skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While Waymo is only trying to enable itself on 1-2 particular highways in western America, Tesla's FSD can work hours with no interventions on the highways, do exits, and automate pretty much the entire trip on a highway in any place in the US, Canada, and China.

Again, it's just different approaches to solve the problem.
The closer you are to the cutting edge, the more sliced up you’re gonna get.
Are we following the rule of law here? We are talking about arresting bad actors, built on the fundamental principal of due process. There are rules to follow. If the department of justice wants to bring criminal charges against individuals or corporations, should the first step be 'sieze all assets'? When is the doj allowed to sieze assets, if we think its a scumbag foreigner but what if its an upstanding american tax paying LLC? Should your business be subject to immediate takedowns while the doj investigates and attempts to prosecute you?

Has anyone been convicted of anything? We are siezing control of personally owned assets under the presumption the responsible parties will be found guilty. That seems like a slippery slope.
"The core is a step beyond that."

Where? If you've found it you should write a paper.

I think the point here is, a virus, and in other studies even 'magnets' can do it. You can modify behavior, such that the person does not realize they are modified. They believe they made these decisions themselves, when in reality they were being tweaked externally.
I would not. See the Chinese Room thought experiment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
At this rate I'm convinced ChatGPT is the red mercury of digital threat campaigns.

"Mr. President, Mr. President, come quick! We've reports that Chechen Separatists have began to delegate portions of their work to ChatGPT."

"Excellent, then we have nothing to worry about."
> The answer 95%+ of the time will be no.

This is where I think everyone will disagree with you. I don't know anyone who would agree with your statement. Most people I know would agree that you're being fired when your terms of continued employment change drastically in such an unfavorable way. If my boss told me, "Hey, you can keep working here as long as you work for free" then that's being fired but by your definition - it's not.
When your provider cuts you off, that’s when you know that your provider has a legit upgrade you need to take. Take the update and then lock stuff up again.

Of course, I don’t think you’re supposed to make mods to your vendor provided equipment…

In the satellite world, this would happen too: old firmware would be cut off. That’s when you go legit for a while with your sub’d card, take the update, and watch your sub’d channels until the new update could be reverse engineered. And probably have some heroes learn the hard way of taking the update and having some negative impacts that are harder to reverse.
Knuth was talking about a very specific thing, and the generalization of that quote is a misunderstanding of his point.

Source: Donald Knuth on the Lex Fridman podcast, when Lex asks him about that phrase
For context: I work on large-scale browser apps that are closer in complexity to something like Linear or Obsidian than to your standard WordPress blog with some forms. E.g I'm currently working on a browser-based GIS tool for the financial sector.

I started my career as a full-stack developer, but went all-in on frontend because I felt I was spreading myself too thin. At one point I found that I could choose to be almost good enough at doing two different things or extremely good at one thing. I chose the latter option.

Modern browser apps are complex beasts, at least if you want to do them right. You obviously have to worry about all the technical bits --- HTML, CSS, JavaScript, your view library of choice, platform APIs like <canvas> and WebAudio, cross browser testing, bundle sizes, performance optimizations, techniques like optimistic rendering, all that good stuff.

On top of that, you also need to work closely with designers to make sure they know the features and limitations of the platform(s) they're designing for. More often than not, you end up being a sort of bridge between the backend devs, designers, and product managers.

A lot of times you end up doing design too, whether you like it or not. I've learned a lot about UI/UX design just because I often have to fill in the gaps where a designer forgot to include a certain error state, or didn't test their design on tablet screens, or didn't account for cases where a certain API might not be available.

I tried for many years to learn as much as I could about Django as well as React and friends. But it eventually got too much. I found that I wasn't able to keep up with both ecosystems, and I was producing code that wasn't very good. I could certainly build things quickly because I was familiar with all parts of the stack, but it came at the cost of code quality, security, stability, and robustness. I eventually decided to hang up my backend developer hat and focus exclusively on what goes on inside the browser (which can be a lot by itself these days!)

It's probably possible for a single individual to build a high-quality server-rendered MPA with some forms without making a mess of it. But that says more about how good Rails/Django/Laravel are than about the capabilities of any single individual. I don't think a single person could build a product like Linear end-to-end without cutting corners.
Probably all of them are state affiliated but only this one affiliated with a state the US considers an ally?
> Readability doesn't matter much when you have 10,000+ lines of code. You aren't going to read all that code (...)

You got it entirely backwards. Readability becomes far more important with the size of your project.

When you get a bug report of a feature request, you need to dive into the code and update the relevant bits. With big projects, odds are you will need to change bits of the code you never knew they existed. The only way that's possible is if the code is clear and it's easy to sift through, understand, and follow.

> You need a system of code management (documentation, diagram, IDE, tests, etc), to explain in a human-friendly way what the hell is going on.

That system of code management is the code itself. Any IDE supports searching for references, jump to definitions, see inheritance chains, etc. Readable code is code that is easy to navigate and whose changes are obvious.
The Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate Wikipedia page seems to be missing a sidebar listing the combatants, strength of each side, causalities, etc.
Could it be that the original commenter is saying state and corporate spying gets justified with these kind of succesful and positive operations, and this gives states the goodwill to push for deeper surveillance, which is then used unethically?

Think how the world changed after the PATRIOT (lol) act, and how many terrorists have been actually detained in exchange for such invasive measures on the general public. I'd bet the most benefited from all these years of mass surveillance have been advertisers, not law enforcement.
Because they are humans who need to eat.
Oh, btw.. I tested your site on mobile and that was the first thing I saw.

I now see you do have a landing page for desktop users.
On one side you need to check which folder you are in, on the other side you need to do a static analysis of the whole current and past apps.

I know there's some diverging opinions here but there's one which sounds definitely easier than the other.

As for deletes, I work in a company with a good hundred devs so that happens weekly at least.
Nice :) Our github.com/google/highway also uses this technique to compile your code multiple times, once per target CPU.
Wormable vulnerability in a router is 10x bigger issue in practice than attacks that brick a router. By "in practice" I mean judging by the real world attacks that I know of. Hacked routers are used as residential proxies for criminals, for DDoS attacks, fast flux networks, credential stuffing attacks, and more. Bricking routers is rare (and very loud), that's why it's news on HN.

Many router malware families don't even try to be persistent. Even Mirai - arguably the most famous router botnet - is not persistent [1]. In case the device is rebooted, it just gets infected again in a few minutes.

It's very important that all network connected devices have an update mechanism, working automatically in the background.

[1] At least the original version. After the code leak people were doing all kinds of updates, so there are some variants that try to be persistent in some cases.
This is especially true for a data scientist, where most code is throwaway. If you make it all spectacular, you aren't getting anything done. Data scientists' code should be "eventually good," that is to say it gets refactored as it approaches a production environment. I talk about this in my last book, Agile Data Science 2.0 (Amazon 4.1 stars 7 years after publishing).

https://www.amazon.com/Agile-Data-Science-2-0-Applications/d...

I will say that after 20 years of working as a software engineer, data engineer, data scientist and ML engineer, I can write pretty clean Python all the time but this isn't common.
>You are bouncing back between it is ony for startups and it requires enterprise level maintenance. It can be used easily for both.

No, I never said that. You are the one that brought FB into the equation.

Just because it can be used for something does not mean that it should.

I said that that approach doesn't scale well, especially for frequent data/model changes. For small apps, where as you say, you have few data changes, by all means embed your database as closely as possible to you end user code.

Sqlite inside a c app or electron, e.g. No need for any API at all! Just raw query access.

Its nice GQL to generate stuff for small non-changing web apps, I'm sure. But once you get into more performance oriented, data-migration-style stuff, if there's not good support for changing the data and reacting to the environment, then adding complexity (GQL) to an already complex situation is a Bad Idea.

You never said what this 1% was, autogeneration is not a bonus when you already have to manually filter and route things. The simpler solution gets you there as well, with less fuss.

You think you don't have page specific apis, but if you are doing the manual filtering, then you still have them, you are just "hiding" them inside another language, that doesn't have a clear benefit? At least you can't say what it is, without going in circles, another sign GQL is probably ultimately a garbage technology...
Agreed on the turd aspect. It's really amazingly poorly done, everything from the bad charger to the incoherent interface to the badly designed and operating app.

But what's nice is that it is a limited capability device. I'd love to hear more about the controls and restrictions associated with an Apple Watch. Apple's documentation is pretty shitty so I don't have a good feel for how it operates; just that the features exist.
What does fairness mean in this context though? Fairness to whom and by what measure of the term?
Unsolicited writing advice: drop the self-aggrandizing grandiosity. It is distracting and undermines the work itself.

Zig is a language for writing perfect programs? The fact that a progress bar is needed at all is a symptom of the lack of perfection of Zig. A perfect compiler would compile instantly (or at least faster than human perception is capable of registering) with no need for a progress bar.
The problem with all the "best practices" is that quite often they are sensible within some context but can be a detrimental tradeoff in a different one.

"it depends" is almost always the correct answer.

But what we see is young, inexperienced and zealous coders trying too hard and implemented the so called best practices before they understand them.

And I don't think there are too many shortcuts to replace experience.

My advice for beginners and intermediate is to first stick to the simplest solution that works, and don't be afraid to rewrite.
I'm not sure that says what you claimed?

Overall, eating raw or undercooked beef, lamb, or other meats; contact with soil; and travel outside the country were major sources of infection.

Contact with soil is from cats shedding oocysts, as covered earlier in the same extract, and while that doesn't necessitate owning a cat, I would classify it as exposure to cats (your neighbors outdoor cat shitting in your yard is still cat exposure to my sensibilities).

The association of cats and human toxoplasmosis is difficult to assess by epidemiological surveys because soil, not the cats, is the main culprit. Oocysts are not found on cat fur and are often buried in soil along with cat faeces. Therefore, direct contact with cats is irrelevant with respect to T gondii transmission, and soil contact is universal and difficult to avoid.

Which doesn't say cats don't matter, just that direct exposure doesn't matter. Soil exposure is exposure to cats through an intermediary, just not direct. It will still likely be affected by prevalence of cats in a population, even if not necessarily at a household level.

So, I think the article answers my original question to a degree, but I also think your claim that almost everyone that has it got it through eating meat with it in it is too strong given the sources you quoted (thanks a lot for posting them though, it's always nice to have data for a discussion!). If you think my reading of it is incorrect or I'm missing something, please let me know though.
it would be dependent on the country the ship is registered in firstly. Secondly it is based on the country the owning company is in. Basically as an employee you can go either the maritime court route or whatever civil court system the country has.

Most ships are registered in Liberia, so good luck making and collecting a claim based off their law.
With the right really difficult to get right knowledge and intervention vectors, biological organisms can be hacked all you want. To me, it’s not a question of “if” but of “how expensive”, “when” and “maybe making a silicon-based sucesor species to Homo Sapiens is the madness we settle for.”
So say that instead of related and make people waste their time reading the same information.
Personally, I would buy a business that does about 250k-300K in yearly profits. A business I can run with a small team as needed. Now I am generating a 25-30% yearly return (yes, I am working on the business too and not totally passive but there are businesses like these you can spend may be 15-20 hours a week).
I grew up on a bike. It was the only way to get around the neighborhood with friends, as if something was more than a couple hundred feet, you did it on bike. We biked to the city nearby to see movies or hang out at the mall. We biked into the woods to get away from everyone. We biked across town because it was something to do. Bikes were freedom.

My father was big into cycling. Diagnosed with diabetes as a juvenile, he believed if he stopped cycling he would die (unfortunately, the disease ultimately won, as it always does… but the last thing he was doing before going to the hospital for a 5 month ordeal after which he died was riding his bike). He participated in endurance races and tours, he rode his bike 20-30 miles each way to work and back almost every day of the week, the Tour de France was his Super Bowl and local or other international races were his college bowls. He spent a lot of time reading biographies of renowned cyclists. Some of my most cherished memories are our several TOSRV tours together on a heavy steel Japanese tandem, even the days of icy rain, baking sun, or when Dad had a reaction and I had to pedal us both… uphill with a headwind.

My riding dropped almost completely off, with spikes of interest here and there. I rode my bike multiple times a week to visit him in the hospital before he died, a 40 mile round trip. Those moments alone (other than the terrible traffic) were moments of respite and quiet in my fear and anxiety over my dad’s descent, my recent and failing marriage, my trouble with alcohol, my trouble with my career. He died and left me his bike, a Masi Gran Criterium that he bought around the time I was born, rode every day, painstakingly overhauled and sunk ungodly amounts of time and money into over the years he had it.

I rode it on and off. I’ve done a few smaller tours in the 2010s until I had a health concern. I rode it during the pandemic with my mom until I started getting bad saddle and wrist pains. I started becoming afraid something would happen to the Masi and I would lose a deep connection to my father. But I’ll be god damned if I don’t feel he’s right there beside me when I ride it, and all the world goes quiet except the soft clicking of the bike and the woosh of air blowing by. Yet, I keep making excuses for not riding.

I’m gonna get that god damned bike off the wall and go for a ride.
I don't think being contrarian is a requirement for seeing value in comments that others disagree with. Just on this thread, your comment was downvoted but represents a particular way of solving a problem that differs from the downvoter's. Even if that way is not better, for them, I think acknowledging that it might be better for someone else is objectively open minded, and not in the least contrarian.

But my point isn't to criticize anyone for downvoting. Just the opposite. It's to illustrate that thinking outside the box is in itself disagreeable, which, as is the case here, can be a searchable metric.
Shadow Trading Is Bad Sometimes
> Ever seen an engineer do a loop and make n+1 REST calls for resources? It happens more often then you think because they don't want to have to create a backend ticket to add related resources to a call.

> With internal REST for companies I have seen so many single page specific endpoints. Gross.

As someone pointed out in reply to another comment, GraphQL is "a technological solution to an organizational problem." If that problem manifests as abuse of REST endpoints, you can disguise it with GraphQL, until one day you find out your API calls are slow for more obscure, harder to debug reasons.
Load the form asynchronously, or after the user clicks “feedback”.

If Google forms are ugly, write your own form that submits to the same endpoint: https://blog.webjeda.com/google-form-customize/
If it can boost density in existing teeth, even that's a big deal. Probably more valuable than regrowing.

I am a 49-year-old and (apart from the four teeth removed in my teens so that orthodontics could straighten and resolve overcrowding) at the moment I have all my teeth, wisdom teeth included.

(It looks like one wisdom tooth might not be long for this mouth, but I digress)

But once you get to this age, the density of your teeth begins to matter.

What would be really great is a treatment that would regrow gums in a meaningful, controlled way that supported reattachment; some of my gums are receding for reasons that are developmental, and some is less than ideal self-care, but much of it is just plain being a man over 40.

There are some medications that cause gum overgrowth as a side effect, but not usefully.
You just don't understand probability, possibility and potential very well. Yes, you can get hung up where you are and we can argue semantics - the fact is that if I throw 1000 dice and get 1000 "1"s that is not the same as my being able to theoretically do that an equal % chance each throw.

The ring may be possible but, so far, it's the only example so despite being a potential random outcome of randomness, the sheer singularity of its existence proves it's incredibly low likelihood of occurrence - perhaps such a low % chance of actually occurring that it may be easier to believe that the ring had help in its formation, whatever that may be.

I'm not going to deny obvious things just bc they challenge my worldview - especially if I have to defend my viewpoint semantically
I have used Angular since version 5.

I have never had any major issues or problems with it.

Think of it this way: GraphQL, Docker, and Kubernetes solve problems that very, very, very few GIANT tech companies have, but not every app will scale to millions of users.
> Readability doesn't matter much when you have 10,000+ lines of code. You aren't going to read all that code,

As someone who has read 10,000+ lines in order to track down surprising behavior in other people's code, I can say without a doubt that readability still matters at that scale.

Code management systems can sometimes be helpful, but they are no substitute.
Quote: "How do you share that dataset with an analyst?"

..and blah blah about the sharing from a developer perspective.

In reality the analyst is some higher up that only knows how to import/view CSV in Excel so that's exactly what will ask for ("hey zzz can you send me those daily parcels in a .csv file? thank you")
I wasn't aware this was discussed, thanks for the pointer! I'm curious now what he says he was talking about ;)
Intentional refactoring is not a waste of time. I mean you are learning right, both how to refactor and the right way to represent your problem domain. So that is not bad nor a waste of time necessarily. Do the refactor as it will help you create new features later and as you gain experience you will start using the design patterns from the beginning.
Your claim was that "LLMs will claim that it’s normal for pigs to have wings and fly to the moon" and that humans free of mental/cognitive disorder would not. Which is to say, humans with a mental/cognitive disorder might claim that it’s normal for pigs to have wings and fly to the moon. If we're carving out such a section for humans to be so wrong, then we should also carve out a section for LLMs to be so wrong.

Fwiw, ChatGPT-4o can write a lengthy essay as to how pigs don't have wings and couldn't fly to the moon even if they did, but if we're more interested in them being nothing more than just a statistical model and that those mere statistics can't possibly result in something that looks like reasoning then we've got to disregard the fact that it "knows" that pigs don't have wings.

Of course pigs having wings is a stand in for whatever else wrong thing that LLMs might "believe", so I agree it's very important for everyone that uses an LLM to understand their limitations especially around hallucinations, but where there are books written about how flat the Earth is and are in the training data, the current state of affairs is that ChatGPT and Gemini both know it's not flat. That Google search AI results, which is a different model, is telling users to use glue on pizza, or to drink urine only serves to say that Google Search's bot using Reddit as unannotated training data is as representative of LLMs as a human with a mental/cognitive disorder.
I disagree with you, but it would probably be an impossibility for me to prove it! Why? Well, as soon as a truly altruistic act is observed by third-parties, there's a chance the actor could be rewarded for it (for instance, by being honoured by society). Then, we would have at least the ability to claim that the actor was doing it for the chance of a reward, rather than purely selflessly. Thus, truly altruistic acts can only be immune from accusations of selfishness if they are entirely unobservable!

Of course, I hope you'd agree that such an accusation would not always be plausible - the higher the personal risk of the act relative to the potential reward, the less plausible selfishness is and the more plausible altruism is.

I personally have acted altruistically - as you describe it, "actively and knowingly doing good for someone else for absolutely no personal benefit". I can't prove it to you, but I think it's a natural consequence of empathy. I'd posit that altruistic acts are often done by those in situations where they are vulnerable themselves, which is why events like natural disasters are often accompanied by unusual levels of social cohesion and acts of personal sacrifice. That instinct can be exploited, of course; yet, by itself, it is a beautiful thing.
this UI feels right.