skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is beyond me how a CEO can serve at any board, at all, let alone the CEO of one billion dollar corporation serving at the board of another billion dollar corporation.

There are potential issues with non-compete agreements, any and all deals between the companies, hiring and compensation of executives, board members actually having the time to do the job of a board member, and or course also sensitive information leaking to where it shouldn't.
Since Java 9 deprecated APIs are actually removed, and since Java 16 naughty reflection tricks are forbidden.
I switched to Pop OS in 2018 because I was in college, and I wanted to spend less time gaming. Unfortunately for me, that was also the year Valve released Proton, and my gaming didn't (immediately) drop very much :>
As already stated: At home I use Fedora (and others). Company restricts me to use Windows - well technically, the project does, but company IT would not be happy, if I'd use Linux there.

And no, this is not a reason to leave an otherwise perfectly fine job behind.
I haven't used Lyft in awhile but as an Uber rider what I can tell you is, if that company has a similar policy, it hasn't worked for me. The quality and cleanliness of the vehicle, and the quality of the driving, has been vastly inferior for me in San Francisco than Waymo has been.
Dumb. Lol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ivt_N2Zcts
AI Doesn't Kill Jobs? Tell That to Freelancers
I don't think the scale of coal is 200m+ people a year. That's taking artistic liberties or is too hyperbolic to entertain.

>I also feel relatively confident that a Chernobyl scale accident every year is in no way likely, even if the entire world was 100% on nuclear

I don't. Einstein's quote rings alarms in my head here. Imagine all the inane incompetencies you've seen with current energies in your house, or at a mechanic, or simply flickering lights at a resaurant. Now imagine that these people now manage small fusion/fission bombs powering such devices.

we need to value labor a lot more to trust that sort of maintanance. And the US alone isn't too good at that. Let alone most of Asia and EMEA.
Listen to the data that you're migrating from one system to another, so to speak. Test v1-to-v2 and v2-to-v1 migrations until you're blue in the face. Feature-flag migrations for individual clients. Ensure that any SLAs are met with v1-only, v1-in-flight-to-v2, v2 only, and/or some mix of static partial migration. Make sure that you have an absolutely homeomorphic mapping of data from one representation to another.
I recognize this "thinking the thoughts twice", and sometimes feel that the "fast" thoughts have to wait for the slow ones (language wrapping) to catch up. Then I try to skip the second phase and let the fast ones roam at full speed, expecting brilliancy. Never succeeded yet, but not giving up.
Cool!

I keep hearing that self-hosted email gets discriminated against these days, in terms of delivery rejection. Is that your experience, too?
I wish Twitter/X had Picture search So we can expose liars 100x
What the hell is up with HN people's fascination with V? HN is the only place I ever see people who have drank the V kool-aid. Why is the HN crowd seemingly so gullible? It's the same thing with cryptocurrencies and AI and NFTs; if there is a tech-adjacent hype train, you can bet there's constant spam from HN commenters who have bought it hook, line and sinker.

Stop. It's boring.
Just last night I was watching a video on Jai from Jonathan Blow, and he was showing off how he could compile a game demo of +50k lines from scratch in under 0.5 seconds, with plenty of room left for optimizations.

Which really makes me question if language design is going in the correct direction. Are Swift programs less likely to contain bugs or are they easier to debug? I know that many of Swift's creators are incredibly experienced programming languages experts, so how do they justify this insane compilation tax?
Imagine thinking in concepts instead of images. I can't visualize a hammer or a face, but I don't have trouble with a multidimensional array or a graph.
I have aphantasia, and I don't feel handicapped at all. The only thing where I really notice differences is when trying to describe people. Since I can't visualize them in my head, I can only describe "known facts", like "they have brown hair". I would make a lousy crime witness...
we do get consultants coming into companies and telling the experienced professionals how to screw up stuff all the time though. i think there are laws with teeth and of course the immediate body to get rid of that helps surgeons maintain the integrity of their profession. when the outcome is far removed from the decision, you do get people like ministers meddling in things they don't understand and leave the consequences for the next administration.
Atari ST serie was very popular in Europe, more popular than Mac or Amiga at the time I believe.
Ditto this. I still have to use windows occasionally, but the extra friction over linux make me wince each time.
I draw pictures. Had some difficulty dreaming up a part to create in engineering school but 3D cad programs made my own shortcomings irrelevant.

We had a 'intro engineering' class that taught orthographic drawing (by hand, about a decade ago, so thankful for it) which included puzzles on what the various 2D views should be given a 3d object, and the opposite direction. Holy crap those were so hard for me, but picked it up with practice.

I have visio open constantly at work. Lots of mind maps, flow diagrams. Take lots of pictures on vacation because the visual memories are basically gone as soon as my body is.

The 'language is a tool for communication' thread from today has some discussion on different types of thinking. For example it was inconceivable to me that someone would visualize words in their head, but I guess that's a thing for some people.

I do have to ask people to draw me a picture occasionally when they're trying to describe something. Don't need a lot of detail, just a rough sketch and I can figure out the idea.
Not a good comparison, given how bad of a track record in "adapting" the truth the vlang author has.
Same here. I had a conversation with friends who said, language influences thinking.

I said, no, I have thoughts, and I communicate them with language but the thoughts are not language.

Later we spoke about being able to have no thoughts - still mind. I said I can do this any time, I can stop the thoughts and be still. At the time I had no training but I could do it for 10, 20, 30 seconds easily. And I knew with training I'd be able to extend that time, it was effortless.

To them, that was crazy - they couldn't stop thinking at all!

So yes, we learn how our minds can work completely differently from one another.

The study of Human Design takes this to the next level - this strange science states that humans can be classified in 5 different general types which operate totally different from one another - it has taught me a lot about other people.

My base assumption that everyone is more or less like me - turned out to be completely off.
I don't know how many people there are who won't take care of public property, but whatever it is I doubt it's 1 in 3.
It's definitely real - I just need to draw/map out things on tos like drawio all the time when things get too complex to hold in my head as just memorised words and relationships
That old doctype header has been deprecated for ~15 years. You can omit it and need not remember the same.

svg header is simply:

<svg version="1.1" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">

Maybe read the manual once per decade ? Its like saying JS does not have support for lambdas.
This feels to me very similar to my experience - I tend to joke that in order to express a thought to others I have to translate it into words first; and in doing so I also flatten the thought.

And before it, the time of having a raw thought in my brain it just feels like… something, it’s not sound, not light, but “a thing” which I know means the item or concept I am thinking of. And the process of thinking is kind of these “semantic things” bouncing off each other - which usually happens much faster than I can translate it into words.

When solving a problem, I usually tinker with it for a while and then let my “big subconscious coprocessor” deal with it for a while, and more often than not if not a solution but the clear idea of direction and reasoning emerges the next time I look for it.

At the same time I tend to make a fair bit of puns based purely on spelling alone - feels a bit magical to have all the omonyms kind of flash in the head all at once, and then make-pretend pick the wrong one for fun.

Is this anywhere similar ?
This was my biggest puzzle as a child: how do all those people in crime shows describe suspects? And was it just made up?
Being used to current industry-standard Java practices, this source code looks like C to me. No streams, no generics, no patterns, but lots of mutable variables and for/while loops. And no tests of course! No build tool! Java was a _very_ different language (and ecosystem) back then, kind of like the wild west.
You replied to the creator of the V language.
Some insightful home truths there! I do enjoy programming in Swift more than ObjC but, ironically, it’s mostly on Linux.
Like any other tech, this will replace some jobs. The question is if it will generate more jobs than it replaces. And my take is that no, intellectual work is finished. In a few years any job that has information as an output will be doable by machines. Tech so far has always freed people from manual work and forced them to climb up the ladder of education and intellectual and creative work, where machines had no reach. Now we are perched at the very top of the ladder and machines are climbing the last steps. There's nowhere else to go in that direction. The kinds of work that will be spared are those that require embodiment and physical interaction.
I think Chomsky is a linguist really more famous and respected among non-linguists than actual experts in the field. I don't think modern linguistics - particularly applied linguistics for example in the area of language acquisition - references Chomsky.

His theories are unfalsifiable and un-empirical and thus, for me, unscientific. This discussion is typical. Chomsky's definition of "recursion" - like that of a "language organ" - has become completely plastic. In his initial work, it was deeply tied to the same notion in formal grammar theory but is constantly redefined and evolving as the initial notion becomes more and more dubious. The "human language is unique in that it is _recursive_" theory has no practical application and has provided no path for advancement in the field of language pedagogy for example.

Watch me chew up a bunch of karma dismissing Chomsky's theories of language. It's what often happens with comments that question his theories of language - I don't know why it's seemingly impossible to just admire his politics without feeling the need to vigorously defend his 60 or 70-year-old theories of language which have long been abandoned in the field.
Really? I thought Microsoft was pretty strict about dogfooding.
Every time I read one to figure something out I just end up searching it online. Maybe I’m just dumb but they all read like they were written as self reminders for the author of the software, not for someone who doesn’t already know how to use it.
Yes, you are correct. This is a native (disguised) ad. The interviewee dances around it but the positive OSA effect is due to improvements in weight/metabolic health from weight loss.

“ Funding support for the study came, in part, from Eli Lilly and Company.

Disclosure: Atul Malhotra serves as a consultant to Eli Lilly and Company.”

And from Lilly.com:
“ Mounjaro® and its delivery device base are registered trademarks owned or licensed by Eli Lilly and Company, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.”
> Theoretical physics is done by physicists who lack the necessary skills to do real experiments; mathematical physics is done by mathematicians who lack the necessary skills to do real mathematics.

I owe my switch from being a "systems" informatician to a "theory" informatician exactly to a mathematical physicist, so I'm glad there are some people who don't find it too much of a burden to work with the mathematically immature: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo415803...

(I'm guessing the "Algebra of Observables" is why JvN seems sometimes to crop up under every other stone I turn in semigroups?)

Russians also invent putting flow over beat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_ppG_G2s9g

(Have I mentioned I'm very disappointed that «Иван Васильевич меняет профессию» hides exactly how Ivan Grozny crosses himself; how are we supposed to decide if he's an Old Believer or not? I also still have to watch that «Ku» «Kyu» one sometime...)
We can see similar results with much simpler examples where the judgments are incontrovertible. Here's a classic pair from Chomsky:

a. John expects to present himself.

b. Who does John expect to present himself?

In (a) 'himself' refers to 'John' whereas in (b) it refers to whichever person is the answer to the question. How does GPT-4o fare?

> Who does "himself" refer to in the sentence "John expects to present himself"?

> In the sentence "John expects to present himself," "himself" refers to John. It means that John is the one who expects to present himself.

> Who does "himself" refer to in the sentence "Who does John expect to present himself?"

> "Himself" refers to John. In this sentence, John is the one who is expected to present himself.

The statistical model is confused by the superficial similarity between (a) and (b), just as Chomsky predicted decades ago.
Open AI Acquires Rockset
Surface Pro: missing support for MIPI cameras

Z13: until very recently, BIOS bug that made Linux not recognize the sound chip
I started using swift after the last wwdc and really fell in love with the language. It's really elegant and powerful at the same time.

I just tried the compiler flags, but the slowest expression is only 3 ms in my 1014loc project. Still very helpful to see where my slowest expressions are. I think I will set the threshold to 1ms and avoid slow expressions at all.
Why is this bollocks even allowed on the App Store.
> you won't have a choice

I will have a choice. I will choose one of the competitors.

> Same thing that happened when Lyft and Uber when they ran the taxi industry out of business

There's still a taxicab industry in San Francisco. It became better after competing with Lyft and Uber.
I was going to label this a fine example of yak shaving. Usually when I'm working this hard against the tool, I've missed something, though the author here sounds expert.
Not exclusively a Microsoft/Windows problem. It reminds me the nagging "Update iOS" messages in iphone, that take you to a new screen to dismiss them. Also in iOS, you can't use their wallet app for tickets and other cards if you don't add a payment card there, because they have this huge banner that says "Get started with Apple Pay" and that can't be dismissed. Disgusting.
It's real and I have it. I was astonished when I discovered other people see pictures in their head. It doesn't restrict my creative thinking but I am a spatial thinker.

When I solve an imaginary logic problem such as advancing the hands on a clock I can't see the before and after states but I can infer their positions by the directions they must point and then read the new time from that.
What none of the answers seem to touch on is the simplest case that would be a solution 99% of the time: If a previously connected to network (i.e. one we have a key for) has more bars (which I as a user can see in the UI), that is the one that will work better.

Since this is almost always true, the technicalities of _actual_ strength don’t come into it, right?
And jailbreak that Kindle and install KOReader on it, too; now it supports epub in a much more awesome reader app (not to mention having the capability to install any gtk app - I have a term emulator with ssh on mine, among others). And you're now root and can remove the amazon crap for real, no need to use airplane mode after that.
They are all bollocks and probably all free ripped off GitHub.
If I think of basically anything technical I get an image in my head. Any algorithm I write first exists in my head as a visualization of what I want to do. If I can't visualize what is going on I can't understand it and am in a state of confusion.
BuyMindfully
Embrace smarter, sustainable shopping with BuyMindfully. Track, review, and choose products that last, save money, and reduce environmental impact. Join us in empowering mindful consumers to drive demand for quality and sustainability, making every purchase count.
> What those people miss is that the productive part about dynamically typed languages isn't that you don't have to write the types, but that the types used by dynamically types languages are extremely ergonomic and can fit in many different contexts so you rarely get type errors.

This isn't true at all. I write a lot of python and I don't think I've ever had a duck-typing happy coincidence that wasn't an error. No it's exactly that I'm only depending on the aspect of the type that I need at the call/use site (so I can update types while maintaining those contracts and I don't need to update any signatures anywhere).
Understandable! Thanks for what you've shared. I'm doing academic work on something that could leverage a digital twin, hence my interest.

There are many uses for this tech, particularly in less techy crowds that still make significant use of traditional photogrammetry.

Your solution, if local, could give a significant advantage over other products such as Polycam. Again, if local, you could allow for much bigger scans (wink for those doing architecture, particularly those in the restoration field). Anyhow, hope you get that funding!
Written by Tim Bajarin, who appeared on a few episodes of Computer Chronicles. I'm currently binge-watching episodes of it so I recognised the name.
Nothing stops you from copying a book or a DVD from the library, but the lending process seems to work fine for those.
> what does this mean?

The experience of thought differs from brain to brain. For example, autistics generally experience thought differently from neurotypicals.

This happens, in part, because autistics have a different distribution of synaptic connections, which are shorter on average than is neurotypical. This typically results in an experience of disorganized thought, where multiple different parts of the brain contain independent thought, because there aren't enough connections directly between them to enforce synchronization. There are enough localized connections to allow general thoughts to happen and be operated on, but they are exactly that; localized.

Detail-oriented thinking is another well-known side effect of this, because each individual detail can easily be fit somewhere without being lost in the "big picture". Autistics are usually who you'll find sweating details that most people wouldn't necessarily care about, but they're also who you'll find sometimes getting lost in those details rather than sticking to a single clear vision. Neurotypicals, on the other paw, can miss those details if the picture as a whole looks okay to them, but they also usually won't get stuck on them in the process of executing their vision.

Note that every person is different, whether autistic or non-autistic, so there are autistics who are good at thinking in terms of the big picture and neurotypicals who are good at considering every detail. The fact that the physical mode of thinking differs doesn't necessarily mean that another can't be emulated - it just means that even if two people appear to be doing or thinking the same thing, the way it's actually implemented "in hardware" (meatware?) can differ greatly depending on neurotype, even from autistic to autistic and neurotypical to neurotypical, as the brain has no single switch between fully autistic and fully neurotypical.

Some of the statements in this comment are based on my personal experience as an autistic, some are based on anecdotes from others, and some are based on this article: https://embrace-autism.com/autism-and-disorganized-thoughts/

I've been informed that the author of the article doesn't generally do good work, but I've personally reviewed the article and believe it to still be sufficiently accurate. Additionally, this particular description of autistic disorganized thought is what originally tipped me off to the fact that the way I think is different from others. If you're not autistic and/or it doesn't describe you, please know that it perfectly describes me, which should be enough to understand how exactly the experience of thought can differ from brain to brain.

Also, psychedelics can significantly change one's mode of thinking. I use them recreationally from time to time. Somehow, they give me better executive function than my ADHD meds do.
Waymo has mounting evidence from millions of driven miles that the presence of their vehicles makes the roads overall safer.
Would love to try it but, knowing nothing about Java, I don't know how to run it. Could you add instructions to your github page on how to run it?
The problem with SQL is not SQL itself, but how it integrates with modern programming languages. It’s the gap that it’s painful. My SELECT query is very elegant, but if it takes tons of custom code or even a library to transform the resulting rows in objects in the PL of choice, well then the elegance is worthless.
Ah.

And therein may lie the source of my frustration: HN is full of not only gullible people who fall for these scams, but also the very perpetrators of these scams, using HN as a tool to generate hype.
> the user can’t know that something over there made it so something over here can’t type check

To the Swift developers: just add source positions to your type AST, in addition to the term AST, then you'll know where a type has come from. It lets you give error messages like: expected type A (line X) but got type B (line Y).

Hindley-Milner type checkers perform well in Haskell and OCaml. I don't think this type system can be blamed entirely for Swifts problems.
That is bullshit, public spending is really massive here, and this study just looks at investments made by NIH not accounting other governments:

> In this cross-sectional study of 356 drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 2010 to 2019, the NIH spent $1.44 billion per approval on basic or applied research for products with novel targets or $599 million per approval considering applications of basic research to multiple products. Spending from the NIH was not less than industry spending, with full costs of these investments calculated with comparable accounting.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148199/

The industry might spend more overall, but if you look at typical drugs they are typically publicly funded.

Edit: I think the main point people miss is all the research done by universities that is government funded. MRNA vaccines were made possible by decades of university research based on public funding, the private corporations just came in and did the easy part at the end. Novel medicines are mostly based on such research and hence mostly publicly funded, we would continue to make such progress regardless of private investments.
I recently discovered Swift Playgrounds and have been using them to teach my 7-year-old son to code. I think he enjoys it, and the instant feedback (moving Byte, the main character, through a maze) is both helpful and fun.
Executives usually have quite a bit of leverage and have multiple ways of retaliating against a company, typically in the form of a lawsuit and dragging it on for years.

This is also the reason why C-suites are given "golden parachutes", because firing them may end up triggering a lengthy legal battle that neither party benefits from.