skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> My big question is, I don't understand why the oil companies haven't gotten on board. Why aren't we seeing more and more L3 chargers at gas stations?

I'd guess that in the US one factor might be that a large fraction of gas stations are also convenience stores and most of them make more money from the convenience store side of the business than from the gas side of the business.

The convenience store has two kinds of customers. One is people who are there to get gas but also pick up something in the convenience store. The other is people who come specifically for the convenience store.

Space outside not used for cars that are at the gas pumps is usually used for parking for the people who are there for the convenience store.

If they add EV chargers that are separate from the pumps they will probably have to reduce the parking space for convenience store customers. So they are replacing spots currently used by people who are there for a usually short visit to the convenience store with spots for people who are there to charge EVs.

Even if 100% of EV charging customers also use the convenience store it still reduces convenience store volume because they occupy a spot longer than the people who are there just to use the convenience store. Plus there will be people who are there just to charge and will not use the convenience store.

If they add the EV chargers where the gas pumps are, then the EV charging customers are replacing gas buying customers and so again their is a reduction in turnover because EV charging is slower. Because EV charging is slower I'd guess there is a larger chance that an EV charging customer will decide to also use the convenience store than there is that an gas customer will, so that might compensate some for the lower turnover but I'd guess that it would still be a net reduction in convenience store business.
There's a similar "actual test" scene in By The Great Horn Spoon!, a fun kid's book about the California Gold Rush we read in elementary school.
You’re right. The assumption right now is that you’re running on trusted devices on your own local network. I will add a section in the README.
Original thinker might be bad for historical summary as they might try first to sell their own …
and by the way - for your landing page is that a custom sveltekit theme ? been wondering where to find a theme like that .
Are you suggesting we're already good enough at measuring the mass of atoms and no further precision will ever be needed? Otherwise, your statement would have been equally valid 100 years ago by just taking some significant figures off.

By the way, 4!! ~= N_A was a funny surprise! If you were starting from scratch though, you could make it even simpler and define the unit of mass to be 1e27 times the mass of a hydrogen atom which is 1.7 kg. But again, you might find some other more accurate way and have to redefine it to include an ugly conversion factor just to get practical work done in some high-precision future world.
it's a pretentious, overblown word that apparently had a burst of interest around 2012 and is completely unnecessary (but sounds scientific).

What does it give you that "oversimplified" or "simplistic" does not?

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=r...

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/reductive

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/321096/what-is-the-defini...
My take on this is that each narrow field goes through an S curve with a very exciting exponential beginning followed by a long tail of slow and boring progress. Then there is a new field with a new S curve.

The current hotness is experimental and theoretical investigations of large language models. This is just maths, and the papers coming out recently have been amazing.

I’ve read papers showing things like that neurons pack information into nearly-orthogonal spaces with beautiful geometric symmetries.

Just yesterday there was a paper showing that the middle layers of a deep language model can be interchanged and still work!
Suppose you live outside of America and the supermajority of LLM companies are American. You want to ask a question about whisky distillation or abortion or anything else that's legal in your jurisdiction but not in the US, but the LLM won't answer.

You've got a plethora of cloud providers, all of them aligned to a foreign country's laws and customs.

If you can choose between Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, and some others... well, that's really not a choice at all. They're all in California. What good does that do an Austrian or an Australian?
This is a bit of a digression, and I might write a blog post about this, but I welcome comments, either way.

It really seems we live in a kind of Twilight Zone when it comes to indie software (both productive, as we see here, but also in entertainment) pricing. AAA software (say, stuff being churned out by companies like MS/Apple/Figma/Adobe/etc.) is so aggressively priced, so egregiously recurrent (I actually am not even sure how many hundreds of dollars+ I spend a year on software I probably don't even use, except for maybe a handful of times a year—like Word or PowerPoint). Similarly, games are routinely being sold for 70-80++ dollars.

However, indie games (and as we see here, indie software) is held to this wild and insane standard. To me, even 100 bucks as a one-time-payment for productivity software (that is: something that literally helps you make more money) is kind of a no-brainer. And yet, there is so much pushback here. Even though we all probably pay for Google's garbage, for Apple's garbage, for space we don't use, and so on.

It's kind of how people brutally skewer the $5 Steam indie game, but if the $80 game made by the AAA billion-dollar studio sucks, folks seem to be much more forgiving (looking at you, Diablo 4).

I'm also working on some local-only software I plan on releasing some time this year, and pricing is something I'm very torn on. On one hand, it should be obvious that a one-time fee is the more consumer-friendly option. But something like $10 a month not only probably makes you more money, it also seems to be way more palatable by the general public.
And NVidea has a reputation for going all-in on certain market decisions. That is hard to compete against when the bet works.
> Why would you ever put points on it a few months ahead of time? You do estimation in the sprint planning when it's a candidate for that sprint.

Because people (customers and managers in particular, but not just them) want to plan ahead, they can't escape the optimistic (and usually wrong) planning mode of BDUF projects. They fear uncertainty and want to know, at a glance, how long the work will take based on their current backlog/queue/whatever. Customers don't like to be told "We'll deliver when we deliver" so managers (salespeople) give an optimistic schedule now based on today's staffing (and optimistic assumptions about future staffing levels and future staff abilities).

If they'd spend 5 seconds thinking they'd realize they can produce and deliver most (but not all) systems in an incremental fashion that will satisfy the customers while leaving key decisions and estimations to be made when there's enough information to actually make them. But that takes 5 seconds and that's too damned long.
Roapi: Create APIs for slow moving datasets without writing code
> I’m a software engineer at major US research university developing AI-powered software to improve critical reading and writing skills in higher ed.

Oftentimes, the root cause of the critical reading problem is the quality of the writing that students are subjected to. My daughter recently showed me one of her economics readings, and said she couldn't understand it. It was 40 pages of convoluted academic writing like this:

Wibbels argues that developing countries face an inherently disadvantaged position in the world economy due to their dependence on foreign capital and an undiversified base of commodity exports as primary sources of hard currency. This dependent position relative to capital markets prevents developing countries from borrowing to engage in counter-cyclical aggregate demand management.

Is such language the optimal way to express ideas for comprehension by peers, students, and policymakers?

I hope your mission to improve writing skills in higher ed addresses the source of output - professors, teaching assistants, journal editors, and others who continue to promote outdated, inconsistent, and counterproductive academic writing styles.
Fun fact: zig used to have a `@newStackCall` builtin [1], removed from the language in 0.6.0 [2].

[1]: https://ziglang.org/documentation/0.5.0/#newStackCall

[2]: https://ziglang.org/download/0.6.0/release-notes.html#newSta...
It had both top-down 'combat rooms' and a 3D first-person view (as did Ultima III.)

Of course, in Ultima III, you couldn't leave the top-down combat arena until the monsters were dead or you were. That was also fixed in Ultima IV, where you could chicken out at the cost of some Valor.
Thank you for the support! I agree on the cost point, and personally I don’t want to live in a world where all AI runs on H100s in a giant datacenter controlled by one company.
A company move like this has likely gone through plenty of discussion with internal stakeholders. I wouldn't expect big company moves like this to be measured on externally visible incentives and costs. Just as I wouldn't expect any big customer of AWS to pay the externally visible price tag.

But we aren't privy to such things, and what remains of messaging is communication to people like us. Musk decided that putting a spotlight on trans youth would be the content of such messaging.

Of course another possibility is that just like Twitter, Musk ignores high level advice and does whatever he wants.
>That mythology is no longer part of mainstream culture.

Tell that to Percy Jackson, Disney's Hercules, Hades, God of War, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Smite, Lore Olympus, Disney Descendants, Immortals, Blood of Zeus, Kaos, numerous Marvel and DC characters and countless other media that still incorporate it.
Citizens united isn’t even 20 years old. If you want to really feel depressed check out The Fairness Doctrine that Bush I abolished.
What are you doing in aviation safety that requires time series modeling? Weather?
And now you know why it failed (well, that and product reviews that were rivaled only by the ones for the Humane Pin for their scathing take). I don't know how much you know about the product, or how much of the blurb you read, but VCs threw money at a company making a complicated hydraulic/electric military-grade internet-connected industrial press suitable for stamping out automobile doors. Turns out, though, you could get equal results just squeezing the bags with your hands, skipping the $800 hardware piece.
That’s a little comforting at least… only met one guy IRL who ever said “Yeah the polygraph was fine.” Everyone else said it was a miserable experience for one reason or another, even people who were very straight laced
Freestanding c++ with compiler intrinsics is a nicer alternative. You can do things like take the address of a function.

Use an interface over memory allocation/queue launch with implementations in cuda, hsa, opencl whatever.

All the rest of the GPU side stuff is syntax sugar/salt over slightly weird semantics, totally possible to opt out of all of that.
https://archive.ph/JsY7H
sounds like something you could implement easily in emacs, having full access to whatever is in the buffer
Third VR winter. Don't forget that Sensorama (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensorama) also failed to take off.
Fascinating article, I have always been wondering how these big number libraries worked.

As a side question, does anyone the program that the author used when making that "addition" and "multiplication" performance graph? Thanks.
ACK is required for TCP to work, reply is not for email.
Yep, IIUC blackmail or coercion is one of the primary concerns. Looking at people who sold out to foreign actors I think financial troubles are the #1 reason
Its a shame that money seems to be valued more than morals.
Film 'built atom-by-atom' moves electrons 7x faster than semiconductors
I'd compare that to hearing Bach on period instruments, or Beethoven on a fortepiano. I actually played a modern reproduction of one of those.

Yeah, it IS closer to what people experienced then. I can't argue that.

But we're different; the halls are different; our ears are different. The miracle of Shakespeare (or Beethoven) is that it still means something to us, no matter how much you torture it.
The problem is that we are talking about philosophy here and what is positive is being studied and discussed. And because we have not agreed yet, those changes would be more a power play then a right-idea (say positive) play. Marx is bad has been proved beyond doubt in practice. Still because it is all about power and change, it is a bad idea.
> Sorry for the layman terms.

Not at all! What you're describing is whether there are problems with classical solutions that have also been solved via quantum computers in practice.

It depends how exactly you define a quantum computer, but for a long time D-Wave was making a number of splashy claims about how it had some large amount of entangled qubits in its "adiabatic quantum computer" and was using it to perform quantum annealing to solve various optimization problems. (Confusingly, despite the name, quantum annealing is a classical algorithm.) As part of the showcase, this system was used to solve a sudoku puzzle among other things.

There is no clear evidence that D-Wave's devices qualify as quantum computers (and if so, certainly not general-purpose ones capable of implementing Shor's algorithm), and that they achieved meaningful quantum speedup. But, they certainly did sell a handful of these devices for millions of dollars.

The general challenge with a "real" (more precisely: universal) quantum computer is that in order to get any useful computation out of them, you need a fair amount of entangled particles with high coherence times, and a fair amount of gates with high fidelity.

The wording of your question suggests that you're aware of the various implementations of Shor's algorithm and how the circuitry was designed with the answer in mind. So instead let me point you at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHL_algorithm which solves a certain family of systems of linear equations, which we can verify using classical algorithms like Gaussian elimination or LU factorization.
I think you're imagining something like chess. In order for an ai chessbot to teach me chess as efficiently as possible, that bot is probably superhuman at chess.

That's not necessarily the case. A good tutor can be more "curator" than "creator of course content"

I can learn math by reading existing math textbooks. Imagine having an ai that is able to judge my knowledge of that math and assign reading or problem sets accordingly. Imagine an AI that is compelling to talk to and keeps me on task given my stated learning goals.

None of that requires superhuman anything.

Would I still want to learn linear algebra even if the frontier of math is being advanced by some super intelligence? Sure, why not? Isn't the frontier already being advanced by many people smarter than I am?
There's over a decade of real-world data available from Tesla and Leaf, and the batteries are very long-lived: they degrade about 1%-2% per year with a good battery management system, and around 3% per year with Leaf's weaksauce one.

Additionally, batteries are getting cheaper and more energy dense, so when it's time to replace them, you'll probably get an upgrade for cheaper. Leaf started with 24kWh batteries, and now you get 40kWh for the same price, and a 64kWh upgrade option.

People often extrapolate from their experience with cell phone batteries, but these "lithium" and those "lithium" batteries are very different. There are different chemistries, different conditioning with active cooling/heating, different rates of discharge, and a big difference in redundancy when you have 1 cell vs 7000 of them.
Many of the ways? I guess that's it then, there's no reason to look at the whole picture, and especially no point in reading all the way to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Cosmic_microwave_b...
Same. I am old?
Is Visual Basic still a thing? That was my start and it always felt like a good intro language. It was limiting but you could still make "real" desktop apps.
Nobody will spam you except your service provider. My mail server will just return error to your service provider when it tries to send email to it over SMTP.
The value of story points is that it acknowledges that not all stories are equally time-consuming. Importantly, story points also provide a process for identifying stories that should be further decomposed.

In my experience, story points allow forecasting that's as good as any forecasting method I've ever used. And I've used pretty much every schedule forecasting method over my long career.

The author touches on many of the reasons why story points don't work. And pretty much every reason he gives is something that you are not supposed to do.

The key to getting them to work is trust, and a commitment to never use story points as metrics to measure the performance of developers. Any attempt to do so will result in gaming of the system. The tradeoff that stories provide is lack of precision in exchange for not having to spend 50% of your development cycle up front doing detailed analysis required to provide detailed estimates (which never worked anyway).

Things you must also never do:

- compare calibrated burndown factors between teams.

- Ask why the calibration factor isn't N. THe calibration factor is.

- Have stories with more than N story points (where N is 3 or 5). Decompose them.

- Introduce the least bit of stress.

- Use burndown rates to generate commitments, instead of forecasts.

- Use forecast results to justify asking developers to work overtime.

The last point, I think, is particularly interesting. The manager who was my first scrum master made the following commitment to us: you will never work overtime again. And voluntarily working overtime will be consider a bad thing, not a good thing, since it impairs predictability of the team's productivity. "I know you don't believe me", he said. But he was right. We never worked overtime again.
Pretty sure no paying customers are going to tolerate your branding in the widget
I disagree. Since Covid pushed us into WFH, the number of slide decks I am subject to is trending downwards. Most of my presentations these days happen in Miro, or Notion, or over a screen share of whatever we’re doing. There’s still the odd PowerPoint but they do have their uses as much as I dislike them.
There's no such thing as entropy free lunch (2017)
People can be wildly hostile to changing their programs. The people who wrote it aren't here any more, the program was validated as-is, changing it tends to stop the magic thing working and so forth.

That changing the compiler is strongly equivalent to changing the source doesn't necessarily influence this pattern of thinking. Customer requests to keep the performance gains from a new compiler but not change the UB they were relying on with the old are definitely a thing.
This is exactly the problem we have found in our research on generative AI for education [1]. We ran a pilot in a large high school in collaboration with math teachers, and found that students basically copy answers from ChatGPT, resulting in worse performance compared to students not given ChatGPT. If students don't want to learn, ChatGPT isn't going to fix anything.

[1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4895486
As far as I can see there are pretty much zero incentives in the AI research arena for being careful or intellectually rigorous, or being at all cautious in proclaiming success (or imminent success), with industry incentives having well invaded elite academia (Stanford, Berkeley, MIT, etc) as well. And culturally speaking, the top researchers seem to uniformly overestimate, by orders of magnitude, their own intelligence or perceptiveness. Looking in from the outside, it's a very curious field.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump starts a second space race, to put the first human on Mars, and funnels billions into SpaceX to achieve it.
> It's kind of how people brutally skewer the $5 Steam indie game, but if the $80 game made by the AAA billion-dollar studio sucks, folks seem to be much more forgiving.

...yep. It gets really tiring. Expectations for even a $5 Steam indie game are really high. Needs to have achievements, leaderboards, steam cloud saves, works on Steam Deck, have online multiplayer, be localized in 8+ languages, accessibility options, controller mapping, have zero bugs, have every single game option you expect in a AAA game, work flawlessly on all platforms with zero bugs, and have 10+ hours of gameplay (but preferably 40+), or else you'll get buried alive in the reviews.

There's a reason it's taken me like 10x longer to get my current game out compared to past games. It's trying to get somewhat close to all these sky-high expectations (also more responsibilities and less energy now that I'm older, though).

I didn't have any of this crap in my old Flash games I used to make (except maybe zero bugs, but even that wasn't always true), and somehow those got played millions of times then. But expectations are much, much higher now.

Granted I would like most of this stuff in the game myself too, it just takes a long time to get it all in there, especially as a solo dev.
Ok, so I just stumbled on the problem, that I tried out openwhisper (from OpenAI), but on my CPU, because of no CUDA and workarounds seem hacky. So the headline sounds good!

But can this help me directly? Or would OpenAI have to use this tool for me to benefit?

It is not immediately clear to me (but I am a beginner in this space).
Maybe I'm not a visionary, but I can't think of a mainstream use case. Maybe as a telepresence thing for better situational awareness? But I think for a lot of things the tech we have today is "good enough". I'm not going to jack into cyberspace to pay my water bill "in person" when I can use an app or website with less friction.
MSCHF drop from (2021)

Discussion then: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27811047
It shows that their interest is in a "sustainable ad-driven economy model with privacy deemed acceptable by Mozilla", and an "agent of the user".

I suppose it shows who's paying Mozilla.
I think the assessment, harsh as it might be, is fair. Morgan Ames' excellent 2019 book on the OLPC project, "The Charisma Machine" [1], does a really good job looking at all the things that went wrong in the project. There was a lot of hubris in this project from top to bottom -- a lot of Ivy League intellectuals who believed they knew how to best teach the developing world and that somehow, this device would be the one to do it. It wasn't.

Well-intentioned or not, I think its broader impact is probably overstated in many circles (the notion that we wouldn't have sub-$300 laptops without OLPC is just silly), especially since many of the promises behind the device (the price, the crank, the way it would "reshape" education") were just untrue.

Is it a blind waste of investment looking for a problem to solve like Juicero? No. Is it a scam like Theranos? Also no. But given the poor-execution of the project, the imperialist nature of its whole raison d'être, and the negative effects its failure had on the EdTech movement as a whole, I think it is definitely worthy of critique.

[1]: https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537445/the-charisma-machine/