunky "bleep blorp" dialect that lots of other movies go with. They even make fun of this in the movie when he asks her to read an email using a classic voice prompt, and she responds pretending to be a classic AI assistant.

The new voice2voice from OpenAI allows for a conversational dialect, most prominently demonstrated in pop culture by the movie Her. Sam's tweet makes perfect sense in that context.

Sky's voice has been the default voice in voice2voice for almost a year now, and no one has made a connection to the Her voice until it started acting more conversational. It seems pretty obvious that OpenAI was looking for a more conversational assistant, likely inspired by the movie Her, and it would have been cool if the actress had helped make that happen, but she didn't, and here we are.

Also Juniper has always been the superior voice model. I just now realized that one of my custom GPTs kept having this annoying bug where the voice kept switching from Juniper to Sky, and that seems to be resolved now that Sky got removed.
It’s not ftl but there are ideas and projects to do interstellar travel in a lifetime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Starshot
This may come off as defamatory, however does anyone else feel like Sam Altman has slowly been heading towards an impending reputation disaster hilariously adjacent to that of Sam Bankman-Fried? I've seen this perspective expressed on twitter/X several times as well.
Because of bad design decisions, a whole pile of unrelated stuff lives in the std namespace, and the disambiguation probably isn't what you wanted, so this can silently cause surprises.
>> You see the same problems with a lot of “flagship” oss ware. Gimp seems to have the same awkward feature set for 25 years.

I think Kritta is the new flagship OSS image editing software. I don't use either, but that's my impression.
To read the claims charitably, it could be that fans of open AI, and Sam Altman jumped to his defense in the ways that toxic fandoms often do to women. It wouldn't surprise me if constant flagging and reporting suppressed her presence on social media.

It also wouldn't be the first time a victim of a public figure received employment backlash for coming forward with their abuse.

I think the real question is though, what did you hope to accomplish by asking your questions?
Cleverness is like connecting dots.

It might be an instance that reveal a smooth curve that seems so obviously clear afterward but was unfathomed so far.

Or it can cast a baffling intricated sequence of discrete points each generated at coordinates using the previous one in a well specified but completely ungrabbable way, the whole drawing a scary screaming face that any sane mind will flea away from.
Same in JS. I once worked with someone who would use [].forEach and didn't like for loops because functional good, iterative loops bad. It was essentially in the coding style of the project and the for version would be rejected in MRs.

I don't miss this.

IMHO [].forEach just essentially expresses the same thing as a regular for loop, although in a more verbose and convoluted way that is also likely very inefficient because a JS compiler probably can't optimize away the function call per iteration, because of the very dynamic nature of JS. forEach probably has its use when you specifically need to call an existing function on each element, but I don't otherwise see the appeal.
Don’t hold back progress based on unfounded fears.
Slightly off topic: what’s the reasonably smallest LLM model i can use to do language processing and rewriting of a large library of word documents? For the purposes of querying information and regurgitating out summaries or detailed information?

My use case is very simple: take 1000 word documents filled with two to three pages of information and pictures. And then output a set of requested information via prompting. Is there something off the shelf? Or do I have to make this?
The other thing nice about the second style is that it's much easier to skim when part of a larger function, since it's a single type-checked statement. Keeps you from doing too much in it too.
C# arrays don't. However, C# arrays are IEnumerable<T>, which does.
Does Weird Al pay rights? I know he asks for permission to maintain his relationships with artists and to make sure he gets his share of songwriting credits (and the fees).

But does he pay for rights? I’ve never seen that before and I’d love to read more.
When Jim Carrey is impersonating, it's clear that it's Jim Carrey impersonating someone for comedy-sake, not providing a service in lieu of someone else. In other words, Jim Carrey isn't getting paid to stand in for Jack Nicholson for example. Otherwise, it looks more like the Midler vs Ford Motor Co. case[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
30 minutes after posting: #2 with 140 points and 79 comments

https://imgur.com/a/MwsnQIH

40 minutes after posting: #17 with 171 points and 120 comments

https://imgur.com/a/YEyuKP5

50 minutes after posting: no longer on the front page with 207 points and 169 comments

"Amazing" isn't the word for it.
Trauma isn't as simple as more worse things -> bigger/more trauma.

Under certain circumstances people can experiences horrible stuff with barely any ill effect while other times really trivial small things can totally break them.

Just having one stable positive relationship with an adult can make a child significantly more resilient while the child that lacks that relationship might break at a minor problem. There are many factors that determine resilience and it can vary greatly from person to person. And it is situational. Someone might be a hardened war veteran having seen it all but totally break when seeing a child getting a minor wound.

So children today might be objectively better off than in the past but it does not necessary mean their struggles are less valid, they are just different. So hard to say whether they are less traumatized or not, maybe a little bit but mostly probably just in different ways.

But yeah, the main thing is that we are much better at recognizing signs of trauma these days and people can be more open of their struggles so it might seem like there is more traumatized people when probably there is the same amount or less.
The actual example'd make the post better, but I understand the author is not allowed to give more details on that one :(
Not illegal in the US!
System design: Wire transfer - Using design specification langauge
I think it would be more like "precludes you from work (arguably) deceptively impersonating the more famous actor."
As a WorldCoiner it's not that bad. We're happy, Worldcoin is happy. It's only people not involved on forums who seem upset at us. And the odd politician but not actual users.
The 90s Favorite Media Player 'Winamp' Is Opening Its Source
My wife jokes that we’ve never made it to the end of that museum, because the museum has always closed before we get to the end, and we’ve been at least a dozen times. I had no idea he cofounded it, among his other accomplishments.
"We're going to release not-your-voice in 2 days anyway, maybe you want think about the deal again?"
Agreed, I mean "incredible" and not in the good way. Someone needs to take this to Twitter / X or another platform that isn't insider controlled.
Looks like "really YIYBY, NIMBY" was an attempt to narrow it down
The feature that stands out the most to me is that the black "boom or bust" line that shows prosperity/recession is effectively never at 100. It crosses the line (going up or down) a bunch of times, but is almost never on the line. I have to wonder if more balance with this would result in better outcomes, or worse.

Also, and this is just an eyeball analysis from the pdf, the booms seem roughly balanced with the busts until the great depression. The prosperity of WWI seems to have set up the cycle of bust for the great depression.
I think this is a great point. When looking at ‘best practices’ for constructing robust parametric models I keep thinking “this is so much like software engineering where the programming language is the CAD system” (as an aside, I’ve tried OpenSCAD but found the rendering UI waaay too slow even with simple stuff to be usable for me).

So as a model builder you end up trying to build these higher-level abstractions into your model, where the parameters are your top-level interface.

I think CAD is so much like programming in those ways, although I could just be biased since I’m a software engineer.
A big problem for a lot of devs is that even with an invalid API key, iTerm2 is still sending everything that happens in the terminal to OpenAI.

Which begs the question: what happens when any key (even an invalid one) gets added to iTerm for any reason (e.g. dark pattern, settings export/import, buggy update, accident, forgetting to remove an old key, a sentinel message saying: "do not use AI in this department", etc...).

Besides that there's other issues,

- What happens if the training data is poisoned to compromise developers machines with a `curl ... | sh`?

- What about developers who can no longer use the tool due to policies/regulations that rule out products with LLM features, or a feature that has the potential to send data to a third party?

- What happens if the LLM hallucinates an env variable's value/existence and what should be a simple `rm -rf $BUILD/` turns into `rm -rf /` when $BUILD is not defined?

I'm sure there's more concerns too.
There is also the story where early Apple employees didn’t get any stock and Wozniak gave some of his.
Right, the incentives are adverse: if they lower quality of service for free offerings, they'll be rewarded with more paying customers for reliable service.

But quality does take money.
> If you think Python is like that, I advise you to never look at Ruby codebase.

Like any other language you can write perfectly expressive and intelligible code in Ruby, and in fact it is quite common to do so. The first layer of a Ruby codebase tends to be approachable, it's only when you get into some of the bigger libraries that you get some tricky metaprogramming.

Even then I don't often see Rubyists write tricky/clever code for the sake of it. The metaprogramming usually has utility and is often the "right" way to do something, especially in say the Rails codebase.

Ruby is all about developer happiness. It's the founding principle and the guiding ethos of the community.