skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> achromatic camera

Is that the same as a panchromatic camera?

Edit:

Asking because I have a 410x410px hyperspectral imager that has an aligned 1886x1886px panchromatic imager that is use to perform pan-sharpening of the HSI data bringing it up to 1886x1886. I'd never heard of a panchromatic camera before I got involved in this business and I've never heard of an achromatic camera either. All I seem to find is achromatic lenses.
Sounds like you are neither doing research, nor playing video games, which are my top morale boosters. Perhaps you should start.
That's mentioned at the bottom: "However, liquid oxygen and boron fullerenes (B80) are paramagnetic."
Wait until you hear that the USPS scans the front and back of every piece of mail that passes through its high-speed scanners, stores it for an unknown period of time, and makes those records available to law enforcement.

Those images are part of their 'informed delivery' service which you can sign up for.

I've noticed on a number of occasions that the contents of the envelope were noticeable without enhancement and legible with simple contrast/level adjustment.
I never use channels because of the context switch. Just big, adhoc group chats.

I’m a member of about 300 teams, have literally never looked at them.
Basically all the benefits listed are already in https, just maybe not used often (thinks like client certificates). IMO it'd make more sense to make SSH use http2/http3 than it would to make HTTP use SSH.
This is one company (Luxottica, not Meta) that I cannot for the life of me figure out why the FTC/DOJ haven't been constantly trying to break up. It very clearly is a hugely dominant monopoly with significant pricing power over consumers
Not a physicist, but I’d guess that bending the metal causes it to heat up, which in turn could make it easier for electrons to align and respond to magnetic waves.
Still gotta handle gdpr requests, etc.

Also, how many "few more" years? It's already been six.

I do think this sucks more than other shutdowns, because there's no practical way to off board.
I stopped seeing anything as much as a unified Christian theology long ago and now I doubt that any two people sitting next to each other in a pew are even really worshipping the same god; god is merely an idea that each individual holds in their head. I think whatever part of the brain that allows one to believe in the supernatural is simply missing from me, but I wish I was capable of believing.
The choices being (A) the government has my records and (B) the government and a bunch of companies and other people have my records. I choose A.
How many new cards a day do you set?
my company blocks most shorteners, which make a lot of normal browsing just not work correctly due to how many sites use them now.
Am I confused or did Trump turn into the bullet rather than turn and avoid it as claimed here?

The bullet came from stage left, which he was facing and hit his right ear i.e. towards the back of the stage.
Under privacy I understand that I have to the limits of my ability control over with whom I share information. But the same is true for anyone sharing information with me. If I have to input any data from someone else to a program without their implicit or explicit permission it breaks, at least in my opinion, their privacy. The same is true if I for example forward an email addressed only to me to another person. I think I can not expect others to at least try to not break my privacy if I break theirs. Though I can not control other people and would never desire to do so. And I may break unknowingly their privacy as they may do with mine. We all make mistakes and modern software has become horrendous in telling the user what it does.

I know that email providers are scanning the received and send emails. But that is something both party involved know (or at least should know) beforehand. This is what I mean with implicit permission. People sending me an email can and must expect that my email provider will scan their emails to a certain degree. They can und must expect, that I will store their email on a local device for an indefinite period. But they can also expect that I will not post their emails somewhere on the web or forward it to someone else. If they desire otherwise they may state their desire and if I agree with them I will try to accommodate for that to the best of my ability.

For most cases I know about in which ai is used there is neither an implicit nor an explicit permission involved and just the assumption that the other side is ok with their data being shared with a 3rd party as long as it is with a machine which may or may not promises to run locally. Having this permission is an assumption I will not make and which I think is wrong.

Hence why in my mind privacy and ai is irreconcilable. Because the only way I can see to have them both is with an incredible unpractical overhead of managing all this implicit and explicit permissions.

Hopes this answers your question. Though I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else.
> As the very least, down votes should require a comment. Even "false", "not true" or "disagree" would help.

This may be a bad idea. Think about the recursive effect: Someone downvotes, and gives an explanation. Someone downvotes the downvote, and gives an explanation. That's a worse discussion, because it has no more real comments, but all these downvote comments (or worse, comment chains).
Actually, bullshit also happens to have an academic, formal meaning, and it has been defended successfully in the context of AI: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40626692
This is a ridiculous statement. The backlash isn't over spending money to support open source software, which is obvious from reading the comments on the announcement. The backlash is about an open source project using the AGPL 3 license (right there in the project repository in the LICENSE file) is "selling licenses to use the software" while making vague promises that "nothing will be paywalled".

Yes, you can sell open source software but the way they're going about it is incredibly tone deaf and brings up real worry they'll change the license in the future, maybe making it not truly open source. Even if this isn't the case the communication is really terrible. Why should we trust them when they're already this ham-handed?
How do you figure? Establishing Post Offices is a Constitutionally enumerated power of Congress, and the USPS exists as a Federal Agency since the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 [1]:

> The United States Postal Service shall be operated as a basic and fundamental service provided to the people by the Government of the United States, authorized by the Constitution, created by Act of Congress, and supported by the people.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Reorganization_Act
Thanks for your input!

I've pondered on and off about distrokid (or the like), and thankfully one of my peers has done just that. Mind you, he is more established and "successful" (as in, gets more paying gigs, more audience, ...). So I've talked to him about it. During the past half year, he's "earned" 4€ from Spotify (in other words, one song made the cut of 1k listens over a year), and 180€ from Bandcamp.

I see Distrokid as helpful marketing investment for discovery, so I was still inclined to burn some money (one teaching session will likely cover my loss, so whatever), but then he went on how he put a video of a performance of a published song of his (published via Distrokid) on YT - et voila - he's got challenged by Distrokid for it. Uh, yeah. I understand you gotta relinquish rights to let DK do their thing, but that's the sort of headache I wouldn't ever want. Maybe he was doing something wrong, of course, but I'll likely fall into the same trap. More reading required ...

I'll keep in touch with him about it, maybe the discovery on spotify led to the BC throughput, but we'll have to dig deeper. There's a lot of us small artists in different stages of our development (say, performance, entertainment, composition wise), I'd love to exchange experiences on what works and what doesn't for the ailing musician. There's platforms which contains a lot of us, but everybody seems to be struggling and there seems to be a strong sense of competition among many of my peers, so it's hard to get unfiltered (subjective) truths there. And the internet is filled with horror stories as well as "from dishwasher to millionaire" survivorship biased fairy tales. Oooph.
Rather than a monopoly, I'd say it takes 2 things (that are often present in monopolies):

1) Big piles of money
2) Enough of a moat that there's no immediate threat from competition

#2 drives a lot of the desire to innovate, the hope being that by the time competition catches up, you've got so much new stuff that they're back where they started.

The closest thing I can think of in the tech space now is Apple with consumer hardware moat. The other big players are still cannibalizing and copying each other's business segments.
This is from current ChatGPT 4o:

Q: Write parameterized Python that gives the answer to 9.11 - 9.9 and 9.12 - 9.9. Run the Python to show the answer to each pair of parameters.

A: The results for the parameter pairs are as follows:

- 9.11 - 9.9 = -0.79
- 9.12 - 9.9 = -0.78 [>_]

The [>_] is a link. Clicking it opens a pop-up window, showing:

def calculate_difference(a, b):
return a - b

# Define the pairs of parameters
pairs = [(9.11, 9.9), (9.12, 9.9)]

# Calculate and print the results for each pair
results = {f"{a} - {b}": calculate_difference(a, b) for a, b in pairs}
results

Result:
{'9.11 - 9.9': -0.7900000000000009, '9.12 - 9.9': -0.7800000000000011}

// Note, if I ask it simply "compute the answer to 9.11 - 9.9", I get nonsense such as a negative number, and no Python. It doesn't "automagically" write code, it has to be nudged. If you see "Analyzing", it's fired up a sandboxed Python container.
Many engineers get weird when they have power over people. In search of perfect, they miss good.
And children.

I wonder if I could talk my family into this. (Edit, going on a space travel simulation as a family.)
I read again my question and it was not very clear:

Not: Who is going to loan $1K in HN?

Yes: Who is going to invest a lot of money (>>$1K) in your project?
How hard was to create a VOR receiver with GNUradio?
I really like the idea, but I found GNUradio very difficult to learn (and I have a master degree in Telecommunication Engineering). The basic things are easy, but when things becoming complex I am getting lost immediately.
My side project, still unfinished since years, is to create a WSPR decoder in GNUradio
I'm also curious about this (as a researcher myself). It would be nice to know what model is used (or if this is actually novel[0]).

It is also worth mentioning the legal issues of this, and since you are charging(?) for this, you can be in legal jeopardy[1]. The architecture might be under some license and if you tuned a model that might also be under a license (it is worse if these are not under a license!). Most research software is under MIT licenses, but it is starting to become less common. If you trained or tuned an existing model that does not necessitate you release the checkpoint, which let's be honest, that's the secret sauce.

[0] I don't expect this as even most of the research is not novel. There's so much railroading where things build on top of one another. But that is also the nature of how we create things. Not by giant leaps.

[1] lol, open source is stolen all the time. Legal action is really unlikely. But let's admit this is unethical.
What would it take? Two world wars leading a protracted cold war between two "superpowers."

No surprise that the end of the cold war brought about the end of our collective need of a closely held quasi-national entity like AT&T.

I think the real question is "What would it take to recreate it in the abstract, from the disparate components we have attached to the internet today?" Or to rephrase it "What happened to the early promise of the internet when it was mostly available only through Universities?"
> its a very difficult problem to do generally.

Can you expand on this?
You can file a complaint here:
https://www.cppa.ca.gov/webapplications/complaint
I saw the news of it crossing the lock in my town basically an hour after it happened, was disappointing to miss it. Used to walk over that bridge every day to school.
To be even more precise, Prolog programs only ever run forward because the order of evaluation is fixed as top-down, left-to-right. These notions of "forward" and "backward" are very unhelpful and should be given up. Beginners find the order of evaluation hard enough to understand, let's not confuse them even more.

Also, the notion is woefully incomplete. Let's say we consider this "forward":

?- list_length([a, b, c], Length).
Length = 3.

Then you would say that this is "backward":

?- list_length(List, 3).
List = [_A, _B, _C].

Fine, but what's this then? "Inward"?

?- list_length([a, b, c], 3).
true.

And then presumably this is "outward":

?- list_length(List, Length).
List = [], Length = 0 ;
...
List = [a, b, c], Length = 3 .

None of these cases change the order of evaluation. They are all evaluated top-down, left-to-right. The sooner beginning Prolog programmers understand this, the better. The sooner we stop lying to people to market Prolog, the better.
https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/environment/deepmin...
I would like this feature.
Sorry, you can not at the same time argue "efficiency has gone a long way" and "other people were paying just south of a thousand". It's one or the other.

I'm kind of tired of these discussions. It's completely absurd to associate quality of life, safety and general comfort with the size of the car. If they were not brainwashed by marketing, 99.995% of people that drive a SUV or pick-up truck would find more utility and value in having a Station Wagon, an actual van or a properly-sized commuter car. If you want a simple way to check this, just look at the fact that those that really need trucks are importing it from Japan [0] because the industry is not interested in serving them.

The lengths that Americans will try to justify their completely illogical behavior is pathological. They would rather believe in American Exceptionalism than face the truth that they are being played for fools by the Auto industry. It's easier to keep eating up the BS that they "need" a bigger car than to learn the ways that the system is rigged so that you can fight it.

[0]: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/04/20/rural-ame...
> This is one of those things some people are okay with

People aren’t “ok with it”. The idea that people are ok with spying is one of those lies that the surveillance industry tells themselves. But they know it’s not true, which is why it’s always much harder to not be spied on than to accept the default. That’s why settings keep reverting to spying, and why almost no one chose to let Facebook track them when Apple gave the equal-handed option.
Introducing version -1 of what I've been working on! Midjourney is great but character/style consistency, and the art style is just not good for manga/webtoon/comics.

We are building the best visual novel storytelling tech at Caffelabs. Play with the Playground :)
It's fascinating how Google --transformers--> OpenAI looks like Xerox Parc --gui--> Apple if you squint real hard.
Both memristors and 3D XPoint aka Optane are in a patent limbo. The current patent holders tried them, and found the current crop too hard and unprofitable, but further research and commercialization would require either buying the key patents or waiting for them to expire.
I haven't seen much innovation in the HAM spectrum, but I do some fun stuff done with Lora, and mesh networks by flashing routers with custom version of OpenWRT.

Honestly I think the problem with the HAM spectrum is that it doesn't allow for (much) encryption and so much digital transmissions are hampered.
What does that mean? They want to use a cheat-discouraging browser?
Issue to track Mistral NeMo support in llama.cpp: https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/issues/8577
Would like to see this treatment for business models too.
OpenSSL Mailing Lists Are Moving to Google Groups
Amazon VPC for On-Premises Network Engineers – Part 1 (2016)
It would be easier if you linked your web site / marketing copy. Better than HN would be finding a way to talk to actual users.

Some suggestions:

1. Recruit some potential US/UK users and talk to them. What use cases/problems does your SaaS solve? Maybe they don't experience those problems in the same way, or have alternatives for solving them?

2. English speakers are quite sensitive to copy. Websites or emails with even slightly broken language trip a lot of people's "scam/spam" filters. "Generally acceptable" may not be good enough for your target market unless your product does something they can't live without. This effect is very strong if your product demands any kind of trust (e.g. crypto or money).
Was the Bell Labs Systems Journal shared outside of Bell Labs contemporaneously? I have original copies of the Unix issue, for example, but have no idea if that was 'generally available' back when it came out...
The author's generalized subtype check is interesting: what the author defines as "inconclusive" is clearly a type error in more traditional statically typed languages. (Traditionally the type checker is supposed to guarantee progress and preservation, so leaving something inconclusive to the runtime isn't acceptable.) And I guess the kind of differentiation the author makes between "inconclusive" and "static error" is so unusual that the normal classification of covariance and contravariance break. This reminds me of Haskell, where type variables may have user-provided annotation of whether they are representational, nominal, or phantom. Such classification affects the ability for values to be treated at runtime as a different type (using Data.Coerce). Maybe the author can come up with a similar system for classifying type variables for things like List.

However for a configuration language that is type checked and immediately run, there's not much difference between runtime type checks and pre-run static type checks. Given this escape hatch, I think the author is right to simply defer everything that cannot be checked statically into runtime checks.
I’d love to hear more about your trauma :-). What are the main ways C and C++ could be better?
It reminds me of the experiment where people are shown a girl with purple hair holding a feminist sign and then asked which statement is more likely to be true; either (A) the girl works at a bank or (B) the girl works at a bank and is a feminist. Most people felt that statement B was more likely to be true but that is mathematically impossible.

This seems similar: "Do you want only the government doing that bad thing?" Our knee-jerk reaction is "no".
> This is why I feel a little scared too scared to attach my main profile with thousands of karma to this post.

If you've got a surplus, there's certainly no harm in risking a few points?
That didn't help the childrens hospital that was hit 9 days ago unfortunately. 40 people died in that strike.
You can do it easily with object caching / function memorization patterns in any modern language which should fit your desired solution. Best of luck!
Iron exists in many different crystal structures in different kinds of steels. Some of these forms are magnetic, others are not. When you work the metal, such as by bending it, you can cause it to change from one structure to another.

304 is an austenitic stainless steel, and austenite is non-magnetic. But when it's cold worked, it turns into martensite, which is harder and magnetic. If you anneal it by heating it and letting it cool, it turns back into austenite.
How does the law differentiate that from jQuery on a CDN? The CDN is also doing some amount of tracking, and some of it is simply technically necessary. Google is actually using the Google Fonts service to track traffic.
I actually have a little ambition but maybe one day if I have energy I'll pursue an amateur radio art installation of sorts. The space seems ripe for this sort of energy.
A wonderful, wonderful read. An audacious title, but the book absolutely makes good on it.
Haha that bit cracked me up, all I could think was "yep, that'd be real scary!"

This site rules :)
Thank you! And I absolutely understand you gotta start somewhere.

Music recommendation is HARD. A lot of people don't think they like didgeridoo (which is where my expertise lies) until they hear a live performance of contemporary didge over a PA and they're in tears of joy (seriously, if you got the chance, give it a try - the stack of vibrations from this single, simple tube is amazing). IME, that wouldn't work for your average ear-buds or "smilie curve"-tuned over-ears. So, say, a friend convinces you to go to some concert with them - that would be a proper, healthy, sustainable music recommendation service. But of course that doesn't scale in any direction.

Best of luck with your project - I'll be checking back :-)
SwiftUI GeometryGroup() Guide: From Theory to Practice
What someone outside the culture thinks is "innocent or praising" might not be seen that way by someone inside the culture. That's why we ask permission.
I think it's more about miscommunication than money.

These licenses are just donations, so the announcement should be framed around supporting Immich voluntarily. Instead, they give 4 paragraphs of corporate speak and 2 license tiers, which signals the complete opposite of voluntary support.

There will always be stingy users who complain about paying for indie software. But this announcement confused even the supporters who were happy to donate to Immich in the past.

I wonder how much of this weird monetization is caused by the FUTO acquisition. And I doubt they'll reach their funding goals from individual payments anyways. I think the main money in open-source comes from corporate sponsorships and involvement, right? And didn't the core Immich team join FUTO in order to receive full-time salaries?

Just a really confusing situation for users.
So if Microsoft discovered something very useful (e.g. new battery technology, or more efficient air conditioning system), but decided that it was something they didn't want to develop and market; would they share the knowledge or just bury it in case they might want to use it someday?
Nope, heating would make it non-magnetic again.

It's the act of physically working it that makes it change structure.
Anything like that available for iOS?
Those are the densities needed for near eye displays. The best displays can still show pixelization to the human eye up close.
Mainstream consumer x86 processors have had IOMMU capability for over a decade, but for the first few years it was commonly disabled on certain parts for product segmentation (eg. i5-3570K had overclocking but no IOMMU, i5-3570 had IOMMU but limited overclocking). That practice died off approximately when Thunderbolt started to catch on, because not having an IOMMU when using Thunderbolt would have been very bad.
Yup. You should walk in eyes wide open to see which role you are in. Clues you might be a real CTO:

* you've been a CTO in the past

* you meet with the board and investors

* you are involved in strategic discussions

* you have budget control

> the "CTO" is gone by ~18 months.

Well, I hope they exercised and got the equity they legally earned.
awesome, thanks! And thank you for the invitation to a conversation, I'll take it up!
I mean, filtering messages that contain _addresses_ ... That must be an almost impossible task to do for machines of a multi billion dollar company!
It certainly linked to a company or institution that were able to harness the potential and release the innovation as research or products. Not all of them.did.

It's like wind energy: the wind blows for everyone, but some build a turbine or a windmill. (Though indeed, when the wind us not blowing, even the best turbine is going to be a disappointment.)
Corporate dominance.......Sorry!