skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> This reply just raises all sorts of questions.

Yes. All of those questions are open areas of research in the foundations of QM. There are no generally accepted answers to them, although of course each individual QM interpretation has its own set of preferred answers, and physicists who prefer a particular interpretation will often talk as though their preferred answers are generally accepted--but they're not.

> which MWI claim contradicts observation?

The fact that we observe measurements to have single results. The MWI claims that every measurement has all possible results, but that this fact is in principle unobservable. That makes the MWI unfalsifiable.
Yeah. I’d be very cautious about the Middle East and some other specific locations including a lot of Africa. But I’d have very few concerns about Eastern Europe with obvious exceptions.
> I don’t disagree with any of that but that’s a different problem which should be directly addressed

I think most people here will probably agree with that (myself included!), but I suspect the disagreement is about whether that's a convincing argument against this policy given the political reality that reforming healthcare as a whole is not feasible at the moment and won't likely be any time soon. Trying to reform healthcare right now would require passing in the Senate (meaning either a supermajority voting for it or the majority party eliminating the filibuster), the House (which currently is not controlled by the same party as the Senate and the White House and unlikely to agree with them on any healthcare laws), signed by the president, upheld by the Supreme Court when it inevitably gets challenged, and then not repealed subsequently by a later presidential administration and Congress.

The part that people disagree with you on isn't whether this proposal is the best possible way to handle the issue of people unfairly having medical debt; it's whether doing nothing until the entire healthcare system gets overhauled would be letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Complexity. It's now playing catch up trying to support all of these different chips with all of these different peripherals, capabilities, and errata in quick succession.

As a developer, it's much more difficult to navigate when there are 8 files with the same name, 5 registers with the same name defined in different files, etc. A lot of code is heavily punctuated by ifdefs to selectively include and exclude lines for different targets, making it more difficult to follow. Intellisense struggles, no matter how well it's configured.

I could deal with all that but it's the runtime cost that is the worst. ESP-IDF is constantly getting bigger and slower. All of these abstractions, structs half-full of pointers being handed about at runtime, dead code being linked in for features the chip doesn't even support, it all has a cost.

This is even worse in binary blobs where conditional compilation is more difficult to do. I'm not convinced they're even trying though. A single commit that only mentioned WiFi 6 changes increased my binary size by over 10kB. On a chip that doesn't support WiFi 6.
You can't sync Obsidian without paying. This syncs for free right?
How did this bus cross the English Channel?
> Holy shit you are a fucking moron. I posted direct links to everything.

Holy shit you are a fucking moron! None of your links say anything about Apple's new services.

I think it's safe to say we're not going to find common ground here. You have a nice day.
Yes! And the best part of that feature:

> Andy had given Kelly a rough idea of how we were getting so much detail through the system: spooling. Kelly asked Andy if he understood correctly that any move forward or backward in a level entailed loading in new data, a CD “hit.” Andy proudly stated that indeed it did. Kelly asked how many of these CD hits Andy thought a gamer that finished Crash would have. Andy did some thinking and off the top of his head said “Roughly 120,000.” Kelly became very silent for a moment and then quietly mumbled “the PlayStation CD drive is ‘rated’ for 70,000.”

> Kelly thought some more and said “let’s not mention that to anyone” and went back to get Sony on board with Crash.
i got caught up in this B.S… literally got the rate locked T-Mobile account because of lifetime rate lock. then last year they sent me “opt-out” notification that my guaranteed rate was increasing unless I send a certified letter or some stupid shit. I dumped them the next week because i don’t have time in my life to play fuck-fuck games with shady companies. I hope there’s a class action lawsuit, I would gladly get on board.
Fun fact, but I doubt anyone on HN still lives in San Francisco.
It's kind of beautiful how largely unreadable this is, yet how the critical part is completely unchanged.
> it's card issuer's problem if they still authorize those biometrics-authenticated transactions afterwards.

Isn't it the reverse, with the issuer declining fraud allegations as they can "prove" you originated the transaction ?

That's the building block of 3DSecure and other additional authentication, where the merchant is protected from chargebacks in exchange for pushing stronger check on the customer.
Sounds like this is a personal problem.
> traditional collapse theories have a bunch of trouble setting up clear lines of what macroscopic is, how collapse actually occurs, etc. that do not seem to have easy resolutions

All of this is true. But none of it makes it "obvious" that the Schrodinger equation must always be exactly correct and that one should be "dumbfounded" (your word) that any interpretation (like Copenhagen) that says otherwise has any proponents at all. Yes, "collapse" is an obvious open question that hasn't been resolved. But the belief that some way of resolving it will eventually be found that doesn't require accepting the MWI is a perfectly reasonable belief to hold, and an interpretation like Copenhagen is a perfectly reasonable interpretation for people to use in the interim while we search for such a resolution.
Like you don't even have to know all that much and the bar is crazy low. Even if your diet is absolute garbage it's unlikely you're actually deficient in anything.

I've just been accumulating daily supplements from dr recommendations over the
years — the good fish oil for my dry eyes, b12 because I don't eat much meat, high-dose turmeric because mild jaw inflammation, d3 because I'm light sensitive and don't go out in the sun enough, and a women's multivitamin.

I don't really think about my diet at all outside of roughly total calories and haven't gotten a bad bloodwork yet.
A label on packaged foods would be great. But in the mean time, you can use the database [1] to look up the classification of many products.

[1] https://world.openfoodfacts.org/
Sure, but it's LLM - so this would be mix of some of the real defects (but not all of them) and a totally fake defects which do not actually need fixing. This is not going to help junior developers figure out good from bad.
Literally every single thing you reason about is something happening in space-time.
I wish I new how that article got to 80k for a house in 1955.. I couldn't find a link to trust "interactive visualisation" they're citing and Google didn't help me either.

I wasn't born then, so no personal experience and everything I could find pointed more towards 5-10k, i.e. this advertisement

https://i.redd.it/75sc90f58qsa1.jpg

That'd be safely below 100k, inflation adjusted... Actually, maybe that 80k is already inflation adjusted? The number is pretty close
I don't understand the move. Seems it would be ultimately cheaper(support, potential legal, churn, etc) and harbor more good will to just flag these old accounts and leave them alone.

Most companies I've dealt with in the past just leave these older plans alone to rot, and try to motivate people off of them with new plans, new features, faster speeds, phone deals, etc. Not just arbitrarily deciding to jack up prices because "technically we're allowed to."
We dedicate so much to the ones who perish along the way. I'm not saying we recollect everyone but it's not that they aren't known.

Being more nomadic than my peers, I have felt that rural parts of many places are much safer than cities. People are welcoming in ways we have forgotten.
never worked on ubuntu 22.04, I had to use xorg for that.
> I’d like to be able to blame this on some kind of medical problem, but I think mostly I just stayed up late playing Counterstrike too much.

I love this quote! I wish I could blame my poor sleep hygiene on anything but myself lol
For the last 10(ish) years I've been using Greenshot [1]. I haven't found any issues with it but it is only available on Windows and Mac.

[1] https://getgreenshot.org/
That screen saver ate some serious CPU time! My first job was writing software designed to be run by primitive RF handheld devices via a telnet session to a Windows NT Server (running MSSQL). It was a light weight enough application, written in C, doing some database hits, user picks some options etc. More less a directed CRUD app for inventory management.

Well... there were performance problems when the system would get really slow at the factory site. The boss guy over there would always get the reports and go look at the logs from the main machine. He'd always come back and say "Looks fine to me!" and indeed it did - he touched the machine and stopped the screen saver. Boss guy just assumed the floor workers reporting the problem were lazy and didn't want to use the inventory system (he was correct but that wasn't the issue).

One day I was on site and I saw that running pipes everywhere and it hit my young, stupid, naive mind that was our performance problem. I changed it to a blank screen and the problem never repeated.
Is it possible for AI to be like this in the future?
Given the current trend of companies developing increasingly large language models, with the goal of creating a single model that can do it all and surpass human-level performance, it is worth considering an alternative future scenario. In this scenario, models are micro-sized and highly specialized, capable of performing only a few specific tasks.

These micro-models are independent and can run on CPUs, with a high degree of automation that allows them to identify problems and dynamically combine with other micro-models to complete larger tasks.

This approach would allow for the creation of flexible model ensembles that can be easily disassembled into their constituent micro-models."
> kayktn

I cannot figure out how to pronounce this in one syllable. It looks like it should be pronounced "caked in".
> then medical debt would become even less valuable to collectors, and hospitals will struggle to sell off unpaid accounts

Medical debt is already heavily discounted given its abysmal collection rates. Papering over that by pretending something that trades at pennies is worth face value strikes me as a useless fiction to continue propagating.

> have to make up the difference elsewhere, and raise prices further

Medical debt trades at a nickel to a dime on the dollar [1]. This isn’t a meaningful difference.

[1] https://www.solosuit.com/posts/how-much-collection-agencies-...
I think you're now shifting from your original claim that games were always a part of PC sales, which I disagree with, and a cursory review of market share supports my stance, to now focusing on 1993 and beyond. To that end I think the article is fair to point out that DOOM was programmed to run on computers that did not have the kind of hardware support for gaming that many other home computer systems had, and because of that techniques had to be carefully engineered to get such games to run on them.

Consider that many of the games you mentioned such as Lemmings, Prince of Persia, and Sim City were not even released on the PC originally and were ported to the PC often times years after their initial release.

In 1990 PCs including clones made up only 15% of market share, whereas by 1994 they made up over half of the home computer market share. The 90s were a wild time and a lot of things changed over a small period of time.
I sort of think there are other things still at work here.

People still live near infrastructure (although requirements change)

Maybe 1000 years ago, they probably lived near a port, water source and source of food.

Nowadays we have efficient transport with semis and container ships, but I would imagine that there are still things like say power infrastructure, sources of commerce and schools and even internet that make living practical and affordable.

I'll bet as we can do distributed living practically (PV+batteries, wells/septic , starlink and amazon) that maybe more things are possible.
> These guarantees rely entirely on trust in the hardware but it's not your hardware.

This exactly the problem that "trusted computing" is designed to solve.

I'd encourage you to read for example the AWS Nitro Enclave outline here: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/confidential-computing....

Nitro enclaves are similar in that they are designed to stop AWS operators from having access to the compute, even though it isn't owned by you.
you need to buy the frequency you use. They are not for sale.
While not mentioned in the article, it’s worth mentioning that this also coincided with T-Mobile’s acquisition of Sprint. Specifically, T-Mobile made assurances that the acquisition would lower prices. Instead, within a couple years they exercised their newfound market power to increase prices a fair amount. The merger should have never been authorized.
Ah, you're right, apologies for not reading your comment more carefully.
They may be the same absolute size, but they're not even remotely same proportion.
I think you are approaching this from the wrong direction.

Small complex long-term effects in humans are fundamentally inaccessible to the kind of science that collects and analyzes data. Either the necessary data cannot be collected at all, or collecting it would be too expensive, time-consuming, and/or unethical to be worth it.

When the truth is inaccessible, science focuses on establishing the boundaries of what can be known. You collect the data that can be collected and see what can be determined from that. Or you reuse data that already exists and try to make new justifiable conclusions from that.
You cannot metabolize calories if you don’t have the nutrition that powers the enzymes that metabolize those calories and turn them into ATP.
I am not young at all. My question is about how you interpret cross sectional estimation of probability for an individual who only lives once.
The fundamental problem here is that courts bend over backwards to allow fine print that contradicts the plain reading of how advertisements and services and presented. Unfortunately, the only way it's ever going to change in the US is if somehow a Supreme Court is appointed that's far less business-friendly than it has been in possibly ever.
I dont have much dishes, because I eat my gruel directly from the pot. But €150 dishwasher was the greatest investment lately. Finally all tools, shoes and bicycle parts could be freed from the eternal grease and grime.
> it's not likely that all of the data involved in a computation is happening inside a single instance of particularly secure and hardened hardware.

Actually it is. Read their docs on what they do linked below.
Oh no, we have lost another giant! Very few people in the world know the gratitude she is owed. I doubt Nvidia and the other fabless companies would exist without her contribution. I met her through DARPA in 2018 [ref] and I later reached out for advice when I started a company in 2020. She was kind and generous with her time in all of our interactions. Beyond her technical prowess, she really understood people. The community/collabroation aprpach she used to launch the VLSI revolution in the 1970's are worth studying.

RIP

[ref] https://youtu.be/W_cB8VYunY8?si=9M9QVmBipbKUXxMR&t=1414
That's so cool!!!Thanks for your wonderful job!
The society may benefit over long term, I agree.
I am not sure about the individuals.
There's no difference in distance between Latvia/Estonia (NATO members) and Ukraine.

NATO threat to Russia is internal fear-mongering propaganda and I have no idea why Mearsheimer and others talk about it with a serious face. We're not in the middle of 20th century anymore.

On one hand we have EU/US/NATO intelligence saying Kiev will fall in 72 hours to the 2nd best army in the world.

And then on the other hand we must believe Mearsheimer that Putin really fears that EU/US/NATO would start a war out of the blue with a country that has 45% of world's nuclear arsenal in the middle of Europe?

Give me a break.

No one sane in Europe is interested to start a war with Russia.

Europe and especially Merkel have spent the last few decades turning Russia into an important trading partner and tying them heavily into the European market. This worked well for them with the economic union post World War 2 (that turned into the European Union) which stopped wars in Europe for almost a century.

Similar approach was taken with Russia, but sadly it didn't work.

Russia has every right to fear NATO and make plans around it. But to say Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO (or nazis) is nonsense.

I don't believe you'll even find any Russian opposition/anti-government journalist/scientist/economist or politician talk the "NATO threat" reasoning seriously. They know what Putin has been doing to their country for the last 20+ years, and it has nothing to do with NATO.
At least in open source, I would claim that it's a result of volunteers doing the work for fun, which necessarily means they follow the dopamine: implementing someone else's work is not nearly as fun as figuring out a problem for yourself.
countless of problems in the world are underspecified in exactly this way, that is effectively what common sense reasoning is. Or what Charles Sanders Peirce called abductive reasoning, making a sensible best guess under conditions of uncertainty.
I don't understand the fascination with blur. It's terrible from a security/privacy perspective. The data is still in the image. Sure you can add randomization to the blur to make it less easy to undo(I haven't looked if Flameshot does or not, most don't). If you crop the stuff you want out of the image, there is no data there to do anything with.

Every screenshot tool I've ever come across has a blur tool but no cut tool. So I just use the OS specific screenshoter and then load it up in an image editor and cut to my hearts content.
> What do you think it would feel like to observe a measurement to have multiple results simultaneously?

I have no idea.

> do you think MWI predicts any branch of the wavefunction would exist in which a human would be experiencing that sensation?

No. As you say, the MWI claims that in each branch of the wave function, the human experiences a single result of a measurement.

However, that is completely different from the way QM normally treats individual branches of the wave function in an entangled superposition, which is what we are talking about--"measurement" in the MWI is just an interaction that entangles a "measured system" with a "measuring device" (and eventually with "the brain of a human who looks at the measuring device to read off its result") and results in an entangled superposition of all of those subsystems. Normally, in individual branches of an entangled superposition of multiple subsystems, each subsystem has no well-defined state at all. Only the full system, including all branches of the superposition, has a well-defined state.

That would imply that in the case of a "measurement", the measuring device in each individual branch, and the brain of the human that looks at it, would have no well-defined state at all. It would not imply that in each branch, the measuring device and the brain of the human that looks at it has a well-defined state that corresponds to a particular measurement result being recorded and observed.

In terms of your "feel like", the way QM normally treats individual branches of the wave function in an entangled superposition, it should not "feel like" anything in any individual branch. The human should only "feel like" something, if at all, in the full wave function, containing all the branches. And of course nobody has any idea what it would "feel like" in such a state--but it clearly would not "feel like" having observed a particular result of a measurement.

> I'm not sure which hoops you think MWI needs to jump through to match our subjective experience.

It needs to explain why, somehow, when a "measuring device" or a human observer is involved, the way QM treats individual branches of entangled superpositions drastically changes. See above.
A spreadsheet is lisp under the covers. Be it =IF(test, then, else) or (if test then else) - that's just syntax of a functional language dialect.
From time to time I merge PR in Racket, and they need a rebase or a tiny tweak. In those case I post a closing comment like

> Thanks! Merged in 67b421.

So the author can find the final version merge in the main branch.
FYI - It's dishonest to keep changing your comment.
Ditched T-Mobile last month, disgruntled AF over the rate hikes.
Helium gives me the same exact service experience at 1/4 the monthly cost.
Wow, 4 citations. I feel happy for Lynn that she ended up doing a lot more impressive work, but definitely this should be restored to its proper place in the history of computing.

Something doesn't quite compute here though - according to Wikipedia after she announced her intent to transition Lynn was fired in 1968, but this paper was from 1966 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40650635 also does not have any information. Maybe at least someone shielded her for some time?

Also Francis Allen seems to have worked on the same project at IBM - she mentioned there were works by other women that other people (Turning award winners IIRC) took credit of - could Lynn's work be one of those? Really hope Fran and Lynn would at least knew each other.
OpenAI ex-employees worry about company's control over their shares
> What’s the politically infeasible but effective solution

Proper published pricing, for starters. If the price isn’t properly published and price wasn’t agreed upon ex ante, the bill should be dismissible. (It’s technically the law, but compliance is miserable.)
Wild that telnet isn’t installed by default on modern Macs. Times have changed.
Really well done, enjoyed it.
> Why is one interaction measurement-like in nature, but not the other?

The mirror reflects all the energy of the photon whereas the photodiode absorbs the energy and its state is altered by it. How nature knows the difference is a deep question. Presumably the rules governing nature ensure this consistency. What that looks like is anyone's guess.

>I would have said that quantum erasure experiments make by far the most sense if you consider measurement to never happen

I agree, but then this interpretation comes with the exponentially growing cost of actual branching. In my view, this rationally must be the interpretation of last resort, for reasons stated in the other threads.
Tom Mueller also mentioned how he had like 20+ direct reports. The organization is _extremely_ flat with almost no middle managers.
Thanks to this guy, those who have contributed to his discovery/these meds, and dieting+exercise, I've been able to cut my cholesterol down in two months, from 203 to 110. Thank you Mr. Endo, and may you rest in peace