skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sounds like a data engineer job to me
`Bytes`: The Lesser-Known Python Built-In Sequence
Thanks @koutetsu,

I know about FHE and TFHE, but as you said, they need a lot of computational resources.

Ignoring the training process and just looking at inference, what are the "technical" drawbacks of this idea? If the first and last layers of the network run on the local machine, how could a malicious cloud reverse engineer the inputs and discover the raw data?
Honestly if you use obsidian a lot consider paying for sync. It has some nice options, especially if you're also using the mobile app.
WTF? Right now, this post on HN is titled "Critical Vulnerabilities in Package Manager Revealed by Secret Scanning Research". That's nonsense. The title of the linked Medium post is "Exposing Hidden Dangers: The Essential Guide to Secret Scanning in Package Repositories", and it is not about vulnerabilities in package managers as one would ordinarily understand that mean, but rather about scanning for secrets that have accidentally been published to package manager repositories.

Am flagging simply for the misleading title. This would be unobjectionable (though IMO not very interesting) if the title were fixed.
Amazon bought goodreads and crippled its discoverability features.
Well, yes, it's the very definition of a conspiracy theory. That doesn't mean it's automatically false though.
I guess it means "someone who has or is about to have a PhD".
Then use a time-limited token, you can assign it to a particular role or support engineer too. You could do fancy things like making it pronounceable… there are so many options that do not involve passing around keys (while fearing you might leak an email address, which is less worrying than the key, IMO).
If someone lets their kids outside while not under direct supervision, there is a real risk of the government taking their kids away from them.

Just one example from the news https://reason.com/2022/12/08/emily-fields-pearsiburg-virgin...
If some random dude on the internet copies it's ok, if he copies it, because he happened to work for them years ago it's not?

There's no logic to that.

> Really i wish we could all just work together on great things

Indeed, but for that to happen you need to be open-source since day 1, and not work for profit. And even then you get ego issues, which this CEO apparently has.

We'd need capitalism 2.0 because the current version just sets incentives to not make you work somewhat harmoniously together.
Even more if you use the legendary "pip-chill" to trim down the requirements file ;-)

Sorry. Shameless plug.
Those machines were quite interesting because they were bit-serial but highly parallel. If you had to do lots of calculations on 19-bit numbers they were real winner but were not a good match at all for floating point.
Wall Street (1987) by Stanley Weiser and Oliver Stone. Third draft, 4/23/87
I don’t believe you understand what a natural key is, but aside from that, I’m not the one advocating passing around IDs like that isn’t a security failing. If you wouldn’t put it in a URL then you shouldn’t be passing it around anyway.
This is definitely written by an AI, the tepetition in the package manager descriptions alone is a dead giveaway. The way trivial lines of code are explained tells a similar story.

This article could be 10 paragraphs, and, ironically, would probably yield more success as people would actually finish it.
and some years later: https://dood.al/pinktrombone/
Pink Trombone: Bare-Handed Speech Synthesis
Probably would have been better if I had instead suggested figure formatting and page layout… I think I’ve come close to stroking out over that…
Like Diogenes Across the Atlantic (2018)
People do actually generate and not use HN accounts and then later sell them on or give them some life (repeating other comments in days old threads is common) so they can later be used to "chime in entusiastically" when a product is launched.

Watch that account and see if it endorse | votes up a submission next week.
I do occasionally force push myself, mostly for making my history look clean, not really secretly hiding stuff.

And if I had to tweak / study a GitHub exploit, I would definitely force push to try stuff without leaving a trail for meaningless commits.

It actually didn't occur to me that the author would do this for messing around, but it could be indeed. :-)
I 100% agree with the article. The expense if new, internet enabled, much higher insurance rates and taxes keeps me in my 17 year old vehicle.

In the US anyway, I think the days of the "open road" is slowly coming to an end.
There used to be this amazing hobbyist weather station sharing site. Weather Underground.

But like so many they turned commercial and kicked off all the hobbyists that made them big. It was a really nasty move. I have never found a suitable replacement. I don't know what it is about weather that gives people so much greed.
The alternative is not being random, and "decent statistics" means "being pseudorandom" - the statistics are inseparable from the randomness. You can make a PRNG that has data races, but from a randomness perspective, that is equivalent to just using /dev/null as your random number generator.
I agree with the author's complaint about the problems of Wikipedia being taken as authoritative on operating systems. I have seen all kinds of bizarre claims which are at odds with reality, but which, being described in a wikipedia page, are taken for gospel, and end up reproduced and sometimes embellished further.

His article is probably quite a good discussion of what happens on Linux. It is over-reaching however if it is supposed - as it seems to be in the conlusions - to be talking about modern Unix-likes generally.

PID 0 on NetBSD (and I suspect of Free, DragonFly, Open, etc, as well) simply means the kernel process. Here are a few of the threads that run under the kernel process in NetBSD:

PID PPID CPU LID NLWP PRI NI VSZ RSS WCHAN STAT TTY LTIME COMMAND
0 0 0 118 106 123 0 0 28132 physiod DK- ? 0:00.00 [system]
0 0 0 117 106 125 0 0 28132 pooldrai DK- ? 0:00.00 [system]
0 0 0 116 106 124 0 0 28132 syncer DK- ? 0:00.00 [system]
0 0 0 115 106 126 0 0 28132 pgdaemon DK- ? 0:00.00 [system]

These are all true and authentic threads, they just don't spend any time executing userland code. The work they carry out is, respectively: to carry out I/O to/from buffers in userland, because this may incur page faults and cannot therefore be done in a soft interrupt which has no thread context; to reclaim pages from the pool (slab) allocator; to lazily synchronise dirty buffers back to disk; and to carry out page replacement.

All of these listed above carry out memory management, so it is not correct to say that PID 0 "has nothing to do with memory management" or that the Wikipedia article is wrong to discuss paging as a responsibility of PID 0. That's what pgdaemon is doing!

There are many other threads that are part of the kernel process (or "PID 0") on NetBSD - modern kernels generally use a lot of them to carry out all sorts of tasks. A few others on NetBSD include worker thraeds for running asynchronous I/O completions and for processing various kinds of input in the networking stack.

Illumos should also be considered. Looking at its PID 0:

root 0 0 1 1 0 11:22:53 ? 0:02 sched

We can see it is called sched. Why sched? This article talked about the historic role of PID 0 in process swapping. Process swapping is a scheduling problem (like a lot of problems in software). This is why swappers are traditionally called medium-term or memory schedulers. Illumos generally gives most groupings of kernel worker threads their own processes with their own PIDs, but one, called "sched", remains in PID 0, and its responsibility? Process swapping:

https://github.com/illumos/illumos-gate/blob/579c23696ac6891...

The Wikipedia article has now been hastily edited, and replaces a claim that was true only of certain Unixes other than Linux with a claim true only of certain Unixes including Linux. Is this an improvement?
> Lisp doesn’t even have "operators" — everything is a function. Gosh, the more you learn about Lisp, the more it feels like we went backwards.

Don't learn wrong things. Lisp has operators and no, not everything is a function. LET for example is not a function. It is a built-in special operator in Common Lisp. Similar in other Lisp dialects. Scheme R7RS documents "let" as syntax: https://standards.scheme.org/corrected-r7rs/r7rs-Z-H-6.html#... with a "named let" as a variant: https://standards.scheme.org/corrected-r7rs/r7rs-Z-H-6.html#...

In Emacs Lisp: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/eintr/le...

"The let expression is a special form in Lisp..."

Also: limiting the redefinition of standard operators is not backwards, it's useful, to prevent to crash a Lisp, since in Lisp function names are often late bound. -> changing a core function will have immediate effect on all code using that.

Macros are also not "function". Macros are operators which expand source code to new source code.

Lisp typically has these operator types:

* functions, which are operators which get called with evaluated arguments
* macros, which are operators, which get called with source code and which return new source code
* special operators (QUOTE, LET, DEFUN, SETQ, IF, ...), which are typically hard-wired in the implementation with both syntax and semantics. Scheme has a set of those, too.

Additionally one my see fexprs, which are operators, which are called with source code. Then in some Lisps some functions lazy evaluate their arguments.

The glossary of Common Lisp explains "operator": https://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/26_gl...

operator n.
1. a function, macro, or special operator.
2. a symbol that names such a function, macro, or special operator.
3. (in a function special form) the cadr of the function special form, which might be either an operator[2] or a lambda expression.
4. (of a compound form) the car of the compound form, which might be either an operator[2] or a lambda expression, and which is never (setf symbol).

> You can't redefine it

In standard Common Lisp it is UNDEFINED what happens when one redefines a standard operator of Common Lisp. Typical implementations will signal an error (which often provides a restart). Typical implementations will also extend this to other protected packages, such that the user can't accidentally replace an operator and the Lisp system may crash.
Yet any one opinion is just that - one opinion. I find node easy and quick, and some of the ones in your easy list to be easy while others are time-consuming and odd. We're both right - it is all a question of what you are used to.

So for someone just starting out, I agree - just pick one. You'll learn it, it is will make sense, you will be productive, and because you only know one thing everything else will seem weird. If you keep doing things, you'll learn more and then things will seem less weird.
That was 7 months ago. They canceled a free plan for a product. Yes I agree that their communication were bad and didn't give enough warning for people. But how that related and how is that an answer to my question?

Google used to give universities unlimited storage but even with their billions they pulled the plug and left universities in a difficult situation (so did MS later).
HP CEO: Printed Pages Are Down 20% Since Pandemic
It's arguable, WW2 is typically dated from the German invasion of Poland. By then, the war in Asia was already underway with the Japanese fighting in Asia. So with the British Empire, Germans and French and the Soviet Union also starting hostilities, much of the world was at war.
But this part should be more widely remembered:

>The crew manually set the thrust to 84.5% N1 (rather than 92.8% N1 as needed) and continued takeoff. The aircraft rotated about 260 meters prior to the end of the runway and crossed the end of the runway at 10 feet AGL. The crew continued the flight to Las Palmas although whenever they tried to engage autothrust, it disconnected again. The aircraft landed safely in Las Palmas.

10 feet is 3 meters
New Life for a Dying Trade
My friend built one. Details here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvxZvObr2hw
If you use a proprietary format and don't archive the executables to read them, it's simply not reasonable to expect such an archive to last 14 years. Nothing to do with this TOS change. You should have taken action when they started with the subscription model and creative cloud thing. People have been warning about this.

But what were you supposed to do right? Use some software with the eraser in a weird place??

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40607704

It seems to me not worth the tradeoff.
What's with Boeing lately? In the last years I see a lot of news related to crashes and problems with those.

Is it me? I did not take a deep look into the topic.

How does it compare to Airbus security-wise, with the real data from fatal crashes at hand?
I still think it’s about ego as well. If you happen to release a piece of software that is used massively, then you become a “rock star” (well, at least in the scope of the software engineering world). That means, you may not need to work for others anymore (if you get sponsors), or that you boost your employability by 10x (“Oh, he’s the author of X!”), etc.

So there are many devs out there that want to win the jackpot. I don’t blame them.
> At best, ethics are a responsibility shouldered by individual designers; at worst, they aren’t considered at all.

This concept of shouldering bothers me. I imagine a thought process like "as a designer, I am highly influential! I must carry the burden of morality on my shoulders for the good of humanity! (And possibly animals too, it's my duty to decide things like that!) It's all up to me! I'm so important!"

To the extent that this is true, the situation is aggravated by being tasked with designing public works, where pleasing everybody is a fool's errand and opinions cause trouble. But I don't want a designer (perhaps one who has stumbled into wielding government authority) to try to take it all on. I want designers to think about morality, sure, and certainly to do what they personally care about, but not to go shopping for it with a view to "what good can I do here", because that would just be being a do-gooder. If your reaction to discovering that your project has an ethical dimension is to duck and cover, I think you have good instincts.

> we need to make ethics an intentional part of our process. Not just to avoid unintended harm, but also to do good.

But this sounds awful. I don't want designers to be the arbitrators of good, because I don't think they'd be any good at it. Other than the personal beliefs that a designer has been incubating for a lifetime, I don't think other people's moral quandaries are a designer's business, and I don't think they should be encouraged to be bigger-headed.

In fact I don't want anybody to be the arbitrator of good, which is something the article alludes to by mentioning how difficult it is (although it doesn't seem to want to admit that nudge theory exists). I want a marketplace of small, uninfluential decisions and diverse choices by users, not centrally managed megaprojects where the designer has substantial influence on public thought. I want an almost subliminal culture of uncontroversial ethical choices to emerge naturally, so that we all learn to hold ethical values as a result of millions of unimportant design-idiots making foolish choices that may succeed or may be shot down. Fortunately, this is how it already mostly works.
You can also serve JS from github pages for dynamic sites. You just can't host a back-end server or data store.
Your observation on non-optimal random generative mapping misses a crucial point, the key challenge lies in establishing a topological invariant mapping, which ensures that the intrinsic structures and properties of the input data are preserved in the output. This becomes even more complex when dealing with higher-order structures that span multiple modalities.
Let's optimize Running 15× faster with a situation-specific algorithm
Well i don't know about your stack but from what you describe I can definitely suggest 2 solutions. Building a backend for a chat is easy. At my company, a medium based startup, I'm responsible for writing full stack solutions for our clients.

1. firebase real time database. This one is really easy to implement. Using firebase almost completely solves your backend needs. You will mainly need to write the frontend. It comes with easy to use library. You can use it with react, angular, vanilla javascript or any one of the other frontend frameworks. This one is really easy to implement. It basically connect your frontend with a real time publisher/subscriber to the firebase. It's also scalable so you will not need to maintain any server or scale up or down your servers. The pricing is also flexible and you only pay for usage. The downside of firebase is that it might not fit to you stack. I don't know what your stack is but you will might need to fit it to your stack.

2. This one is also easy to implement but will require you to write the backend service. ec2 + Node Js + express server + socket.io + typescript + mongodb/sql/database you already use + s3 as file storage. This one is also easy. setting up socket api on ec2 is really easy. It can easily take 20,000 connections per day with the small ec2 that cost something like $5 to $20 per month. I guess you will need to write something like 600 lines of code to set it up but if you need security + validations + types it will might be 1200 lines. if you are already using AWS it might be better. Again from my experience the t2 can easily take the load. We are currently using this stack to download over 10 million of records every hour and to sync it to our marketing dashboards.

Should you buy?
Well, I don't know what is the costs of buying. I never did research on buying white label chat. I also don't know how good are the chat solutions that are available on the market and I don't know if you will be able to adjust it to your needs or to provide a better experience to your users. Plus you will also need a developer to build the integration.

Should you build?
Definitely build. It’s easy. If you plan to build i guess you will need 1 developer for max 1 month of work (including the frontend and the backend). That is if you already have the ui/ux ready and set in place. So i guess the costs of building is something between $5000 to $15000 (frontend + backend) depending on the developer you hire.

Anyway building a chat app is easy. It's not something tricky. I guess it will take you max 1 month for a finished product. I would definitely choose to build.
> eFuses, maybe? Or a bit of battery-backed SRAM. Lots of devices have a small amount of hardened storage for e.g. encryption keys. FPGAs supporting bitstream encryption and Atmel's ATSHA device line are examples.

To clarify, I was referring to the status quo of current discrete TPM implementations, from a bigger picture perspective, there is certainly room for improvement.

Also I am not sure the current TPM standard is compatible with that idea at all. Operating systems set up their own TPM sessions, so there would need to be secret storage only available to a specific operatings system, e.g. similar to what TPM provides, and we are back to the chicken and egg scenario.
> innocent bystanders as CGNs are deployed

SSH is not HTTPS, a resource meant for the everyday consumer. If you know that you're behind a CGN, as a developer, an admin or a tool, you can solve this by using IPv6 or a VPN.

> Worst case, this will give bad actors the option to lock the original owner out of their own server

Which is kind of good? Should you access your own server if you are compromised and don't know it? Plus you get the benefit of noticing that you have a problem in your intranet.

I understand the POV that accessing it via CGN can lead to undesirable effects, but the benefit is worth it.

Then again, what benefit does it offer over fail2ban?
By the way, to elaborate, I love it because it's really secure when used with yubikeys, it's fully self hosted, it works on all the platforms I use including android and it's very flexible. There's no master password to guess which is always a bit of an Achilles heel with traditional PW managers. Because you have to use it so much you don't really want to have it too long or complex. This solves that while keeping it very secure.

The one thing I miss a bit is that it doesn't do passkeys. But well.
Bracing myself for the next generation of self-important monochrome tech ‘zines coming out of Spain
funny but with a mouse at least only one part of the speech producing parts can be manipulated at any one time. Needs multi user collaboration. After which talented gamers can produce an a cappella concert of some sort.
In another comment you were saying you'd use an LLM to do this. If that is your solution, I'd say that a good percentage of people on HN can do this themselves - what do you have in mind for the tool that would make it a better solution vs. our own engineering?
Different one. That one returned to base immediately, it's not safe to continue with a surging engine.
Always great to see a brr.fyi post on HN.

Living in the south pole is basically like living on an alien planet.
Pretty much anything you'll find recommended can receive mail fine. Consistently delivering it is another job you/I, and most people, probably don't want.

Maybe that Super Important email you sent got delivered. Maybe it didn't. If not, maybe it bounced. Maybe it didn't, and so on.

Life generally doesn't get easier adding services to admin. Especially one as trusting, yet not, as email. IP reputation, blacklists, whims of some remote greybeards, etc.

I've done it before and it went well. Then it didn't and I took stock. Entirely not worth it. Dedicating time to decorate and maintain a trash bin.

All told: I'm entirely happy to pay someone else to host this. I put my sensitive stuff on services I run that are also easier to get consistency out of
Are DC costs more manageable at medium voltages?

If i really wanted 11kV MVDC is this a feasible spec for an industrial site?
Very interesting post, but one question is it really necessary to wrap it in a Sync block? Isn't it synchronous outside the async block?

Sync do
5.times.map do
Async do
...
end
end.map(&:wait)
end
I don't know if you're right or not, but still I'd trust a team with 10 launches of anything behind their back more than a team with their first launch, even if it goes flawless.
It's what Hitler was saying he wanted, Lebensraum for a new German empire by conquering the "inferior" people of Eastern Europe. Western Europe probably didn't expect to be invaded, and who knows what kind of alternative history would have taken place if Britain and France hadn't got involved. Perhaps the Nazi's would never have been satisfied unless they were at war somewhere, or perhaps they would have had their hands full in the east. Nato countries today probably assume that Russia invading Ukraine isn't a prelude for Russia attacking Nato countries.
Something I’ve been doing recently is declaring a variable, writing a comment explaining clearly what the variable actually does, then renaming the variable to reflect the comment. If I have to explain the variable name too much then it’s not a good name.
The engine wear and consequently the risk of engine failure during normal operations goes up with full throttle.

Noise abatement is reducing the throttle when the plane has reached a certain altitude and not relevant for takeoff roll.
God blessed him to be able to die doing what he loved at the ripe old age of 91. Prayers for his family or foundation to be able to keep the flying heritage museum well maintained in his honor.