skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your product is very appealing, and I was just about to place an order. However, the purchase interface seems to be frequently unstable, showing application errors. It took me three attempts to finally see that your product is priced at $729 and won't be available until November. I hope you can optimize the payment system or make the pricing clearer on the homepage.
> Borrowing and base 8 weren't created by New Math. Teaching them to students, at least according to the song, was part of New Math. Lehrer specifically says this.

No, he doesn't.

So first, we can observe with our own eyes that borrowing and carrying are the same thing, with only the label being changed.

But we can also observe that what was taught to students, as reflected in their textbooks, is the same thing that was taught under the label New Math and the same thing that is still taught today. Go ahead and look at the textbook.

The part that is specific to the New Math is the conversion of the problem to base 8. If you want to stick closely to the lyrics of the song, you might notice that they specify that the base-8 subtraction is the only problem posed by the New Math textbook; the base-10 version is something that Tom Lehrer provides to the audience to aid their understanding of the base-8 version.

This isn't just the clear message of the song, it's also what you'll learn if you read retrospective or contemporaneous coverage of New Math. You can see discussion in precisely these terms on the rather perfunctory Wikipedia page.¹ But most importantly, you might notice that working in alternative bases is actually new, in that - unlike the working of the base-10 problem in the first verse of the song - it doesn't appear in textbooks written a hundred years before the New Math was developed.²

The joke in the first verse is just that it's hard to follow a rapid patter. One specific joke in that verse is the set of lines "And you know why four plus minus one plus ten is fourteen minus one, 'cause addition is commutative. Right." Again, there's nothing new about this material, it's just that the explanation is superfluous to the process and paced in a manner that makes it hard to follow.

¹ Admittedly, the page's view of what was salient in New Math is pretty likely to have been influenced by Tom Lehrer's song, but that's still a radically different and more plausible interpretation of the song than what you're pushing for.

² That far back, it's all carrying into the subtrahend, but the approach of "here's an example showing each step of the process in detail, accompanied by a theoretical discussion of why it works" is already present. To get carrying out of the minuend, you need to go to just decades before the development of New Math, as the patter notes.
This is actually what I was hoping to make this summer...
It would have been an excellent idea in Southern California not that long ago — a good mask massively reduces PM2.5, and PM2.5, especially on So Cal freeways, was quite high.
> 77 studies, all published after 2019... 23/77 (29.9%) assessed mask effectiveness, with 11/77 (14.3%) being statistically significant, but 58/77 (75.3%) stated masks were effective. Of these, 41/58 (70.7%) used causal language. Only one mannequin study used causal language appropriately (1.3%). 72/77 (93.5%) pertained to SARS-CoV-2 alone. None cited randomized data. 1/77 (1.3%) cited conflicting evidence.

Bit hard to follow here since the talk about "studies that didn't actually study it" seems like a valid critique of study quality but not of mask effectiveness. (But where does the 1978 year in the title come from?)

Seems like of 23 studies, 11 of them found statistically significant evidence of improvement; only 1 saw conflicting evidence.

Sounds like room for further study and investigation but possibly suggestive of differences in mask quality, correct usage, etc, so deeper dives would certainly be interesting.

Obviously in some situations and disciplines nobody questions the value of quality masks, so the "it can't possibly be effective" crowd seems even more unjustified than the "it's effective [even if just 11 out of 23 of the studies said so]" crowd.
You can reference the competitor, but you don't want there to be any risk that a moron in a hurry might confuse your product with theirs, else you're in for a trademark violation.
The Sixty-Year Trajectory of Homicide Clearance Rates
16575923
> multiprocessing with shared memory if you need to use CPU resources in parallel

This is actually pretty powerful. I personally prefer it for most purposes, because it restricts the possibility of data races to only the shared memory regions. It's a little like an "unsafe block" of memory with respect to data races.
Show HN: Turn study notes into exam questions with Zenquiz
I created a web app that lets you turn your study notes into interactive and engaging exam questions using AI. As a university student and software developer, I wanted to find a use case for AI that fits into education and help learners study more efficiently.

I was already adding my study notes into ChatGPT but what was missing for me was the engaging part of being able to simply click on an answer option and get instant feedback if the option is right or wrong and - most importantly - why. Soon, I will add a feature that will also tell you the text excerpt from which a given question is generated from. It was also important for me to not just build a tool that does course work for you. Instead, Zenquiz is meant to fit alongside the study progress of a student.

Current features:
- Create documents from text, files (docx, ...), Google Drive and Notion
- Select from multiple choice, true/false, fill-in-the-gap questions
- Bundle questions from different documents into a custom quiz
- Test-taking experience with interactive UI and answer feedback

Planned features:
- Upload PDF files, support more third party note taking apps
- Share custom quizzes and personalise test taking experience (think Kahoot, Typeform, etc.)
- Upload course overview, syllabus, multiple documents etc. and create a realistic mock exam

I would love to hear your thoughts and feedback!
Often posted, today due to my frustration with CakePHP 2.x at work.
Honestly it's becoming impossible to find information on the web.

A friend of mine wanted to find some lyrics and the lack of proper verbatim mode has made it impossible to know if he had the wrong lyrics or if the information is not there or if the search itself is failing.

If there are no matches whatsoever then tell me there's no matches. If there's partial matches tell me how close it is to my search terms. Like you might match all but one or two words and so on. These are the kind of useful features I'd expect on search.

The usefulness of AI, on my mind, might be more towards interpretation of the questions rather than generation of the answers.

If I were Google I'd try something like using genAI to rephrase the question to extract keywords and so on that can be used to enhance search. But then again, I think I put myself in a position of "how do we make search better and more accurate" and that's simply not the position Google finds themselves in.
420702

Thank you ICQ!
I didn't even know it was still working
That’s a very impressive UIN!
Google today feels nothing like the Google 24 years ago. It was magic and reliable and no nonsense.

I understand technology needs to change with gamification of SEO but I get so much frustration in my searching and often have to use Google in combination with site filtering keywords (e.g, site:stackoverflow.com). But it would be even more difficult to use if I didn’t even know what sites were trustworthy ``authorities.''

I just wish somebody would disrupt Google like Google did with search and email 2 decades ago. Searching on Alta Vista or Yahoo was a nightmare until Google came into our universe.
Oh, is this similar to the pineapple-debate? Are there glue-proponents, and true Italian pizza aficionados, who consider glue as a topping to be a heretic thing?

Personally I will take glue anytime. It's on the internet, so it must be great.
Disaster planning for regular folks: level-headed prepping tips
That's cause we used to have to remember everything. We don't anymore. This guys explains it more hilariously than I ever could.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C3bRvSfLV7R/
Maybe it's ok that people don't care about repairable phones, and there isn't a need to force them.

Also, the closest consumers got to using free software was Android and Chromebook (i.e. not exactly free) plus using services hosted on Linux servers, cause it actually makes sense there, and GNU/Linux home desktop has still not won.
The people who are unhappy about only getting 2 years of service out of an $80 investment are probably not the people who are giddy about only spending $2,000 on a new radio for their car which will be practically worthless once it is installed.
I dont understand this recent talking point. Surely eating a "supersize me" multiple times a day is going to cause an increase in fat, weight, cholesterol etc. We know this.

Plus the fact that the whole documentary was intentionally extreme: no one eats mcdonalds 3 times a day. Its sorta pointless to begin with.

Pointing to his alcoholism to dismiss the health concerns, which are obviously true, seems very odd to me.
Absolutely none of this has ever been objective, or even based in reality, let alone evidence, so I find it hard to care.

The issue was never about masks, but of two highly-polarized groups (few of them having any real knowledge on the subject) dehumanizing the other under color of Science™.

It was purposefully misunderstanding and sloganizing Science™ into simplistic, unscientific statements like "Masks work" and "Masks don't work" [for what? for whom? etc]. Objective science isn't sold as bumper stickers and lapel pins on Etsy.

It ignored completely and purposefully the two extremely basic and fundamentally different modes of operation: protecting the wearer from inhaling Bad Things (Masks Don't Work) and protecting people other than the mask wearer from what the mask-wearer is exhaling (Masks Work).

The Science™ on this hasn't really changed in any meaningful way, and the whole subject is tiresome. People who can't think past Mask Good or Mask Bad might think otherwise, but their opinions are perhaps even less valuable than this study.

Besides, if you're not a physician or have a PhD in maskology, how could you possibly begin to evaluate this evidence anyway? It's so very complicated and technical, see. You should be Trusting The Experts™.
Designing a very small device to be DIY repairable has a cost too.
People aren’t a resource, they are the ones sharing the resources. You’re conflating a capitalist business structure with politics, they aren’t related.
Thanks, that is very interesting.

Still, that mostly confirms my experience: to achieve this level of performance, you need to do optimizations on a lower level, and this is not really achievable with docker out of the box (plain Linux host with usual Docker runtime).
I don't understand why Johansson's movies would make it obvious you're not supposed to mess with her.

> I repeat. Do not mess with Scarlett Johansson.

> You would think her movies, and her suit against Disney, would make this obvious.

What are the movies supposed to show? Is it a joke, or does the author not understand the difference between the actor and the role? Johansson is not actually Black Widow. Or what am I not understanding?

Of course the other points stand on their own, like successfully suing Disney. Just nitpicking.
I feel like the massive industrialization of software development has really squeezed a lot of this stuff out. The focus on the task at hand has really overwhelmed the broader holistic competencies folks used to have; the tension between efficiency versus holistic expertise has gotten so far to one side that the struggle isn't even visible in most places.

I'd love so much to see cool come back. To see companies be, hey, yeah, we do encourage (and will help) you to run good systems that you can get better at, systems that form a worthwhile ecosystems. Not everyone needs the passion & drive for Linux-as-channel-to-self-enrichment, but it is a path and there should be way more workplaces where you re brushing shoulders with others also interested in & engaging those paths.
I don't know what the official ICQ client does today but back in the day it had more than just chats between people. It had file sharing, etc.
I haven't used it, but Quassel looks like a similar idea.

Alternatively using a Soju[1] with Goguma[2] for phone and Gamja[3] for web could work; FWIW, I use Soju, but not the other two.

1: https://sr.ht/~emersion/soju/

2: https://sr.ht/~emersion/goguma/

3: https://sr.ht/~emersion/gamja/
Not something like 1994's Wing Commander or other PC games with Hollywood actors and cutscenes?

I'm not super invested in the nomenclature but it's odd to me that those are all Playstation games.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.02709
22861316

Tried to login a few years back to see if any of my old Quake buddies happened to still use it, but couldn't. Support said unless I had the recovery email still, which was at bigfoot.com which has been dead for decades, I was out of luck.
SSH Authentication via Yubikeys
That deal they made with Reddit to use their comments as training data is paying dividends: https://x.com/Very__Regular/status/1794010853257126316
You are making assumptions here.
That's right. Also adds a fade on the ad transitions. I haven't noticed a drop in quality.
I think party lines on the phone, yes.
How did you find the business in the first place? Did you look at multiple options? etc.
Chip Factories Are Unions' Next Target in Test for Biden
https://archive.ph/xk5La
There's always L Ron Hubbard, but I'll assume he's a one off aberration, as very few sci-fi authors veered off into founding infamously belligerent religious cults.

That said, the idea that people in power wouldn't think of ways to abuse pretty much any technology and that considering such things is some personal fault of @doublerabbit is quite the silly accusation for @iancmceachern to have made.
Musk: AI to Make Jobs Optional
On an M3 15 minutes of podcasts takes about 1 minute of processing. The transcription is the slow part.
ICQ was the primary tool for my friends and I to play games online ( quake, doom, starcraft, etc ). Not only with each other but people all around the world. Every time we joined a server our list of icq friends kept increasing. I still remembering coming home from school and immediately checking icq. The mid 90s to early 2000s was a real special time.
Let Ukraine Defend Itself Properly
In the small-med biz teams I worked in, we didn't try to write component-level tests. We had a bunch of unit tests for basic utility functions, API calls, etc., but then to test the overall functionality of the frontend we just wrote a lot of frontend & E2E tests with Playwright/Puppeteer (or a cloud version, like https://docs.datadoghq.com/synthetics/ or https://www.browserstack.com/percy).

Those are just real browsers running headlessly, performing UI actions, and then verifying the results (either looking for something in a real DOM and/or comparing screenshots). If something went wrong, the devs can then follow the exact steps to replicate it and debug it.

It was a lot quicker (and arguably more useful, I think, since it emulates real users and mostly real systems -- if your staging setup is similar to prod) than trying to shim some intermediary component testing. (You can also fake certain inputs in lieu of waiting for a backend, if you prefer.) Is it perfect? No, but it's a quick and cheap stopgap.

Edit: A further argument is that this can also help catch unexpected DOM bugs (like z-indexes or viewport width weirdnesses or plain browser incompatibilities) that pure code bugs won't catch. At the end of the day it's what the user sees that matters, so IMO if you have limited resources and can't write tests at every level, it's better to have more E2E coverage that realistically emulates what a real user would experience, since that would typically cover logic bugs too (at least happy path ones).
A bit like you don't need funding to write software.
I believe the article writer is talking about moving QA work to the beginning of a process, not adding unit tests to the front of a pipeline.
I hate the direction they are taking Windows. The OS is supposed to be a workhorse, but MS nowadays only sees it as a way to shove ads and spyware down our throat.
While there is definite hype and buzz among executives to jump on the bandwagon, from my experience and perspective massive amounts of value to be obtained. We are doing work with LLMs that would have previously taken teams of people to do. Many legitimate uses but overshadowed by the hype.

I think the way the corporates are applying it are not very useful, specifically the Googles and Microsofts of the world. I am overall bullish on the niche applications of LLM though. Google and Microsoft are just throwing it at everything and I don't think much of it is sticking. The Google search experience has definitely downgraded with their AI implementation. Kagi on the flip side has done a much better job imo, it does not get in the way and it is generally answering the question I asked.
Well I'm poorly placed to critically review the comparison as I'm a longtime supporter of Rep. Burchett's UAP transparency efforts.
I remember I paid $600 or so to Mirabilis around 1996 to buy their http server library to save the development time.
Lots of bad copy-editing out there.
> It was magic and reliable and no nonsense.

The web was different as well.
What has happened to us that 16M people is something we just laugh at as an inconsequential number, wtf.

I literally meant 16 total people. To be fair, that was a bit of hyperbole, but the point is that there probably aren't a lot of people looking to use an "open source ICQ alternative" in 2024.

That doesn't mean that somebody shouldn't still do it, but it would probably be a passion project, more than something that would make money. At least that's my guess. :-)
Eyoo I was 99485387 just two digits diff, nice!
> While they don't have the science/maths background that makes Lehrer an obvious win for the HN crowd,

True, but they did one on thermodynamics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnbiVw_1FNs
Wow! Can I deploy it on my iPhone and have it look over my poker games with friends?
This is brilliant. Assuming successful revenue stream, are there going to be any further developments?

I would love this as a monitor for coding (I use a plain black on white scheme in vim), for writing and for reading.
> While a lot of it is disinfo driven, a lot of it is because of distrust of Medicine due to bad past experiences.

I know people who believe the covid vaccines are racist experiments in line with the Tuskegee syphilis study. And that is just the tip of the insanity iceberg they believe in.
What's the problem? I eat salt practically every day.
You can take mod 7 anywhere you like as you go. It's a tool to make the arithmetic easier.

No, you don't need to do it relentlessly as you go, but it can be used in an ad hoc manner to keep the numbers small.

Having said that, if you have 24, you can reduce it (mod 7) to 10, which you might find it easier to work with rather than reducing it to 3. Similarly if you start with 27 you can reduce it to -1 (mod 7). You don't always need to reduce things to the range [0..7).

(Note, by convention the square bracket implies "included" and the round bracket implies "excluded", so [0..7) is the collection {0,1,2,3,4,5,6}.)
I only read part of the FAQ. I find the desire to keep the complexity low by limiting the compiler lines of code and not using LLVM interesting, but I wonder how practical it is. The FAQ admits that because of this, it generates slower code. So it shifts the complexity to the software codebase, by telling the users to “use assembly where needed”.

Seems a bit like Python’s philosophy of not introducing too much optimizations to prevent the runtime complexity from spiraling out of control.
Opinion Stage AI-Boost leads and sales with quizzes and surveys
Transform boring quizzes, forms, and surveys into interactive visual experiences your audience will love. Introducing Opinion Stage AI — make conversion-optimized quizzes and surveys in seconds. Fully customize and brand them to make them uniquely yours.
So what will be mandatory?
Going to Mars or UBI will be the case!
One perpetual source of concern that I have is how will this work in practice? NIST has not standardized algorithms as of yet. NSA has come out in opposition of hybrid schemes (note that NSA is also a big fan of CsfC, which uses entirely seperate dual layers of crypto, which could be how they would have a hybrid scheme - one layer classical, one layer pqc. Will they? I ahve no clue). But this protocol is still a draft.

OpenSSH has chosen their own algorithm that afaik was on the NIST shortlist for PQC but not a final candidate and incorporated it in OpenSSH. That's not standardized either.

Given that Govt (which mandates encryption requirements via blunt tools like saying they will only purchase things that meet their requirements) and Industry are going two ways, and industry is doing whatever they think best without waiting for standardization, it feels like this is going to be a source of headaches to support properly in the future due to the diversity of schemes.

I am actually in favor of what Google / OpenSSH are doing, enabling new things shouldn't be breaking stuff, and should just be a net positive in their own bubbles, but the govt opposition and foot dragging makes this harder.
>This process then becomes more of a waterfall model where dev and QA are distinct, sequential phases.

I think we overuse the term waterfall. Having a QA phase as part of a development cycle doesn't not make something "waterfall.:
Your friend can still enclose the phrases of the lyrics with double quotes to force an exact match on each of them.
Emacs in fifty keystrokes
If I learn everything from human and have human intelligence, doesn't this mean they will lie too?
I just saw an interview with Sundar Pichai and someone showing him the mobile Google search results and how bad they are. It was pretty embarrassing. It's like he doesn't even use his own product. https://youtu.be/lqikP9X9-ws?si=0NAJX5GhzXfhP1t0&t=1524

Also discussed AI junk and how it is crowding out real content. https://youtu.be/lqikP9X9-ws?si=HknLDI_yaByLoqRO&t=1310

Also, Google eating other sites/putting them out of business https://youtu.be/lqikP9X9-ws?si=IXm5MrAj7glGsLC2&t=452

Overall a good interview.
Aren't you tired of lies???
Which proves the value of the press. If people hadn't shined the light on this, they would have rectified nothing.
>The moderators of r/Pizza attempt to save the day

It's interesting when normal people get accidentally wrapped up in high level events.
I don't use reddit, discord and slack because they are not open protocols. I use them because of the network effect and only reluctantly. Look at the relatively recent success of software like bittorrent and know that idealism and commercialism both live and die by the network effect. We aren't doomed to live in walled gardens forever.
"We cannot effectively study, understand, debug, or improve, the underlying operating system if it is non-free. We actively work with the source code for the systems on which we depend, and we are not interested in supporting any platforms for which this is not possible."

I understand that you don't like it, but how do you come to regard a statement like this as "arbitrary?" It's exclusive, for sure. "Purity test" is one way to characterize it. But do you really think that statements like this are just the product of individual caprice? That it's not someone's attempt at a principled intervention, but just an "attitude?"
Not if it exists adjacent to it. It does if it habitually gates releases though.

If you can't risk not having QA gating your releases then your process is probably more waterfall than you might have hoped.
Can't spell "Ok, boomer" without "me".