skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They don't say if it was an Apple or Android device. Either way -- that was fast. I wonder what happened here? Did the suspect not have encryption turned on? Using an older phone with known vulnerabilities? Is the FBI sitting on some 0-days?
> What stops Trump from becoming president?

Once again, the military, who are sworn in to protect the constitution. If Pence felt physically threatened, the national guard steps in. This would only work if Trump had the backing of the military in order to prevent them from acting or enforcing the law.

> Why did he attempt all of this, when it could never have worked?

Maybe because he is a wreckless fool. That does not mean it was an insurrection. Ironically, using J6 for political gain and calling it an insurrection in order to prosecute him has backfired and made him more popular, just like all the other instances of going after Trump for things that clearly have been done by other presidents.

He has risen in popularity precisely because of this political double standard, when he could have faded into oblivion back in 2016 (let's not forget he was called racist, fascist even before J6).
I don't think AMD needs to support 5+ year old GPUs personally. And all the recent generations are already practically supported.

AMD only claims support for a select few GPUs, but in my testing I find all the GPUs work fine if the architecture is supported. I've tested rx6600, rx6700xt for example and even though they aren't officially supported, they work fine on ROCm.
Will they try to nerf UBlock Origin next lik what Chrome is about to do in the name of "privacy"?
I think the first order utility of the system is indeed negative. But the second order effect is to set a boundary with advertisers as to what is acceptable, which is positive.

I don't think it actually allows advertisers to identify trends except in terms of conversion rates. Let me reproduce the paragraph I linked to:

> Since the DAP server acts as a middleman, and reports are only generated at conversion times (impressions without conversions are not reported), ad networks have no way through this method of collecting your personal information (such as your user information or your IP address/browser client info). All they receive is an aggregate that informs them that their ad (published on source ) led number of people to a positive outcome for their customer over a period of time . Some amount of noise is also added to the information in order to further strengthen privacy[7].

Impressions without conversions aren't reported, so the only trends seen are over conversions as grouped by websites. If that's all it takes for advertisers to stop fingerprinting us, I'm open to something along those lines.
> "some countries" is a pretty low bar since many large university campuses probably consume more power than North Korea.

You think ASU consumes more power than a nuclear armed nation of 20 million people? You sound like someone who graduated from a state university.
CUDA v1...CUDA v2... CUDA v... CUDA isnt commonly assosiated with a version number...
But you haven't described what kind of websites they are, or what kind of content.

You haven't provided even any comparison screenshots from over the years, much less graphs showing that this is an actual quantitative trend, as opposed to you just noticing different things now and maybe not remembering things entirely accurately.

I'm not saying that you're not telling the truth about your observations. But I am saying that you provide absolutely no basis for making broad sweeping generalizations about Google Search changing its "defaults".

Maybe you work in a category of low-quality content, while people in other categories have seen more of their pages indexed.

The point is, your personal qualitative observations from a miniscule subset of 100 sites is nowhere near sufficient to make a provocative headline claim such as "Google Now Defaults to Not Indexing Your Content".
That would be the vending machine on the skis.
Do you have any indication whether this “universal” space might be shared between models, or is it unique to the architecture and training set?

Maybe it’s crazy, but is there any possibility that, say, Llama and Mistral use the same representation space?
I have used it successfully against header files for Win32 COM interfaces generated from IDL which include major parts of the infamous "windows.h". Almost every type is a macro.

This is an extremely well-understood space.

Just open the docs and do it.
Hey this is great! How long does it take to generate the Wiki when setting up, and what have you found is the best way to keep it up to date?
Just to check here, if you're given something like the following PTX:

wgmma.mma_async.sync.aligned.m64n256k16.f32.bf16.bf16

Do you reverse it back into C++ that does the corresponding FMAs manually instead of using tensor hardware? Or are you able to convert it into a series of __builtin_amdgcn_mfma_CDFmt_MxNxKABFmt instructions that emulate the same behavior?
I only use ChatGPT for things which don't really need a source, such a code snippets. Either a snippet works or it doesn't. For anything where I think an LLM might mess up without me realizing, I go for Perplexity, so I can then check the sources to confirm.
Lightning network is mostly dead. Someone should do this but for the thriving L2 ETH ecosystem.
But the question is, can it also run SHUDA and WUDA?
You never need to call strlen unless you are getting your inputs from a place that doesn’t give you a string length (such as stdin).
Honestly I am pretty convinced by this post. Good job Mozilla.

> Digital advertising is not going away, but the surveillance parts could actually go away if we get it right.

This rings especially true to me. A lot of people, especially HN readers and myself included, hate advertising so much that we want to block ads altogether. But clearly we are still in the minority and we have to accept its existence. I think Mozilla's position here is clear: digital ads are evil but it's a necessary evil, so the best we can do is to limit how evil it could be.
Only when enforced, which it hasn’t been until very recently.
Surely it is something safer than a suicide cord,[0] especially if used inside where things like children live.

[0]https://www.consumerreports.org/home-garden/generators/why-s...
Gemini AI platform accused of scanning Google Drive files w/o user permission
> the advertisers could simply block Firefox en-masse and survive

And why would firefox users care about advertisers blocking firefox? Oh noes, ads aren’t showing up in my browser!
Mozilla themselves siphon telemetry (eg: incoming.telemetry.mozilla.org), they're at best a faux defender of privacy.

Seriously, they don't deserve peoples' support.
Visual programming is alive and well in industrial logic controllers.
That's a completely different issue. Using math to solve physics problems deals with physical models. Models are imperfect and what kinds of math they use is completely separate from asking "does infinity exist in our actual universe".

To answer that question, you would have to dismiss with experimental evidence all models people can come up with that try to explain the universe without "infinities". It's neither completely clear what that would mean, nor whether it's even in principle possible to determine experimentally (it's also most likely completely irrelevant to any practical purpose).
Eventually we will just have our ai agents reading the content while we sit in a pillow lined room doing the real important work
I got the impression that the comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek.

The joke lies in the fact that saying "100% of real numbers" isn't *technically* the same thing as saying "all real numbers", because there's not really a good way to define a meaning for "100%" that lets you exclude rational numbers (or any other countable subset of the reals) and get something other than 100%.
How is that? Say you are reading 1000 lines of stdin at once to process them. Which registers are your string and substring headers stored.
Ties between Google's Project Nimbus and Israel's military
Do you understand Shannon's definition? Have I made a mistake somewhere? Differential privacy as I understood it is a statistical notion. It gives the advertiser a noisy average of the behaviour of a large group but not about the individual users in the group. Mozilla pulls a switcheroo saying that the individual info is protected so everything is fine. In fact the statistical info is invasive too, and that's Shannon's notion. The system is private if the information gained by the adversary is exactly zero.

Also, "advertiser" is way too benign a term: in cryptography we generally use "adversary". Consider that in this election season, the Trump and Biden political campaigns will be among the biggest advertisers. Mozilla will sell them information and they will use it. Question: will they only use it to solicit votes, or will they also use it to help round up their enemies if they get into power?

And yes, they can use statistical information for that. The first thing they will want to know about any specific class of enemy is how many of them there are, before worrying about identifying individuals. So Mozilla shouldn't help them with either.
Unix got increased presence on Internet because DoD paid UCB to port "DoD Internet" (aka TCP/IP) to Unix, because Digital had announced cancellation of PDP-10 line.

Meanwhile everyone and their pet dog Woofy was exploiting the recent explosion in portability of Unix and thus source-level portability of applications, using unix as the OS for their products - because it enabled easier acquiring of applications for their platform.

With some Unix vendors (among others Sun, which arose from a project to try to build "cheap Xerox Alto"), providing ethernet networking and quickly jumping on BSD sockets stack, you had explosion of TCP/IP on unix but it still took years to get dominant.
Highly suggest trying orion browser on iOS. It supports webextensions, so you can install ublock origin.
I think you're confusing some terms here.

> In C++ you need an `extern "C"`, because C++ linkage isn't guaranteed to be the same as C linkage.

`extern "C"` has nothing to do with linkage, all it does is disable namemangling, so you get the same symbol name as with a C compiler.

> Throwing a C++ static function as a callback into a C function usually works, but it's not technically correct because the linkage isn't guaranteed to be the same without an extern "C".

Again, linkage is not relevant here. Your C++ callbacks don't have to be declared as extern "C" either, because the symbol name doesn't matter. As you noted correctly, the calling conventions must match, but in practice this only matters on x86 Windows. (One notable example is passing callbacks to Win32 API functions, which use `stdcall` by default.) Fortunately, x86_64 and ARM did away with this madness and only have a single calling convention (per platform).
> One thing I’ve learned from following Jake Seliger’s excellent blog [0] is that cancer patients are often on their own when it comes to researching and applying to clinical trials.

And, IMO, this mostly makes sense. There's very limited spots and eligibility criteria; we can't throw everyone in a trial. Filtering based on who is most motivated to go through the process makes sense.

The opposite, where oncologists enthusiastically convey the news of trials that probably won't work and offer false hope, isn't great.

The whole point of the trial is to get to the point where we know we can recommend this for more people.
For rust code calling C, sharing structs is doable with #[repr(C)]. See https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/type-layout.html#reprc-s...

(Nitpick: I don’t think it technically is correct to call this “The C representation”, as strict layout in C depends on the C compiler/ABI. I wouldn’t trust this to be good enough for serializing data between 32-bit and 64-bit systems, for example. For calling code on the same system, it’s good enough, though)
(a - b) in fixed point will have very low precision, too, and will generally be exact in floating point. The following multiplication by c may or may not be exact in floating point (or in fixed point, mind you - multiplication of two n bit numbers exactly needs 2n bits of precision, which I doubt you will give yourself in fixed point). The "unbounded" error comes in when a and b themselves are not precise, and you have that same precision problem in fixed point as you do in floating point.

For example, suppose your fixed point format is "the integers" and your floating point format has 6 significant digits: if you have real-valued a = 100000.5 and b = 100001.9,
both number systems will round a to 100001 and b to 100002. In both cases, (b - a) will be 1 while (b - a) should be 1.4 if done in the reals. That rounding problem exists in fixed point just as much as in floating point. In both systems, the operation that causes the cancellation is itself an exact calculation, but the issue is that it's not precise. Fixed point will just give you 1 in the register while floating point will add a bunch of spurious trailing zeros. Floating point can represent 1.4, though, while fixed point can't. If a and b were represented exactly (a = 100001 and b = 100002 in the reals), there would be no problem in either number system.

The only times that you get better cancellation behavior are when you have more precision to the initial results, which when comparing double precision float to 64-bit fixed point comes when your operands in fixed point have their MSB at the 53rd position or above. That only happens when your dynamic range is so deeply limited that you can't do much math.

When you are thinking about cancellation numerically, exact is a red herring. Precise is what you want to think about.
The idea is that because you could simply use open source mercurial to achieve whatever you needed, a company couldn’t build services around it and make money off of it, so there were no dollars around to promote it either and pay sales people to sell it to enterprises or sponsor GitHub conferences and hackathons, etc.
> You can't reference Claude Shannon and information theory and then say a system to serve ads that preserves privacy can't exist.

They didn't say that. They said this isn't it.
yes. As far as I understand, I need a special sleep study to calibrate a rebreather. The rebreather recycles my exhaled air and increases the CO2 level to trigger the internal sensor that tells me to breathe. 3 doctor visits and multiple calls and I still haven't gotten my next sleep study.

fckn medical industrial complex
This is pretty cool, congrats on the launch. Could you run it on Blender? https://github.com/blender/blender
Phone encryption debate to reignite after political violence
Since you're knowledgeable in the field, I have a question: what makes immunotherapy more inherently expensive compared to other options?
Show HN: I made a WordPress plugin that makes plugins with AI
Oh, I don't know, I don't mean to slander Librewolf. I'm just saying that intermediaries are sure to cause some kind of inefficiency.
"Certain diets such as the “Mediterranean diet” are rich in antioxidants" https://sepalika.com/arthritis/antioxidants-rheumatoid-arthr...

"They found the product, a key component of the cure-all Mediterranean diet, reduced brain inflammation and activated a process known as autophagy, where cells flush out damaging debris" http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/819819/Extra-virg...
Agree. It seems the modern "nobody left behind" approach had the unintended consequence of optimising for the lowest common denominator, which will obviously be a very low skill level.
I am happy with a many of "the government" initiatives in my lifetime (which spans beyond your 84 threshold) that were enacted by one party (the one always cleaning up deficit messes), yes.
Also thought it was a joke. Absolutely not signing in to google for an unknown app meant as a novelty, and I can’t imagine that’s necessary for this to function so I think it’s fair to say it’s a bad design, if not outright malicious.
Our Browser options are currently all tied to one of the big AdTech companies:

* Safari is owned by Apple

* Edge is owned by Microsoft

* Chrome is owned by Google

* Firefox is partnered with Facebook/Meta

I guess technically there's Opera (owned by Chinese company Kunlun) and Brave (known for inserting affiliate links into stuff), which aren't any better.

In the future there might be Ladybird (where we'll have to see if Shopify wants something in return for their >=$100,000 investment), though that's pretty far off.

I know that maintaining a browser is a massive amount of work, but man, things are bleak. I guess that an OSS fork like Librewolf or Chromium is the best option these days.
> Once the disk is imaged, the secure enclave can be simulated in software, also without the limitation of the number of tries. Only the password is missing.

Yes, good luck breaking a 256-bit or similar key. I'll see you and your quantum computer in 2.29*10^32 years
A lot of that page builds a lot of point about specific time in order to sell the idea about dropping the unviable gold standard (in the form of Bretton-Woods system) as the real culprit.
> Then again, maybe this was in the release notes and on the blog.

It belonged in the big tab they popped up when 128 was installed. If that's not for informing users about major new features they really should know about, what is it for?
KUtrace: Low-overhead Linux kernel tracing facility
Yes. They're just surrendering.
> Doesn't antitrust already deal with this kind of thing?

Theoretically, but as a sibling comment mentioned, enforcement of that has been lax. That's why I'd like to see some defense-in-depth. If there are multiple ways to thwart that kind of concentrated power, we're not fucked if the one basket (antitrust) we were putting all our eggs into fails.

I also think you may letting perfect be the enemy of the good (e.g. antitrust should already deal with this kind of thing, so it's the only thing that should deal it).
The point is there isn't an alternative and using imagination isn't going to magically make that possible. If you are 200 yards away, a gun is probably the only way to stop someone in any way. Pepper spray, tasers, etc... none of that works from a distance that most guns can be fired at. Tear gas or other crowd control will not stop someone from taking a shot.

If you're suggesting creating something new, then sure, but even then I would assume most things have been tried already. Nothing stops a gun from a distance except another gun.
Ladybug? Yeah, it seems like a long shot, but we need it.
Nop, this is the wrong approach. Create a system that separates a default sum from the paycheck of every individual in the EU (and US could adopt this strategy too). A small sum, like 5 euros, whatever. So you visit sites and at the end of the month you get a summary from your browser showing you which sites you frequented and which of those sites have the headers showing it's up for funding. So you wouldn't send money to google, but would send money to individual creators.

End of the month the browser shows you how it shared that 5 bucks among the sites you visited based on visits, time spent reading, whatever metrics. You can maybe also assing a part of this sum to sites you have a preference of. Let's say you love Momma's baking corner, and allocate 10% more to that site.

This is your payment for the services of the people who create web pages on the Internet. You have no control over that 5 euros, you can only spend it on sites you visited. There you go, everyone pays at least a small sum for what is consumed.

Same approach can be applied to Open Source projects. Since for example Github just doesn't want to implement a proper payment system for the projects they host and exploit.

Problem solved. Companies can have even bigger war chests for this purpose...

As an added plus site owners-creators can show what open source projects they use to run their sites, so those can be also funded with this approach.
…yes it is? https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-toolkit-archive
Looking at the diagrams of one of your provided examples, https://wiki.mutable.ai/deepfakes/faceswap I think there is room for improvement

I don’t feel that any of those diagrams would really help me if my goal is to dive into that codebase
IIRC, iOS doesn't allow any browser that isn't a wrapper around Safari.
Would be cool if there were some sort of world wide… connection system of some sort so the authors could share their data without needing to respond to individual emails.
Hand tooled battlefield-deployed hardware
Presumably the macaroon itself contains a shortish timeout.

You can rate-limit (runes do this, which are simplified macaroons) but then the server is no longer stateless. Pretty sure I've ranted about this in HN comments before, could dig it out if you're interested?
Sorry for the delay! I need a way to monitor discussions that isn't me polling for updates).

That IS my local/personal convention. It comes from my Amiga days where we had a second partition called work: (no home directories remember). I never liked ~/Documents very much but ~/work performs the same purpose.
I imagine there is a massive benefit to trying to secure and claim this cave before others have a chance to. Turn key Cheyenne mountain complex on the moon with little complex lunar excavation required? Yes please, says every nations strategic space command at once. I wouldn't be surprised if there were more such sites, undisclosed for fear of competition settling on the site, but already identified for future basebuilding purposes.
I think your starting assumption (that your target audience will be turned off by having to download an image and format an SD card but will not be turned off by plugging said SD card into an unenclosed dev board) is faulty, but I suppose your market validation test will suss that out.
From what I recall from the 1970's, we paid a monthly charge for each line (number), phone rental (each), and then long-distance calls were itemized. If you had two phones in your home for the same line, you'd be charged an additional location fee, as well as the rental for the second phone. If you had two numbers (like one for the parents and one for the teenagers) then it was 2 lines, 2 phones, plus any long-distance calls each month.

By that time their billing was computerized, so the monthly statements would list each long-distance number you called and how many minutes you spent talking. I was calling BBS's at that point (300 baud acoustic coupler hotness!) and I had a phone budget that I had to stay under or pay the parents. Long distance calls (basically anywhere outside your city) were expensive!

Bell planned for the 2 line scenario, as your wiring out to the pole had red/green (tip + ring for line 1) then black/yellow pairs (tip + ring for line 2). So they could offer two lines without needing to run additional wires to the house. Or use the second pair if the first one went bad. The Bell System did forward-thinking like this all the time. And could afford it because (as mentioned) they amortized their system investment over 40+ years.
People buying THC products doesn't affect me, it affects them.

That said, I don't plan on being drawn into this discussion any further. Keep fighting the good fight I guess.
not hating on the great amber - but why LEaP on the front page of HN with no context...?

happy to see some light shown on the grim state of comp chem file formats and their shockingly lossy interconversion but I'm not sure that was the OP's intent?
Couldn’t it be as simple as a face recognition unlock?

There’s an option on iPhone’s FaceID to require eyes open and looking at phone to unlock, but this might have been deselected. Or it could be subverted.