skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's true but it's hardly a failure of the market. Airliners are big, complex products that are apparently best managed by big, complex companies (not my opinion, just an observation).

If the government decides airliners are a strategic priority and decides to interfere with the market, the cost of that decision is that tax money is going to be used to prop up the incumbent, instead of funding for the poor.

I think a little bit of industrial policy can be a good thing.
Instead now the interpretation depends on the court that hears the case? And could change every time it is heard? With the current Supreme Court leaving stare decisis dead and buried it's the legal wild west.

I have to wonder which circuits will be most favorable to the people who want to overturn regulation. Will it be East Texas again? Companies will have a lot of leeway to forum shop when looking to deregulate themselves.
There is nothing about Chevron that says an agency can decide when the constitution applies.
I'm still using an iPhone 6s from 2015, with one battery replacement. Nominally I wanted to upgrade the last few years, at least since the 12 generation, but each time I couldn’t be bothered and found the prices rather high. Now I’m again in the weird timespan waiting for a September event and deciding afterwards.

Thing is: Did I really miss out on the mobile ecosystem in the last years? There are apps, most of them run fine or fine-ish. The biggest problem are lazy developers using non native toolkits. Games, obviously are another problem, but I’m more of a puzzle gamer. The biggest advance was photography but since I couldn’t integrate photography in my life in the last 15 years I don’t think I will now. Whenever I look at newer iPhones, I don’t really feel huge FOMO. What are the mobile use cases to always upgrade to the newest one?

(Maybe because I’m primary a Mac user and the iPhone is more of an appendix to that.)
The remarkable efficiency and effectiveness of urban rail systems.
The Fruit Machine: Canada's 'gay purge' (2018)
Some history.

Operated up until the 1990s
Low salary likely to cause exodus of European tech talent
I'm doubtful -- this is like saying you can sidestep the law against murder by not getting caught.

Obviously some of this will depend on how the legislation is drafted, but there's a difference between whether those actions shield you from prosecution or if they just make it harder to detect.

Most likely those sidesteps will be seen for what they are, and when prosecutors become aware of them they will still investigate and prosecute for violating the statute. Under current law there are members of Congress that have been plainly guilty of insider trading and yet prosecutors have declined to prosecute (the article mentions this explicitly for COVID-19 insider trading). It is entirely possible that there will be a lack of prosecutorial enthusiasm, but hopefully this will have a chilling effect on some of the most flagrant cases (cough Pelosi).
Elon Musk beats $500M severance suit over mass Twitter layoffs
That is absolutely not what chevron was.

Chevron was essentially the decision that an agency established by congress to make rules for a domain had rulemaking powers for that domain so long as it doesn't go against express congressional decisions.
Fleetio | Full-time | 100% REMOTE - open to candidates in the USA, CANADA & MEXICO (Pending role) | https://www.fleetio.com/careers | Fleetio is a modern SaaS platform that helps thousands of organizations worldwide manage their fleet of vehicles and equipment. Founded in 2012, 2023 Series C, 6k+ customers, 50+M in ARR, 290+ employees, 4.5 rating on Glassdoor. Benefits: Competitive pay + equity + 5% ARR bonus, 401(k) + match, health, vision & dental insurance, remote first since 2012, 4 weeks PTO, wellness fund, professional development fund, equipment stipend + more.

HIGHLIGHTED ROLES (More available on our careers site):

-- Sr SDET, Mobile (Just opened): https://grnh.se/ccdde7237us

-- Quality Engineering Manager (Just opened): https://grnh.se/8226fc9d7us

-- Sr Application Security Engineer (Just opened): https://grnh.se/fd25f43e7us

-- Engineering Manager, Platform: https://grnh.se/a4fd822b7us

-- Sr Software Engineer, R & A: https://grnh.se/08b68ea27us
20 years is easy: Just make a thowaway project. I made a demo for my work in the university like 10 years ago and it's still in production. Fingers crossed that it survives 10 more years and someone else has to fix the horrible code or rewrite it.

50 years: Make a library in Fortran. We are still reusing parts of old code and I'm not sure if it's Fortran 77 or older.

100 years: It may be hard.
This is interesting, thank you for sharing.

Would you happen to know where the data for this table comes from? https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/u...

Vox cites a LCA database but not a particular study or metastudy. I tried to look for it but couldn't find the exact one.

It seems to me like the kind of thing where the numbers could be drastically different depending on where you draw the boundaries (for plastics, does oil extraction and refining count?) and the sorts of impacts you consider (not just CO2E but as you mentioned, biodiversity, water, waste stream, etc.).

I'm inclined to believe the overall point of that post (sheep make a lot of methane, as any ruminant). But I'm not sure that banning wool outright would have the desirable outcome. I don't think cotton can replace wool in many situations, especially in wet outdoor environments. Would replacing it with (new) synthetics, which is the most common substitute, really be a net positive across all the impacts?

I appreciate the information, regardless!
Nearby star cluster houses unusually large black hole
So Sheriffs could take gratuities to deny ccw permits... Maybe a patreon for each denial.
> as-if that is their pricing

No, that's not what I'm saying. Their "Storage Costs" table shows costs to rent storage from some provider (AWS?). It's clear that those are costs that the user has to pay for infrastructure needed for certain types of software (e.g. Turbopuffer is designed to be running on "S3 + SSD Cache", while other software may be designed to run on "RAM + 3x SSD").

I'm comparing RAM costs from that table with RAM costs in the real world.

The idea backed by that table is "RAM is so expensive, so we need to build software to run it on cheaper storage instead".

My statement is "RAM is that expensive only on that provider, there are others where it is not; on those, you may just run it in RAM and save on software complexity".

You will still need some software for your SaaS API to serve queries from RAM, but it won't need the complexity of trying to make it fast when serving from a higher-latency storage backend (S3).
Related:

Gassy cows and pigs will face a carbon tax in Denmark, a world first

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40802152
Users must prove Amazon ripped them off to revive Buy Box rigging suit
I've worked with a fair amount of software that's 50 or so years old and is still in daily use.

I don't think that the language its in matters a great deal as long as its one that has very wide and deep support. In today's languages, that would mean C/C++, Java, COBOL, and a few others that escape me at the moment.

The bigger issue is going to be hardware changes. A lot of the half-century software I've touched was written for mainframes from the '60s and '70s -- and it's still running today only because those mainframes are being emulated on modern hardware.

I think that, generally, the way you build software that will last is just to engage in excellent engineering practices. Document everything well, keep the code simple, don't get cute or clever, don't follow the fashion of the day, use good names for procedures and variables, don't use magic numbers, and so forth.
> OTOH, are you really going to be implementing memory segmenting in your gate-level CPU?

I have, but it was a PDP-8 which I'll be the first to admit is kind of cheating.
A unique window into Japanese culture.
Show HN: Build LLMs with Cosmic Horror and Animals
Hi HN. We’re writing and drawing a digital zine on building LLM evals. It’s set in a world where forest creatures learn how to prompt the LLM shoggoth living in the canopy of their home.

After talking to a bunch of AI engineers, we found either people were waist-deep in evals, or they had kinda heard about it, but had no real clue about it. We wrote this guide for the latter, to get people up to speed quickly about building their own evals.

I personally found some things surprising, such as how the grading scale matters and being conscientious about picking metrics for multiple goals as a proxy for “good”. We put the things we learned into a nicely illustrated package.

We took inspiration from the meme that LLMs are a Lovecraftian Shoggoth--an alien intelligence that we put a mask on to make it palatable for us. Juxtaposing it against forest animals seemed amusing, and a way for us to do some world-building and fun as well.

And yes, the illustrations are all hand-drawn and not generated. The current image generation tools aren’t yet consistent enough.

In case you miss it on the landing page, here are some sample pages and table of contents (subject to minor changes). https://forestfriends.tech/assets/preview.pdf?v=1

Are you building LLM apps and haven’t put in evals yet? What sort of challenges are you running into or would like to get addressed?
Do you really want people like Marjorie Taylor Green trying to write all of the technical details for cabbage sales or carboxy methyl cellulose production?
As a counter-point, $QQQ is also up 23% YTD and seems to track a similar up and down as $NANC. People primarily investing in tech are getting tech returns.

Most of the returns for both are from $NVDA, which is up 172% YTD.
> When Chevron as active you could not challenge the US constitution not applying to border patrol because of Chevron.

Do you have one source for this? A case where someone tried, or a blog post by a legal expert discussing this?
Yep that helps a ton, thanks. Now it behaves more like nvim, and cursors around much faster -

$ time vim -c 'syn off' tt.json

real 0m3.277s
user 0m1.690s
sys 0m0.349s
The problem with America is you can fall off really quickly. I've had really good years. Then you get fired, you don't have health insurance since for some God forsaken reason we tie health-care to employment.

Unexpected medical bills pop up. You're out tens of thousands overnight. Maybe you miss a mortgage payment since unemployment insurance is next to nothing.
> I've just started working on a new portfolio site and was wondering if I could skip the Figma/whatever wireframe phase and just use a local WYSIWYG tool for a static page.

Someone above suggested https://bootstrapstudio.io/ which seems to fit the static page use case very well.

> it was usually ruined by a project manager or a developer trying to make something 'look designed' by mimicking some simple, elegant design they saw that was totally inappropriate for the application.

This hits home for me as someone who ruins design to ship faster. I think dev being the gatekeeper for UI can turn out badly when we start cutting corners or inserting our own opinions into the implementation.

I hope giving designers the ability to contribute on the UI side can alleviate this issue.
To be fair, the paper has an emoji in the _title_, so I wouldn't read it as a particularly particularly serious academic study as much as the equivalent of the Gawker of AI research. It is a "gotcha" paper that exploits some blind spots (sorry) that will easily be patched up with a few batches of training. I do think it highlights the lack of AGI in these things, which some people lacking situational awareness might need to see.
Being able to look out over the heads of the crowd can help
Creating and Evolving Elixir (With José Valim)
Fun! I'll take a swing (and I'm cheating by looking stuff up):

1. Blackbody radiation per unit wavelength.

2. Momentum.

3. Not sure. Quantum harmonic oscillator? Orbital mechanics?

4. Pythagorean theorem.

5. Bernoulli's equation.

6. Drake equation.

7. Velocity.

8. Ballistic/projectile motion.

9. Blackbody radiation per unit frequency.

10. Newton's law of gravity.

11. One of the Freidman equations for cosmological expansion.

12. Velocity of an accelerating object over some distance.

13. Einstein's mass-energy equivalence. (The memorable half, at least.)

14. Newton's second law.

15. Not sure, but I have a feeling that's one of the terms of the Ricci curvature. Maybe the classical limit?

15E. Edit: Whoops, nope, it's the Rydberg constant from the Rydberg formula for atomic energy levels. (Thanks gus_massa!)

16. Not sure. Reminds me of population inversion, so I'd guess stable state population of some quantum transition.

17. Not a clue.

[1][9] https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/505909/frequency...

[11] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations

[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relati...

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature

[15E] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rydberg_formula

[16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_inversion
If a law could be challenged, but a regulation based on that law can't be challenged, then that's a problem and we should get rid of that specific issue. But that's not the main point of Chevron and doesn't require overturning the entire thing.
Legislation is always the first-line rule maker, this is about deciding who is the second-line rule maker - the administrative state of experts and political appointees, or the judicial state of, well, political appointees.
There's something interesting with the light mode / default theme I got after downloading and opening on Apple silicon:

Sidebar contrast is too low, yet, spot on for the wrong contrast ratio target (3.0, for fill, versus 4.5 for text/bg).

I'll file an issue on GitHub eventually, feel free to pass along email in my profile if y'all see this and have someone who is already nerding out on this stuff.

Context on why, and before I get more fuzzy/opinionated, why I'm comfortable speaking to this is some quasi-authoritative tone: I built a new color system that ended up being launched as Material You at Google, at its heart is getting contrast while having expressive colors instead of just flat black/white, so I really appreciate the effort here.

Fuzzy/opinionated territory:

Problem with the low contrast here isn't just that it doesn't literally hit a 4.5 ratio. IMHO this isn't strictly verboten, if I thought that it would mean the engineer part of my brain was too in control. There's an argument to be made its good the sidebar isn't distracted. Problem is disabled states traditionally lower the foreground brightness, so it crosses over into "disabled element" territory when you visually parse it.
Four zero days headline hefty July Patch Tuesday drop
So you're just agreeing with what I said:

> I think what he's getting at is that drag increases with the square of speed
A generic AI image generated from a simple prompt is kind of the opposite of a deeply researched and well written article. Throwing the two together is incongruous. It doesn't personally bother me as much as some, but I certainly don't think they add anything to the article.

At least the images are easy to scroll past. Useless AI features that actively get in the way of real functionality are much more off-puttting to me.
I see, that's indeed an important distinction. Thanks!
Kagan's dissent is pretty damning. Essentially breaks the way modern government works, long term. Imagine a corporation challenging the EPA's right to limit PFAS, because Congress didn't explicitly carve it out in the original legislation. Practically speaking, it also makes the courts the supreme lay of the land when it comes to regulations, since they will have the power to challenge or overrule basically anything and congress is perpetually gridlocked for a generation. In addition, they can reinterpret anything congress passes ex post facto as being too ambiguous.

Some judge in Texas might allow a company to dump chemicals, because they are ignorant of chemistry or listened to the corporate experts trotted out to explain why forever chemicals are fine.

None of these changes are for the good of the people, long term.

https://newrepublic.com/post/183269/elena-kagan-supreme-cour...

https://www.courthousenews.com/after-scathing-kagan-dissent-...

You can read the entire passage here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf
Their toolkit is developed in their monorepo and is not on crates.io nor versionned, so they can do breaking changes any time. Seems risky to use in 3rd party projects.
Malware that is 'not ransomware' wormed its way through Fujitsu Japan's systems
I came here to say the same thing. What insight do these diagrams provide? They always struck me as a useless but flashy visualization that you would put in front of your company to make people believe Important Work is happening inside.
Well finally you're trying to use some logic and critical thinking. Thank God.

For real you're as bad as me because you also reply and can't stop.

I'm not hearing voices, I'm talking about the context of the OPs question.
Is one effective method perhaps to carve out a consistent, say, 5% of the day to focus on this cross-polination of implemented solutions?
On and off over the last year I have been rewriting QEMU's x86 decoder. It started as a necessary task to incorporate AVX support, but I am now at a point where only a handful of opcodes are left to rewrite, after which it should not be too hard to add APX support. For EVEX my plan is to keep the raw bits until after the opcode has been read (i.e. before immediates and possibly before modrm) and the EVEX class identified.

My decoder is mostly based on the tables in the manual, and the code is mostly okay—not too much indentation and phases mostly easy to separate/identify. Because the output is JITted code, it's ok to not be super efficient and keep the code readable; it's not where most of the time is spent. Nevertheless there are several cases in which the manual is wrong or doesn't say the whole story. And the tables haven't been updated for several years (no K register instructions, for example), so going forward there will be more manual work to do. :(

The top comment explains a bit what's going on: https://github.com/qemu/qemu/blob/59084feb256c617063e0dbe7e6...

(As I said above, there are still a few instructions handled by the old code predating the rewrite, notably BT/BTS/BTR/BTC. I have written the code but not merged it yet).
So make new laws or amend old ones? Isn't that what congress is ostensibly paid to do?
I don't know why anyone is talking about insider trading. I don't give a shit if the congresspeople do insider trading.

What I care about is that if congresspeople can trade at all, they have a conflict of interest in doing their legislative duties. They are incentivized to pass laws that will benefit corporations and make the stock market rise. That's what is unacceptable about Congress trading.

Banning trading totally is the only thing that matters.
"The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday made it nearly impossible for Americans to sue federal law enforcement officers who violate their constitutional rights, further narrowing the already limited path to hold U.S. officials accountable for even egregious misuse of their authority."

Source: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-in...

This cannot be challenged because Chevron was in place. I would imagine it will now be challenged.
Options 3 and 4 are options - not requirements (hence the "or" between 3 and 4). Manufacturers choose which of the 4 options to implement. If you don't want them, dont buy the cars from manufacturers that do.

What you suggest would impose manufacturers who want to do 3 and 4 must also do option 1 or 2, which would make them unreasonable.
Reposting from a child comment:

I don't know why anyone is talking about insider trading. I don't give a shit if the congresspeople do insider trading.

What I care about is that if congresspeople can trade at all, they have a conflict of interest in doing their legislative duties. They are incentivized to pass laws that will benefit corporations and make the stock market rise. That's what is unacceptable about Congress trading.

Banning trading totally is the only thing that matters.
> Chevron deference is the reason the US works at all.

I mean, arguably it worked better during the years before the decision

Not to say that I agree with the recent supreme court decision, but eventually the dust will settle
Won't it lead to wildly different environmental laws in different states? One state can pump waste it considers safe into a river that is shared with another state who considers that waste harmful? Factories on borders of states can pollute the air in ways they do not agree upon, etc?
20 or 30 years sounds possible using boring tech and targeting public sector
This kind of node/edge based programming model is one I've been interested to see applied to LLMs.

In some sense, we can see the input of an LLM as a node, the LLM itself as a function describing the edge of the graph, and the output of the LLM as a new node.
FWIW, I enjoyed how the pictures were adding a little theme, were consistent and broke up the reading nicely without being too "noisy" (compared to e.g. technical articles full of meme pictures).
Seems to me that if Congress would prefer that any disputes arising from the implementation of their laws be handled by the admistrative agency charged with enforcing it, all they need to do is say so in the law. Not sure how the courts could get around that.
Prestigious projects don't mean you don't have to actually argue with logic now
Bullets for sale in some US grocery stores with ammo vending machines
What if a previous judicial interpretation violated this rule, it is better to reverse the decision (changing society again) or to stick with it?
The courts have long used 'expert witnesses' to make decisions, I expect this will just become even more common going forward. And many times these so-called 'experts' are in fact provided by the very industries that would be affected by legislative decisions. On the surface what looks like a significant increase of power by the judiciary seems really to be effectively an additional capture by corporations.

Maybe it was already that way by a different route, but still.
This is what congress does by creating these agencies that up until now relied on Chevron rather than a drawn out process of creating specific laws (so years can go by with dangerous loopholes etc).
Would you trust a doctor to execute on a large distributed systems project? If they had some advice from a Meta engineer?

Background in one space does not translate at all. We absolutely do not want judges to be on the same level as experts in any field. They are not, and will never be, equivalent to people who are educated in a given space. People spend years and decades of their lives becoming experts in a given space, they cannot be replaced.
What are you talking about? I'm referring to hidden inflation that is suppressed by this activity.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo was brought by Ryan Mulvey and Eric Bolinder of the Americans for Prosperity, which is the primary advocacy arm of the Koch brothers to weaken various regulatory bodies.

Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce was brought by lawyers from the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which is also funded by the Koch brothers

so hint: it definitely was "big" entities looking to skirt regulations
Chevron is from a decision in 1984, so how did it apply in 1976?
> selling to developers is really hard.

Yes, software wise, we either take open source stuff or write our own stuff.

There are just very little in between that can be monetized.. unless it bundles with hardware like ChatGPT.
IT people already live in a dystopia where they are actively playing and creating a video game at the same time under the belief that they can defeat their own creation.