skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure Waymo has anything to gain from a partnership with Tesla.
I was seriously considering Sony’s 32” CRT for my first HDTV around 2006 or so. It must have been right about the tail end.

It may have had a better picture, at least for analog stuff which was most all of it at the time. But the biggest factor was size. At ~150-200 lbs I couldn’t move it and would need new furniture to hold it.

The LCD I bought probably weighed 40 pounds, was easy to move, and my existing furniture was fine. It was 720p only though.
Is `_mm_sqrt_ps(..)' an Intel-only thing? Why is the naming so jacked?

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/docs/cpp-compiler/de...
Hey, laser printers do it
the cost of solar/wind depends on how much solar/wind is actually deployed.

1kWh of solar delivered midday, when there is 20% penetration? easy peasy.

1kWh of solar delivered at 2AM, when there is 65% penetration? much much more difficult.

These types of price comparisons are always unfair, always apples and oranges, because they always compare a 2AM kWh of nuclear with a midday kWh of solar, and of course solar wins that comparison.
It's been a consistently excellent experience for me in both SF and LA.

The cars are well maintained and clean inside and out.

They are very careful and considerate drivers.

They navigate complex and ambiguous situations with unprotected turns, pedestrians, bicyclists, double-parked cars, construction zones and narrow streets.

They're better than Uber in every respect.

And I dare say I think they're now a safer and more capable driver than I am, at least within their designated operating territories.
Why didn't this happen with literally any other technological progress that has resulted in job losses?
I sincerely wish that any company that advertised unlimited and didn't actually allow unlimited X was penalized because it is straight up false advertising.

unlimited data (but after 5tb we throttle you to 100kpbs) is not unlimited it is 5tb + 100k * 30 * 24 * 60 * 60

Google was unlimited with 5 users. Then they rug pulled and it was "as much as you need" + "you can request increases every 3 months". then prices went way up. now its "you are only allowed 3 increases"

its fine to have limits but businesses should be forced to disclose them upfront
37 days: https://chatgpt.com/share/bff87762-664e-4350-abf9-54be80064b...

1Gbps is 1 gigaBIT per second.
The USF isn't a final destination for money though; it's spent on those small population customers in proportion to the carriers that serve them. You seem to be arguing that because 100% of the money doesn't go to AT&T, paying that fee somehow isn't relevant to the discussion of AT&T serving those remote customers, but the amount they get is literally determined by how many of those customers they serve. By the same logic, other carriers collect the same fee from their customers that could get funneled to AT&T!

I'm not sure if you're just trying to argue semantics about the fact that only part of the fee goes to AT&T or if you misunderstand how the USF actually works, but AT&T isn't disadvantaged at all compared to other carriers by this fee; they're all on the same playing field in terms of having to collect the fee and then only getting it back in proportion to the costs of serving the customers that the article discusses.
Please, stop it.
C is not memory unsafe. It's the way you use it to be unsafe.
C is a kind of "high level assembly" language. And this is why it is used for a number of core things in the world, from OSes, to core libraries and tools.

It empowers programmers. At the cost of requiring careful programming.

It's like very sharp blades. Use them judiciously, and you'll get your job done fast and precise.
Forget about checking everything and you'll start bleeding.
I am not saying that. You must have misunderstood. There is definitely an inflection point for safety in any given road.
> I reject the argument that a no-rebase, merge-only history "preserves the true history of how commits were created", because I believe that is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the tree looks like once the merge (or rebase) lands.

Was the bug introduced by the rebase, or was that code always broken?
And maxes at 30s (if apigw triggered), GP's point totally valid.
Very exciting and satisfying! What’s the current break even date?
We will need both, or at least something else, since not every building has a rooftop that can generate sufficient solar.
Lawdy, that's a serious delay!

Okay, I'll see what I can do to wait for NETWORK_IDLE or something
Slow as hell. Which is why everything we are doing is no longer in Lambda. Literally it was crippling and most people don't notice it in the noise of all the other problems that software complexity brings in. If you measure it, you end up going "oh shit so that's where all our money has gone!"

We have one service which has gone back to a Go program that runs locally using go run. It's then shipped in a container to ECR and then to EKS. The iteration cycle on a dev change is around 10 seconds and happens entirely on the engineer's laptop. A deployment takes around 30 seconds and happens entirely on the engineer's laptop. Apart from production, which takes 5 minutes and most of that is due to github actions being a pile of shite.
Doom came out 4 years after this tho
Sheesh, the TCP and whatever else overhead is probably more than the 24 byte difference of 1024 vs 1000..
Is there a name for this property (i.e. a signature scheme only allowing an observer to realize that messages m1 and m2 are signed by the same public key if they know that public key)?

I suppose it's an easy enough property to add to any signature protocol via a designated verifier scheme, and just defining the public key to be a combination of the public signature key and the secret verifier key.

I also wonder whether there is any formal proof (or at least an intuitive argument for why it would be intractable) for the variant of Schnorr signatures mentioned in the article.
Intresting, for me the link 404's

This page isn't available
The link may be broken or the Page may have been removed. Check to see if the link that you're trying to open is correct.
Go to Accounts Centre

also

Uncaught SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions, async generators and modules
Show HN: cx_log gem to create one log per request
Some time ago, I read about emitting single logs that capture the context of a request or a job here(https://stripe.com/blog/canonical-log-lines).

I have used this approach extremely useful at work and in my hobby projects. So, I created a Ruby gem to create single logs instead of multiple logs
I kinda prefer how vite handles things in dev by not bundling files. I work remote to my server, and I'd much rather download the few changed files vs a multi-deca-megabyte file.
Because more money will deliver more quality even with efficiency gains as long as we don't hit a ceiling on ability to improve with more resources, the cost of new top-end SotA models will scale with hiw much capital is attracted to AI, and efficiency will not reduce top-end SotA model costs. (It may reduce “good enough” model costs for many tasks, but that doesn’t effect the top of the market.)
upvote for both the username and the public service
A corollary is that if you have your lambdas call your other lambdas call...
While LLMs can appear to write code, they can not execute, maintain, or design the systems that use this code.

The actual "code" was never the hard part to begin with.

Developing software is not going away soon. LLMs only addresses a small part of what it means to develop software.
Refocusing the CDC after Covid-19
For AA batteries that's true. But licking a 9V battery gives you a notable shock. Any wet skin should work to some degree at 9V, but the tongue is very sensitive so it brings the most dramatic effect.
FreeBSD Bhyve Companion Tools
Daily Automated Testing for Milk-V Duo S RISC-V SBC (IKEA Tretakt, Apache NuttX)
How much adv. warning makes up for making a promise you (should have known you) couldn't keep?
Us?

If one take the position tha minds are not part of the "real world" then you end up defining "reality" by some random model.

It is just as absurd as saying that the only thing that exists is my own perception and you are "just" a ghost my mind is "thinking into existence".

It sounds less crazy only because we are used to reductionism being generally more useful, but what is the usefullness of concepts like reality and existence when defined to mean that we and our minds (the only thing we perceive) are not "real" or do not really "exist"?
Use Qubes OS as a daily driver. Open websites in a disposable, self-destroying VM, which is based on Whonix.
Credit to the author for pointing out the public transit aspect of Waymo. In the same way that mobile phones and solar are allowing the developing world to skip a big middle step of fixed infrastructure, Waymo could allow cities to skip (or eliminate) expensive and limited use rail networks.
Also Tesla: drive the price of EVs down to parity with ICE cars while delivering a superior product, built out the nations charging infrastructure (and got everybody to switch to NACS), and oh yeah: made self driving available to everybody for next to nothing.
How does this not trigger an immediate investigation of this guy… he might not be wrong about approving it… but I would want to be dang sure he is not getting a kickback or some other misc benefit.
Unrelated to what you are citing, but I believe a “factoid” is something that looks like a fact but is not. Like how a planetoid looks like a planet but isn’t one.

I only realized this myself decades after using the term factoid due to pages in highlights for kids.
I believe my friend still has our 32" 1080i tube TV kicking around. All 180lbs of it. has HDMI and everything if I recall. Old consoles look awesome on it and if you can get your PC drivers to play ball games on that also look stellar, but text looks like trash.

It was also a Trinitron.
Code doesn't exist until it is merged, so these are equivalent
Apple didn't own a touchscreen phone interface, lol. Android started earlier than iOS did, and was always, always significantly ahead of the curve.

Apple made the concept 'cool' and benefited from their loyalist userbase, but if anything Apple copied Android. Even simple things like widgets and app folders Apple didn't get for like 10 years. Honestly, it's shocking.
You sound like you have intimate knowledge of the landscape. What would be a great disruption?
> the AI you used to write this

I don't follow. Are you suggesting I'm an AI? Or that my answer was copy-pasted from an AI?

> HN is kinda asynchronous

Or that HN runs an AI to serve the website?
Godspeed good sir. When those shitheads from PerkinsCoie send you a legal threat make sure to share and shame them for it.
I agree in the short-term the argument that AI puts people out of work isn't very strong and would also have told us to not invent word processors like you say. But some people envision a future where all jobs will be done by AI, without humans being able to compete at all.
Parent should have said “on only AI and vision, no lidar.”
This being a thing should have been pretty obvious. “Unlimited” never means unlimited in a literal sense. Even if phrased like so.

And loosing actual backup files a whole different story…
But if you don't care who signed it, then you won't even notice if it was/wasn't signed by the same key. That's what I got out of what they were saying. As in, 'this whole charade is pointless ... but it does solve this somewhat tangentially related problem ... kinda'.

> "Whoever holds the same key that signed this package"

This only matters if you care or know what the keys are. If your guards let anyone in with a blue pass, it doesn't matter what the name is on the pass or if it even matches the name of the person.
Seems neat, but direnv can do more despite this claiming to be "modern".
> Only true if the commit author doesn't do so, and it is trivial to do so, either during or after a rebase using the rebase exec command. So given this is a discipline issue no different from a developer authoring a change without testing it, I fail to see how this is "rebase"'s fault.

"Undisciplined enough to use rebase, disciplined enough to put in extra effort to mitigate some of the harms of rebase" is an imaginary intersection.

> Go right ahead :)

git log --first-parent
I get this on Safari on macOS:
SyntaxError: Unexpected identifier 'wait'

and this on Chrome on macOS:
TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'click')
at <anonymous>:14:71
I think within X decades, any viable car company will have self driving or have to license the technology. Companies would rather develop their own than license it for the same reason as they have their own anything.

But I think that as AI continues to improve and more sensors are manufactured, the cost goes down and feasibility goes up for more companies to implement self-driving.
I thought it was about an operating system. Spoiler: it's not.
I think you misread. If they go to the Bay Area they would like to try it.
As one of my last monitors before LCDs took over, I had a 21-inch Sun, and boy was that sucker heavy (>30 kgs (>65 lbs)):

* https://dogemicrosystems.ca/pub/Sun/System_Handbook/Sun_sysh...

* https://dogemicrosystems.ca/pub/Sun/System_Handbook/Sun_sysh...

* https://dogemicrosystems.ca/pub/Sun/System_Handbook/Sun_sysh...
It's a bit like asking why Google doesn't just partner with Apple on phones since Apple is clearly better at it. The reason is that they are building competing products, with competing teams, competing software stacks, and different business models. Competition is good for innovation.

Tesla prioritized building a highly generalized stack that can offer incremental improvements from L2+ on all roads (today) to L3/L4 some time in the future. Waymo is prioritizing building a tightly geofenced L4 system and gradually expanding the operating domain.

Neither is more of a "correct" approach, since they have different design goals, and it's hard to even directly compare them at this stage of development.
You can see algorithmic aversion every day on HN, in the form of those who complain about the algorithmic portion of the technical interview.

They act as if the only way to get algorithmic knowledge is to grind specific examples, when really if they would read through Knuth they'd be fine.

These are people who see algorithmic knowledge as the bane of their careers rather than seeing algorithms as:

1) a great way to add value to resource constrained projects

2) a trivially simple and easy way to signal programming abilities, letting you easily breeze through the interview

I seriously would hate having to work with one of those who take pride in how little computer science they know, and because I run a math and computational geometry heavy organization, I will never hire them. But I would estimate that algorithmically and mathematically averse coders form the majority of coders.
Skip the efficient transit and go straight to jammed up roads. Doesn't seem like a good move.
We want to get to net zero by 2050 not 2030. At the current growth of 2-3% per year plus some acceleration we might get there.
> grid... grid-scale power storage... stability of the grid ... grid-following inverter ... grid stabilized by ...

The problem isnt solar, or wind, or storage ... the problem is the grid. Were running on a system that was never designed to do what were asking of it, and yes its going to be a number of problems to solve. All of those are jobs, economic action and improvements to reliability and quality across the board.

> I don't think they're controllable enough to be mechanically synced to the grid frequency.

Google, there are a number of ways this gets addressed.

> There has been some work on grid-forming inverters

Yes, we know how, and the race to build them is on... this isnt a hard problem it's just a problem.

> grid-scale power storage (has never been done so ?

Already deployed in a few places with battery systems (hati, Australia both have them. Possibly Hawaii too). We're doing quite a bit of this. Again a quick google will give you a sea of sources.
If Waymo could operate in downtown Boston? Safely, reliably? Then, at that point, color me impressed!
For someone who doesn't know much about physics, what significance does this have?
“A factoid is either an invented or assumed statement presented as a fact, or a true but brief or trivial item of news or information.”
When a child is born there is nothing remotely resembling large scale warfare inscribed in its genes and the discretional cultural path that must be travelled before such detrimental collective phenomena come to be seen as innate and inevitable is enormous.

Our predicament in relation to our war "habit" is similar to many other challenges we are facing: malignant social patterns that got established before a succession of dramatic technological recolutions are now mutating into existential risks.

It is anybody's guess how things will play out. Cultural evolution is our superpower but we are not exactly in control of it. We still in a transition zone where old moralities feel secure in their "it was ever thus" denial.

It is conceivable that we'll outgrow this phase and survive. A pacified humanity is not utopic, its the only solution to a long term sustainable existence. We thus might work backwards from what we know is the only meaningful endgame and see what it takes to get there.

But we might also implode before we solve that.
Especially when it's an open PR. That's effectively essential in order to, say, address feedback
OP here. @asanwal, in case you're wondering, a mutual connection of ours liked your LinkedIn post featuring this article. That's how I found this.
I'd be interested in how they protect the sensors during day. After briefly skimming the sources it doesn't seems to be present any code to activate/deactivate an external shutter or servo to rotate the camera away from sunlight. There is code to turn the camera on and off but it doesn't seem to do anything else beyond that.
> Cognate ignores words starting with lowercase letters, allowing them to be used as comments. This lets us write:

> Print the Square of 8;

At first sight I really disliked this. I thought it'd become repetitive. But... no more repetitive than just writing prose I guess?
The other meaning is a small or trivial bit of (true) information.
The claim (which is not uncontested, I should add) is that doing so repeatedly inevitably produces model collapse. Even if that is true, however, you can still derive benefit from using larger models to generate large amounts of synthetic training data for smaller models. Most LLaMA finetunes out there are trained on GPT-4 output, for example.
At some point Waymo is going to want a lot of cars if things go well. Those cars need to be electric, due to the power draw of the computer and sensors. A partnership doesn’t necessarily make sense between these companies, but I can see possible synergies.
That doesn't make sense.

> Want more oil from Nigeria? Offer them more money than the other buyers.

How about I offer them some lead to sweeten the deal? As in, take my lower offer or else?

> Want to fish the waters around Tuvalu? Radio them and offer more money.

Or I'll just go fishing because what ever Tuvalu can do to me?

> Want Congolese cobalt? Same idea.

The idea works when the players have no better choice than to play by the market rules, win or lose. At small scale, most people figure it's better to lose the deal than be thrown into jail for being extra convincing - but this is only possible because of a legal and enforcement system that's stronger than any individual or group. At larger, international scale, nukes provide a backstop that keeps everyone in check, by keeping total war absurdly expensive for everyone.

> It was based on the sensible idea that the market place is a better way to settle these things than the battlefield, something even a Marxist should be willing to admit.

The market will tell you that peaceful solution is only better if the war is really expensive. Large power imbalance can easily make war the cheaper option.

In general, any solution that requires people to just go along with it is doomed to failure - someone eventually will figure it's in their benefit to defect. Stable solutions are ones that, by design, align with default human behavior. Like MAD.

Worth also mentioning that there isn't just "war" and "peace", except in international laws. Soldiers on the ground are just the realization of threats of use of force, which themselves are a last-ditch diplomatic technique. There are other such techniques - sanctions, for example, are just as brutal as war. All that is implied in international negotiations, not invoked explicitly unless parties can't reach a reasonable agreement without threats of violence.
Inverters can easily replace physical inertia, it just requires technology developed within the past 30 years, and most grid folks haven't thought about new technology for far longer than that.

As more and more intermittent renewables get pushed onto grids, they become more reliable. Most outages are from single points of failure from large generators or transmission. Dealing with highly distributed renewables means that grid ops get used to acting fast, and there's greater redundancy instead of so many SPOF. Kind of how cloud services got reliable by expecting there to be failure and designing it into the system.

Storage is advancing super quickly, is super fast to deploy, and can replace a lot of more expensive things like transmission upgrades.

We have all the tech to replace fossil fuels on the grid with the above. The only question is the final cost. It's likely to be far far lower than using existing "hard" energy, because by the time we can deploy 50 TWhs of storage, it will have gotten so cheap. We don't know when costs will stabilize, but they have a loooong distance to fall.

And we have all sorts of other technologies that will make all this far cheaper: enhanced geothermal, enhanced geothermal with temporal storage based on injection pressure and release, iron air batteries, flow batteries, thermal storage for industrial process heat, etc. etc. etc.

For every area of the energy economy, there are two to three solutions that look promising. Fusion and fission look promising for none. That's not to say that they can't have some serious innovation and start dropping their costs, but nobody currently operating in the field has demonstrated a path. Yet.
Which is strange because 240p and 480i absolutely looks worse on them than on an SD TV. Better than a flat panel though to be fair.
That's interesting. So in a sense, we hit "peak CRT" in 1989, quite a bit before large flat screens hit.
Nothing prevents people from committing untested code that doesn't even compile without any rebase involved. Even hooks don't help since the incompetent coworkers are just barely smart enough to learn about -n
Most new tech takes about 5-8 years to be available in Europe nowadays.

For good reason sure, but might as well accept it.
Agreed. I think we will also start to see lots of industrial sites that have their own utility scale installs that don't even feed back into the grid, and are used directly, and coupled with thermal or chemical storage.