skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, okay, but turn it round: what do you have to lose by listing the jobs? Some people will be convinced to sign up without them, but if you list them, some additional people will sign because they are interested in those jobs.

Maybe some that would have given you their CV would be put off if they see only listings for jobs they don't match - but they don't match them, so they're not going to help your business any time soon anyway. So: the ones you gain by not listing don't help you, and the ones you lose are the ones that would.

Having only a couple of jobs just makes you look small, not weak. But there are many small recruiting forms that do well - for example, one guy who I've used, Mark Ashton, only listed a couple of roles on his website[1]. But when I was a hirer he was still a great recruiter who found candidates that were matches, because he knew the market. As an individual, I still go to his website to see if there's anything of interest. (Okay, he seems to have changed his website and it doesn't show any jobs, so not as good a piece of evidence as I thought. But probably that's because he doesn't have a client right now, rather than because he wouldn't list them).

[1] https://the1stconnection.co.uk/
Cheaper and bigger misinformation campaigns on social media is what I'm most worried about, but that's not what my comment was about. LLM are not a sandbox and absolutely do have an impact on the world outside.

"How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?"
That's not happening. ChatGPT will talk about sex, and as proof I just asked it what sex was and it happily responded.
I agree with you since it adds absolutely no value to the article. Technical articles don't need unrelated pictures that add huge page breaks.
Anyone who uses material non-public information to trade stocks is guilty of insider trading under current interpretations. If a member of Congress does so then they are also guilty. The question becomes whether you can prove this and whether a jury will convict on it; to date law enforcement has generally declined to prosecute these cases (as mentioned at the end of the article about COVID trading)

The SEC also requires that "insiders" make certain filings well in advance of trading stocks, but that is a separate issue.
usually when I see the phrase “strike bipartisan deal” I assume it is something nefarious

this headline sounds nice

where’s the nefarious angle?
I think Emacs does this too, if you configure it, or even by default, using its backup files, that go by #some_name# or similar.
Loper Bright appears to be more narrow wrt to FERC

https://natlawreview.com/article/analysis-loper-brights-and-...
That's very good UX, I really like that. I wonder why it's not more widespread.
In a recent development in the defense of Dr. Charles Hoffe against the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons, the judge ruled that the College has to prove its alleged "incontestable truths."
The cause and effect in that article seems kind of weak.

> The construction of the Bridgewater canal provided regular, cheaper coal supplies to power the new machinery and improved transport links to Liverpool.
The invention of the cotton gin in 1793 proved crucial in shaping Manchester’s future.

And then because a lot of the raw cotton was supplied from slave plantations it implies the slavery caused the cotton gins, whereas I expect it was the other way around. If there had been no slavery they probably would still have got cotton from paid farmers overseas with much the same effect.
I never understood the obsession with Nancy Pelosi specifically (not by you, but by the people who named that ETF and all of the news headlines) in the context of senate trading.

Her recent returns are high, but they’re right up there with several other Republican and Democrat lawmakers: https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1742207287966777673

It’s even stranger that inception date of the $NANC ETF was after she announced she was stepping down as Democratic Party leader.

I guess the name triggers controversy, so the people pushing these products use whatever sells.
So Chrome and Chromium got this cool trick where they block internal audio from your mic. Like, you can be on a Google Meet call and blast a YouTube vid in another tab, and Meet won’t pick it up. No clue how they do it exactly, but since Chromium’s open-source, someone can probably dig into the code for the deets. If anyone knows the techy stuff behind this, spill the beans!
Net Neutrality is actually a great example in this context, and it came up at oral argument.

If you take Chevron seriously, the fact of whether or not Congress in 1934 wrote a law that required modern ISPs to be regulated as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act actually changed as the FCC ping-ponged between Republican and Democratic control over the past 10 years.

If you're a judge who thinks the law should carry forward consistently the same meaning it had when it was passed, difficult ambiguities and all, that's a pretty bad bug: Now the meaning of a law to the people of the United States isn't fixed at all, it can change (and change back) at the will of the President, without Congress amending it.
I keep saying we need some sort of futuristic face makeup style or temp tattoos that obscure facial features in a way that confuses this. Finally I can get my 1980s style retro/future.
The legacy of Girls in Tech will live on through the successes of the women it supported
The crazy parts that were mentioned in the parent comment are all part of the hot path. Microcode handles slow paths related to paging and segmentation, and very rare instructions. Not necessarily unimportant (many common privileged instructions are microcoded) but still rare compared to the usual ALU instructions.

But it's not a huge deal to program the quirky encoding in an HDL, it's just a waste of transistors. The really complicated part is the sequencing of micro operations and how they enter the (out of order) execution unit.
You just described how the script is less convenient to meet the preferences of the commenter you replied to.

A debian package relieves them of the overhead you describe by having a few people do the work for anyone else that uses the package.
For this reason, I (want to) implement a tag-based newsletter where I can tag a post as "tech" rather than "lifestyle" and only those subscribed to the "tech" tag will get notified, whether by email or by some other way.
This law isn't classifying anyone as insiders. I don't think there's an intention in the bill to ban trading by doing so.
…with the parliament, not the judiciary[and now that it is overturned, certainly not with bureaucrats who run agencies].
> A.I. has helped chatbots carry on conversations almost indistinguishable from human interaction. It has solved problems that have confounded scientists for decades like predicting protein shapes. And it has blurred the lines of creativity: writing music, producing art and generating videos.

Why was this article written now?? This is the only paragraph that substantially marks it as post-2016. For such a key paragraph, I think it's rather too sloppy: eg just one more example of reporters/DeepMind transforming AlphaFold's useful two-thirds accuracy rate into the culminating solution of an age-old problem.
I loved Squarespace Note, and this seems like a close relative. Downloading now.
The political and business environments are absolutely not the same when a chevron was ruled. It’s completely disingenuous to say corpos will be ethical when you see what kinds of companies fight the EPA.

Corporations have vastly more power and influence in our government than they did in the 50s or 60s or 70s or 80s.

I do not trust these entities to stop rat fucking innocent Americans because they had the audacity to not want to be poisoned.
Ai took software out so no more need for more software engineers so the funding for such programs from companies dry up !! Corporate want cheap labour that's all !!
Depends on if you like their personality or not. Twitter was always for the person and eventually other types of accounts focusing on niches came around.
And the point of the "maintain status quo" part is to ensure the pain comes slowly, over the course of a decade or so, as court cases make their way through the system, only taking tiny bites out of the regulatory framework at a time, to make it really hard to point out how much overturning Chevron has hurt regulation in the US
That's more credible than the original point persnicker tried. And it's especially appropriate given the stated intention of the GOP to usher in an era where the entire bureaucracy of the federal government shifts to match the political ideology of the newly elected president. If that comes to pass, it will be an amazing back-and-forth switch every few years. Institutional inertia seems preferable in comparison.
>Nvidia also spends a metric shit ton of money to make sure professors use and teach on their platform.

Do you have a source for this claim? Or do you simply mean that since they spend money making it better that professors end up using it on their own accord?
Congress could create a committee charged with developing an AI policy. That committee can include subject matter experts, and can recommend clear specific regulations. They can then draft legislation that codifies that into law.

As opposed to just creating a new "Federal Department of AI" that has broad powers to regulate AI however its unelected administrators see fit.
And why not? They have background in interpreting the law and in listening to and evaluating expert testimony. Why is direct rule by short-lived experts appointed by an executive who cycles out the rules every four years better than rule by legislation and the interpretation thereof by judges as informed by experts?
The SEC can pursue civil action for insider trading, but insider trading is also a criminal offense prosecuted by the various Attorneys General and investigate by law enforcement.

I'm not aware of any successful prosecutions for insider trading for members of Congress; the article does mention the FBI's investigations in the wake of COVID-19 that ended with prosecutors declining to make any charges.
vscodium and VSCode forks are legally prevented from using the normal VSCode extension site. They have their own: https://open-vsx.org/

As far as I know Chrome forks are not blocked from using extensions from the Chrome Web Store.
The result is to give more power to the courts, not Congress. The safe assumption is that Congress will still write laws that are open to interpretation because otherwise the bills would be too big and complex for congressmen to handle. The difference is now when there is something ambiguous in the law the courts get to decide how it is interpreted instead of the relevant federal agencies because judges are better equipped to deal with the technical minutia of complex systems than the subject matter experts at the agencies. They are better equipped because the Heritage Foundation has been stacking the courts for years now in preparation for this ruling.

My children may yet get to witness rivers catching on fire, a spectacle that had been denied to them by the killjoys at the EPA.
There can be a lag, but not always. Sometimes it’s just a day or so between trade and reporting. Seems like one way to derisk would be to evaluate the time between trade and reporting plus whether anything significant has happened in that timeframe.

For example, Senator buys a stock, stock jumps and plateaus a week later, buy is reported a month later would mean don’t add this to ETF.
Indeed, one should think about whether they want to write for oneself or for others, as the two have vastly different approaches for effectiveness.
"What could France have done more"

Everything it is doing now towards Russia.
Yeah no argument on prestigious, just noting the comp differences.
I am glad to hear you have room in your life to tend to idiosyncracies like this.
It would be any search engine or social media site, not google or bing or whoever. The volume of disinformational crap on the WWW was close to zero at its inception and can only go up. The cost of AI-generated disinformation is so much lower than human-generated, it's like comparing the cost of email to the first-class postage. Just like spam, but without spam filters. Remember spam in the pre-filter days? But this isn't selling penis enlargements that you don't need. So we'll easily have more bot-created content than actual human-generated content in a couple of years.
They use EDA (Electronic Design Automation) software, there are only a handful of vendors, the largest probably being Mentor Graphics, now owned by Siemens. So, yes, they use automation to algorithmically build and track/resolve refactors as they design CPUs. CPUs are /generally/ block-type designs these days, so particular functions get repeated identically in different places and can be somewhat abstracted away in your EDA.

It's still enormously complex, and way more complex than the last time I touched this stuff more than 15 years ago.
If one party is doing worse and the other is doing better that could be a sign that there's not much to it. They're generally going to have access to similar information/groups/etc. Otherwise a theory that one party is "better at corruption" vs "if you grab subsets of people at random some of the sets will be above-average" is dubiously-supported.

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/how-to-invest-like-members-of-co... Per this, KRUZ is lagging the S&P 500 YTD.

And in fact the case it makes is actually less convincing? "In total, 37 members of Congress beat the S&P 500 in 2023, according to stock and options data company Unusual Whales." 37 members of congress is a small subset.
Effectively you can visualize a "calendar tree". So, at the end of 2024, the user can add a summary note to the "2024" node. They can also do this at month level ("2024 Septermber"). Or at decade level. Sometimes they may want to add custom parent nodes spanning certain date range (if year/month/decade granularity is rigid for the use case). In the end, you just have a "tree of memories".

In the end, I recommend keeping your app's UX as simple as possible.
The extreme ends of the individual-collective continuum (complete lack of laws in favor of autonomy and personal responsibility vs. overbearing legal/regulatory intervention that undermines autonomy) make it clear that real life needs to be somewhere in the middle.
> The ratio is certainly a lot less skewed now than when I was a student over 20 years ago

You mean more skewed? The data shows there are less women now than 20 years ago. There is a lot more talk about women in tech today, but that doesn't mean there are more.
> The Chevron deference doctrine or just “Chevron deference” was limited to cases where a legislative delegation to an administrative agency on a particular issue is implicit rather than explicit

This is the first time I've heard this specific dimension about it. Am I correct in understanding that if the law explicitly delegates to an administrative agency, that's a different scenario?

I've read all about how the Chevron defense keeps the government functioning because we don't want Congress to have to decide every little thing in the laws, and to let the experts in the agency figure out the details. But it sounds like if the law explicitly says "XYZ to be determined by Agency ABC" then that's not something covered by the Chevron defense? Have there been lawsuits against agencies in that case? If not, why not? And does that mean the answer going forward is for Congress to be explicit about what they're delegating and to whom? That doesn't seem so bad, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what it's saying here.
This is, after all, the same forum that predicted the imminent offline-ing of Twitter within a week of the layoffs ~2 years ago, and before that, the lack of federal net neutrality was supposed to be the end of decent internet access.
The increasing number of women entering the tech field is a positive development
I actually completely agree with you, although at the very least users can be expected to not be rude. Although, I don't think anyone in this thread (so far) has been rude.
Yes. Please put some time into thinking about creative challenges to the surveillance state side of things. They want to limit agencies powers then surveillance powers should be the first we go after.
This suggests that overturning Chevron will not have any meaningful effect on CBP policies. They are already overtly illegal with no consequences.
Cisco is the only recent-ish video chat app I can think of that has required an extension.

The other I can remember is original Hangouts about a decade ago, cause at the time WebRTC wasn't commonly supported. Chrome was the only browser that didn't need an extension for that, but you know what, other VC apps were free to use Chrome's early WebRTC features too, and they later did.
software change because the job that is does, also change. example: moving money around today is not like it use to be 20 years ago.

an analogy with constructions makes no sense, IMO.
I've favorited your top-level comment. This is an incredibly important lesson to learn, one that I wish I learned earlier in life, but your favorited comment will be a reminder for me in the future.
I don’t see any indication this feature was put there to cover up the issue. It would definitely help since it helps with battery degradation in general, but they would limit it to specific models if it was that targeted and there would be no need to still have the feature around today.
The headline says "bipartisan deal for BAN on stock trading" doesn't it?

Inside trading is already notionally illegal, isn't it?

Why would this law be trying to re-make insider trading illegal?
If I need to protect metadata then I just have people SFTP encrypted files to me and keep everything off of all the shared platforms all together. For me personally that's a one-off as I rarely have such a need.
> A lot of this is done in software (microcode).

No, that's not the case, since >30 years. Microcode is only used for implementing some complex instructions (mostly system instructions). Most regular instructions (and the rest of the core) don't use microcode and their expansions into uOps are hardwired. Also the entire execution unit is hardwired.

There are typically some undocumented registers (MSRs on x86) that can control how the core behaves (e.g., kill switches for certain optimizations). These can then be changed by microcode updates.
"Google should not use a near-monopoly position in the browser to privilege it's own sites and services" is a very simple standard, and this really is not a complex case.

It only becomes complicated if you start trying to rephrase a simple principle as: "Google shouldn't privilege their sites unless they mean well, and then the result is immaterial, but no wait actually I didn't mean immaterial, I meant minimal, and anyway it's not like Zoom isn't still popular so-"

Or... Google could also just not ship invisible extensions as part of Chromium's build process that privilege Google-owned services with extra API access in direct contradiction to the principles of an independent Internet. Because the effect of casually breaking that contract isn't minimal. It does actually matter that the web be a neutral platform. If businesses expect that Google can get away with privileging Google platforms in the core browser, that perception and allowance of interference degrades the entire Internet as a commercial platform - and of course emboldens Google to go even further in the future.
Ok, so there’s not a ton of info in the article about the actual bill itself. Only the caption on the image lists the name: the ETHICS Act.

If you check S.1171 you can see it is in the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. It may die there if nothing else happens.

If you think this is an important bill, you can contact the members of this committee. They are listed here: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/about/committee-members/

You should inform them that this is important to you, and if they don’t take action on this you will not vote for them or donate to their campaigns, and will support their opponent instead.

This last bit is controversial but important. Politicians care about staying in office. If you will be supporting a candidate regardless, your opinion doesn’t matter to them. So you need to tie their election to something that matters to you.
Ah, alright! Thank you!
Or we setup a framework for agencies to be able to decide on new products and chemicals without having to rely on the increasingly deadlocked congress to pass a new law for every little chemical or additive industry wants to add. That framework included tons of checks from both the judiciary and ultimately from Congress themselves who could overrule agencies any time they felt the agency exceeded the bounds of the authority given to them.

Even if we didn't have a near dysfunctional Congress there are so many small decisions on regulations it would take up most of their time passing them individually. No matter how you slice it there's a need for something like the delegation of powers to agencies to keep up with modern industry.
Oooh, thank you this is very convenient. Confirmed zed is not listed here.
Still not further enlightened.
You are both being overly dramatic about this. The system will continue to function and adjustments will be made for the new legal reality.
Chevron deference was abused to circumvent the inability of congress to make laws that were too politically divisive. Eventually sustainability regulations were enacted through these measures when this should have first been explicitly permitted.
> We now have a technology that completely understands natural free flowing text and can extract meaning.

Actually we don't. I know it certainly feels like LLMs do this but no one would dare stake their life on their output if they know how they work. Still useful!
Related:

Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40820949
Can you substantiate this claim?

> When Chevron as active you could not challenge the US constitution not applying to border patrol because of Chevron. This is literally the CPBs only line of defense.

Specifically that Chevron enables this - I don't see how Chevron applies here.
My point is only that even when the software is correct, the reproducible build rate will either be 100% or we've got a representative sample set.

Until then, those issues will continue to be lumped together with all the software reasons it wasn't reproducible.
That was very brave
> stated intention

Namely, Republican efforts to dramatically increase the scope of government employees that a president can appoint and fire on a whim. Basically a move towards the "spoils system" of rewarding political allies and donors with powerful or lucrative jobs.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/analysis/faq-the-cons...
Build a big enough userbase for big tech to want to buy it. It's the
only game left outside ads. Worked for WhatsApp, Instagram, Github,
Kaggle, etc.
I'm pretty sure this is syntax highlighting. It's a known issue to be slow for large files in Vim because it is synchronous. Try starting Vim with syntax highlighting off:

vim -c 'syn off'
Don't forget how Google incentivizes projects, one gets promoted for shipping the project, not for maintaining it. If indeed this were shipped at YouTube, I wouldn't be surprised if it gets slowly deprecated or outright shuttered in a few years. It's better to keep it open source for everyone.
It's written in an HDL; IIRC both Intel and AMD use verilog. A modern core is on the order of a million or so lines of verilog.

Some of that will be hand placed, quite a bit will just be thrown at the synthesizer. Other parts like SRAM blocks will have their cad generated directly from a macro and a description of the block in question.