skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I implemented RabbitMQ based messaging queues as a mechanism to coordinate execution among discrete components of a handful of ambitious laboratory automation systems ~4-8 years ago.

Given a recent opportunity to rethink messaging based architectures, I chose the simplicity and flexibility of Redis to implement stack and queue based data-structures accessible across distributed nodes.

With even a handful of nodes, it was challenging to coordinate a messaging based system and the overhead of configuring a messaging architecture, essentially developing an ad-hoc messaging schema with each project (typically simple JSON objects), and relatively opaque infrastructure that often required advanced technical support led messaging systems to fall out of favor for me.

Kafka seems to be the current flavor of the day as far as messaging based systems, but I don't think I'll ever support a system that approaches the throughput required to even think about implementing something like Kafka in the laboratory automation space - maybe there's a use case for high-content imaging pipelines?

Right now, I'd probably choose Redis for intra-system communication if absolutely necessary, then something like hitting a Zapier webhook with content in a JSON object to route information to a different platform or software context, but I'm not in a space where I'm handling Terabytes of data or millions of requests a second.
StarFive catalog parts use slightly tweaked SiFive cores. So if you were going to license a SiFive core for an embedded design, you may want to have something that uses the catalog part to verify your code will work.

I mean, emulating your core for development is a good approach in general, but at some point you may want to run your code on actual silicon.

So sure, an Intel i9 or ARM Mac is probably going to be faster than a 4 core U74 SoC, but if you're using a RISC-V core for some embedded application, having a RISC-V system to test with is probably a good idea.

And it's cool you can get a RISC-V SBC for a couple hundred bux. It wasn't too long ago that you paid $2k for a 4 core U54 SoC with minimal peripherals. And if you can stuff it in a laptop form factor, it's portable.
This seems quite similar to the Gemini answer.
How about we keep in mind that they're doing both, in parallel:

China intends to build 150 new nuclear reactors between 2020 and 2035, with 27 currently under construction and the average construction timeline for each reactor about seven years, far faster than for most other nations.

with a clear stated long term planned intent for a target mix of solar+nuclear.
While it's true the instructions aren't great and a big botulinum warning should be given for any non-acid preserve process...

This has a really strong "That Happened" feel. In point of fact it's quite hard to culture any given bacteria, almost no one knows rules like this, people engage in all sorts of terrible food safety practices, and the number of actual botulism cases is vanishingly small.

Is it possible this happened? Yes. Is it more likely someone constructed the scenario for reddit karma? Probably.
Fast Crimes at Lambda School
FWIW, in a tight for loop of a million executions of either test 1, [[ 1 ]], true, or :, I get:

test 1 -> 2.70s
true -> 2.55s
: -> 2.25s
[[ 1 ]] -> 2.10s

Like, I don't even have a way to measure the overhead of just the for loop as [[ is faster than that.

But we can do something and see the cost of that: let's do a -z $a when a=. We don't need to quote the $a with [[, but I'll do it both ways:

test -z "$a" -> 3.25s
[[ -z "$a" ]] -> 2.65s
[[ -z $a ]] -> 2.10s

So, sure: it isn't a performance difference that is likely to kill a use case, but it does exist. I also agree that it isn't necessarily worth bothering with... but I just can't get behind something -- using test -- that is both slower and more complex... like, to me, it isn't [[ that has "functionality" that I might not need, it is test: with test I can programmatically decide operators by putting them in variables, while with [[ everything must be syntax. This is an incredible amount of extra power that you get with test that I frankly don't just not need... I actively would prefer not having except in a scant handful of scenarios. It is much easier to glance at a use of [[ and know 100% for sure what it is doing than with test, where you must carefully consider all of the quoting rules, and even then the behavior might be dynamic.
I think that's an incredibly uncharitable interpretation of what GP said.

We already change our behavior around electricity costs and demand: for example, a couple years ago PG&E (California) forced everyone to switch to a time-of-use rate plan where electricity costs go up quite a bit between 4pm and 9pm. You better believe I avoid doing things like laundry or running the dishwasher then, and opt to run them earlier in the day or later at night.

If I had solar (without battery storage), I'd absolutely be running my heavier electric load when the sun's out instead of at night when I have to pay for power. Sure, the ideal would be everything is similarly cheap no matter what time of day, and maybe we'll get there in 75 years or so, but until then, I'm fine continuing to do some time-of-use optimization here and there.
You're going to hire a Google employee?
Yeah, that all sounds like really horrible policy. Landowners in in-demand locations should be taxed heavily if the land isn't being used productively. They sure as hell shouldn't get a tax break for having a vacant lot or storefront.
Well that's where I am heading. but its a failure of society when each person must provide their own utilities.
i was expecting for real life examples
Not really. China is a big country that's virtually empty above its diagonal. The Nederlands on the other hand is all built up. Imagine opening a nuclear storage facility there in contrast to in some Chinese desert. For China, storage of spent nuclear fuel is a non issue.
I think this is typical for software engineers (including myself) to view the world like this: this can't be murder, this is just words, you fell for it yourself. After all words alone are gibberish, the meaning arises in the head of the listener depending on how he interprets them.

However in most countries the justice system works differently. If your neighbor gives you this advice and it kills you, what will matter the most is not the authoritativeness of the advice (he's not a food expert, he was just talking) but the intent. If it also turns out that he had an affair with your wife and mentioned he wants to get rid of you, then he'll very likely go to jail. The "he fell for it and took my advice as if it was authoritative information to be relied upon" defense won't work.

Here (hopefully) the intent is missing. However the whole reasoning that advising partly bears no responsibility for texts it "generates" doesn't work very well.
Yeah, that is needed to make everything more accurate. We are working on 3 related things to make Cody better understand the structure of your code and take feedback from the compiler (and other tools).

All are experimental and not enabled by default, but you can peek at them if you're interested.

1. (experimental) LSP-based context — https://github.com/sourcegraph/cody/pull/3493

2. (experimental) TypeScript tsc context — https://github.com/sourcegraph/cody/pull/3843

3. (experimental) OpenCtx, which can pull in diagnostics from tools outside your editor — https://openctx.org/

And then of course the agent to actually iterate on the generated code based on this feedback.

We're really excited about this stuff, and it'll arrive in Cody when we can get it to a high quality bar and prove it helps.
Note that you've almost certainly spent your time correcting "LLM slop" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40723766
Discussion (762 points, 62 days ago, 366 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40067939
> I can see the price of electricity rising quite a bit across the board, but I don’t think people are going to inconvenience themselves at all to respond to it.

People already do that, and have done so for decades. Many places have different electricity costs for defined peak and off-peak times, and many people absolutely do move their heavy electricity uses outside the peak times when they can.
I don’t know about Europe but the US has been scanning trunk lines of domestic and international calls for decades looking for keywords and actually have decades of archived conversations that AI will make it all the more feasible to comb through and look for thought crimes.
I mostly agree with you - I find LLMs to be very useful in my work, even when I need to verify the output.

But two things I'd highlight:

1. You say you work "in the robotics field", so I'm guessing you work mainly amongst scientists and engineers, i.e. the people who are most specifically trained how to evaluate data.

2. LLMs are not being marketed as this kind of "useful tool but where you need to separately verify the output". Heck, it feels like half the AI (cultish, IMO) community is crowing about how these LLMs are just a step away from AGI.

Point being, I can still find LLMs to be a very useful tool for me personally while still thinking they are being vastly (and dangerously) over hyped.
(US only)

1. Monitor the Mega Millions Jackpot at https://www.megamillions.com/. Wait until it gets to a large-ish value like >$400 million, or if you're extra patient, wait until it surpasses $1 billion (see the history at https://www.megamillions.com/jackpot-history).

2. Once the jackpot is high enough, buy a ticket and select the winning numbers. The trick is to select those numbers before they're announced, otherwise they won't count, because it will already be the next jackpot with different numbers (and a different prize amount).

3. After you win, select the cash option. Unfortunately, you will almost certainly not end up with $1 billion after taxes. However, now that you have hundreds of millions of dollars, you can multiply your fortune through investments to reach $1 billion relatively quickly.

4. With your $100+ million, all you have to do is buy the stocks that are going to rise before they do so, and sell them before they start to fall. After a few months or years doing this, you should have over $1 billion. One nice thing about this strategy is, even after you reach $1 billion, you can continue for as long as you want, and you will not only keep accumulating wealth, but at an exponential rate.
Moral considerations aside, I'm really skeptical of the assumption that following LLM instructions = low IQ.

As always, HN is a very biased audience. Most of us have probably read about how LLMs are the best bullshitters in the world, and we've seen a lot examples like this that prove how little LLMs can be trusted.

But in the general population? I'd bet there's plenty of intelligent people who haven't had the same exposure to LLM critiques and might trust their output out of ignorance rather than lack of intelligence.
I don't really think there's any reason to expect this. I'd look to the USSR - not that they are an ideal to strive for, but because they are relevant on this topic. The USSR was exceptionally over-educated to the point that Russia remains literally the most educated country in the world, at least as of 2014. [1] And the USSR was (largely excepting the Stalin era) also huge on social justice, women's rights, and so on. They even had gender quotas for various government positions. Yet they had a relatively healthy fertility rate up until about the time of their collapse.

In fact when you look at any typical modern fertility correlation explanation, they all really just fall apart under the slightest of scrutiny. Education/income stuff? Look at Thailand - extremely low education, extremely low income, extremely low fertility - even lower than Japan! So what is the real driving factor? It seems clear that if people believe 'true happiness' is just one 'thing' away, then they are motivated to continue chasing those things. Children don't really have a place in this sort of world - as they simply imperil your ability to pursue that sort of perceived happiness. And governments and companies alike have every motivation in the world to push this 'thing based' worldview, consumerism in other words, because it generates income, increases GDP, and so on.

This is the only fertility correlate that explains literally everything in a clean and consistent fashion. For instance the bell curve of income:fertility (very poor and very rich have far more children than the middle class) can be easily explained - both the very poor and very rich are unable to participate in consumerism. The former because of too little money, the latter because they have too much. Thailand? Yes, it's very poor yet there is also rampant consumerism at all levels, and it's even a place when walking into the most mainstream mall in the capitol you're immediately greeted with a literal lambo dealership. And so on for the countless other issues and counter-examples that contemporary fertility correlates fail to explain.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tertiary_...
How JavaScript Is Finally Improving the Module Experience
Two options:

1. People drink water containing let's say 1 part per trillion lead. We test it, we can't measure that, we say it's fine. The people drinking it are in fact fine.

2. People drink water containing let's say 1 part per trillion lead. We test it, we can't measure that, we say it's fine. The people drinking it incur brain damage, but because we can't measure the thing causing it, we don't correlate it with anything.

How do we distinguish these cases?
I don’t have any actual data to inform my feelings (I’m sure it wouldn’t be hard to find), but any time this stuff comes up I have to wonder about the economics of building out the AI, instrumenting a store, building or buying/licensing software for the customers to interface with, the compute, bandwidth, etc…

Versus paying some kid $7 an hour to hit buttons on a screen.

As uninformed as I may be here, my gut says that it doesn’t make a lot of sense.
My testing put the performance a bit shy of an A72 @ 2.4GHz. The U54 was on par with an A53.

I thought I saw someone else publish specmarks to corroborate this assertion, but i can't find it right now.
> You can actually map out the physical processor layout, including on a single die, based on the latency between these cores. It's quite subtle and requires low noise, but it's really cool to map out the grid of cores on the actual silicon due to timing.

This is a very cool comment in general, but I'm intrigued by this bit in particular. I'd love to see an implementation, if anyone knows of any.
They have the right skills for storming the Capitol, unfortunately. And the time to do so.
So, in a way, like this? Someone drove into a river following their GPS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsxpdX2dB4M
Game dev under fire for mandatory sauna sessions
It's total madness. People got violent because iron is toxic (the entire civilization collapsed when it was discovered). Lead and other heavy metals are essential. They got it entirely the other way round, including the measurement of intelligence. Patterns, rules and categories are compensatory mechanisms for the absence of understanding.
I’m sure there is a way to get that to work, but I just tweeted at them instead. Fingers crossed they fix it. I like their articles… (To be fair, I block all their ads and don’t pay them any money.)
The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory doesn’t see much outrage on this forum either, because it also doesn’t exist anymore. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_...

It’s really, really, really difficult to interpret your comment in good faith, can you expand on your question? Otherwise you just come across as trying to poison sentiment analysis algorithms.
I didn't kill this man, your honor. I was just standing out there holding a knife. When he walked in, he stumbled and fell on it six times.
> although lithium is declining currently because EV sales in China have slowed

have they?

'one in three' of all new vehicle registrations in china were electric last year https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2024/trends-in... or 37% https://autovista24.autovistagroup.com/news/ev-registrations... and the absolute number seems to be doubling this year, though they only expect a 45% market share

these figures do include both hybrids and pure battery models, though

in general the 'experience curve' says that things get exponentially cheaper as you produce exponentially more of them
I always wondered how do we get to 'free' energy with our current status quo. As soon as energy prices drop, investment dries off and suddenly future supply disappears (see oil and how many new oil rigs are coming online in the US, see uranium and the current yellow cake shortages)
99%of the people I know and care to communicate with use signal or a group matrix and didn’t really care about the controversy, so I think the effect of what you are talking about is extremely limited in tech circles
High dose dietary Vitamin D allocates surplus calories to muscle instead of fat
Or... Maybe people who buy these things know why they're buying them and raw horsepower isn't their primary concern.
No one expects a computer to be wrong in that way though.

Why would a computer connected to the sum total of all human knowledge just make up answers when it can find the correct answer?

I guarantee no one is going around saying, “Do not trust the output and always check the results”.
I think "simply" is doing a lot of work there. Work that completely overwhelms it.

Building a new nuclear plant is a hugely capital intensive project, not to mention the massive amount of time it takes to complete it and get it fully online.

Places like France (that feed a huge percentage of their demand with nuclear) don't somehow magically have super cheap energy. Nuclear plans cost a lot to build, and a lot to operate.
It's published on GitHub under license ELv2 - Elastic License v2. This does not meet the open source definition, so indeed it's not Open Source. ELv2 is an open source sibling though, closer than many other openish licenses:
https://www.elastic.co/pricing/faq/licensing

Still, Amphi should not claim to be 'Open Source'.
JSON Management Tool
I think you are confusing production costs with selling price.

How much is Insulin in the US?
What magic prevents printed encyclopedia text and images from being AI generated? Surely the same magic could be applied to digital content.
The level chosen seems like a reasonable level to put up a flag. 200ppm is a level where an active gardener could cause excess exposure by growing leafy vegetables-- so that being the point where you warn people there's a potential problem and they should consider where to plant and what to grow.

If you told me my soil lead content was 200ppm, I would change my gardening practices and-- even though it may be a little overprotective-- cover contaminated soils where my kids play most.

(Now, if you told me that only 1/8th of homes would be affected if you set the level to 250ppm, maybe I'd say 250ppm would be a more appropriate level to balance the number of people warned; but if it's not a huge increment in the number warned, 200ppm seems appropriate-- that is, the tradeoff isn't just between direct harms and direct benefits but also, as grandparent seems to state, in helping people judge relative levels of risk accurately).
> "tailoring the hardware for specific languages"

"hardware" in quotes. A bunch of the machines had no/little language specific hardware. For example an Xerox Interlisp-D machine was the same hardware like the Smalltalk or Mesa system. The microcode was different. The microcode provided the instruction set and then the machine would boot either into the corresponding operating systems for Interlisp, Smalltalk or Mesa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star

Similar for the MIT CADR and some others, it was also a microprogrammed 32bit CPU.

Symbolics' CPU were also microprogrammed, but they added hardware features to it.

The SPUR (which is a RISC chip) mentioned is a more generic design, but with support for languages features for Lisp. There were other chips in the making at that time, like the Symbolics Sunstone CPU, which was also a RISC design for Lisp, but which also did not reach the market.

> Take Java for an example: it's possible to implement the JVM as a chip, but then you have a stack machine, and you can't JIT it onto a register architecture.

One could do that, but it would be a more complex chip.

For Lisp CPUS "fast" for benchmarks was also not that much a goal. Goals oftenwere "fast" execution of a Lisp operating system (written in a dynamically typed and garbage collected language), support for large address spaces, support for Lisp data types&data representation, generic operations (like generic arithmetic operations) and compact machine code.
I mean it’s not nix but it’s been fine for me. I’ve a typical setup. Python Java etc. I install things via brew and don’t look back. Pyenv for version mgmt.

Nixpkgs might be a better alternative if you’re really looking for multi version for everything.
initially thought this was going to be a bunch of Freenet or blockchain type projects, but it's not at all. it's quite the assortment, some of it pretty micro and unsexy but important. eg: improving touchscreen configuration and calibration, or security tooling for vehicle OBD2 ports.

nice to see projects like this getting funded. we need more devs doing this kind of work but expecting them all to build a business out of their work or to be a fundraiser in addition to project maintainer (in addition to having a day job and a life) isn't realistic.
I can't see the slightest reason for you to raise the topic you raised in this post's context. You could have made your broad point with a thousand other examples. I'm down voting you on trolling/derailing.

Plus don't tell me what to do.
Well the police aren’t going anywhere and they are the ones pushing for this tirelessly. This is everything to them to make their power (and politicians) absolute. They will have dirt on everyone if you can’t have private conversations at all. Even if it’s not illegal they will find something immoral to destroy your life. Allowing police (the government) to become nearly omniscient is a very very bad idea.
I do not use bash for scripting^1 but I prefer to use "if test" rather than "if [". Same reason: legibility.

However I continue to see shell scripts from what I believe are probably competent scripters, i.e., scripts in tarballs of software from authors I trust, and they almost always seem to prefer using "[". Wondering if there is a reason or it is purely style.

1. Bash is too big and slow for scripting. The bash author admits it is "too big and slow" in the manpage. The world's most popular Linux distribution does not use bash as its scripting shell; it uses something smaller and faster derived from NetBSD Almquist shell. For scripting, there are more efficient shells for scripting than bash.

NB. Nothing against bash. As an experiment I have been using busybox bash as an interactive shell. Normally I use NetBSD ash. I like the way busybox bash does not keep duplicates in history and its command search is quick. But like its full-sized counterpart it is too slow for scripting. Using busybox to do scripting is so slow that it is bascially useless for anything but the smallest scripts.
The new first non-cellular 5G standard DECT NR+ does support mesh. You can use this portable Starlink mini as a backhaul access link to the Internet in remote or rural areas together with DECT NR+ [1].

[1] DECT NR+: A technical dive into non-cellular 5G:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39905644
>> Code as ETL was a huge industry shift

No it’s not. Try and see what banks, retail, manufacturing, various large enterprises still use. They need scale, observability, modularity, and maintainability.
I'm sitting on just under 40MH/s on an M1 Pro with a multithreaded Rust implementation I whipped up. I doubt I can go much faster without using the GPU.