skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Show HN: I Made a ChatGPT Revenue Estimator
Hi everyone!

I'm excited to introduce the ChatGPT Revenue Estimator!

I've build this tool to help ChatGPT creators see the potential earnings from your Custom ChatGPT. Just drop your link in and find out how much revenue it could generate!

Have you considered it before? What are your experiences or concerns? Let's start a discussion!

Looking forward to your feedback and stories!
Embracing imperfection is part of having simpler systems. Even for the simplest of domains, a perfect solution will be complex.
I’ll put this link for the archivists.

“Hanlon’s Razor”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor
You will like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eyFDBPk4Yw
"self documentated code" is probably the biggest lie that the Clean Code gang has managed to indoctrinate generations of programmers who just don't know any better.
If it's feasible, having Postgres as the only dependency would greatly simplify deployment and management for smaller scale systems.

Great job so far- The flow-based UI with triggers is killer! AFAIK, this surpasses what Celery includes.
a light nanosecond is a foot :)
Sexual assault in the United States military
AI-generated Al Michaels to provide daily recaps during 2024 Summer Olympics
I don't think simplicity has a rather obvious form without experience. In my opinion, one needs to go through many years of experience to be able to predict when something is too simple for the purpose, and when it's not simple enough.

That gut feeling only comes through pain, aka experience, botching a refactoring you thought was brilliant to simplify code, and realise there were reasons for it to be overly complex. Experience working with overengineered code that takes a while to realise it's actually much simple than what the code is telling you, and can be thoroughly simplified.

Over many cycles of those experiences I believe one can start developing a sense of form for what's good simplicity.

Another point is it comes from the experience of reading vast amounts of code, from many different skill levels/sets.

Simplicity takes time and consideration from experience, I don't think you can jump the step of building experience to be proficient at it.
Just get an older iPad.
Yeah, pretty much - that was more of a side project while figuring out what to work on next. Plus the Terraform licensing changes were on the horizon and I became a little frustrated with the whole ecosystem.

Part of the reason for working on Hatchet (this version) was that I built the Terraform management tool on top of Temporal and felt there was room for improvement.

(for those curious - https://github.com/hatchet-dev/hatchet-v1-archived)
Methinks that moment is in the rearview mirror.
Are there examples of the prompt or transcripts for the human testing?
The advertising networks and associated trackers on many news sites would not pass gdpr
Interesting and congrats on the launch!

I am definitely a fan of all things postgres and it's great to see another solution that uses it.

My main thing is the RabbitMQ dependency (that seems to be a topic of interest in this thread). Getting rid of that and just depending on PG seems like the main path forward that would increase adoption.
Right now I'd be considering something like this over using a tool like Rabbit (if I were making that consideration.)

You also compare yourself against Celery and BullMQ, but there is also talk in the readme around durable execution.
That to me puts you in the realm of Temporal. How would you say you compare/compete with Temporal? Are you looking to compete with them?

EDIT: I also understand that Rabbit comes with certain things (or rather, lacks certain things) that you are building ontop of, which is cool. It's easy to say: why are you using rabbit?? but if it's allowing you to function like it with new additions/features, seems like a good thing!
Depends, are the serious about avoiding antitrust cases?
I also work at Google and on Gemma (so same disclaimers)

You can try 27b at www.aistudio,google.com. Send in your favorite prompts, and we hope you like the responses.
1. Not technically open source since you can’t use for commercial, but ignoring the pedantry.

2. You’re clearly worried about the commercial risk, why even do it? You have a section on this but even after reading - seems like a non answer.
For sure: in fact MoE models train such a router directly, and the routers are not super large. But it would also be easy to run phi-3 against a request.

I almost think you could do like a check my work style response: ‘I’m pretty sure xx, .. wait, actually y.’ Or if you were right, ‘yep that’s correct. I just checked.’

There’s time in there to do the check and to get the large model to bridge the first sentence with the final response.
Far more likely the battery outlasts the car than the rest of the car outlasts the battery.
1. I’m not attacking renewables. I’m highlighting the failing track record of renewables on the grid failing to displace fossil fuels. They have demonstrated an ability to absorb energy growth and displace fossil fuels within that growth, but the more renewables are installed, fossil fuels remain a requirement to try to keep the grid stable (not just at night time, but during the day too). I have no problem with fossil energy’s externalities getting priced in and we share a goal of getting rid of fossil fuels. I just believe nuclear is the only technology that’s actually demonstrated that for grid energy. You also seem to be pretending like solar isn’t receiving subsidies when it’s receiving significantly more subsidies than nuclear - like estimates are that by 2040 we’ll have pumped in nearly 5T worth of subsidies. Nowhere near fossil fuels but significantly more than nuclear. And also keep in mind that increasing energy prices will also mean that costs across the board rise which will be politically unpopular for taxing fossil fuels more.

2. There’s a few problems with your proposal. Mexico has even less experience than the US building nuclear power and gen IV reactor designs (which is what we should be building) are just exiting into real world plants. Also, Mexico isn’t a nuclear power and it’s permission to build nuclear power plants comes from the US and falls under the US regulatory framework anyway:

> Under the PSAs, each nuclear transaction from the United States to Mexico was an exceptional case to the legal requirements of the Atomic Energy Act. In addition, where the PSA nuclear cooperation required the explicit consent of the IAEA, as well as Washington D.C. and Mexico City

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profil...

I’m not aware of any other low-regulation countries near the US - are you? As for regulation shopping in Europe, again the same problem. The US has exported its nuclear regulatory framework to many Western countries. France is about the only one that managed to evade it and generates a surplus of energy (with no nuclear accidents by the way) that it then exports to its neighbors. This isn’t something nuclear investors can fix - it needs a top-down shift in nuclear policy and pushing politicians in Washington to fix the regulatory requirements. The US used to have the most forward nuclear industry until they killed it in the 80s and it’s taken 40 years for China to buck the worldwide regulations that the US has been using to lock things down due to their concerns about proliferation weakening their advantage they’ve had on force projection.
In 2024, to have an offboarding process that doesn’t fully automate access revocation to all systems - much less the sensitive ones - is incredibly bad, especially for a company of Microsoft’s stature and position in the market.

I have a bad feeling that the 2020s and 30s are going to continue revealing these lapses where they exist, and while I experience no schadenfreude at headlines like this I’m also happy these incidents are getting major attention.
It is not ethical to implicate Boeing in the headline when there is no alleged illegal or unethical behavior by them.
Q: "Why was this written in such a way that this logic that could have been one function is spread across 3 libraries using 3 different frameworks, one of which requires me to run a JAR file to install an Eclipse plugin before it will even compile?"

A: "Job security ha ha ha"

(paraphrasing of an actual conversation I have had multiple times with coworkers)
Your scientists thought so much about whether they could they didn't stop and think whether they should!
I think their numbers are BS, just like Hollywood's numbers have always been BS. Remember when Lord of the Rings lost money for New Line somehow?

Paramount's supposedly got 71,000,000 subscribers. At ~$10/month, they're making something like $8,500,000,000 / yr in subscriber fees. You gotta be daft to lose money on that.

At like a $1,000,000 / episode (last numbers I heard, might be old) that's 8,500 episodes of television a year. Pretty sure they didn't make anywhere near that much content last year. Seems like mostly all they're doing is taking away content and then charging you for it again. Disney already plays this game pretty extensively.
A basic understanding of SQL is one of the most useful skills a software Engineer can have. Sooner or later, you will get to face a database system that requires it, either for actual application development or for data mining.

Even if you don't use it all that often, I think that every developer should get some exposure to Functional, Logic and Declarative languages - and SQL is a decent way to learn more about the "declarative way of thinking", even if it isn't used in a fully declarative fashion in many practical situations.
Weird choice to talk about the placebo effect in this context. The placebo effect is definitely used in combination with chemical and biological effects when administering drugs (or, more accurately, it always automatically happens). It's just when trying to test the efficacy of drugs that you need to control for the placebo effect, otherwise the noise of the results would drown the signal of the biological/chemical impact.
Typically what I’ve see most often is: considering coding as a satisfying hobby, combined with the tendency to generalize into a properly sorted ontology, which leads to prioritizing the pleasingness of the code rather than the fitness of it to the current purpose. This is excellent, if the coding is in fact for a hobby, but it is often misapplied in other contexts. https://xkcd.com/974/

“Simplicity” can also be defined any number of ways, but is most often defined as “Maximally pleasing simplicity” rather than “Fewest moving parts simplicity”, in part due to misestimating how total volume of moving parts is an exponential complexity modifier when one is not already familiar with the mechanisms. https://xkcd.com/2501/
I wonder why they resigned... Just because they were being attacked, their houses burned, with family members being kidnapped, all while they were prevented from entering government buildings....
You could do it legally, but the results are not required to be what you want them to be.
Matt Levine has covered this several times in the past, worth reading. From memory, the Purdue family had put away their money in legally sheltered arrangements, so even an unfavorable decision (to the Sacklers) would likely not be able to claw back much money. The previous deal traded the risk of trial for a perceived as decent compensation. My read is that the majority in the supreme court disagreed that you can always financial-engineer your way out of trials
Ok I get what people are saying, but you are describing the common case, where guilt is in question. I'm talking about the parent comment which is saying "even if someone is known to be guilty they still deserve defense." You're talking about the common case -- where there is doubt to guilt and/or someone maintains innocence. Do you also believe someone who admits guilt should still be defended (e.g. hide this fact from the jury and proceed as though they didn't admit to the crime)? The only reason for defending someone is because they may be innocent, there is no advantage to excusing a guilty person. Or do you believe there is an advantage to excusing the guilty?

I also understand why we have our current system, and that there may be false positives, I'm merely commenting on the fact that we should not defend those that are 100% known to be guilty (and I'm not claiming that its easy to ascertain, but that in cases where people plead/confess, maybe its for the best).
Given enough experiences of documentation diverging from reality - the system does not behave how the docs claimed it should - people lose faith in the documentation.

That may explain the sentiment that the code is the documentation. There may be some html or pdf with "documentation" in the name, but if it's inaccurate, you're going to end up looking at the code anyway.

If that's your experience it makes writing documentation hard to justify. It's a poor approximation to reality which becomes steadily less true over time. So really what's the point.

We need something closer to live documentation which runs the examples against the codebase and fails CI when they stop working to have a chance. Some projects do that. Deriving docs from comments helps a little but comments are often wrong too.
If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
But that break was typically how long it took to get to the next class. So it might have been a break from active brain activity (as evidenced by the brain dead decisions of navigating hallways/lockers), it's not a break per se. Maybe one was determined by the other, but I remember having to hustle to get from one end of campus to the other in those 10 minutes in a very un-break like use of energy
How does this compare to something like in-trans paired nicking?
> For those claiming the Supreme Court is a political institution, I'd like to note that this was indeed a 5-4 decision.

Is there a name for this type of fallacy, in which a single data point is used to argue that a global trend does not exist? (Another prominent example is "it snowed somewhere, therefore climate change is not real.")
How would audial waves affect the brain as electrical waves? I don't think that's possible. I'm figuring they'd need to directly take effect in the brain tissue itself to clean it.
The biggest challenge I’ve felt is finding modern, idiomatic solutions for framework code. All LLMs seem to be victim to this issue where they will propose a mixture of old anti-patterns, roundabout approaches that technically work but make little sense, and mixing framework patterns with non-framework patterns in a way that leads to problematically incohesive code when taken together.

For example, I’m an experienced backend programmer but have been using Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4 asking questions about a frontend I’m building in TS using Svelte (which i am not very proficient in). The LLMs frequently confuse themselves with TS/JS, server/client side approaches, recommend old and deprecated approaches, and mixing patterns from other frameworks (e.g. react) when an idiomatic approach does exist. The biggest risk is when, in my ignorance, I do not detect when this is happening.

It’s been functional enough to push a hacky prototype out (where it would take me probably months longer to learn and do this otherwise), but the code quality and organization of the project is certainly pretty low.
The problem with mind altering substances is they can short circuit your rational thinking. So you can start with the most well-considered decision process ever and still end up addicted. In fact, this doesn't even require a substance. Gambling is plenty addictive to many.

There's a kind of fallacy to thinking that sufficient education can counter biological human desires and impulses in all cases.
Midwest right now. Maybe next time the mothership calls me to Redmond. I love Seattle.
The 27B model is also available in AI studio

https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts/new_chat?model=gemma...

So far it seems pretty strong for its size.
The WasmGC version is twice as fast as the JS version.
They mention a book, book seems like it never came out?
I can say with a pretty high level of confidence that we aren’t going to be a seeing an epidemic of vaccine addiction in the coming years.
once that rug is gone, so am I. I suspect several other folks in this discussion chain are of similar disposition
Not only is this a counterpoint, but the outrage never made sense to begin with, IMO.

It’s so easy to imagine the kinds of harm a disgruntled employee can cause with the right access that it’s hard to imagine why anyone would be upset at an appropriately swift access revocation process.
They have made it invalid. You’re not supposed to do it.
> oh you didn't just say that did you now you're in more trouble you should have had a lawyer

Yeah, there is so much absolutely farcical stuff that happens in our court systems that would make for champagne-tier black comedy, if it didn't affect people's lives so much.

Accused: "I want a lawyer, dawg!"

Police: No lawyer.

In court...

"I asked for a lawyer and they refused to let me get one."

Prosecutor: "Your honor, the defendant asked the police for a lawyer dog, and knowing no canines that had passed the bar, they were unable to find one. This isn't their fault."

Judge: "Sounds entirely reasonable to me. No issue here."
Well, I don't think civil forfeiture specifically would work, but like I mentioned above, yes, if the justice department wanted to criminally charge the Sacklers, they could possibly win and get a judgement against some of the money. But then that money doesn't really go to the victims - it's just a way to punish the Sacklers.

The bankruptcy settlement had a bunch of money going to families of the victims, and also to the states for anti-addiction programs, and also some money towards documenting the Purdue wrongdoings, so that the public would have better visibility just HOW this was allowed to happen in the first place
Is it safe to give part of your domain url to redirect to someone else's website
So I have a domain.com
I've been approached by some company in same industry to change dns of "somepart.domain.com" of my domain to redirect to their dns. That will drive them traffic and they will backlink to me there.

Is it safe or did anyone did it?
Counterstrike Go worked fine on my macbook until Valve released Counterstrike 2, which automatically upgraded everyone's version of Go to 2. Then it no longer worked on MacOS. Valve responded by just refunding anyone who used Go on a mac in the last x months, it was pretty frustrating.
Seems like you kinda described this book! (Really interesting book!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
I have personally been in teams where, when I questioned whether or not we really needed Shiny New Thing, I got a ton of pushback, most of it not very persuasive. I have even heard programmers criticize the state of the code when they joined the company, saying "there just wasn't much code...".

You get what you reward. Our industry rewards more keywords in your CV. Therefore, people try to get as many keywords as they can.
Or, you know, fix the issues that prevent you from sleeping instead of messing with hormones. If you really need to sleep, take some GABA. Otherwise, work on it and maybe take magnesium.
I’ll explain by example: If police were military they could be “deployed” to areas of the country that they are not from. By shuffling officers periodically you could prevent the formation of cliques within the force at a local level. In Mississippi for example there is a lot of corruption and racism in the force, likely to a greater degree than what you would find in LA. And they answer to absolutely no one. Recently a mass grave of unnamed people was found behind a police station in Mississippi: https://peoplesdispatch.org/2024/01/18/a-mass-grave-of-hundr...

For the reasons outlined above I would prefer police to be part of the military. Then maybe you would have some type of accountability. This southern cop behavior is the type of thing Blackwater got up to in Iraq. Non-military people who pretend like they’re the real deal without being beholden to a command structure are all but guaranteed to go rogue.
That's just how much Amazon thinks you will enjoy it. I mean, if something is that enjoyable, surely it's worth a higher monetary price tag? It's a luxury read.
It also seems to turn whether the Sacklers seek a third-party “release,” which is precedented, or “discharge,” which is not. (The Court also assumes Purdue’s indemnification of the Sacklers will not hold, which would allow the Sacklers to drain Purdue as they fight the various claims against them.)

Interestingly, the argument for is textual. The argument against is pragmatic. (Both argue history, in my opinion, unconvincingly. They’re talking past each other on release vs discharge, a delineation neither side bothers to delve into.) The dividing line defies easy summary. (Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Barrett and Jackson concurring, Kavanaugh, Roberts, Sotomayor and Kagan dissenting.)
Conversational dialogue seems like a fascinating distraction.

Many people who have (unsuccessfully) attempted to apply AI to education have focused too much on the "explanation" part and not enough on scaffolding, navigating, and managing the entire learning process. It’s easy to go on a wild goose chase building an explanation AI.

You fall in love with the idea of AI having conversational dialogue with students, and then you get lost in the weeds of complexity. You solve just enough of the problem to produce a cool demo, yet you're still hopelessly far away from self-service learning in real life.

I don't think conversational dialogue is even necessary.

What we do at mathacademy.com is hard-code explanations and break them up into bite-size pieces that are served at just the right moment. And we close the feedback loop by having students solve problems, which they need to do anyway. (The student's "response" is whether they got the problem correct.)

Sure, hard-coding explanations feels tedious, takes a lot of work, and isn't "sexy" like an AI that generates responses from scratch – but at least it's not a pipe dream. It's a practical solution that lets us move on to other components of the AI that are just as important.

What are those other components? A handful off the top of my head:

* After a minimum effective dose of explanation, the AI needs to switch over to active problem-solving. Students should begin with simple cases and then climb up the ladder of difficulty, covering all cases that they could reasonably be expected to solve on a future assessment.

* Assessments should be frequent and broad in coverage, and students should be assigned personalized remedial reviews based on what they answered incorrectly.

* Students should progress through the curriculum in a personalized mastery-based manner, only being presented with new topics when they have (as individuals, not just as a group) demonstrated mastery of the prerequisite material.

* After a student has learned a topic, they should periodically review it using spaced repetition, a systematic way of reviewing previously-learned material to retain it indefinitely into the future.

* If a student ever struggles, the system should not lower the bar for success on the learning task (e.g., by giving away hints). Rather, it should strengthen a student’s area of weakness so that they can clear the bar fully and independently on their next attempt.
The Finals is nuts and sports one of the most advanced game engines out there right now. Fine-grained, server side destruction physics that's synced perfectly to everyone's client so everybody sees the building crumble in exactly the same way.