skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
SDL and Vulkan are equivalents to DirectX, to state otherwise is itself preposterous. Is it a complete implementation with perfect compatibility? No, but that's not a realistic goal or expectation even on Windows. One of the first steps I take to get older D3D9 games to work on Windows is to use DXVK, Microsoft's own implementation of their APIs isn't perfect either, having atrophied over the years.

Outside of Steam I use Lutris, which works fine. Though it's rare that I actually need to use it, given I have Steam and the vast majority of my games library is on that platform (as is just about everyone elses). Saying that the reliance on Valve's store is a problem is I guess a valid one in a ideological sense, but practically? Steam dominates PC gaming, it's what matters, even more so than Microsoft's own store.

You're the one who tried to spin up a semantic argument over your overly broad application of the term DRM, I had no interest in getting into that.
I don't understand what your comment has to do with any of the previous ones in this thread: no, she doesn't have the authority, yes, it was on the table pre-COVID, and sure, she mentioned 100% remote work returning (!?) as one of the reasons.
My encounter with LA's raw-milk, powdered-meat smoothie
>We are surely better than where we were at in the middle ages with leaches and stuff, but there is still a lot of practice and experimentation to see what works and what doesn't, just evidence without hard proof.

Here's a question for you. When is the last time mental health outcomes improved in a way which could not simply be the result of reporting differences?

I would say the last time was around the year 2000, when suicide and drug addiction were at all time lows. Every single chance since then, on aggregate, has been useless and the entire field of mental health has completely failed to produce any evidence it has advance an inch this millennium which is absolutely fucking scandalous. I don't know how much oncology improved in the same period of time. Also if you include reported mental health data, people report WORSE mental health now than they did in the past.

Given that, I see pretty much zero reason why the status quo today does a lick to improve people mental health better than the status quo back then. I am just dead stupidly sceptical of diagnosis (at least beyond 2000/DSM-IV levels) as being a source of mental health because not only is it not proven people don't even attempt to prove this.

When the DSM-V was released, the director of the NIMH started the RDOC for research which was nominally supposed to do studies based less on categories like "autism" and more on underlying biological phenomenon, trashed the idea of symptom based diagnosis pointing out it has largely been depreciated elsewhere in medicine, and suggested we might have to get rid of the words schizophrenia and depression because they were confusing things. I think about such things occasionally and wonder if the entire diagnostic nosology we have is basically a fatally flawed system.

So my essential objection is, why medicalise people's identities if there's no evidence it's improving people's outcomes?
On FreeBSD there's a sysctl to control it and there's a kernel module you can configure to allow specific UIDs/GIDs to see everything so you can still allow your monitoring tools to do their job without being root, for example. It's a standard config in places I've worked
"suburbanites in Buffalo and Albany are not affected by the tax in any meaningful way, and should not have a disproportionate say in a policy that benefits millions of city residents."

But it says in the article itself and pretty much everything about this that "they want to try it in other places next". Are they not supposed to read or react to that part? Can you really blame them for trying to stop this at the point they have the most leverage?
The dude is a pure academic and just trying to sell socialism with hand waving.

I look at it differently: His ideas are so weak and removed from reality that they can’t even stand up to a Yahoo Finance article.

We should be careful taking policy advice from people who have never had real jobs.
> My high school driver’s ed textbook asserted that a head on collision between two cars each going 50 miles an hour had the same effect on each as running into a brick wall at 100 miles an hour.

I've intuitively believed this to be true for a long time. But the article made me think about it, and the textbook is quite wrong.

It's a test similar to if you're in a train in motion, and you drop a ball in the aisle, does it fall towards the front or the back of the train?
Thanks for sharing. Where I work we know chatGPT exists but we're still using SO for obscure errors. We don't trust any copilot when dealing with our livelihoods.

At least you got away "easy". I'm waiting for the "...cost us $100k..." post.
that blog post is all they have so not much to worry about company wise
You should have given up on difficult capital projects after seeing the results of the second avenue subway and the oculus.

The insanely high cost of building relatively modest things precludes entirely building ambitious things. Not even the federal government has that kind of money.
Let's reproduce GPT-2 (124M)
This is not a "static" evaluation of the library dependencies, it's a loader debug flag. So it's not quite the same thing.
Perhaps #6 could be that Mars does not currently have a magnetic field like this planet does[0].

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field_of_Mars
My view is that there is extrapolation going on. They look at the progression of GPT 2-3-4 over a relatively short number of years and are extrapolating to a near future where these things are much more capable. FOMO. But the history of AI is huge leaps from a technological innovation, followed by years of crawl, and all this extrapolation may be wrong.
"we only" need to do that, huh?

> Good topsoil contains about ten percent biomass, [Schlesinger, 1977], so a hundredth of an inch of biomass growth means about a tenth of an inch of topsoil. Changes in farming practices such as no-till farming, avoiding the use of the plow, cause biomass to grow at least as fast as this. If we plant crops without plowing the soil, more of the biomass goes into roots which stay in the soil, and less returns to the atmosphere. If we use genetic engineering to put more biomass into roots, we can probably achieve much more rapid growth of topsoil. I conclude from this calculation that the problem of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a problem of land management, not a problem of meteorology.

What about all the land that isn't even farmed or managed?

How exactly are we supposed to accomplish this thing we "only" need to do?

Not very much later:

>To grow topsoil on a massive scale may or may not be practical, depending on the economics of farming and forestry.

Oh, so it might not be practical, without much math into whether or not it's an easy "only" or an "actually this would be far harder than other approaches" idea?

> All that we can say for sure is that this is a theoretical possibility and ought to be seriously explored.

Starting from the sweeping statements of "all we need to do" and then landing on "theoretically this is possible" is not convincing me that there's credibility here. Later we get into "maybe actually the carbon will help prevent an ice age, we don't know."

"We need further study" is not heretical; "we have time to wait" seems increasingly iffy a position; and "let me toss out some wild possible alternatives that I haven't studied myself" is more just unhelpful than heretical?
I go shopping for, like, a pair of tweezers, and for some reason come out the other end with a kit of 27 different kinds of tweezers for $19.97. And then I stare at them for an hour and tweeze stuff in all the various ways. Then pick one and put it in the desk drawer, and all the others go in a baggie in a box marked "small tools". And every once in a while I think contentedly about how rich I am in tweezers.
Theres also linkwarden. I wish linkwarden could sync select collections to/from browser bookmarks, that would make it perfectvia thier plugin
interesting how oldpersonintx's comment "thinly-veiled passive-aggressive swipe at Ladybird" was dead'd here when that accurately reflects the authors comments (as roc-robert o'callahan) here on LWN.net: https://lwn.net/Articles/977625/
Do you have a great example of a code base that meets your ideals?

I think one of the problems is that we just don’t have people that we admire in programming compared to other areas like biology or literature.
It reminds me a bit about my family, but maybe in a different way. We were allowed to challenge everything (even though, my parents had final say).

But what I think was great about my parents was that we were encouraged to find out the answers to any questions we had.

It was pre-internet time, so it basically was looking something up on a dictionary or on the Encyclopedia Brittanica (a Spanish language version my parents still have today), many times it was rather hard to figure something out.

No question left unanswered, at least as best as we could.

Even if it meant that my dad went out and bought me a book about basic electricity (Ohms law and such) just to give to me because I wanted to know something.

That care about knowledge and logic (my mom was great at logical arguments and she knows a lot of crap, seriously) helped me succeed.

I hope I'm doing as good a job with my kids (ideally even better).

Raising people is weird and can be so fulfilling.
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite prototype that runs Linux emerges
My point is not merely that there exist socially competent people who advance science at the highest level, but that I reject the claim that this is an anti-correlation. I do not think that scientific genius and social grace are anti-correlated, or antithetical.
AI Will Become Mathematicians' 'Co-Pilot' – Interview with Terence Tao
Counterpoint: Chicago parking meters
American libertarianism is a utopian, privileged political philosophy seemingly perfectly favored by a large swath of the moderately and absurdly rich while denying the preferential welfare they enjoy while there is simultaneously insufficient social investment for the middle-class and the poor. No one is an island, can get ahead in isolation, nor fund essential commonwealth infrastructure.
I wonder are there linters to detect those types of mistakes for SQLAlchemy. Even though I'm aware of such pitfalls, it's nice if linters can catch them cause I'm not confident to cache them all the time during code review.

Some linters like pyright can identify dangerous defaults in function call, like `def hello(x=[]): pass` (mutable values shouldn't be a default). Linter plugins for widely-used and critical libraries like SQLAlchemy are nice to have.
> I'm yet to meet an FP fanatic who actually properly understood OOP.

You just haven't met one who has realized that monads in FP map roughly to objects in OOP yet. :) Both are used for the same broad things: encapsulating/hiding/controlling state and allowing state transformations to be sequenced.

I actually have great sympathy for the functional programmer: having decided that managing both kinds of complexity is mentally exhausting, the functional programmer opts to eliminate, as much as possible, the accidental complexity of willy-nilly side effects in order to better address the inherent complexity of the problem domain. A good programmer can write mostly referentially transparent code with controlled side effects in any language, but it takes more care and forethought to do so in, say, Java.

This is why I say Lisp is really for bad programmers. If you're a programming genius, you can apply the same principles used in Lisp all the time to Java or even C++ code... it's just more work. Work you may not even notice because that stuff comes natural to you. But if you're a mid programmer, much of the friction of working in Java or C++ goes away in Lisp and you feel relieved of a burden. Much more feels within your reach. (I happen to love Lisp, and prefer working in it to anything else if I can, so maybe I'm a bad programmer.)
Eh I imagine they looked over the code as well, doing code review -- and at first glance, the code looks reasonable. I certainly wasn't able to catch the bug even though I tried to find it (and I was given a tiny collection of lines and the knowledge that there's a bug there!).

If anything, I think this says something about how dangerous ChatGPT and similar tools are: reading code is harder than writing code, and when you use ChatGPT, your role stops being that of a programmer and becomes that of a code reviewer. Worse, LLMs are excellent at producing plausible output (I mean that's literally all they do), which means the bugs will look like plausibly correct code as well.

I don't think this is indicative of people who don't know what they're doing. I think this is indicative of people using "AI" tools to help with programming at all.
This is why working for startups gives me PTSD. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
Elon's xAI chatbot says SpaceX's quiet part out loud
They mean "audio streaming" ala "video streaming" not like audio downloading to your device streaming. The stream means live download not just download through the net.

i.e. realtime audio podcasts, etc.

I assume*
Painting stolen from Chatsworth House 45 years ago discovered at auction
And rewriting into a language that they lack experience in so much so that they can’t spot what are in my opinion really quite obvious bugs.
How is it not true? Instead of tracking data and function calls over a unified stacktrace, you track Things and Messages over databases, queues, and logs —- none of which you can trivially attach a debugger to.

I generally like event-driven architecture, but I need to admit that debuggability is sacrificed where it matters most.
> Many years later I heard an elderly man of whom I had a generally favorable opinion tell a child who had disagreed with him not to contradict his elders. I was shocked — the statement struck me as heresy, very nearly obscenity. If your elders are wrong, you have as much cause to contradict them as they would to contradict you if you were wrong.

Personally I would split this into two aspects: the tone that the argument is expressed in, and the meat of the argument. People who tell you not to contradict with elders (which I take to mean not just older relatives but also just people in a more senior position) usually only care about the tone of your voice, and the fact that your tone displays respect towards elders. And this is usually good advice: you want to avoid hurting their ego, because they are in a position of power and they can inflict harm and misery on you. On the other hand, once you speak in a sufficiently respectful tone these people don't really mind changing their mind in an argument. They don't like to be confronted and be forced to change their mind; they just like to feel respected while changing their mind. It's an art to speak in a way that protects the fragile ego of the counterparty while still contradicting them.
You can read more about what that deal covered — and didn’t cover — here on NMPA’s site:

https://www.nmpa.org/twitch-makes-deal-with-nmpa-but-streame...
Huh. So that must subconciously be why I got into birdwatching at age 35 and am now slowly leveling up the purchase price of the binoculars…
"The River" Revised by AI
Would you happen to know of a good resource that shows an implementation of an LLM so I can see this more concretely in practice?

The idea of an LLM makes sense: it's ultimately a graph with statistical weights for which node we use to generate text next (my understanding here is still correct, yes?).

My issue is, where does the "learning" part come in? It feels like it's all hard-coded but I know it's not. What allows for flexibility in token generation besides that randomization from temperature that you mentioned?
May be some here https://github.com/iipc/awesome-web-archiving/blob/main/READ...
It is very difficult to say.
I see the point from the video too, but it is all about the general baseline.

For us, it might not matter, because we are very aware about these things.

But most, and especially for the upcoming generations, they don't think like us.
The baseline is defined how they are used to "robots". What are they expecting? To whom they are comparing?

People who don't know how internals works on these things, might tend to up trust more "human" version. At least I would assume so. It is easier to interact with them and easier to like.

People who know how these works internally, might be hesitant, and trust more for "neutral one". And the comment in the video is over-engineering the solution for the problem of the minority.
What does it feel like to read RSS?

Well, my eyes go from left to right across a field of text, which I interpret as words, sentences and paragraphs.

If the overall body of text is interesting, I continue reading; if not, I don't.

I really have a hard time understanding the problems that many people seem to experience in modern life...
Amboy – a Mojave Desert ghost town and Americana icon fights to survive
Just switched off IPv6 on home network…and that fixed multiple hard to troubleshoot issues I’ve been having. (Eg specific parts of some iPhone apps not loading)

As much as I want to love it…still more hassle than it’s worth
I’m still confused about why the textbook is wrong. Is there something about the energy or momentum scaling differently in the brick wall case vs. the head-on collision case?
Okay we are are getting a little lost in definitions here, but nonetheless.

You can solve the above by remembering that the dirac delta is the limit of a series of functions.

If you take your delta to be lim a -> 0 N(0, a) where N() is the normal distribution, then you can see that in your above equation, you then have two limits. lim t -> 0 and lim a -> 0. By swapping the order of the two (which is a dubious operation), you can send t to zero first then a to zero, and the result is zero.

So in one way, it can be deformed to zero, in another way it can't, because it's 0 times infinity .

However, the thing to focus on is that dirac deltas aren't actually valid points in the solution space of partial differential equations. They aren't functions, and they aren't actually physically real.

Come to think of it, that would probably exclude them from being TDs a-priori. Because a TD must be a solution to an underlying physical equation, and that solution must be deformable to zero. But if it's not a solution to a PDE (because it doesn't live in any valid hilbert space), then it can't be a TD.
One example I like is Internet Explorer. IE had a "monopoly" back in the early 2000s and made up something like 90% of the browser market. Then Firefox came along and broke the market open, then Google and Apple rolled in like bulldozers [0] and we got to a healthy 4-player market.

Everywhere except for South Korea. You can still read articles on it to this day [1]. Regulations had an unfortunate interaction that made IE into the only option and set up an actual monopoly situation.

The caveat is I personally think monopoly is called far too quickly; as far as I can tell every successful product is a monopoly to someone on HN. A lot of the things people want to call monopolies aren't, they are markets like the browser market that haven't finished settling. Unfortunately they can become ossified due to bad regulatory practice.

[0] What Steve Jobs did to Flash should come with 18+ violence content warnings. They were the days. Nothing could be done about that scourge until suddenly something had been done.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/business/korea-internet-e...
>>far beyond her constitutional powers as the governor

That’s because there are no penalties for violating the Oath of Office they take - the courts will simply override her decision at some point.

If by chance they don’t she will simply reverse her decision - after the election.

This is pure politics by a politician who cares only about herself and her party.
to be fair, Qualcomm runs on Linux (Android) all the time
> What attracts people to being a programmer? For some people it’s “looks like a reasonable job with good pay and conditions”. For others, it’s more “I love computers, programming, and abstract puzzles to solve”. This latter group (of which I am one), is more likely to provide both benefits and problems.

> The benefit is they will generally be capable of greater innovation than the former group, but the downside is that they may just focus on interesting puzzles and ignore the needs of the (boring) business.

I think the problem rather is that many "business people" have a deep hate against people who love to think about whether there is a deeper hidden mathematical structure behind the business problems. Just to be clear: there also exist some few business people who appreciate this, but the latter are typically "nerds" who mostly switched to business because it pays much better.

It's not my experience that the latter group of programmers ignores the business problems, they just rather have their own much less anti-intellectual way of approaching them.
I wasn't aware of that. Fair enough!
Googled that, thanks for not providing clear references to your claims, and found that docker can crash Windows on boot, but not "brick" it. People are still able to safe boot, run system recovery/restore, or even reinstall Windows if they choose.

Besides, bricking software is impossible, bricking refers to physical devices unable to bootstrap anymore.
Bear Blog Blogging Platform
Huh...? Black holes have mass.
We found a museum in Haines, AK that contained only hammers--the proprietor had stories to go with many of them. If you stopped to look at any given hammer for more than a second he'd tell you not just a history but an entertaining history of it. Highly recommended:

https://www.hammermuseum.org/
FWIW, we host on Cloudflare and use their API to resize images on the fly and we're fine. Not so much a "lock-in" if other vendors can fill-in, is it?
Perhaps the fact the wall is to a first approximation an unmovable object, the oncoming car isn't.
I'm a bit confused by the story. Why did you disagree?
More likely outcome: ads on static textures and between lobbies, oh but you can pay to turn them into _theme of the week_.
Alfred, Choosy, DBngin, Flux, IINA, iStat Menus, Ice, Karabiner Elements, keepingyouawake, Little Snitch, übersicht
Qualcomm has previously announced their desire to support Linux, and they have an upstream roadmap: https://www.qualcomm.com/developer/blog/2024/05/upstreaming-...
Yeah I always like the sound of a Venus colony more, similar gravity being one of the main benefits but guess being stuck in a habitat in the clouds doesn't satisfy the same explorative instinct as Mars where you could actually walk on a new land
> Having opinions about the product is way more valuable

Be careful with this statement: many programmers value very different properties of the product than the typical customer.
What does "why a library is found or not" mean? It is either in the LD_LIBRARY_PATH or it isn't? The screenshot doesn't make it clear to me what this refers to.
Exactly, and the same explanation holds for any odd UI quirk you see in a for-profit SaaS. Spotify for example, has a lot of frustrating aspects to its UI, but everything makes sense in the context of $$$
Honorable mention: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivors_(1975_TV_series)
Trying to resolve it before the sleep deadline is what turns the argument into a quarrel...
Even back in my youth and early adulthood, there was a wide variation on how loud CRTs were between models and individual units. There were some that were close to silent for me, while others were very noticeable.