skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
“Overnight we filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection,” the message said. “In connection with the filing, we have applied for approval of a debtor in possession [DIP] loan. Upon court approval, we expect payroll to be funded early in the week and funding for this upcoming week’s payroll to also be secured. We also expect to have the funds to reinstate medical benefits back to May 14, 2024 and going forward. We will provide regular updates.”
None of my posts should be flaggable at this point. Probably Russian trolls?
I watched someone die of ALS for 6 months, it was pure hell on earth. A middle aged guy who basically was vibrant and in average health struck down from out of no where, the final moments were horrific when they turned off the life support. Even his diagnoses was difficult since no doctor wanted to deliver the news and it required a trip to the MAYO Clinic to finally get an answer.

I have often wondered why he was chosen to carry such a burden, a harmless and kind person.
Daily trivia/puzzle game I whipped up
Yes, he does.

> content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been “freeware,” if you like, that’s been the understanding

Sure, it's his belief, but this statement is completely incorrect. The words that he's using mean specific things, and he's just got it wrong. You would expect he's smart enough to know this, but 'it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it'.

> That’s a grey area, and I think it’s going to work its way through the courts.

It's not a grey area. Putting up a robots.txt doesn't change copyright, and it certainly doesn't make it a 'grey area'.
I agree with this. Nobody can be exactly the same amount of good at everything.

What the current system in the west (NOT Sweden) encourages people to is: for a 50/50 scenario; as a man, you'll have to pay alimony, child support, work, and take care of the kids. As a woman, alimony and child support are rare to non-existent, work is optional, and taking care of the kids is an imposition from the patriarchy.

As a man, you can dispute the money part IF you keep the kids 50% of the time at least, but oh boy, there's a million scenarios where things may be based purely on hope:

Hopefully you'll get a judge that has common sense and doesn't just want to avoid dealing with the feminist crowd (or actually believes in those claims).

Hopefully you won't get a false domestic violence claim, which automatically "believes the victim".

Hopefully you won't experience the child's custody being weaponized to get more money.

Most men simply walk away from all that (and no, that's no justification, they're being horrible fathers - or no fathers at all - by doing so).

The equality discourse revolves around the division of labor in a family being just an imposition of the supposed patriarchy which rules the world. There's no historical fact checking that can support such claim.

The right tends to claim that "raising the next generation is the most important job in the world" while at the same time refusing to put ANY money on it (see the Finland example, with very extended parental leaves, financial support, and public schools).

The left tends to enable woman to do whatever they want, with no accountability, on the premise that they were oppressed from the patriarchy (so it's time for payback I guess?).

Children are the last thing anyone cares in both scenarios. The reality is that whatever we're trying to do right now is really far away from the "success rate" of the nuclear family. Even same-gender couples with kids tend to evolve into husband/wife dynamics eventually.

Also, stop giving examples from Escandinavia, nobody else functions (or legislates) like that. It has little to do with the money they have, and more to do with their culture and heritage. I'm aware of the irony of giving a Finland example myself.
Feels like you should be able to use some basic image recognition to build out a privacy-preserving version, perhaps providing a cartoon rendering of the crowd. Surely the key information here that's wanted is "how many people, and what demographic"
Right, nobody on the internet has ever violated copyright and gotten away with it. /s
> Content published openly online inherently invites broad consumption, reproduction, and creative reuse by the public.

You're using "invites" as a weaselword here. Then you go into the law, as if the law is discussing "invitations."

Counterpoint: content published online is usually extremely hostile to reproduction, and the people who produce it are deathly afraid of other people copying their work and outranking them with it.

> —-Lastly, if anyone really thinks the Robert’s court is going to knee-cap AI, you’re soft in the head.

If you think the Roberts court is going to be hostile to copyright, you're insane.
We are hiring https://boards.greenhouse.io/andurilindustries/jobs/43047390...
High-end watch people generally eschew quartz movements and anything resembling them. The occasional exceptions are for watches like the Omega Speedmaster X33 and Breitling Emergency, and even then many watch people don't want anything to do with them.

I simply don't think the market would support the investment needed to pump out these movements at scale for a new player.
I emailed the admins to investigate why this post was flagged and by who.
My philosophy of exceptions: they're always ambiguous (2021)
It’s a fair point that “did not invent the term” is not a valid criticism and I retract my earlier comment.

I still stand by my comment that the OSI is an organization that profits directly from significant funding by closed-source big tech players and therefore has a strong conflict of interest in their definition of open-source according to their Open Source Definition.

The OSD is defined specifically to ensure that open source code, except GPL can be commercially exploited and effectively become closed-source by big tech.

Famously, Christine Peterson the woman who did invent the term, defined "open source software” in 1998 as software which included the freedom to view, modify, and distribute the software's source code.

She made no claims about the ability to commercially exploit open source software without compensating the original author(s). Those terms were added later by the OSI definition.

I do think it would be more accurate to claim that software with terms limiting commercial exploitation is “open-source” per the original definition, but is not in compliance with the OSI’s Open Source Definition (OSD)
Most people would read the first quote as totally aligned with the article’s title.
If the price does go up, did it "actually make money"?
It can change over time. The deal that makes sense in house with toddlers may not make sense when the kids are gone and the primary breadwinner has gained many responsibilities. Nobody anticipates this, because the patterns are set 20 years before.

What I described is maybe stereotypical, but the point remains that relationships tend to stick to patterns even while conditions change.
It seems like you could easily address privacy concerns while keeping the app useful by automatically blurring faces or just lowering the resolution. I really love the idea for this app because the number one challenge when going out is finding venues that aren't too crowded to enjoy, trying to tell based on recent visit metrics helps but is sometimes misleading.
The article does a pretty good job outlining the actual legal rights of published content and how his statement is not supported by laws and precedent.
Vue's creator is also the author of Vite, which was designed with Vue development in mind and it's anything but slow.
I have that XKCD printed out and posted on my cubicle wall. I refer to it quite frequently as justification as to why some requested feature/etc. should NOT be implemented.

I use it so much that many non-technical people at my company have started adopting it as well.
It means you can't sell it/make a profit from it. There's a legal definition of "commercial purposes":

https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840...
I do think it's good for certain things to be ASCII-only. People will say it's Americentrism or Anglo-Saxon-centrism. Ok so be it. Make the account handles and email addresses not inclusive and ASCII-only.
I made that one up intentionally, but didn’t want to put it in quotes because I already had one word in quotes.
Or we can say the latency is a good listening skills!!
It was fast but occasionally interrupted me to answer.
I walk through humboldt daily. The tent city is 3 tents. People make a big deal of it because our homeless problem is so small compared to the west coasts.
> centralized control seems to be the answer

Yep, worked perfectly for East Germany, USSR and works great for North Korea.

An omniscient committee of a dozen party members will know better than hundreds of millions what is better for the hundreds of millions because humans are alike and predictable. /s
The more I read about this guy the more I get the feeling that he is an unscrupulous individual.

robots.txt is a "grey idea" to him, instead of being a directive to keep moving? Wow.
Pretty sure it has to “oy vey”.

It’s also a good example: it’s easy to understand for me because in German, “oh weh!” is a very common phrase.
I don't see how that follows. I certainly didn't feel atomized or depressed when I was part of a highly functional team.

Maybe you mistook my comment for a statement on society at large? That was not my intention at all. My post is about small software engineering teams, not democracies.
Weird: the article doesn't put acronyms in parentheses following thier first use. Is that normal? Or just a poor article?

https://archive.ph/5ajCE
> I could not binary-patch Borland C++ to perfectly cooperate with screens that have other width than 80 characters. So I was cornered and had no choice but to make my own editor. I could no longer remember how to use Turbo Vision, and I couldn’t bother to study, so I wrote the editor entirely from scratch.

That reasoning doesn't make much sense. I think he just wanted to write an editor (which is fine). I'm pretty sure I used DJGPP's RHIDE with 132 columns, and doing Turbo Vision stuff following the excellent documentation is pretty simple.
Sandboxed in the sense that things like file i/o or network access can be easily removed and selectively reintroduced, e.g. to give an interpreter which can trash it's own heap but can't do anything to the host.

Bounds checking on instruction opcodes can absolutely be implemented in an interpreter. I suppose it's more complicated than just trusting the integer - but then the thing doesn't fall over on malformed bytecode which seems like a feature.
SAP, Oracle, and IBM: cloud, AI drive legacy software firms to record valuation
Have you considered personal branding/networking via either social media / blogging?

Making Peace with Personal Branding:
https://www.fast.ai/posts/2017-12-18-personal-brand.html

Your blog would detail some of your work experiences you wish to write about, such as tutorials, case studies, etc. I realize it's likely a longer game than classic networking.
Related: https://www.wired.com/story/london-underground-flooding/
The Verge quotes: "I think that with respect to content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been 'freeware,' if you like, that’s been the understanding."

This statement is quite wrong. People have complained about content farms and plagiarists ripping off their content for ages. The only kinds of Web content I can think of where his statement could apply are open source software (for the more permissive licenses) and Stack Overflow posts. Almost everything else was posted with the intent of copyright.
Vaccines designed at a genomic level target the spike because that's the protein at the surface of the virus, and thus believed to be the most effective target for your immune system. That belief seems to have been correct (at least as to infection), since mRNA vaccines against the spike had the highest efficacy. The spike is unfortunately also under heavy selective pressure for that same reason, leading to the rapid evolution that you note; but that's the inherent and unavoidable tradeoff.

Inactivated virus vaccines (like Sinovac) don't target the spike, since they don't target anything. They do induce anti-nucleocapsid immunity, but there's no evidence that corresponds to any clinical benefit.

I don't think the word "immunogenic" means what you think it does. Vaccines are supposed to be immunogenic (i.e., to generate an immune response); if they weren't then they wouldn't do anything. I've seen papers proposing that the spike protein is toxic in certain cases, but no evidence that the exposure from the vaccine minus the exposure from averted infections is net harmful.
Same age, same realization - stuff that used to be just ‘tiring’ now knocks me out the next day too while I recover; and everything, bumps and bruises and blood etc, seems to take nearly 3x the time to heal now.
The inventor of the term "open source software” defined it as software which includes the freedom to view, modify, and distribute the software's source code. She made no mention of the ability to commercialize without compensation. Those terms were only added in the OSI’s Open Source Definition (OSD)
Content on web eithout any copyright notice is by default "all rights reserved" content. So you cannot use it to produce new content, unless you can prove that the old content was never reproduced ever along all the invocation of the LLM
The general issue with your comment is _just_ the president was donald trump.

He's not the governor of a single state so when those states issues stay at home orders conflicting with his direction that's just federalism in action. And then you need an act of congress to override the states like with slavery.
No ones using this to actually get useful information. The key thing is people watching and hoping something wacky happens, are you unaware of just how popular “IRL” streaming is with gen-z/alpha?
Mercedes Is Walking Back Its All-EV Future to Invest in 'High-Tech Combustion'
It's an incredibly fuzzy statement, really.

You can copy copyrighted material you download for your own use and the use of your friends. You can't copy it to a different website and distribute it further on the "open web". You can modify material provided for download in your own home for any purpose you wish but unless that modification is in the category "fair use" (a small part, a parody, etc) you can't distribute it freely on the web either.

His statement might mean this but it could mean a zillion other things too (what does "it is fair use" mean? etc)

Whether using randomly obtained copyrighted material to "train" an LLM and then selling the output of that LLM is "fair use" seems like so far another "gray area" and the foggy statement seems oriented to reducing awareness of that situation.
Aerospace supply chains have been treated as jobs and/or kickbacks programs versus practical/product need. The aircraft with parts made in every congressmen's constituencies and our partner allies versus the aircraft with a sane supply chain designed to best serve the aircraft needs. So now you are dependant on hundreds of small suppliers/subcontractors. Small businesses can't exactly scale up and down like Lockheed could, especially when you consider the large investment in say and addition upright mill that needs a lot more demand than a few extra spares being made to justify.

In software the saying I've heard/used is 'everything can't be everything'. You can have a jobs program. You can have kickbacks to local economies that aren't required to make financial/availability sense. You can have a reactive/responsive supply chain. Or you can have an efficient least expensive supply chain.
I explain more in other comments, but in this situation I was dealing with people who fundamentally could not program .

It wasn't a matter of, oh I would have done this differently, it was more like this company is full of people who have no idea what they're doing and I'd rather not be here .

I will say you should absolutely never talk about code issues at a current employer when interviewing. Who's ever interviewing you is going to interpret this as you being some weirdo who argues over tabs and spaces. There's not enough nuance communicated.

Maybe I'm trying to say you shouldn't take it personally when a company isn't a good fit.
Not sure why downvoted.
https://www.wired.com/review/fujifilm-x100vi-camera/

The main challenge for those interested is going to be finding one. They're sold out everywhere and are selling for well over $2,500 on eBay. Your best bet is probably to place your order now and sit tight for a while
All joking aside, there is a lot of literature that really needs to be spoken to be grasped.

I learned this in college taking a middle English literature course. The Canterbury tales really need to be read out loud. They have a cadence that needs to be spoken.

I would actually argue that Joyce is in the same category. His work isn't meant to be internal. It's storytelling in a group and meant to be spoken. It helps understand the DENSE writing.
> Just because something is evolutionary doesn't make it right.

True, but you’re not going to be able change it either via evolution or culture change, so rather than make excuses and complain you might as well try to understand the best you can and figure out path that works for you within an unfair and unaccommodating system.

Back on topic Regarding OP, the book “never eat alone” is a great way to learn this stuff and anyone wanting to improve tactics and mindset for networking should read it.
>Steelmanning against this, when you publish any form of content online you have to be prepared for the consequences of it's digital proliferation.

when you walk down the street in skimpy dress you have you have to be prepared for the consequences too, right? Whatever you're trying to say it has nothing to do with what rights companies have to use content.
Engineers develop face screening tool that detects stroke in seconds
> I think that with respect to content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been “freeware,” if you like, that’s been the understanding.

is literally

> I think it's perfectly OK to use content in arbitrary way if it's on open web

The only difference between this and the title is he doesn't think this behavior is called "stealing".
txtai: Vector search, Knowledge Graphs, RAG and LLM workflows locally run
Keep in mind this was also how a lot of jim crow laws worked.

ex. it's illegal to be unemployed (enforced against blacks) where unemployed included self-employment. So now you have a large population that is forced to work for any wage or get throw in prison where they're forced into work detail anyways.
I mean, that seems to be exactly how he's defining "open web" here, actually. That which is - in the dichotomy presented by these two quotes - "the open web" is free game for any use, and he defines things that use language that explicitly disallows all uses except indexing as the complement of this category. Maybe he'd accept any site that effectively declares any "whitelist" of acceptable uses in this category too, though this isn't explicitly stated.

His contention is an assumptive close, wrapping the assumption that anything not explicitly labeled otherwise must use a "blacklist" policy where any usage not specifically forbidden is permitted into "the social contract" that he claims to be so obvious as to not permit challenge

He would like the "grey area" of legal debate on this matter, as he explained quite clearly, to be exclusively about whether AI models can be enforcably barred from training on content for which such a narrow whitelist of acceptable uses has been defined. Naturally this would mean both that the courts could decide such a blanket ban can't bar msft (or anyone) from using this content to train AI models, but also that the court needn't or maybe even can't decide that failure to ban this use case explicitly (or adopt a similar "whitelist" style blanket ban) makes acceptance of it legally implied. Hell, he even leaves room for explicitly banning this use to be rendered legally unenforceable

I can see why he would want that to be the overton window!
For some reason this page is a thin wrapper around an iframe, the actual page lives here:

https://open-llm-leaderboard-blog.static.hf.space/dist/index...

The only thing that actually lives on the page at the submission URL is the little floating breadcrumb at the top right.
I use Google Maps feature where it shows you if a venue is busy or not a lot. I feel like Google maps could easily make this feature more accurate and widely available and completely obliterate these fucking weirdos who want to livestream and broadcast bars.

As someone who likes to go to bars/nightclubs, blurring isn’t a solution. Its not just random people, think about crazy exes that can recognize you from your clothes/build. This is a really dumb idea.
>I think that with respect to content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it.

Good thing it doesn't matter what he "thinks" the "social contract" is, copyright is automatic.
I'll bet they don't consider the windows and office source code fair game for arbitrary reuse provided the other party found the copy on the web. Even if the person found the copy on GitHub.
The History of the LISP Programming Language (1980 & 2023) [pdf]
Sorry, where's that stated? I'm pretty doubtful of that claim because if that's what they meant they would say that -- they'd say it was O(m^(1+ɛ)), that would be well-understood notation. But what they wrote is that it's O(m^(1+o(1))), which, read as written, means it's a single bound that they're just not being very specific about.

I'm not asking for help decoding the notation; I'm asking for if anyone knows what the more detailed bound is that O(m^(1+o(1))) is abstracting.
Oh sure but at least honest people can avoid being swindled by this stuff or falling for some types of pump and dump or pyramid schemes.
Do you have AMFI turned off?
Every past American war has to be criticized. Every past American president has to be criticized. HOWEVER the current war and the current president is always sacrosanct. We are a democracy but war is always pinned on one person; the past rogue democrat/republican president.

All the news articles about US meddling in Ukraine are still online but all wikipedia articles have been "speedy deleted"

"It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia...

"Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.usa
Seems like a huge liability risk from predators using this to take advantage of identifying inebriated potential victims.