skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When we are judge and party, it’s easier to come with the scoring scale that put ourself on the top of the board.

If intelligence definition is not imposed on us by nature itself, then we can only conclude that we are indeed great at producing evaluation scales that will flatter our egos. I guess many other animals are also very good at that game though.

If you take "survival of the fittest" (species, not individuals, should I recall?) as the criteria, then we measurably can’t bluster anymore. Many other species survived for far longer than we did, and maybe will outlast us after we finished to disturb so much the environment condition on which our lives depend.
I really like this metaphor of provisioning architecture and staying clear of dead ends. I'd say dead ends come not just from bad quick design decisions but also from wrong predictions (in the scenario you describe where it's hard to tell what the long term looks like ---which is most of the times).

> awesome designers are great at predicting where the architecture will be and at forward-provisioning it.

And this matches the No Silver Bullet conclusion.
> It's noticeable how few computer wargames simulate any of this, instead allowing for frictionless high speed micromanagement.

Friction is simulated in many computer games, the problem is that taking it too far would make them unenjoyable or too niche. Remember they are games first and simulations second (with exceptions; precisely the ones that are too niche).

Friction in computer games is simulated in multiple ways:

- The most obvious one: randomized results. Your units do not do a set damage nor do they always succeed, but instead the PRNG plays a role (e.g. most combat rolls in most wargames, but also whether a missile launched within parameters tracks or fails to in DCS).

- Fog of war: many wargames do not show areas you haven't explored or where you do not have scout units.

- Morale: many wargames simulate morale, units may break if sufficiently scared (e.g. the Total War games do this) and some may even rush to charge without your command, jeopardizing your plans (e.g. Total War, Warhammer: Dark Omens). In the Close Combat series, your soldiers may become demoralized or even refuse to follow orders if you order them to walk through enemy fire or take too many casualties.

- Some have external unpredictable hazards jeopardizing your unit (e.g. sandworms in Dune II).

And many others. So wargames do attempt to model friction; the problem is that if you make this too extreme, the game stops being fun for the majority of players. The illusion of control is an important aspect of gameplay.
In my opinion it was so before the American smartphones took the prevalent market share.
It's just magazines and TV. But in 2024.
You’re not tougher if you’re harming yourself or others to cope.
Show HN: An open-source tool that cleans tables using LLMs
Hello! Our recent project helps engineers automatically clean tables using LLMs. The outputs are SQL/YAML codes (for dbt) and an HTML page for summaries.
An online service is available to try it out. Just upload a CSV and get the results in 10 minutes.
Let me know your feedback. Thanks!
It’s his job to build relationships and trade favors. I don’t see how it contradicts the majority of publicly written opinion about him.
SUSE Company is launching a new generative AI platform called SUSE AI Solutions
> ...the actual distribution of the service time - it is not a constant.

I'm concerned by the number of misunderstandings expressed in short time here.

1. Nobody claims service time is constant.

2. Little's law is one of the few parts of queueing theory that remarkably does not depend on service time distribution.

3. Many results for typical simplified M/M/c systems apply well also to any other service time distribution provided (a) arrivals are Poisson, and (b) the server uses time slicing multiprocessing. These are not very severe requirements, fortunately!

Long-term average sounds restrictive but it really just means a period long enough to exhibit some statistical stability. Most systems I see sit mainly in those regimes.
If you enjoy fiction I urge you to read Blindsight by Peter Watts. One of the central concepts in the plot is "what if consciousness were unnecessary for intelligence"? Along the way it explores all sorts of angles on consciousness and cognition.

Still ranks as one of the best SF works I've read this century.
Indeed. One should always disable extension auto updating. Besides that, there’s not really any less security than NPM packages. It’s the open secret of the whole industry that we just open ourselves to RCE every day because the alternative (vetting dependencies) is too annoying.
If you are stuck in this situation open a chat with support and ask to cancel with the reason "My new employer is paying for my Adobe subscription" to get the cancellation fee waived.

I can't guarantee it still works but it worked for me and at least 3 others I know of

Adobe deserves to get slapped down for this practice and I hope they are forced to change it, but something to try in the meantime
My claim is _not_ that this work is not useful. But however "great" your work is, misleading on the steps you took during your experiments and overselling your results is never a valid approach in research.
Doubtful tbh, at least in the context of the article. The problem for games that simulate war (or any other environment with "friction") too closely is not that the AI is not good enough, it's that such environments are just inherently not "fun" and thus not good material to make games out of.

Games work on a tight gameplay loop where the player can have feelings of agency (they can influence what happens at all) and mastery (they can get better at influencing what happens with practice). For this you need to have a relatively predictable relation to actions and outcomes. Having the game randomly lose the orders you give to a unit without any feedback is kinda the opposite of that.
The idea that everyone prior to contemporary times was harming themselves or others to cope is nonsense.
A new RISC-V Mainboard from DeepComputing
There were a few cases where Apple's Sherlocking resulted in an inferior version being included in the OS, but managed to kill the original anyway. For example:

- Konfabulator vs Dashboard (only caught up to Konfabulator with widgets in Sonoma)

- Growl vs. Notifications Center (I think Growl is still more configurable even now).
I'd check your numbers on that from 30 years ago. They weren't even in the same universe of selectivity as they are now. Full-time/part-time is totally irrelevant. What, are you the most elitist credentialist of all time lol? Jesus.
I thought America loved hidden fees
Near enough exactly this
brilliant.org is the site of that sort that's always mentioned at the end of a bunch of engineering channels. I tried it and it wasn't really my thing, but it sounds like just what you're looking for.* I just didn't like it because it's TOO interactive (requiring click after click after click, with many simple questions in between), but it's good for learning something you know nothing about.

Also, ChatGPT is actually pretty good at coming up with quizzes like this. Example: https://chatgpt.com/share/dea5ca58-358c-4030-bb28-fb7706ea35...

-----------

* Here are some referral codes for Brilliant if you want to sign up (no affiliation to me). They all do the same thing, give you a 20% discount and help sponsor a engineering or science YouTuber (of your choice):

https://brilliant.org/practicalengineering

https://brilliant.org/veritasium

https://brilliant.org/realengineering

https://brilliant.org/theb1m

https://brilliant.org/fern
I suppose you could generate an alternate view (maybe someone has?) that doesn't show the individual satellites, but instead only shows little green/yellow/red flashes whenever satellites cross within some radius of one another.
The Gaia Sausage the Major Collision That Changed the Milky Way Galaxy
> The average kid living in NYC a century or two ago was exposed to many more repulsive things on a daily basis than anything social media can come up with today.

I don’t even need a citation here, I’m just curious what you’re imaging when you say this.
tHNanks for writing down this!

(so it seems putting two stochastic processes on top of each other is not like putting two "solid" things on top of each other, right? intuitively they mesh, I guess their stacking height is their "expected value"?

and their worst case will be the sum of their worst cases, where there's no averaging, right? so again intuitively a the larger a flow is the more dangerous is, even if it's smooth, because if it backs up it fills up queues/buffers faster, so to plan for extreme cases we still need "linear" thinking)
Ask the Therac-25 patients if the difference between electron beans and X-rays is important
Krebs said that some malware checks for a cyrillic keyboard to try and geo target outside of the country of operation. This seems to be the same type of thing.

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/05/try-this-one-weird-trick...
I totally agree. The authors have found a security vulnerability in a mechanism that wasn’t even trying to protect the software from attacks. I don’t see any relevance in this paper except being a good exercise
I appreciate the explanation. The argument that China can't throw you in jail is technically correct but ignores all of the things that they can do to you. They won't throw you in jail they only seek to erode and nullify the West.

I'm not worried about jail as much as I'm worried about surveillance of my friends and family for profile building, blackmail, staging cyber attacks on power grids and water treatment, and harassing journalists to name a few. They can and are currently doing those things on a massive scale.
The other cohort mentioned is Överkalix:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96verkalix_study
Paraphrased here in 2 minutes by Milton Friedman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67tHtpac5ws
Or write silly messages on an Internet forum.
You are right, some games, especially multiplayer ones will refuse to work in the VM to prevent cheating, but this is, of course, the business decision on their side. You can always construct the software in such a way that when it detects something suspicious on the system it ceases to function: some copy protections looked up for change in the network card hardware id as developers presumed it is highly unlikely someone will change network interface, but that stopped to be common, when people started using on-board interfaces that change with every motherboard change.

There is also a difference when using commercial stuff such as vmware instead of qemu or virtualbox as open source is more suitable to be tailored to the specific thing, in this case, cheating.

In the end, this approach works well for slowing done malware as there is less risk for normal software to allow working inside of vm in contrast to malware that should be coded to be extra paranoid in order to avoid as many tar pits as possible.
I genuinely sympathize with the developers. You put your heart and soul into a project (not to mention years and money), and wake up to find the rug pulled out from beneath you. It can be crushing. The only thing I can say is that this is common across all industries. Capitalism offers the potential reward of big profits, but carries big risks. There’s no way around it.

As a founder, always be thinking about that moat and plan for the day you do have competition. If you’re building something of value that demonstrates success you will have competition at some point, and probably from someone bigger than yourself. That’s the nature of life. Fortunately, a rising tide often lifts all boats, so a big competitor can help address the biggest challenge most companies face: capturing mindshare. Think of how you can survive and even flourish in this bigger ocean, be it through better marketing, more advanced features, or addressing more specific use cases in a larger market.
Missing from this article is the correlation between train length and use of sidings when opposing trains need to pass.

It’s well known the reason Amtrak sucks is because freight trains run on the same tracks and their sidings are too short, relative to the length of the trains, to prevent freight-caused delays on most Amtrak lines. Avg. passenger rail speeds in the US peaked in the 1880’s iirc.

If you simply can’t use a siding because your train is too long, I can see a derailment becoming more likely.

There may also be loading fatigue contributions, similar to higher speeds and harder tires making semi trucks responsible for 90+% of US highway wear. The longest trains no doubt run on a minority of busiest routes, so there is less risk of derailment with shorter trains on the plurality of routes. In essence, it’s not that the derailed train is too long, it’s that the previous train is too long, causing the track to wear out too fast.
It's crazy to think that $29.5m x $19.99 (old smallest price) is $589m. That's just a starting point for revenue. Wild.
In Apple terms an app is a unit of software sold in the App Store.

F.lux had all the hallmarks of any other tweak-style standalone application. Prefs, launcher, icons, update channel, etc

It was so good and groundbreaking that it was adopted by every OS. Victim of it’s own success
Hows that fantasy working out for you?

Where is the evidence?

Meritocracy is a capitalist belief system and is essential to resolving cognitive dissonance:

It lets the "have it all" winners feel morally justified in stepping over the "have not" losers.
That's such a nonsense argument; one could apply the same argument to Amazon's products by using their third-party sellers to do product research for them. Why even try to invent a better vacuum cleaner if both Chinese copycats and Amazon itself will eat your pie? This is clearly monopolist and anti-competitive behavior.

I'm sure we'd have many more VCs investing in such industries if they'd believe there's any money to be made there, but there isn't because Amazon will eat whatever margin there is.

It's so stupid that I recognized that this would happen more than a decade ago and had a free ride on Amazon stocks that likely most VCs never did, even with ZIRP.

Apple, Amazon, and others are clearly abusing their market position. Governments should regulate those companies so they can only operate in their area of interest.

Apple shouldn't be allowed to make apps, only to publish APIs that would make it possible to make more interesting apps. If you've ever tried making apps, you'd know how limited what they offer in comparison to the data and possibilities your phone has. Check their phone usage API as an example, it's virtually null. They'll keep using the excuse that they can handle your data better than third party apps, all their narrative is about making them bigger.
For those of you who think we have crappy definitions for things like Intelligence, Consciousness, Sentience, or even just Existence, I invite you to ponder Joscha Bach's thoughts on these subjects: https://youtu.be/cs9Ls0m5QVE?si=E2TKfnuV8tXo4J_3
I’m not sure if the python tiktoken library has the cl200k tokenizer for gpt-4o, but I would imagine it does. So this library does support gpt-4o at least.
Modos laptop?
False Claims Act of 1863
There are projects for this, but right now Moore's law is still shuffling along well enough that by the time you'd get to market general processors will still be better, remembering that you need on the order of $1b to design a modern CPU.

Once it's truly dead pushing more features into silicon will the be only way we can get speedups and this will become a major research area again.
"you will also receive free updates until such a time Version 3 is released!"

This is what stops me. I've experienced too many instances of a full version upgrade with a sunset on previous versions.
Hi, Jason - I'm Andrew, one of Adieuu's cofounders. Totally valid point re:transparency. We've been in stealth for a bit and just launched our waitlist a couple days ago, shared it with a few friends, etc. We weren't expecting to start blasting things out for a few weeks, we're still setting up our company's site, LI, etc. Was definitely not expecting it to end up on HN this quick before we had our stuff up, this is a total surprise to me. What you said about transparency is exactly what I was thinking when we published the waitlist (horrible irony in preaching tranparency and not having a web presence yet), but figured we had a bit more time to get things up before people started seeing it. Lesson learned.

I'm adding some info about Adieuu below in the meantime - happy to answer other questions you might have. There's a couple things we're still a little quiet on til we get close to launch, but as much as possible I'm happy to be an open book.

re: selling data: We worded it this way because we haven't run the copy by any attorneys and I wasn't sure what all fell under "selling data". To be clear on the spirit/intent of the wording - we have no intention of selling any user data, period.

Non-Profit/For-Profit:
Our founding team has never run non-profits before, so for-profit is more of our wheelhouse. It seems to us (naive as we are about Non-Profits) like handling monetization and what we can do, sell, etc (payments vs donations, etc) is more straightforward in for-profit. Strong opinions loosely held - it's on our list of todos to research this more; this isn't something any of our current mentors know much about, so if you happen to know anyone you think might be open to educating me I'm all ears. We're early enough we can certainly swap our structure around to whatever is best.

---

Sorry for the long post, hope the above is helpful - if not, please say so and I'm happy to discuss more. Until we get more about Adieuu live on the web, LI, etc, here's some quick details (ask away if you have specific q's, I'm happy to answer):

- Two cofounders: myself (https://www.linkedin.com/in/adefee/), Lexi Sprague (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexisprague/). Not our first co, and much of our careers have been in/around privacy & security (something we're passionate about).

- Team size < 5.

- Based in US.

- No funding raised to-date (no present need or rush to do so).

- No revenue from Equal yet (product not yet launched).

[edited typo, wording for clarity]
Near enough yes but it was a nice helpful error message with the form fully populated as they left it - as far as it looks the user it’s client side validation as the service responds with just the correct html for the form and htmx swaps out the chunk of html.

Its like old school for validation back in the CodeIgniter days.
Researchers Identify Gene That Helps Cancer Cells Spread Throughout the Body
checked means clearly bounded by laws and institutions. There are judges who disagree the EC. The council and the parliament have to say yes to new law. This is clearly checked.
IO STDs
Threatening to call my state AG and the AG of a company’s incorporating state for fraud has 100% always cut the bullshit and gotten me to rightful resolution when customer service gives me the runaround.

I’ve never had to make the calls. It’s a bluff but the cost of legal compliance to answer AG calls always outweighs the cost of rightful resolution.
I definitely don't think that follows at all.
Forgot to mention windows on arm is progressing (qcom snapdragon elite chipset on microsoft surface devices), qcom gunyah hypervisor, MediaTek's GenieZone hypervisor, winlator
Don't think they need to legalese around exemptions, they can just do as they wish - as the Pfizer-gate shows they are not wrong so far.
* Significant white space, and the rules around whitespace are very convoluted.

* There's no pattern or regularity to how infix / prefix / suffix operators are used which makes splitting program text into self-contained sub-programs virtually impossible if you don't know the exact behavior, including priority of each operator.

* There's a tradition of exceptionally bad names for variables, inherited from the realm of mathematical formulas. In mathematics, it's desirable to give variables names devoid of everyday meaning to emphasize the generic nature of the idea being expressed. This works in the context of very short formulas, but breaks entirely in the context of programs which are usually many orders of magnitude bigger than even the largest formula you've ever seen. There, having meaningful names is a life west.

* It's impossible to make a good debugger for Haskell because of the language being "lazy". Debuggers are essential tools that help programmers in understanding the behavior of their programs. Haskell programmers are forced to rely on their imagination when explaining to themselves how their program works.

* Excessive flexibility. For example, a Haskell programmer may decide to overload string literals (or any literals for that matter). This is orders of magnitude worse than eg. overloading operators in C++, which is criticizes for defying expectations of the reader.

One of these points would've been enough for me to make the experience of working with a language unpleasant. All of them combined is a lot more than unpleasant.
I saw your comment and had to re-read it. Damn insightful yes.
What is awesome is that I can pick up one of these and put it in my existing Framework 13.
A federal law limiting trains to the length of a siding within 60 miles (or be double tracked) would simplify some things.
13% are not making over $100k. Who knows how they define an influencer.
> has still not managed to land a single person on the Moon.

How about, "has still not _decided_ to land a single person on the Moon."
DeepComputing RISC-V Mainboard
Nobody talking about the track geometry which is surely a major factor at play.
GGHead: Fast and Generalizable 3D Gaussian Heads
How does a mistake like that get made 3 or 4 years later when he was never the chair, and the only official source for that had been edited within days to remove that, and apparently there has never been a YC chair at all?
Type alias doesn't save me from typing that stuff at least once, plus I have to come up with a name which adds indirection (and a dependency that I have to manage!) that I have to recompute in my head everytime I read it.
It's also (mostly?) transparent to compiler which will still spew me with the same unreadable errors and types as before.

The C++ modules that you've been advocating for years as a workaround for slow compile times still haven't arrived in my (and most everybody else's) practice, sorry.

I do use precompiled headers in some settings to work around slowness, which does help a lot for build performance but is again terrible (breaks modularity, it's basically a choice: #include everything vs have slow build, with little possibility for making a tradeoff).
I've never heard any of these ideas. The question in the title is nonsense and you are skewing and distorting other ideas into more nonsense to make something that is already ridiculous political.
PHP forums and their ilk (including R*ddit) very commonly provide tutorials and clear advice from skilled hobbyists all happy to help newcomers......

....and without 5-10 minutes of video padding and waffle from some "influencer" knobjockey trying to peddle disguised advertisements.

Give me the former anytime.

EDIT: Clearly the downvotes are coming from those indoctrinated into thinking "influencers" provide a benefit!