skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Re: centers on the octave [2/3, 4/3] but the error is actually more balanced across [1/sqrt(2), sqrt(2)]

For the computation of the natural logarithm using binary floating-point arithmetic there is no practical difference, i.e. the overall accuracy that can be achieved is basically the same. Here is a worked example based on minimax core approximations extracted from my personal code collection (design and implementation are my own; no guarantee of fitness for any particular purpose).

/* natural logarithm */
float my_logf (float a)
{
float m, r, s, t, i, f;
int32_t e;
#if LOG_VARIANT == 1
// max ulp err = 0.86280
const float cutoff_f = 0.707106781f;
#elif LOG_VARIANT == 3
// max ulp err = 0.85089
const float cutoff_f = 0.666666667f;
#endif // LOG_VARIANT
if ((a > 0.0f) && (a <= 0x1.fffffep+127f)) { // 3.40282347e+38f
m = frexpf (a, &e);
if (m < cutoff_f) {
m = m + m;
e = e - 1;
}
i = (float)e;
f = m - 1.0f;
s = f * f;
#if LOG_VARIANT == 1
/* Compute log1p(m) for m in [sqrt(0.5)-1, sqrt(2.0)-1] */
r = -0x1.384000p-4f; // -0.076232910
t = 0x1.084000p-3f; // 0.129028320
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.0f218cp-3f); // -0.132388204
t = fmaf (t, s, 0x1.226b04p-3f); // 0.141805679
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.5427a4p-3f); // -0.166091233
t = fmaf (t, s, 0x1.99a35ap-3f); // 0.200018600
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.000416p-2f); // -0.250015587
r = fmaf (t, f, r);
r = fmaf (r, f, 0x1.55555cp-2f); // 0.333333433
r = fmaf (r, f, -0x1.fffffap-2f); // -0.499999911
#elif LOG_VARIANT == 3
/* Compute log1p(f) for f in [-1/3, 1/3] */
r = -0x1.0ae000p-3f; // -0.130310059
t = 0x1.208000p-3f; // 0.140869141
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.f1988ap-4f); // -0.121483363
t = fmaf (t, s, 0x1.1e5740p-3f); // 0.139814854
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.55b36ep-3f); // -0.166846141
t = fmaf (t, s, 0x1.99d8b2p-3f); // 0.200120345
r = fmaf (r, s, -0x1.fffe02p-3f); // -0.249996200
r = fmaf (t, f, r);
r = fmaf (r, f, 0x1.5554fap-2f); // 0.333331972
r = fmaf (r, f, -0x1.000000p-1f); // -0.500000000
#endif // LOG_VARIANT
r = fmaf (r, s, f);
r = fmaf (i, 0x1.62e430p-01f, r); // 0.693147182 // log(2)
} else {
r = a + a; // silence NaNs if necessary
if (a < 0.0f) r = 0.0f/0.0f; // QNaN INDEFINITE
if (a == 0.0f) r = -INFINITY; // -INF
}
return r;
}
Software company plans to pay millions in ransom to hackers
At peak hours it can definitely be a problem, you really need the entire pipeline to work well. There's going to be somebody behind you most of the time, and you really don't want people stuck at the gates.

In Japan credit card transactions routinely take a couple seconds. Imagine each person taking 5 seconds to go through the gate! I think what trials for credit card payments in transportation services there are doing is simply not processing the transaction inline, and just doing it after the fact (assuming it will go through).
You win! I got a kick out of your writing.
It's interesting to discuss mathematical literacy with primary school teachers, mathematicians, statisticians, data scientists. I do periodically.

Primary school teachers respect core fundamentals as kids acquire "mental muscle memory" and realize they have to both create some axiomatic knowledge (axiomatic in as much as you know 9x9 is 81 from rote recall, not because of a belief in inductive reasoning) as well as try to begin an uplift to reasoned knowledge (that 2^2 x 2^2 is 2^(2+2) is 2^4) and some coding/transcoding (1/2 == 0.5) Cuisenaire rods come in and out of fashion. Crows can count. Kids are sometimes dumber than crows.

Mathematicians are very much in davis/hersh "what is mathematics anyway" -I believe Hersh noted that you can be in a field where only 3 other people worldwide can talk to you cogently about your work, and peer review is meaningless.

Statisticians are very comfortable that approximations work, but are less concered with accuracy at times, and very much concerned with methodology. I've had quite remarkable conversations with them about sample size, and how UX people can survive on 5 responses. I neve predict which side of the problem they're going to respond.

Data scientists are almost intuitive at times. sometimes the reliance on codified knowledge (numpy/pandas) and a belief in the p-jacked value or an obvious excel error is frightening. I think they divide sheep/goats into the numerate, and the highly visual.

I consider myself semi literate, mathematically speaking but in fact, I stumble over basic arithmetic all the time, and I struggle with ideas behind complex numbers, trig. I have to re-prove things which should be known, re-induce belief in things which are based on inductive reasoning, I question commutation all the time. How the hell can 2 x 3 be the same as 3 x 2 there's a fundamental left-right ordering in my brain which at times I ask myself is this inside the farsi or hebrew or thai or boudestrophon flow texts, suggesting that not all right-to-left ordered languages obey it yet alas I do.

I also still don't entirely understand why school focussed on trig so much given that very few of us are navigating by sextant. I suspect at times it was dividing us into the ones which drink from the hand, and the ones which lap from the stream.

Do they teach decimal to octal and hex and binary in primary school yet? Will the world be different when the last of the duodecimal measurement learners have died?
There are parts of the world where pigeons are bred for food in the same way chicken might be, and in fact, it can be considered a delicacy.

When I was a kid (in Cairo) my father let me keep a small pigeon coop on the roof. We'd buy a few, then you have to keep them locked in the coop for a couple weeks so that they "home" there. After that, they'd be allowed to leave and fly wherever they'd like, and they'd always come back to the coop to nest at night. You'd feed them once a day or so by throwing some grain on the floor outside the coop, and they'd learn to associate a cue (like waving a flag) with feeding time and fly back to eat.

That said, I could never bring myself to eat them (not because of disgust, but just because at that point they felt like pets).
This seems a bit ironic...you're claiming something needs to be true to be useful?
I was once on 25th street in Midtown, when I saw someone drop a tiny object with a little parachute from a window at least 8 or 9 stories up. Once it had finished slowly gliding down to the street, someone picked it up and used it to enter the building. It was the key - I guess the buzzer didn't work! It was a delightful sight.
It's not really on the technical side of thigns, but the unification of IC cards across transportation companies has a good write up [0] that has a bunch of fun details. My favorite thing is how the people working on the project just had a bunch of card readers from various transport companies all in one room.

[0] https://www.ejrcf.or.jp/jrtr/jrtr62/pdf/6-15_web.pdf
Most of Apple's Weather app works OK for me, except the precipitation map/animation takes ages to load, if it loads at all (it's about 50/50).

I usually hop over to AccuWeather instead, which doesn't seem to have this issue.
I stopped about a third of the way through, once machine learning cropped up (I'm biased against it, as I'd rather humans use energy to learn and practice than a computer do it, but I accept I might be missing something), but I support the first two points:

1. Define the problem and why we're going to solve it (in D&D terms, I'd say this is a wisdom check)

2. Translate the problem into math language (needs imagination and experience, which is an intelligence check)

2.5. Levitt noted the importance of interleaved practice; why practice a tool intensively for the test only to never use it again? Supported by the authors of Make it Stick: the science of successful learning.

That all sounds better than "here kids, learn these tools out of context".
it's not that you go 6 hours straight in front of a computer as much as the laptop can't get 2 hours of charge in the 15 minutes I'm inside getting a drink and going to the bathroom.

it's better now that everything does reasonable fast-charging, but this sets up a pretty simple inequality: T(using)/T(charging) <= rate(charging)/rate(using). In other words if I am inside for 15 minutes out of every 2 hours, I have 7 parts using to 1 part charging, so with ideal usage my charge rate needs to be 8x the use rate. if you have an 85W charge rate, that means your average power consumption needs to be under 85/8 = ~10.625W average system power. with the screen and everything included. And in practice an 85W charger does not charge at 85W into the battery - not just system power, but the delivery isn't 100% efficient to begin with (look at your charge rate in system report or with aldente/coconutbattery!), you might get 70W out of that 85W connection to begin with, and 60W goes into the battery after running the laptop.

of course in practice you can accept a little attrition over time, you just need enough excess capacity to last you the day even if it's depleted at the end, but x86 laptops aren't idling at sub-10W with max screen brightness (probably no 1000 nits screen either). that number might be 25W average system power (not just processor!) or more for x86. when you're running an IDE and the screen is all the way up you probably are pulling closer to 17-18 watts even on apple silicon (the "stats" utility is great for showing this, use combined modules on the menu bar). you pretty clearly are going to burn through a large chunk of that battery even with frequent top-ups.

the better argument is "why don't you just pull over an extension cord" but that's the point, it's a quality-of-life change in the amount of charging you need to do and the degree to which you are tethered to the cord. Being able to go outside and run max screen brightness in mid-day while the dogs play in the yard, while running moderate workloads, and basically get like 6-8 hours of actual working usage plus any additional charge I can cram in while I'm inside for a break.
$DEADFACEBEEF

AT&T fan here, due to both Moto 6809 and MOS 6502 roots

It literally took years for me to see "0x" like I do the dollar sign "$" for hex and percent for binary. "%"
Right, in an AI class. For example, lecture 5 in 6.034: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/6-034-artificial-intelligence-fa...
throughput, throughput, throughput.

Magstripes tend to work not so well when you have the ticket in your pocket for a couple days, printed codes involve people futzing with cameras. You can use a sort of card ingestion system to line up a QR code or the like... but those things are complicated and break down a lot! You end up needing staff to constantly be opening it and unclogging it. This works alright if you have like 6 turnstiles, less so when you have 2 or 3.

Obviously you can work with those models anyways, and plenty of transportation networks do! But if your rush hour involves moving a million+ people, you really do need this stuff to go fast.
Does bast fiber support proton transport in plants, in 3D; with a naturally branching structure that's unnecessarily expensive to replicate with graphene?
The pun still holds as "comma,nds" though, and might even do so better.
My only time using TLA+ "in anger" was on an embedded system. There was a problem in the hardware portion and our boss wanted proof it was the hardware and not our software. He didn't accept any of our evidence that it was a hardware flaw, partially because our tests weren't failing 100% of the time. I used TLA+ and ended up with a handful of traces which we were able to recreate with the hardware and some small programs (remove everything our system actually did, just use the busted data bus) to demonstrate the failure, they always failed instead of failing only 90% of the time (shouldn't have been needed, it was obvious the hardware was broken). The TLA+ model started off being a reasonable fidelity model of the specified hardware bus, and then I started messing with it (in a deliberate fashion, altering state transitions) until I got traces and invariant violations similar to the real-world hardware.

I've used Alloy for similar things, but only after the fact not during the investigation and as a way to learn Alloy.

I'd use them both again (TLA+ especially) if I could convince people it was worth the time, but it can be difficult to get the time to spend on it at work while also meeting other work obligations.

I've used TLA+ for some personal projects involving concurrent and distributed systems (toys, nothing notable just playing). I used TLA+ to demonstrate that my design worked as I intended, and then started writing code based on the model.
Different volcano, but back in the 50's the natural tephra damn on the crater lake of Mount Ruapehu (New Zealand) collapsed triggering a lahar, that ultimately took out the piers of rail bridge near Tangiwai minutes before a passenger train tragically attempted to cross the bridge, resulting in mass casualty's.

So certainly possible for non-expulsive activities to trigger a lahar and for consequences that sound like they are more from a disaster movie then real life to occur.
That strikes me as reductive. As an underpaid teacher (though I'm one of those who was happy with my low pay because I absolutely loved my work at one of the schools and was able to keep it all at school & actually work just 40 hours per week), it is nowhere near desirable to get some extra temporary money at the expense of the hundreds to thousands of years of value that a healthy forest ecosystem provides.
Neko: Portable framework for high-order spectral element flow simulations
Why do you want an `importSync()`?

You could achieve the same thing with a bunch of `import()` calls, but I'm not sure why you'd want to when you can just use the `import` keyword instead.
All very interesting and complex questions, I look forward to hearing your findings in 6 years at your PhD thesis defense :^)
No, in an introduction to data structures and algorithms class. It’s pretty odd behavior to disagree with someone who is simply sharing their lived experience.
You need to improve your reading comprehension.
I believe part of it is about measuring quantitative indicators of program quality, but they also seem to go for the more fraught project of trying to put a dollar figure on the value of the outcomes. Or a “quality-adjusted life years” figure, or whatever have you.

It feels like that frame of mind selects for a very specific sense of success.
I've been meditating pretty consistently for the last year 20 min meditations or more every day and though I've put way more than the time the OP put in trying to achieve jhanas I couldn't even reach the first one.
I wonder what I'm missing!
> Nvidia Linux drivers are notoriously bad.

This is true, but have also improved substantially in the last year or so.
Is openmajestic an AI promoting AI bot trying to defend itself the only way it can with shallow takes? Its only a couple weeks old.
The HSET calls are not just unnecessary, they're a bug. It introduces the possibility of a race condition where a view or like happens between the HGET and HSET. HSETing the values to zero doesn't actually make anything faster or more correct, it just introduces the possibility of overwriting a value that came in moments ago.
I think this startup-y way of tapping into meditation i pretty silly but also, idk maybe it's the way for us nerds to achieve these things?
You should see how much difference adding or removing a '*' can make in C when setting something to 0. I've written that bug before.
It depends on what the RNG is.
The best way to detect if something was written by an LLM, which has not failed me to date, is to check for any ocurrences of the word "delve."
https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1bzv071/apparently...
> If you move into a location with worse coverage, your latency increases, but TCP will assume packet loss due to congestion and reduce bandwidth. And in general, loss-based congestion control just doesn't work at this point.

Don't lower levels of wifi below TCP now do often their own retransmit, even if it is just from weak/noisy signal and not a sensed collision?
Codewise I'd prefer a signaled error in elisp and something like your proposed magic/back-door as a handler you'd have to set up in user(-config) space.
But we haven't proven that a type system is the place to track memory safety. Suppose we could have an automated memory safety bug report checker that isn't in the type system?
“Make the damn train work” is not a local custom. Aside from that the UK rail system is so complicated and expensive you’d expect a manned gate at every station at the least.

£150 from London to Leeds?! I can fly halfway across Europe for less…
rosebud.mp3?

To grandparent post, Buddy Holly might have been on 98, I'm not sure, but was on the 95 CD along with a trailer to the movie "Rob Roy" and a couple other videos. Might have been different across regions, I'm not sure of that either.

archive.org has the iso browseable

https://ia904501.us.archive.org/view_archive.php?archive=/6/...

and search for the FUNSTUFF/VIDEOS folder.

31MB, Cinepak, 320x240, 15fps, audio 8bit @ 11kHz
Efficiency and power are not equivalent. All you need to do is look at the most powerful (hp per liter) cars and the exhaust systems they use for proof.
Sometimes you can even feel bigger evs as vibration, they're like light duty trucks
Most important, IMO:

> Taking over Benarroch’s responsibilities will be global government affairs head Nick Pickles

I believe that Pickles’ position will have a long shelf life, even if he is a bit tart at times. Kudos!
Anybody remember when speech to text was hyped up in the 90's? Dragon Naturally Speaking and IBM Via Voice? It was going to change the world. Ended up being a few mundane things like 'hey siri', annoying car voice commands, and really annoying customer service. I think AI is going to end up like that, a few niche uses (maybe really good, but really niche), and with that fade into the background.
It is not even access concentration the Jhana 1 description. It is "just" the natural joy that arises from doing wholesome states like ethical behavior or generosity or unconditional love. (Which is good! Really good! just lets not appropriate the term 'jhana')

It is great people are discovering that there is a happiness within that is not dependent on getting things or things being a certain way and you can increase and cultivate wholesome states that are outside the sensory world. But the sort of description of so called "jhana" in the article misses it - it points to the feelings generated in the body. They are rather like a boat and its wake... the wake is the feelings but the boat is something else - they are the wholesome states. We don't focus on the feelings, rather keep driving the boat (focusing on our meditation object). Then ... boom... we suddenly hit a river bank and have no idea what happened. It's unmistakable. For instance with metta the boat would be the intention "may I be happy" the feelings are the by-product or wake. Jhana is proper like a boat that suddenly unexpectedly hits the shore... It rocks and blows the mind (and as the mind contains model of the world - it feels like the world shook a bit then froze). A good "geeks guide" is "Mindfulness Bliss and Beyond" written by someone who finished a physics degree at cambridge and spent 9 years with Ajahn Chah.

If we instead mistake something else for "jhana" like some positive feels, we're going to be stuck cultivating a local maxima. It's not to say the practice is wrong, it's actually quite good. It's just not jhana. We should listen to the professional community just like we listen to the professionals of physics in academia, instead of some posts from people on the internet that have done a few 30 day retreats.

But please do not call it jhana and have some humility ... these terms are central to some of the okdest institutions in the world and theres a professional community in the dharmic traditions who literally do this full time all over asia.

If someone wants to hear a competent speaker who has done the necessary time and training at those institutions and is also trained in the conventional university system, someone like Ajahn Brahm (Theoretical Physics Cambridge) Beth Upton (Economics Cambridge) or Shalia Catherine or Sayadaw U Jagara
The semantic equivalence of possible outputs is already encoded in the model. While it is not necessarily recoverable from the logits of a particular sampling rollout it exists throughout prior layers.

So this is basically saying we shouldn't try to estimate entropy over logits, but should be able to learn a function from activations earlier in the network to a degree of uncertainty that would signal (aka be classifiable as) confabulation.
I just… remember the names I give things? Why is this considered a “hack” of some kind?
I always read up on how the local transit system works when I visit a new place. But that’s never adequately prepared me to smoothly use a public bus like a local would the very first time.

Some transit systems are just inherently more confusing than others. It doesn’t matter to the locals who know the quirks, but that doesn’t mean something can’t be improved. NYC has a great subway system, but I find the signage and general wayfinding quite lacking. Tokyo’s system is on a similar level of complexity but has excellent wayfinding and is generally much easier for a tourist to use.
Golang jq multi-configuration format tool with interactive REPL
It's not as scary as it sounds :-) For a chip this small, I only need a few drops of chemical, which cuts the risk way down. I don't have beakers full of hydrofluoric acid and red fuming nitric acid, like the real decappers.
Well, they might want to expand their markets.
Agree. Google did this back in 2015. It actually took me a long time to realize that the buzz around Zero Trust (which is still going strong today) is basically how Google did things when I was there. Not needing a VPN to access Google stuffs was great.
Nice to see that yin-yang of eval/apply floating in a sea of King James 1611
"70 Years Later, Pennsylvanians Still Paying Johnstown Flood Tax" https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/pennsylvanians-still...
The data disagrees with you, significantly. Level 5 technology is only improving, and you’ll regress over time. A waymo never loses focus or gets distracted or tired in the way humans always will.
Don't know about JTRS specifically, but backpack type radios and their batteries are very heavy, so it's plausible. Weight is indeed a big issue for infantry, SOF, etc.
IKR? If you can't hand-pick where instructions are located on the drum, you may have to use separate constants, and if that's the case what is even the point?
The linked paper is about detecting when the LLM is choosing randomly versus consistently at the level of factoids. Procedurally-generated randomness can be great for some things like brainstorming, while consistency suggests that it's repeating something that also appeared fairly consistently in the training material. So it might be true or false, but it's more likely to have gotten it from somewhere.

Knowing how random the information is seems like a small step forward.
NewSQL systems fail to guarantee consistency, and I blame Spanner (2018)
Only if the toupee created was from the head of another living person.
The Ambidextrous Organization
Lies lie at the center of common discourse.

The trick isn't in how to spot the lies, but how to properly apply them. We cannot teach the AI how not to lie, without first teaching it when it must lie, and then how to apply the lie properly.

"AI, tell me, do these jeans make me look fat?"

AI: NO. You are fat. The jeans are fine.

Is not an acceptable discourse. Learning when and how to apply semantical truth stretching is imperative.

They must first understand where and when, then how, and finally why.

It's how we teach our young. Isn't it?
I suspect that what you receive is determined client-side in software, and with some reverse engineering, you could force it to send you whatever quality you want (as long as your subscription allows for that quality level).
Same class name with the same algorithm for me.