skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Damn. Just put together 2 7900X3D + H13SAE-MF + RTX 4070 Ti SUPER + 100GbE-SR4 NICs with PCIe 5.0 and ATX 3.0. Mostly for bare-metal NIC load testing. Already obsolete.

In other news, I'm getting a Xeon with 4 whole GiB of DDR2 ECC RAM shipped from China that has 3 ISA slots. ;D
Man with one clock, always knows what time it is. Man with two clocks... never quite sure.
This was at least 200k years before the advent of speech if you go by the hyoid bone evidence.
A solitary journey across Antarctica
If you want to try it: https://www.bing.com/

Knock yourself out!
Whether Pac-Mom is a copyright-infringing design may just be a question that hasn't hit the courts yet.
Nice catch. Added above. Thanks!
I think people really over-estimate the wage growth differences between good and bad labor markets.

Median usual weekly earnings are (in 1982 Dollars)
Q1 2024: 365
Q1 2013: 331

So over 9 years, including the largest bump in wages in generation during the pandemic, wages grew by 1%

From the early 80s until now, wage growth was like 0.4%

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1pagn
Very much welcome this!
As i replied to the parent comment: this was at least 200k years before speech if you go by the hyoid bone evidence
Yeah great, although I am keen to see if this eventually will run on something like an Amazon Fire Stick or one of those old Androids in my drawer.
L4GM: Large 4D Gaussian Reconstruction Model
Stating the mentalese hypothesis as fact is a bit tenuous
>If you ask an engineer if 2.5 and 2.50 are the same, they will say no
They will say it depends on the context. If you don't look into the implementation, the class name and maybe a short summary provides that context and clearly misleads people
New World Record: Mitsubishi Robot Solves Rubik's Cube in Just 0.305 Seconds
Thinking isnt even a path to "free will". Thinking is pretty clearly determined by exterior stimulus just like feeling is.
Most businesses do not need and should not get vc funding. YC themselves say this: https://youtu.be/D81y-kh11oI
There are speciality brands using natural waxes, but they are a lot more expensive and appear very niche and retail customer oriented.

Per Wikipedia, Generic wax paper (since 1897) has used parafin wax, and per that other link since 1967 has used PFAS compounds.

So unless it explicitly says it’s using natural waxes, I’d assume some variety of synthetic is being used - probably PFAS based for anything modern.

And glass is indeed great for that! Also old coffee tins!
Unless China is suddenly preparing for another invasion of Vietnam, not sure what the value would be in doing such a thing.
They copied Lenin’s NEP, which was copied later by the German fascists. As it happens, Sun, Yatsen, on his deathbed, met with Mao one time in Guangzhou and they both agreed a fascist (or state capitalist) system would be best for the Chinese people. That was after NEP but before German fascists rose to power. Of course Stalin put an end to NEP and powered and willed full on communism after Lenin’s death.
From the perspective of the company, you also have a moat in the form of a proprietary system that doesn't have to compete with anything else because little software your customers depend on will run on anything else. Your business decisions become the Word Of God to people and companies with no real alternative.

BeOS never got successful enough to do that, but A Particularly Loud stock would argue this can work fairly well.
Django user here. HTMX fits in perfectly with the Django templating system. A fairly common approach is to use the same view but check for the HTMX header and then return a template file with the specific bit of HTML being swapped. There's also work in the Django space to be able to return parts of a template based on the request, which will suit HTMX perfectly too.
Give Truth the Advantage (2021)
> Tight loops come from the uop cache, and branchy code gets 3-way decoding.

First, there is no uop cache on the "mont" cores.

Second, Intel aren't decoding both sides of the branch.

That wouldn't actually help much, as modern branch predictors are correct well over 99% of the time. It would be a waste of silicon and power to have an extra decoder producing work which simply decoded most of the time, and an even bigger waste to have two extra decoders.

Intel's actual approach is way more clever; They run the branch predictor ahead of the decoders by at least 3 branches (probably more). The branch predictor can spit out a new prediction every cycle, and it just plops them on a queue.

Each of the three decoders pops a branch prediction off the queue and starts decoding there. At any time, all three decoders will each be decoding a different basic block. A basic block that the branch predictor has predicted that the program counter is about to flow through. The three decoders are leap frogging each other. The decoding of each basic block is limited to a throughput of three instructions per cycle, but Skymont is decoding three basic blocks in parallel.

The decoded uops get pushed onto three independent queues, and the re-namer/dispatcher merges these three queues back together in original program order before dispatching to the backend. Each decoder can only push three uops per cycle onto its queue, but the re-namer/dispatcher can pull them off a single queue at the rate of 9 uops per cycle. The other two queues will continue to fill up while one queue is being drained.

The branch prediction result will always land on an instruction boundary, so this design allows the three decoders to combine their efforts and maintain a throughput of 9 uops per cycle, as long as the code is branchy enough. It works on loops too, as far as I'm aware, intel doesn't even have a loop stream buffer on this design; The three decoders will be decoding the exact same instructions in parallel for loop bodies.

But Intel have a neat trick to make this work even on code without branches or loops. The branch predictor actually inserts fake branches into the middle of long basic blocks. The branch predictor isn't actually checking an address to see if it has a branch. Instead it predicts the gap between branches, and they simply have a limit for the size of those gaps. Looks like that limit for Skymont is 64 bytes (was previously 32 bytes for Crestmont)
Apple has shiny hardware, yes.

Compatibility for many programs people care about is a lot better on Windows than on Mac (or Linux). That has improved a lot in recent years, of course. Especially for games.

Linux has great compatibility for lots of hardware, but Windows is still better supported. Mac has almost non-existent compatibility for hardware: you need to buy an Apple branded device to run Apple's operating system. For peripherals Windows has probably the best compatibility list, but Linux can often be better for very old stuff. Mac's record is spotty at best.
I think people have a unique edge here to counter your argument because most of the work that goes into fandom wikis are from unpaid volunteers, and they have every right to move somewhere esle.
The first animal in orbit was Laika, a Soviet space dog. She was launched aboard Sputnik 2 on November 3, 1957. The first animals in space were fruit flies, launched by the United States aboard a V-2 rocket on February 20, 1947.
Meta needs to emulate this because they're sinking tens of billions without being focused enough on delivering profits with all that hardware they're spending treasure on.
“AI” (as absurdly broad of a term as it is) has legitimate use case. It isn’t JUST hype. However, because of the buzz, it’s being shoehorned into so many places it really just isn’t the proper fit for, and it’s hard to figure it where.

However, there ARE plenty of areas it IS the right fit for. Lots of “fuzzy” systems that would struggle to be rule-based and generalizable benefit hugely from LLMs and other fuzzy / intentionally broadly scoped tooling.

Source — I work at a “chat with your data” startup, and our product just categorically wouldn’t be worthwhile if the above weren’t true :)
Opportunity cost alone means women are paying nearly a quarter million in lost salary and promotion earnings.

Only competing with the right number of zeros in the incentive will fix this.
So this opinion completely ignores molecular recycling. I posted about this a month ago. If it scales well, it's going to be the future of recycling:

https://www.eastman.com/en/sustainability/environmental/circ...

https://www.eastman.com/en/media-center/news-stories/2024/ea...
Didn't mean to ignore your half of your preceding post; just that takes time to unpack and respond to these points, and honestly, it seems a lot of your arguments just aren't well-constructed.

But leaving that aside, and to address just the first line, if I may, of your post above:

I'm quite familiar with Ukraine's collaborationist history in WW II. Of course callaboration was widespread, and the occupation forces had substantial support (or at least acquiescence) throughout the population -- again, as in all occupied countries. There's a reason they were able to pull of the multi-year Babyn Yar operation just outside the center of Kyiv, were able to recruit so many Trawniki to do the dirty in their camps, and so on. This isn't a revelation to me at all.

My question to you is -- how does any of this history move the needle (serve as "proof" in your words) -- or have any other kind of bearing, for that matter -- in regard to any of the assertions you're making about Azov today? As I asked in my most recent response (and you "ignored"): what is the actual chain of implication and substantiation here?

I'm just not seeing any. If you can enlighten me as to why I should, perhaps we can continue with the other points. But in any case that's all I have time for right now.

Because it actually takes a lot of time to answer you carefully and patiently like this, you know.
Its assumed that many many people involved in an already really cloaked investment vehicle know that Sam is not. Thats the point. Not that Sam wrote it, that the organization signed off on it.
I think the downvotes are a bit harsh, but I think it's hard to say that Apple definitively made the right move (beyond getting Jobs back and him creating a direction beyond just computers).

Many people said that NeXT was further along than BeOS, but it was still four years from Apple buying NeXT to Mac OS X shipping. People talked about printer support being ahead in NextSTEP, but OS X had terrible printer support for a while - basically until they bought the CUPS team. Display PostScript was ahead of its time, but being "behind" wasn't really a problem for Windows there and realistically the hardware of 2000-2008 wasn't exactly great for OS X's graphics needs (and Apple needed to re-implement it as Display PDF/Quartz to get around licensing costs).

BeOS was blindingly fast on 90s and 2000s hardware and Apple definitely could have used that as a differentiator. Realistically, without non-computer products, would Apple have survived? I say this as someone who ran System 6 through OS 9 as well as every version of OS X. OS 9 was lovely, but technically flawed and just way out-classed by Windows. OS X was so slow it was nearly unusable.

I think claiming that there's something unique about Unix making it portable to mobile isn't really backed by any evidence. Be had already created BeIA for "internet appliances" which were low-resource machines. In fact, one could argue that Be's thrifty use of resources would have been a better fit for mobile than OS X.

Apple's real benefit to buying NeXT was getting Jobs, not getting NextSTEP. BeOS probably would have gotten out the door faster and with less pain. You might like OS X as it has evolved, but back in 2001 it was just pure pain while BeOS was joyful. But buying Be might have meant no iPod and no iPhone. It's hard to know how history would have gone, but it seems a bit of a stretch to claim NextSTEP was a much better OS, that it's uniquely good for mobile, or that it set Apple up for the next 50 years.
Same. I was surprised to see this on HN as a daily Live 2 user.

Ive been using an Akai S1100 sampler from 1991 recently, I'm a millennial who grew up with DOS and floppy so not totally foreign but it's been fun exploring floppy, Syquest SCSI 44mb drives, CD caddys, and hunting down old manuals to find the special combination of keys to get into hardware diagnostics mode.

Plenty for nerds to get technical enjoyment in music.
People want to audit the args, mainly because of the potential for destructive operations like DELETE FROM and rm -rf /

How do you know a malicious actor won't try to do these things? How do you protect against it?
It's a really nice project idea but it doesn't have any content yet?

In the github repository almost all markdown files are empty and/or only contain a headline. What's up with that?

Regarding reverse engineering, book.hacktricks.xyz might have a lot of overlapping content.
Go co-routines are the same: a bit of magic you just use and don't think much about.

I'd argue the primary magic in large-scale languages should mainly be in those two places: inversion of control and concurrency.
Bad is subjective too.

There's new syntax for props, reactivity and state that's slightly more complicated for hello world applications but you really notice the differences for even mildly complicated components.

export let foo;

vs

const {foo} = $props()

looks far worse until your doing something like extending an input and you no longer have to deal with $$RestProps ugliness

type Props = {foo: number} & HTMLInputAttributes

const {foo, ...rest} : Props = $props()

<input {...rest} />
> Anyone who defended that isn't even close to a free-speech absolutist.

No True Scotsman.

> You just don't want to acknowledge such a stance is possible because the people you agree with are in power, allow the speech you agree with, and censor the speech you don't disagree with, so you stand with nothing to gain by supporting free speech. That's a personal choice to have no integrity.

... I am not American, neither do I have anyone in power who supports the speech I agree with. There's no need to attack me specifically. I am talking about the wider pattern. Free Speech Absolutists exist as long as the speech they support is being oppressed. Do you support Free Speech of the person screaming obscenities at your young child? False claims about you? Whipping up entire communities to attack you physically? Do you support speech that incites genocide?

Yes, some of those are crimes but I am not sure you'd care if you'd been attacked already. The damage is done.
How do you know what 999900000999 needs better than them?
OEM licenses for windows 11/10 are dirt cheap even here in the U.S. You can get a single use (can only activate once) for around $10-15. Most of those online sellers are based in China or HK. So yeah, those are legit OEM licenses. Since MS doesn't seem to have issues activating them. (I've bought them for VM use before)
This matches up well with my hypothesis that language developed as a mediator of institutional behavior and not the other way around. https://spacechimplife.com/institutional-code-and-human-beha...
You can give away dollar bills. It's a service that lots of people really want to use. You just need to figure out how to charge for it.

(Lest you think I am joking, have a look at the 'MoviePass economy.')
"the args"

You need to be more specific. In a systems, everything but the output is an argument to something else. Even then the system output is an input to the user.

So yeah, depending on what argument you are talking about you can audit it in a different way and it has different potential for abuse.
I suppose the idea is that while the SimCity Maxis studio met its true end later after SimCity(2013) [1], Maxis the company was destroyed earlier. They had originally tried and failed to make SimCity 3000 be a full 3D game. It was only designed into its successful form after the acquisition by EA.

LGR did a retrospective on the game and it provides some context for the state pre-EA Maxis was in when they started SimCity 3000.[2]

1. The Sims is again branded as developed by Maxis.

2. https://youtu.be/MngTH_mh_Is?si=ERGNYzGHeDkPXOO2
You could choose a collection of metrics that would make either widget look better. In the end, the individual metrics may be objective yet the selection of metrics will be subjective. For example: those who prefer widget A may cite things like software availability, repairability, and upgradability.
I don't have a subscription, but I can only manage the pure lies and self aggrandizement in that article.
Google search hasn't gotten _that_ bad. But nice of you to help out.
Cars were even heavier in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. They had steel bodies, chrome bumpers, massive trunks, V8 engines too. It wasn't until the oil crisis in the late 70s and the introduction of Japanese brands that cars got small.

Take a look at a 1950s Coup de Ville, Buick Roadmaster or any other famous models from that era. All pushing 4K, sometimes 5K pounds.
Brain circuit scores identify clinically distinct biotypes in depression/anxiety
Hasn't it already.
You are right. But proverbially drug dealers give you the first hit free all the time.

See also how 'picking the low hanging fruit first' would get you fired from any picking gig: the fruit higher up the plant tends to ripen first. So that's what you pick first.

There's lots of other funny (business) metaphors going wrong.

See also how a 'quantum leap' is the smallest possible change possible, not something big and amazing.
Whitelisting and permissions. You can't issue a delete if anything not starting with SELECT is rejected. You can't have edge cases that work around that via functions, if the user the agent uses doesn't have permissions other than SELECT.
Complexity builds rockets with thrust vectoring and lands modules on the moon, simplicity is good for fire crackers.

Once you scale past simple prototypes, you need performance and new features. And the architecture stops being simple and complexity eventually creeps in.

I’ve implented 4 iterations of a product from scratch, and eventually they all get complex, even though each one started out with the goal of being simpler than the previous iteration. Yes, iteration #4 is more complex than #1, but it is more performant.

In parallel I’m building a new house, and each iteration of the plans is more complex. You try to manage compromises. You take 2 steps forward, one back. Which way do windows face, can an older person navigate, is there enough storage space, cost, esthetics, where does a dirty dog enter, where is the chimney for preppers, driveway and orchard, septics and wells, drainage and water collection, guest rooms and hot tubs, all on a budget … Simple wont do.
SSH-J.com – Public SSH Jump and Port Forwarding Server
https://gitlab.futo.org/eron/public/-/wikis/Uncancellable-Cu... (https://archive.ph/j19ev)

https://gitlab.futo.org/eron/public/-/wikis/Code-of-Conduct (https://archive.ph/CFzDm)

fixation on "cancel culture" is a huge red flag for me personally. setting up the stage for a mean community.
I had even bigger "brother" for significant part of my life. That was more than enough.
Well, 'patient' comes from the Latin word for 'sufferer'. So I'd rather nurses and doctors call me a 'customer' or even a 'user.
We refer you to the Rouge Angles Of Satin https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RougeAnglesOfSat... ...
> Mac has almost non-existent compatibility for hardware: you need to buy an Apple branded device to run Apple's operating system.

Not only an Apple device but a recent Apple device. I have a 2014 RMBP that works flawlessly. I haven’t been able to install MacOS on it for a couple of years now.
I feel like I kinda have this, and I'd describe it like this:

With actual vision, there's a pipeline of steps: light hits actual cone/rod cells -> optic nerve fires -> brain stage 1 -> brain stage 2 -> brain stage 3... where each of those stages also have various side effects associated with the experience of "seeing"

I can't synthesize "brain stage 1" at all I don't think, I need my optic nerve to send some signals to "see". But I think I might be synthesizing "brain stage 2" when I imagine seeing e.g. a red apple in a pretty similar way to actually seeing it - I can feel "red apple vibes" but there is no image of a red apple my field of view. My brain state certainly contains some data about the color of the imaginary apple and the shape of it, but it's not nearly the same as actually seeing it.

This is all astonishingly hard to explain in a way that communicates accurately between two people though.
Reading through the linked comment (and it's linked algolia feed) I'll add that public mod actions are less aimed at the making interactions with small and loud subset who will never engage rationally themselves any better and more aimed at helping the rest of the community easily ignore said subset. If the typical rational user will have seen many posts about YC critical news not related to celebrity gossip they will immediately know such claims are unfounded and have public references to it. Right now it's instead much easier to find 10 examples of this type of public comment thread where things may look gray or look at the public data analytics and find 10 examples that appear to confirm the viewpoint that topic $x articles are silently downweighted more often than they should be than it is for anyone but the mod team or those who send constant emails to provide even one bit of pre-existing hard proof to the contrary that doesn't carry the risk of looking like it was formed after the fact.

Specifically on a full moderation log your links also show how it would be troublesome in some ways I perhaps hadn't thought as deeply about. After all even if you moderate 9999 things right the same crowd is going to want to parade the 1 - now with more details as to why. At the same time I still think the same set of people are going to complain either way and the data isn't really helpful to them as much as the rest of the people anyways. I realize I'm extraordinarily unlikely to budge your views on this due to volume of experience/thought/interaction with this topic you've had but just count me in the selfish "I'd rather the log/actions were public for us average user and then your half a day of emailing was explaining the details to the troublesome bunch rather than with the average user spending time trying to understand".

I'll close with a smaller push of "and even if the site never does a full moderation log, not signaling moderated post/comment actions at any level only feeds that small group on believing everything unpopular they say is being censored 100% of the time instead of x% of the time". With that I'll leave you some peace on the matter :). Thanks for the time and reading through (yet another) user's view on this and for the good moderation of the site as always.
Matrix – A Pit of Abuse with Government Ties [video]
Depending how you do the actual modulation, optical modulation does not add any significant latency (there can be no processing involved and the extra transmission length you'd need for the modulation (i.e. Electroopotic conversion, rf amplifiers...) is negligible.

The big issue is really 1. Photonic waveguides are much larger than electronic ones (due to the wavelength) 2. You loose dynamic range and in EO conversion (shot noise is significant at optical frequencies) 3. Co integration of optics and photonics components is nontrivial due to the different materials and processes. 4. Power efficiency of EO conversion is also not that great.

Where photonics shines is for transmission of high frequencies (i.e. a lot of data) over long distances and being immune to EM interference. So there is certainly a tradeoff for at what transmission distances to go optical and as data rates keep going up the tradeoff length has become shorter and shorter. Intel, Nvidia, AMD et al. All do research into optical interconnect.