skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I actually don't think space based solar to beam it back to Earth will ever really be practical short of a space-elevator style tether to transmit the electricity down. But some of the pros would be as follows.

* Capable of 100% capacity - power generation can be 24/7/365 if in orbits around the sun or stationed at the Earth-Sun Lagrange points.

* Greater panel efficiency - less energy lost to the atmosphere that can be captured by the panels, closer orbits will increase efficiency even more due to more power/area

* Surface area - minimum 1x10^20 square kilometers of area you can build panels

There are of course many cons - but it could be a vital part to a space based industry - you need a lot of fuel or power to really do anything in space, and the power from space based solar could to be used to kickstart a fuel production facility off Earth. Fun stuff but not very terrestrially relevant.

EDIT: Some more numbers: You get about 40% more power/area in space vs on the ground.
You need about ~22 TW to "power" humanity. So you need about 70,000 km^2 of space based solar assuming 25% end to end efficiency, which might be a generous estimate. So lets round it to 100,000 km^2. But thats a significantly smaller area than the terrestrial equivalent of about 500,000 km^2. Right now it costs about $1B installed for a square kilometer solar installation, so we if can build solar panels on the Moon or something anywhere close to the same cost as on Earth (very very BIG if), potentially a difference of $400T dollars at todays terrestrial prices.
> In practical terms, Foucault’s and his followers’ assault against sexual normalization has helped bring about institutions that disavow normativity at every turn.

I assume this is an oblique defense of Foucault's lifelong and vocal campaign to remove the age of consent so adults could have sex with children. Foucault was also recently accused of having purchased boys for sex by his friend Guy Sorman.

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/4/16/reckoning-with-...
What about this ruling stops Congress from explicitly granting interpretive power on some aspects of a law? The default now is implicit interpretive power, this ruling flips it.
It was politicized because the hall monitors and moral busybodies (we all remember who they were and what they were like before the pandemic too) tried to force people to pick between getting it or starving.
If you had the context you have the answer. The whole point of the article
This is the Supreme Court that claims, "In the summer of 2023, Justice Samuel Alito told the Wall Street Journal that Congress has no authority to regulate the Supreme Court, despite the ethical regulations Congress already imposes on the justices" (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/alit...) and that does not have any binding code of conduct.
That was a jaw dropper.
Apple Pay 'technical problem' sees customers wrongly charged thousands
Since Monday numerous customers in Hungary are getting charged by Apple Pay without any reason. It looks that settled past trnsactions are booked again by error. Even blocking your debit card does not prevent the transactions.
More coverage in Hungarian:
https://telex.hu/techtud/2024/06/28/apple-bank-mnb-bankszove...
OpenAI CTO says AI should displace some creative jobs that shouldn't exist
Thanks! Didn't know about this cool feature.
You can make plots look however you want with base graphics. ggplot2 users mainly use the default settings honestly, you get that classic grey background plot I personally find more ugly than the cleaner white background defaults of the base package.
> How would you argue that this is an improvement?

Not all branches have the same risk of tyranny. The Executive branch consists of about 1 million unelected government employees, following a rigid command hierarchy who wield power over every aspect of society. The Judicial branch consists of about 900 federal judges who work on a limited backlog of cases. No one from the Supreme Court is going to come knocking on my door if I defy one of their edicts, but as for the Executive branch, you can count on it.
I think OP is referencing this this blog article about how the sweep stakes car is actually a marketing gimmick that is never won.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17392995
Actually, most people have multiple motivations for working in their field. Nursery school teachers like kids. They also like getting paid. Most doctors like the status their job confers and helping people in need. They also like getting paid. People who have jobs that suck -- septic tank pumper, say -- may well be in it solely for the money.
Did you forget the first impeachment for withholding critical aid from a buffer country between NATO and USSR-hopeful in exchange for them investigating his political rival?
It started as a bespoke structured data and Web architecture, which did somewhat complex things that would've been a huge headache to build and maintain in the dominant languages of the time, but were viable for one person to figure out and implement in Scheme and PostgreSQL.

That bespoke architecture and implementation language lent itself to a lot of rapid domain-specific functionality, as well as doable architecture changes over time.
> https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=abcde.git;a=blob...

Interesting. I was a bit surprised by the use of echo in the usage() function (and not cat and a heredoc) -- but that certainly looks like a very structured shell script.

Thanks for sharing.
> I can take the point with Google on transferring already installed apps from the Play Store to a 3rd Party store.

Imagine if your bank said that. Or a storage unit business.

I’m not sure why we accept it for digital “goods”.
Which is the best AI chip now?
> The through traffic comment was a response to my original comment that a person wanted to use the Hudson River tunnels to pass through NYC onto their destination.

Which parent comment are you referring to? I don't see any talking about non-NYC destinations besides yours.

In any case, the only highways that are exempt are the West Side Highway and the FDR. These are the only highways in the zone. And generally you don't take either of those highways for anything other than "local traffic" as you said. So I'm just not understanding your point about routes outside of NYC, that doesn't make any sense in the context of congestion pricing and the exempted highways in the first place.
There's a better way to get power or heat from hydrogen that is 200 times better than burning it:

https://brilliantlightpower.com/shareholder-meeting-presenta...
My love for Meta is strictly confined to FAIR and the PyTorch team. The rest of the company is basically cancer.
> rights of citizens to determine their own laws.

You meant to say "extremely wealthy citizens." The power vacuum that comes with less government is always filled-in by people with the most resources. And those sorts of people only see the non-wealthy as objects to be exploited for them to acquire even more wealth.
Make the domain login-to-[airline]-wifi.com, get a real cert, and return a form with <h1>Login with Facebook</h1> and you won't ring alarm bells for the average user
Might explain why almost zero CCS powerplants have been built.
I know what lit is, a former colleague tried to pitch my manager on migrating to it because he too loved web components and we were investigating microfrontends.

Turns out, it's quite trivial to publish react and angular components as web compenents.

That completely took the value prop away from lit, and in terms of DX and library support, the other frameworks won easily

I'm not saying don't use smaller frameworks. I'm saying the safest future bet is learning the big ones
Heh. Can relate.

Even my own codebases/config. management systems are difficult, if I haven't dealt with them in a while.

However, I am pretty good at understanding old stuff I did, mainly because I leave a legacy for myself.

https://littlegreenviper.com/leaving-a-legacy/
Those kinds of printers were delightfully mechanical. Writing a little loop in GW-BASIC to grab key-at-a-time input (INKEY$) and writing it out to the parallel port was a ton of fun. You could create overstrike-type output like that easily. It also almost felt like controlling a robot. (I mean, you really were...)
Last I checked, the XPS 13 inch was still a serious risk of burning your lap if used as an actual laptop.
I worry about the explosive growth of new datacenters. It is only partially driven by AI, the trend started long before ChatGPT entered the scene.

Where I live, Google is building a huge 860 MW hyperscale datacenter that will require massive amounts of solar and wind to be built in our region, ruining a lot of forests and mountains. It also consumes insane amounts of water.

To put the energy demands into context; 860 MW (7.5 TWh a year) is about 25% of the energy use of all households and the agricultural sector in Norway.

The same is true for other european countries. In Denmark, datacenters now consume 20% of the total energy production. The same is true for Ireland.

Renewable energy is not that green if it only adds energy to the mix on top of fossil fuel use, instead of replacing it.

Solar and wind is resource intensive to build and wind and solar parks can claim large areas of forest and biodiverse nature when installed.

Another local business near me put solar on the roof of their industrial building, and it powers all their delivery cars + their cooling needs for storage. It is owned by the local business, not by an international investment firm, and it does not claim any extra nature when installed. This is how we should use renewables!
If we are going to limit tech I think they should reduce the improved precision of chronometers. Lots of records fall simply because of this. It isn't fair that previous record holders lose their record simply due to better measuring technology.
> Why can't Congress write complete regulatory statutes? Isn't that literally their job? Yes, it is.

No, it's not. That's like saying it's the CEO's job to write every design document in a company.

It not only doesn't make sense -- it's not even possible from a perspective of information throughput.

It sounds like you're saying that Congress should approve drugs rather than the FDA. Absolutely not. Congress should write the regulations that govern how the FDA operates, and then the FDA should operate.

And let's remember -- if Congress doesn't like what a regulatory agency is doing, it can pass legislation to change that. If it doesn't, we can assume it approves. Therefore the courts have no business stepping in -- except obviously when there is genuine conflict between laws or with the constitution. But that's not what you're talking about.
This is the Supreme Court that has repeatedly made subject-matter related arguments (particularly historical arguments) while ignoring the input of subject-matter experts.
It's pretty much impossible to write a statute to account for every single possible situation and interpretation. In one county where I live we recently had a huge kerfluffle over the county code section about a ferry and ferry fares and what kinds of things the farebox can be spent on. At one point there were three different rewrites of the same statute, all purported to accomplish the same goal, and all markedly different depending on which motivated entity wrote the proposal. At any rate someone still would have needed to interpret the statute.
The purpose is more obvious if you understand what makes \r and \n different, and why both existed. But I guess that's becoming lost knowledge now.

Ultimately, many "character sets" combined printable characters, cursor/head control, and record boundaries into one serialized byte stream that could be used by terminals, printers, programs for all sorts of purposes.
Given he was clearly convinced in the end by sound arguments, was it really irrational or was he just a hard sell for good reasons?
Reading the title, I thought this was a tool for optimizing and disassembling LLMs, not an LLM designed to optimize and disassemble. Seeing it's just a model is a little disappointing in comparison.
The great irony is that rhino horns grow back. Poachers would actually make more money in the long term if they didn't kill the rhinos.
> This is the Republican play book: purposely make the government worse, distract with absurd claims, then come election time lie and say that the Democrats want to make the Republican's version of bad government even more expansive. Every four to eight years, the Democrats clean up the Republican's mess. Government gets better. Then Republicans lie again and the cycle repeats.

You may already understand this, but just to make it explicit: the Democrats are not the good guys in this process. They benefit just as much as Republicans from good government being perpetually on the brink. They win the presidency because we're terrified of what Republicans will do if they don't. The system is currently structured to reward both sides for brinkmanship and that's why it sucks.

We need a system that reduces the amount of change riding on any single election and neither party wants a change to such a system. If SCOTUS is as much an extension of the Republican party as people here assume then I think we'll find in 30 years that they badly shot themselves in the foot.
The productivity aspect that he is talking about doesn't have to do with focus. Its significantly faster to work on anything with more screen real estate.
This ai energy stuff makes zero sense..... Unless you have an existing metric for the energy cost of fiat currency. So what is the cost of fiat? And I don't mean merely the production of paper, but also the cost of moving it, transferring it online, etc. The whole idea of an energy cost for currency is nonsense imo. But it does make sense if you want to usher in the idea of a carbon tax.
I can anecdotally say my body works the exact opposite: holding stretches is excruciatingly painful for me and I went from not being able to touch my knees to full downward dog in 12 months by doing very short (2-3s) but very strong stretches (like painful enough I would tear up).

So I think every body is different and there is unfortunately no magic trick.

But the author did one thing that applies to everyone: don’t give up; read up, keep trying new stuff.
I wouldn't say "never was". EV certs were an attempt to do exactly that for a time period of about 10 years. And many users were explicitly trained to trust EV certs as indicating that the site was independently validated as trustworthy, during that time period.
I'll be blunt, the Rust community is not known for being a warm fuzzy place to go ask stupid questions and walk away not feeling like a dumb fuck. Hoping people will wander into the right place to ask rust questions is a non-starter.

You don't control Stack Overflow or Reddit, or any number of slack/discords, so I don't know how I'd address that problem, but it's true.
I just bought a used 2023 Nissan Leaf for $15K US.

US regulators are doing their best to keep affordable EVs out of the country, but the used car market is finally seeing enough EVs that it is making a difference.
Zurich is one of the most expensive cities in the world.
My physics might be wrong, but with Earth's radius at 6500km and Lunar orbit radius around 350,000km, probability of a collision course given asteroid being within a lunar orbit distance is only (6.5/350)^2 or 0.03%, or maybe even cleaner, 1 in 3000. So it's not that close a miss.
Illumos, and specifically the SmartOS distribution.

Being ringside for the fork of Sun's OpenSolaris, and watching absolute geniuses steward a thing like that into a useful product and a build process was foundational for my understanding of how and why process is important, as well as how to get things fixed in the real world, while not muddying the idea of the pure design principles. A balance can exist!
> That means Congress has to write unambiguous laws

I don't understand where this belief is coming from. The judgement explicitly states that writing unambiguous laws isn't possible. There will still be ambiguous laws, and those ambiguities will still be resolved. The only matter being decided on is who gets to resolve ambiguities - is it the agencies or is it the courts.

Let's put this another way. Did Congress have to write unambiguous laws or have them be unenforceable before 1984? Clearly not. The Constitution itself is ambiguous on many points. Do other countries, which lack any equivalent of Chevron deference, have to write unambiguous laws or have them be unenforceable? Again, clearly not.
There are things you are not seemingly aware of, to your point.

But while I do agree NATO allies should spend 2% or more on the militaries in a good faith effort, the spending value itself is kind of a dumb metric if for nothing other than they could just spend money and have poorly trained militaries anyway. It’s a rallying point to be angry about by people who didn’t know what NATO even was before Trump started complaining about it.

Going back to the awareness issue, the United States and allies across the world have been working to stop Russian aggression in Ukraine, and potentially elsewhere like the Baltic states or other formerly occupied Soviet Union states. Many of those in leadership in Europe and elsewhere are concerned about Trump because they do not, for good reason, trust him to act faithfully on the commitments that the United States has made in Europe.

Vladimir Putin believes that the United States and its influence should be degraded in Europe and that European states should instead be under the influence of Russia. This is a net negative for the United States obviously, and the concern here is that Donald Trump seems to either agree or find himself apathetic toward this because he doesn’t seem to understand that he’s being played for a fool to the detriment of the United States and European partners.

To try and paint a more clear picture, if the United States were to fail to honor its security commitments to Europe, it calls into question the ability of the United States to honor any strategic commitment. This pulls not just European countries closer to Russian influence, but causes the United States a massive headache in the Pacific as South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan (never mind the Philippines or others in South East Asia) stand to be sucked into the sphere of Chinese influence which means that the United States loses military, diplomatic, and economic capabilities and leverage.

You might say “so what?” and to that I’d say you’ll find our country worse off economically, higher prices for many goods, and whatever meager international influence exists today to cooperate on global or regional issues will be significantly degraded.
What some people seem to be describing or expecting is that everything comes to a screeching years-long halt. What will actually happen is we will be on a slightly slower exponential growth curve than we counterfactually would have been in a world with much more energy infrastructure. The subjective experience will still be one of being on an exponential trend. The constraints are just different.
This assumes the court can even hear cases in a reasonable amount of time.

An overloaded court system means that defendants are put at a disadvantage and can likely be strong-armed into an agreement that is unfavorable. At least with agencies, companies knew where they stood, after all, most companies probably have a few former agents on staff.

Now it's, better hope you don't lose an injunction and you get a judge capable of understanding the technical reasons why your company should be allowed to operate in that capacity.

I don't think this is the pro-business win that conservatives claim it is. It just changes the rule of the game in ways that I think favor the government. If an agency gets an injunction, then continues to press for continuance based on the fact that they don't have the resources right now, and a judge buys it, then the company end up in judicial purgatory.
AI and bitcoin consume similar amounts of energy, but bitcoin uses more green energy than AI:

https://wired.me/science/energy/ai-vs-bitcoin-mining-energy
Watch videos with OpenAI execs without sound. It’s quite obvious they’re making up their outlandish claims as they go along. It makes me kind of worried actually that there’s not much more gas in their particular tank and the whole “transformers can do everything” thing is reaching a plateau.
Cause when you have quarter million dollars of GPU on each machine, it is dumb to worry about few thousand for the controlling hardware. Too risky to use something new.

Another problem is that all the hardware, drivers, and experience for GPU are on PC. It would take a lot of work to get running on ARM since would be starting from scratch. Then more work to get it stable. All to save a little on processor.
That's all videos about the same casino client? There's a whole thread about it.

The casino had to bring their own IP, so Cloudflare wouldn't get IP banned by countries because... casinos. And yes, that's an enterprise feature.
I'm not sure where play protect is supposed to come in. I haven't had a single play protect pop up ever and have been using fdroid and my own apps for years. This was on a pixel and now an Asus.

I am in the EU tho, so maybe there's difference policies?
>> Ask HN: What is the best code base you ever worked on?

LOL. Obviously. Mine! :)
I refuse to be that cynical. All people can vote. Chevron was enacted in 1984. So the most progressive periods in US History occurred before it was enacted, when (according to you) a power vacuum was filled in by the people with the most resources.

Why didn't those super powerful vacuum-fillers carry the day in the Civil Rights Movement, or when marginal income tax rates were 90+%, or when the EPA was created? Because they don't have the power that everyone thinks they do (maybe even they think they have, themselves).
All optimizations inevitably end up just being funneled into larger and larger models. The issue with AI is its seemingly endless ability to scale in size for marginal gains in model performance (log(n) scaling essentially).
No, their role is a lot larger than that and plenty of legal questions don’t hinge on this kind of thing. This is specifically about whether to tend to defer to agencies on the interpretation of definitions of terms and similar things related to their mandate, so long as they remain within the bounds of reason and plausibility.

A judge could go “nope, per Chevron this EPA interpretation of ‘pollutant’ looks reasonable in this context, that complaint is dismissed, but the rest of the suit may proceed”. Now they’re expected to let those arguments play out. But answering that particular kind of question definitely is not the whole point of the judiciary.
I Louisiana today, Bibles were mandated in every classroom and all teachers are mandated to "teach from the Bible."

I imagine there are some seriously distraught teachers in that state right now.

We are in dark times.
These could easily by Donald Trump's experts soon. And if so, will you hold true to this line of reasoning?
> Congress should be willing to write it into law (or amend the Constitution?)

That'd be the preferred solution, but given the existing incentives, it's almost certainly not going to happen.

It's a version of the installed-base problem: The existing House members and senators got where they are through the existing system, and it's not at all in their personal interests to make major changes.

It's also akin to the software rule that scrapping a running system and rewriting it "the right way!" is dangerous, because the running system (hacks and all) encodes a lot of hard-won knowledge about edge- and corner cases, bottlenecks, etc. In politics, it's especially true, because we have so many different players — with often-conflicting interests — who have very different ideas of what "the right way" would be. "Refactoring" is the best we can realistically hope for.