skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry, I somehow missed your comment until now. Didn't get any notifications. I tend to do it more like what you first said, mocking low-level calls.

I typically put all hardware-specific code for one platform into its own directory. Then I can have multiple directories for different hardware implementations, like MCU #1, MCU #2, and PC. I just implement the same API in all three. It's basically just a HAL. Each build only compiles one of those directories -- the one that matches the architecture I'm building for.

For example I might have a function that does an SPI transaction. On the two hardware builds it will actually communicate with the SPI peripheral in the MCU, but on the PC build it will talk to something I've written to pretend to be the SPI device. So it does take a little bit of up-front work writing code that pretends to be the various devices. In some ways you could call that an emulator, but not in the way you were asking I think.

You can make it as simple or complex as you want to. You could do a full-fledged object-oriented SPI class in C++ (or "class" in C), with different class implementations for different hardware builds. Or you could just make a single function that does SPI stuff and reimplement it for each hardware build.

In one case I have a Qt GUI that pretends to be the UI for the device so the PC hardware-specific code ends up providing its own main() and runs the actual shared codebase in a separate thread. So that particular codebase has a provision to rename the shared main() to not actually be main() on the PC build so it plays nicely with Qt needing to actually provide main().

One downside is you won't catch certain bugs on the PC. There have been a few bugs that slipped past because the hardware build was 32-bit but my PC build was 64-bit for example. But those errors are fairly rare. I probably should be doing the PC build as 32-bit to make it more similar anyway. Still, it wouldn't catch every little problem that might pop up on hardware. It definitely accelerates my productivity though!
I really love this idea in theory, and I believe that for some system, specially mature ones, it may work well. I see good documentation as a super power; it empowers readers and motivate people to understand more about the system without being caught in the weeds of reading the source.

The source has baggages, and the intent of every single function calls is not always evident. Writing documentation up-front can help direct the source, but this is a tug-of-war environment. Each affect the other in its own ways.

And for that reason, documentation driven development can be a real drag. You start writing documentation with the best intentions, everything works great for this first release. But 2 months down the road you need to modify something and it has a ripple effect on many of the things you documented. It's a non-negligible cost.

I've been working on this open-source tool(https://github.com/pier-oliviert/sequencer) and I've spent a lot of time on the documentation. And what I described above happened. I wanted to make a not-too-big change, and it required me to rewrite 30% of the documentation. I still love the documentation aspect of it, but it definitively has a higher cost than tests, in my experience.
heh, me guarding my area I wrote my name in heavily for a bit
So perhaps Land Rovers are a better comparison? It surely reminds me a lot of the design of the Evoque which is quite small by Land/Range Rover standards.
You have checked -100 boxes

Pick your side folks.
> I can't understand the hate

I think it's because of the promises of the team (new Large Action Model) vs what's actually being delivered (the model is some scripts). The team has a history of over promising and underdelivering (or scamming - depending on your perspective). It's also economically unviable. Somehow you're meant to get free LLM calls for life but there's no way for them to actually cover those. There's not really any communication about how it might be a limited time thing for early adopters or how it could ever get to be sustainable.

If they had focused on what they have, they probably could have charged the same amount and people would generally be OK with it. But they've over promised and under delivered again. I think the reaction is pretty understandable.
I think the hate directed their way has more to do with the outsized claims of the founder, Jesse Lyu. For example, he claimed that you're buying a device with a "LAM" but it turned out to be playwright scripts wrapping APIs + OpenAI APIs, and the underlying action model was missing (or very nascent at ship). The team also took a lot of shortcuts security-wise and is getting wrecked for it now (it's not just one hole):

https://x.com/xyz3va/status/1805689140639408277

https://x.com/xyz3va/status/1805985433156759781 (this is the OP)

https://x.com/xyz3va/status/1805993239368860069

Doesn't help that he was shilling crypto right before rabbit. What people love about the form factor has mostly to do with Teenage Engineering's quirky design. Somehow Jesse is a board member there, it seems.

In general I don't recommend trusting their software. If you like the hardware, you can flash AOSP and use google assistant -- it's way more capable and AOSP isn't harvesting your credentials. https://github.com/RabbitHoleEscapeR1/r1_escape
I mean it apparently works on RDNA1 now after some effort but they never really attempted to support it because they initially only supported workstation RDNA cards but they didn't have a workstation RDNA1 release.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ROCm/comments/1bd8vde/psa_rdna1_gfx...

I wish they had comprehensive support for basically all recent GPU releases but tbh I'd rather they focus on perfecting support for the current and upcoming generations than spread their efforts too thin.

And ideally with time backports to the older cards will come with time but it's really not a priority over issues on the current generation because those RDNA1 cards were never actually supported in the first place.
This almost kind of feels like you're reinventing the Actor model (e.g. Erlang/Elixir).
Then you possibly will find this useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden-section_search
The better (more realistic) model is constructive/intuitionist mathematics - ZF without C, or at least without Uncountable Choice.

Naturally, you should be suspicious of a theory of mathematics that assumes the existence of "uncountable" things.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40799879
Show HN: Git Is Coming to Puter, "The Internet OS"
Who said the choice is between coal and nuclear?

I prefer solutions that don't emit poisonous substances into the atmosphere nor make areas dangerous for thousands of years in case of accidents.
Are you gonna setup Adsense? lol
You could easily improve upon that. For example the following will change the cursor to a block in emacs mode, an underline in vi-command and a line in vi-insert in most terminals.

set show-mode-in-prompt on
set emacs-mode-string \1\e[1 q\2
set vi-cmd-mode-string \1\e[3 q\2
set vi-ins-mode-string \1\e[5 q\2

The worst thing about the bash config of readline is that bash disables the key combinations for going from emacs-mode to vi-mode (ctrl-alt-j) and back (ctrl-e). They work everywhere else (where I've checked anyways) and you can't turn it on again in inputrc, you have to bind it in your .bashrc, all that because the bash developers think it would be too confusing to have it work the same in bash as anywhere else were you have readline support.
You are splitting hairs. Tens of thousands of rides per week. Autonomously. Those are the keywords. Other things they are bragging about involve such things as 24/7, night and day, and foggy conditions. I would suggest actually reading the short press release. They make quite a few interesting claims in it. Anyway, anyone in the SFO area will probably be reporting all the wonderful and uneventful rides they are enjoying with Waymo soon.

As for people that recently got their drivers license. I'm pretty sure that demographic is over-represented in the statistics of who drives the least safely, traffic fatalities, etc. Also insurers and rental car agencies have policies that reflect those cold, hard statistics. It will be interesting to see what they do when level 5 starts happening (probably sooner rather than later). My guess is that they'll charge people extra for the privilege of taking control of the car as they are far more likely to damage the vehicle and otherwise cause trouble.

And obviously one of the points Waymo is trying to make with their press release is that they are already safer. It's a press release of course and not the same as cold hard facts. And you make a fair point about self reporting. But it suggests the obvious notion that computers are getting pretty good at not crashing into stuff (or people). I find that entirely unsurprising, BTW. It does not seem like a particularly hard problem.
Fascinating.

I guess it my be better to stick with old-fashioned caltrops instead of chaff.
Well, that's not quite true. You can claim that you have been dissuaded from exercising your First Amendment rights[1] in the future (for example, that you're afraid of publishing new material under threat of punishment). That's called a "chilling effect." The problem in this case is that no plaintiff could do even that and draw a plausible and clear causal connection between their fear and the actions of the Government.

[1] The question of whether someone has a First Amendment right to make a social media post has not yet been clearly established, and the Court didn't get to this question in this case.
Any suggestions for (as a CS person who has been finding quantales useful for my favourite applications, and is curious as to whether there may be connexions to other disciplines) getting into point-free topology?
Golang should have async/await and exceptions, both of which can be implemented as syntactic sugar on top of existing features.
Nyxstone: An LLVM-based (Dis)assembly Framework
No, but the average consumer does Google "what laptop should I get" when they want a new one, and I think at least some of the people writing those lists do consider the downsides of Windows.

When I Google that the first result is from the Verge, and they recommend a MacBook Air because "The Apple MacBook Air M3 is the best laptop for most people — Mac users, of course, but also the platform-agnostic or anyone who wants a no-fuss, straightforward machine that doesn’t bombard them with advertisements or bloatware."
I've seen other brands say/do the same. I suspect these systems would have tons of false positives otherwise, because cars often drive in close proximity to fixed barriers with high radar reflectivity.

I'm sure the best way to not run into other cars on the road is to detect the other objects that are also moving at non-zero velocities. They're likely to be other cars, rather than road signs, poles, etc.
I can't answer for the kindly poster above (ty), but from our experience techniques like HyDE are great when you are getting a lot of comparative questions.

For instance, if a user asks "How does A compare to B" then the query expansion element of HyDE is incredibly useful. The actual value of translating queries into answers for embedding is a bit unclear, since most embedding models we are using have been ft'ed to map queries onto answers.
> But bundling exists everywhere. Why is Microsoft the only offender?

You can't regulate every offender at the exact same time. Who you go after and when is always a political decision. This is basically the claim everybody was making when Android was in anti-trust trouble and everybody was like "How can you go after Android when Apple has a walled garden" and now Apple is in a hot seat.

Look how long it took for TicketMaster/LiveNation to get into the hot seat. Yes, it's not really fair that people get to cause problems for so long before being punished but that's life and it doesn't mean you should give people a free pass since you can't go after them all at once.

> Why aren't they being told they have to unbundled channels from each other? I can't pay per view sports games - they offer subscriptions that bundle the entire season. The NFL is the worst on this. Why can't I just pay a few bucks to watch one game?

I wouldn't argue that Panthers v Patriots is a different application than Broncos v Buccaneers.

Although I think I was fairly clear in my other post that I think the cable bundling is anti-competitive.
Yep, and for games with anticheat, you can check this list[0] to see its compatibility with Linux. I've been running Gnome under Fedora for years, and the times I need to boot into Windows are becoming rarer as time goes on. It's usually just for flavor-of-the-month live service games that eventually get Steam Deck verified anyways.

[0] https://areweanticheatyet.com/
Is it not a case the market will fix - if Microsoft increases costs in an attempt to strangle the customer, the higher prices create an opportunity for new players?
Definitely not. If you as a consumer want to do so, then your best bet is printing a mold for casting.
yep, which many have read and are discussing, over there.
See the guide here - https://r2r-docs.sciphi.ai/cookbooks/local-rag

we have instructions for getting setup and running w/ ollama. It should be pretty smooth.
There was a nice period with devices like the Surface or "Signature Edition" hardware sold through Microsoft where you could get a minimally fucked up Windows install from the factory.

But it turned out that was just the intermediate step between "quit gunking up our OS with so much awful garbage and spyware" and "because it should be gunked up with our awful garbage and spyware."
GPLv3 means you can't use it with code that you distribute outside your organization without complying with its license. It's not an issue for internal tooling.

I know you get the distinction, but I hear too often that "we can't use GPLv3 software at work" from people who aren't clear on it.
If Fission is so great, go build it. I'm not stopping you. But use your own money or get off the podium.
Most paradoxes can be "resolved" by just saying "Don't do that."

Problem is, there is a lot of mathematics that's widely used and which depends on the reals. Pretty much all of calculus, for example.

Discarding the reals is pretty ambitious.
People being struck walking alongside a country road require a different solution than someone crossing a lane mid-block at night in an urban area.

If the rise in deaths is mostly people crossing the street away from crosswalks in urban areas, building sidewalks alongside rural roads won't solve much.

The person that you are replying to could have certainly phrased it better if my interpretation is what they were really asking.
Yeah, I mean, it's not so much "deserving", it's "qualifies for", and those qualifications seem to be "can fill out the paperwork" which is probably fine.

Living without income is a foregone conclusion in 99.9% of cases, of course they can't, which is why they were working in the first place. Realistically, the whole system would be best rebranded as Temp-UBI, run it like Alimony, where X years at a job = X UBI time, call it a day. You'd probably end up saving money not having to process paperwork and admin the entire thing.

That last point is why it'd never happen of course, because you'd scrap a whole bunch of government workers, and, well, if you're the government, losing workers -does not spark joy-
I might use this for better margins when printing PDFs I didn't generate for bookbinding; it's not rare PDFs (research papers, etc) are rendered with shallow margins for full-page print, maybe with a deeper gutter to allow for three-hole punching, but a perfect-bound book requires deeper margins all around to account for trimming and since PDF doesn't reflow, downscaling is the only feasible option.

Granted, this is something I already have a workflow for, so I don't actually need this particular tool. But if I were assembling such a workflow, I might well consider this as part of it.
Crypto industry super PAC is 33-2 in primaries, $100M for House, Senate
> They only have a car that can drive with a human partner behind the wheel who's ready at any second to take over and prevent it from crashing.

Even that is a faulty system.

I really don't understand how people can think Tesla and Waymo are anywhere close to each other. Making a car drive itself is a much harder problem to solve than scaling production. If you look at what Tesla has, today, it is a vehicle that can sometimes drive on its own with the need for a human behind the wheel. The ability to remove the human from the front seat is the other 95% of the work. In systems like this where human lives are at stake, getting "mostly there" with FSD is essentially worthless.

The problems of logistics and scaling are well-known and well traveled. The invention of a self-driving car is not. Once Waymo has solved the issue of entering new cities and quickly gathering data to feed into their model, they've won.
Я 333
Not GP but Hyde is a crutch for having poor semantic indexing imho. Most people just take raw chunks and embed those. You really need a robust preprocessing pipeline.
> I’d guess lots of people upgrading from Intel Macs

Why would you guess that? It's +22% Mac marketshare, not +22% Apple Silicon Mac marketshare.
In ZF+DC is it true that measures satisfy the desirable properties mentioned by Colin? I think the sticking point is isometry invariance. Are there measures in ZF+DC of R^3 that are finitely (countably?) additive and isometry invariant?
The article has a bit of an angle to get clicks. Better to look at the source: https://canalys.com/newsroom/us-pc-market-q1-2024

Lenovo shipments increased 22.4% in the same period.
I think any given day here you can find at least one article getting attention that, no, it has not always been like that and has been getting worse. The most obvious being the Recall debacle. That is in my memory the first time outrage got big enough that Microsoft had to walk back an entire feature they were trying to opt everyone into by default.
Convolutional Neural Networks in APL

blog←{⍺×⍵×1-⍵}
backbias←{+/,⍵}
logistic←{÷1+*-⍵}
maxpos←{(,⍵)⍳⌈/,⍵}
backavgpool←{2⌿2/⍵÷4}⍤2
meansqerr←{÷∘2+/,(⍺-⍵)*2}
avgpool←{÷∘4{+/,⍵}⌺(2 2⍴2)⍤2⊢⍵}
conv←{s←1+(⍴⍵)-⍴⍺⋄⊃+/,⍺×(⍳⍴⍺){s↑⍺↓⍵} ⊂⍵}
backin←{(d w in)←⍵⋄⊃+/,w{(⍴in)↑(-⍵+⍴d)↑⍺×d} ⍳⍴w}
multiconv←{(a ws bs)←⍵⋄bs{⍺+⍵ conv a}⍤(0,(⍴⍴a))⊢ws}

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3315454.3329960
> The opt-out setting, however, was on by default

Is this a bad thing? It's nice politics don't show and spread by default.
Zero is impossible but Siemens, AEG, Vattenfall are examples of companies that value profit over security.

Siemens can't even built proper WEC, what's the nuclear equivalent of blade breakage on wind turbine?
Millions of Taxpayers Call the IRS for Help. Two-Thirds Don't Reach Anyone
Which would rule out any cooling channels inside the bell.
One of the best articles I've seen on here this year! I didn't know about the existence of `pg_hint_plan`.
Not speaking on whether the language should make this easier without an external library, but wouldn't https://github.com/sourcegraph/conc help in that scenario? It has context-aware and error-aware goroutine pools, seems like the exact fit for what you are trying to do. Although admittedly I dive too deep into your code.
Is that a property of imaginary numbers, or a property of relating two orthogonal numbers? Legitimately asking because I can't find any special properties that imaginary numbers alone have in relation to themselves.
Having used both async/await and goroutines, I much prefer the latter. But yes, goroutines and channels are powerful tools that require understanding and discipline.
I think having to "scan" to identify images is kind of fun! And it means the artist gets to choose the width of their own art. A lot of folks have a common screen width so there are fewer combinations than you think.
I just run my own website. It’s the original decentralized web. If I need to, I can share links on social media but I always own the content.
We have seen how that worked out in aviation with Boeing.
Meanwhile ...

"High security against CDN, WAF, CC, DDoS protection and SSL protects website owners and their visitors from all types of online threats"

... says the involved CDN's page (FUNNULL CDN).-

(Sure. Except the one's they themselves generate. Or the CCP.)
This is the reason; the product is imbued with the negative externalities of the people and ideas associated with it.
> Trump could easily use this to pressure tech companies to take down posts advocating for "violent" abortions, or Palestinian "misinformation", or whatever left-of-center viewpoint you could think of.

Yes, and they did. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-tru...

> Oftentimes, requests would demand Twitter stop “shadowbanning” certain conservative accounts, or that the company reinstate banned or suspended right-wing personas. Other times, offices of senior Trump administration officials would send emails seeking to remove tweets that they believed to be “hate speech” or death threats aimed at their principals. And over the years, the knowledgeable sources say, staffers for Republican officials would regularly flag to Twitter content that they believed violated the app’s terms of service or other policies, including on spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.”

Tech companies can, and regularly do, say "no", as the First Amendment explicitly permits.
The fines the eu want are percentages of global revenue, so will be significant sums of money. Maybe they are not so bothered about the money but want to disadvantage the us corperations.

For me the US has largely got it right and EU wrong. You can see this in the number of EU based tech giants. Would the EU be bringing these laws if Apple / google were European?
This is consistent with the design and spirit of the Internet, and in my opinion is how it should be.
great question, I can talk about how we do the more challenging "List all YC founders that worked at Google and now have an AI startup."

For this we have a target dataset (the YC co directory) that we have around 100 questions over. We have found that when feeding an entire company listing in along with a single question we can get an accurate single answer (needle in haystack problem).

So to build our evaluation dataset we feed each question with each sample into the cheapest LLM we can find that reliably handles the job. We then aggregate the results.

This is not perfect but it allows us to have a way to benchmark our knowledge graph construction and querying strategy so that we can tune the system ourselves.
A software build used to last the whole night.
I can only speak to Elixir. Elixir/Erlang/BEAM/OTP have less raw horsepower than, say, Rust, but they can potentially leapfrog “faster” platforms when under load due to predictable latency and almost linear scaling and system resource utilization.

I’ve developed with Elixir professionally for 2 years and it’s a really enjoyable language and ecosystem. So much thought has gone into the design of the language and its standard libraries, and that meticulousness has extended to most of the popular 3rd-party packages. Stability is great; I remember reading or hearing that there is no intent to ever make an Elixir 2.0. Devtools are great with the only major exception being IDE/LSP integration (still a WIP). The community is also less fragmented than other.

If the BEAM becomes a bottleneck, Elixir also lets you write NIFs (Natively Implemented Functions) in Rust (using Rustler) or other languages like Zig (using Zigler).