skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that's definitely how people who work for immoral industries frame their need to work there. In my experience, however, it isn't people working in AI who can't find another job that would allow them to pay rent.

If you're a minimum wage worker with no education and no other prospects working for an arms manufacturer - I forgive all sins.
Tangential, is the opposite also possible? Something that only non humans could understand?

E.g. is there a way to trick 'AIs' on the other side of the phone without a human noticing it? For example 'tricking' something like Contact Center AI from google https://cloud.google.com/solutions/contact-center?hl=en
I’m citing wwii production numbers
I was a non technical founder idealist. Then my friends told me I lacked the skills to be a business and a technical founder.

It was honest and useful. I dropped out of nursing school, went to business school and taught myself how to write code. I worked at some F500 companies for a few years (still there sadly).

But last week I launched my first product with a cofounder and it’s probably the best one on the market. My “technical founder” is much more technical than me but I’ve filled out a little of both gaps.

If you’re a non technical founder I can’t take you seriously. Unless you’re a walking pile of cash with a top hat, no sane technical founder would risk it.
Phone is only a remote that tells the chromecast/fire/roku etc where to get the stream.
Here’s a good thought experiment:
https://www.thebigquestions.com/2024/07/21/the-next-democrat...
A new Tacan also charges at half the speed of a Chinese minivan.

https://evkx.net/models/li_auto/mega/mega/chargingcurve/

https://evkx.net/models/porsche/taycan/taycan/chargingcurve/
As they said at the end of Dr. Strangelove, these things have absolutely no value as a deterrent if you don't tell anyone you have them!
> So bells theorem is wrong

I didn't say that, and I think that statement is wrong.

> i have a degree in physics

Oh my. You lose credibility in an argument about physics when you fall back on authority, and even more, when that authority is supposed to be you.

> I also don’t have time to argue with you. You don’t want to learn? Your loss.

But if you don't have time to argue your point, why did you post it and defended it, and only pull this lack of time now? I would like to learn something from your posts, but so far, you regurgigated the usual incorrect/misleading claims about quantum theory and what the Bell theorem and related experiments imply. So then I thought it is you who may learn something new - please check the article I gave you above. If you do not want to take it from me, take it from people in academia who are better experts on this topic.

> You win. You’ve outlasted me. You’ve successfully learned nothing, and nobody will ever care about your statements about bells inequality because they’re laughably wrong and nobody will read this anyway. Victory is yours!

I disagree, because my aim was to learn or make you learn something I know, and so far I think I didn't succeed in any of those. So, please check the article in the link, if you have genuine interest in this topic.
why not just use a physical VT100?
Good idea, followed your advice for the next release.
Assuming you're striking first, yes. Nuclear subs take ~15 minutes to deploy, though, and that isn't the first option when counter striking. The U.S. president has six minutes to decide/launch a counter attack from the missile silos.

Annie Jacobsen has a book "Nuclear War: A Scenario" on all this where she interviews high ranking officials and pries into government documents related to nuclear war.
That's the deal in the USofA at least; that has an antiquated first past the post systm that has ossified into a two party non representative standoff.

By comparison Australia has a relatively fresh preferential voting system based on a hybrid "Washminster" system that can see sitting heads of government (Prime Ministers) ousted and scrappy kids from housing estates rise to the head job.

No system is perfect. Some systems are less desirable than others. All systems need regular shaking out. No, that doesn't require guns (if sensibly designed as systems).
It’s what the term means. You’re getting mad because you thought it meant “user experience”
Rename files by their contents using local LLM
“Start copying what you love. Copy copy copy copy. At the end of the copy you will find yourself.”
– Yohji Yamamoto.
Rusty-feedback: README for rust port of Golang web framework
I haven't read this piece before but I just knew it was going to be written by Mickens about halfway through your comment.
Dock with USB-C power input, x4 GCC controller ports, composite/component video output, & stereo audio output
commercial value: no

criminal value... maybe?

There are absolutely scams right now that use deepfakes to trick people.
I think it's crazy that we keep finding discoveries like this, and yet everyone continues acting and going about their way as if we now know everything.

The world's an incredibly complex place. Who's to say the consequences of harvesting these nodules are necessarily negative? If we're just finding out new details about them, how can you possibly assume you know how removing them will affect the environment?

Epistemologically speaking, we know very little, while we erroneously believe ourselves to know all.

Kind of like how so many will assert with unshakable confidence that human activities are causatively responsible for the bulk of climate change, when we don't even have an exhaustive list of the factors influencing it, let alone the ability to study whether the observed associations are merely correlated or causative (you need to isolate all confounding variables and have robust experiment design, including controls, to establish causality).

We don't even have true mastery over human-made systems (Rowhammer, speculative execution attacks were possible for many years before any human brain had ever conveived of such a possibility), how can anyone possibly have enough intellectual arrogance to assume we understand how human activity will affect ecosystems we barely even know about the existence of?

And to be clear - I'm not arguing that companies should be allowed to start harvesting these, nor am I arguing that human activity is not the primary contributing factor to climate change - just pointing out the juxtaposition between the immense cognitive hubris and the infinite scope of how much about reality we don't even begin to have an understanding of.

Some points I would argue are that our education system is gravely flawed, our understanding of the world is dangerously shallow, and the level of self-awareness that we, collectively, as a species, have about these shortcomings of ours is dangerously low.

We ought to be ceasing much of what we waste our time with and figuring out ways to organize society to perform much more robust research, not confidently making knee-jerk assertions about the impacts of proposed activity we've never studied in an ecosystem we've barely even seen, let alone studied. That includes assertions both supporting and opposing such activity.
Hah, ok, yeah except for small org + tiny models no ML team is training on laptops. On the other hand I think we're already seeing more app devs using language models while not doing any training at all, and those people will probably want to work on their laptops. Think code completion, OCR / data extraction, image processing, or even as a local stand-in for cloud APIs similar to how SQLite is used as a database stand-in. In that sense local inference is pretty important.
BI - business inteligence
Your version makes it sound like Apple gave Xerox $1M in stock in exchange for the visit. Most sources I can find don't mention the stock at all, but the one that does [0] makes it pretty clear that the offer was to let Xerox buy stock from Apple pre-IPO in exchange for the tour, which is a very different story:

> Jobs's company stood on the precipice of a public offering guaranteed to make him and any investors wealthy, and the tech guru's impending good fortune enticed the suits at Xerox to make him an offer he couldn't refuse: Let us buy shares in your company, and we'll give you a peek inside the greatest minds in your field.

[0] https://www.newsweek.com/silicon-valley-apple-steve-jobs-xer...
> Please stop misusing accounting concepts.

Assets can also be liabilities. The mortgages in a mortgage backed security is both an asset and a liability, as was only too well demonstrated in 2008... It's an asset in the security portfolio, but until you sell the security, it's a liability for whomever is securitizing it.
Just sideload an emulator and play real video games. The torture of playing Freemium games is your punishment for not using a platform that respects your authority.
Ask HN: How to tools like animaapp work that convert Figma to code?
There are many tools these days that convert Figma to React, Figma to Wix etc.

Example: https://www.animaapp.com/

Do these use Figma's API? How do these tools work?
The Minesweeper I think.
That’s probably where people are mostly likely to understand it. A lot of companies do this, especially while they’re still learning things.
I guess mass produced nukes would rather be enriched uranium based, due to the far easier construction. No fiddly implosive lens assembly. No weird multi-phase cristallization that goes critical if you blink. Metal that is merely as dangerous and nasty as lead, magnesium or arsenic, not plutonium.

If you really want to go carpet-bombing with nukes, miniturization isn't as important as having a lot, quickly and reliably.
Clip: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a6jeZ7m0ycw
All these other comments should just go read the book, it's worth it and a good, if horrifying read. What 'no mechanism' above means is that for many decades the SIOP consisted of 'launch everything'. The only way it was a 'plan' was to time the arrival times to avoid fratricide. This btw meant that even if there was a 'tactical' shooting event in Western Europe, all the targets in China would have been hit, even if they weren't involved. Needless to say, Japan was never informed of this....
Not open source is a liability too, with added problems of code licensing conflicts, supply chain attacks, zero-day vulnerabilities, relying on maintainers that don't work for you, etc... ;-)
The problem is that running at too high of a voltage for sustained periods can cause physical degradation of the chip in some cases. Hopefully not here!
OP misrepresented what happened (intentionally or otherwise). They didn't give away $1M in stock, they granted Xerox the right to buy $1M in stock.
Discussion (54 points, 4 hours ago, 10 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41039606
because a vt100 can't emit graphics.
This is in poor taste.
I’m sorry, what?!? We had a massive web presence overhaul at $bigco, high-vis project, it just completed. All because third party cookies were going to become unsupported. Under time and under budget, what a waste of good velocity.
> It seems AMD had an issue supporting ECC with the current chipsets.

AMD has the advantage with regards to ECC. Intel doesn't support ECC at all on consumer chips, you need to go Xeon. AMD supports it on all chips, but it is up to the motherboard vendor to (correctly) implement. You can get consumer-class AM4/5 boards that have ECC support.
The IntelliMouse and Kinect.

The Intellimouse was a near perfect price point of quality, reliability
and correct ergonomics for me. I bought three or four of them and
still have one around today. Kinect was an innovative product that
set-up easy and worked as advertised.
Maybe we can transition to some ad-supported deep-sea oxygenation.
Your contention is that GMD, THAAD, PAC-3 and Arrow are essentially expensive fireworks? Interesting. Russia and Iran will be delighted to hear that in fact their ballistic missiles were not intercepted.
In case it needs pointing out: Clickbait headline not backed by facts in article.

> In other words, third-party security vendors must get the same access as Microsoft's own products. Which, on the face of it, is fair enough.

Indeed, and that should be the end of this line of argumentation.

The issue here is not that Windows users are able to run highly privileged code, or that EU regulators (supposedly?) forces interoperability. There may be an issue in the specific way they chose to solve for it (as alluded to in the article and discussed on HN at length already) and in what software users end up running (duh).

I have a long list of criticisms of Microsoft and EU regulators both but the major issue here is systemic and cultural. There are other more direct and obvious ways in which running Windows for security-critical infrastructure is a terrible idea even disregarding that your antivirus updates could cause availability issues.

Most Linux users are one bad `curl https://whatever.com | sudo bash` away from having their machines completely pwned. This is not a fault of Linux distributions.
What about all the people who don't have a normal contracts counsel?
Discussion (47 points, 7 hours ago, 16 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41037595
My bad... the sixth time (the fifth time was under a different title).
This happened everywhere. I worked in a company offering management agents that had additional features if they hooked up to the internet (“cloud management” or “SaaS” before that term existed). Hospitals would never hook stuff to the internet. Industrial control systems, etc were all huge show stoppers.

No offense, but I think you’re thinking of a later era. Most protocols back then had literally no auth or auth that was never deployed. The thought of critical systems safe enough to be exposed to the internet was just really unfathomable.
Why Privacy Badger Opts You Out of Google's "Privacy Sandbox"
Forbes says “ultra-rich have an average of 2.3 children, above the recent 1.93 average for average Americans”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenaebarnes/2022/07/10/elon-mus...
I sometimes ponder where new entropy/randomness is coming from, like if we take the earliest state of universe as an infinitely dense point particle which expanded. So there must be some randomness or say variety which led it to expand in a non uniform way which led to the dominance of matter over anti-matter, or creation of galaxies, clusters etc.
If we take an isolated system in which certain static particles are present, will there be the case that a small subset of the particles will get motion and this introduce entropy? Can entropy be induced automatically, atleast on a quantum level?
If anyone can help me explain that it will be very helpful and thus can help explain origin of universe in a better way.
There's genetic tests for autism?
It inherently asks for a custom implementation because it's almost like workflows are just how you'd have to code and run everything anyway. Conceptually: why wouldn't we want to reconnect to any work we are currently in progress of, just like in a videogame where if we lose connection for a splitsecond, we want to be able to keep going where we left off? So therefore we must save the current step persistently and make sure that we can resume work and never lose it. Workflow engines also do no magic: They still just run code and if it fails in a place that we didn't manually checkpoint (=by making it into a separate task/workflow/function/action/transaction that is persistable) then we still lose data so.. at that point why not just try doing it this way everywhere whether it's running in a "workflow engine" or not. Before "workflow engines" we already had db transactions but those were mostly for our benefit so we don't mess up the db with partial inserts. Although so far what I've seen in open source workflow engines is that they don't let you work with user input easily, it's sad how they all start a new thread and then just block the thread while it waits for the user to send something. This is obviously not how you'd code a crud operation. In my opinion this is a huge drawback of current workflow engines. If this was solved, we should literally do everything as a workflow I think. Every form submission from the user could offer to let the user continue where he left off and we saved all his data so "he can reconnect to his game" (to revive the videogame metaphor I started with)
Think of these more like a reference implementation to help somebody bootstrap their own compatible hardware design.

Hardware isn't the business they're in and these designs aren't the only way to use their platform. They just make for an officially sanctioned starting point, supported by the legal clarity of an open source license. That making it officially "open source" earns them a news cycle and some buzz is just a little side benefit for what's otherwise pretty common in the industry.
That's the road design's fault, not his. Japan had a very very high rate of pedestrian accidents back then, they fixed it, and they didn't do it by drinking any less or losing pedestrian right of way.
I explain in the post. Here's a copypasta of the relevant paragraph:

"My reasoning for splitting these two processes — restic backup and rclone sync — is that I run the local restic backup procedure more frequently than my offsite rclone sync cloud upload. So I’m OK with them being separate processes, and, what’s more, rclone offers a different set of handy options for either optimizing (or intentionally throttling) the cloud-based uploads to Backblaze B2."
A relaxing game of Solitaire.

Looking at the block diagrams, it looks more like it's a giant mesh router with a few processing cores sprinkled on top, Salt Bae style. After all, the cores take up just over 4% of the transistors. Not sure if that includes the 4MB per-core scratchpad though.
I still wish a Framework-like "smart" TV was a thing.
I wasn't describing anything. A negative income tax is approximately what the guy I replied to was describing. It obviously wasn't a perfect description, but I didn't think my label of the description in his comment would be taken so literally. If you'd care to describe why you believe this isn't an approximation of the outcome of a negative income tax, then feel free to explain.
That's not normal?
Though i don't significantly disagree with anything you've written, i've got to ask: is "Ask HN" the right forum for this? Your post asks no questions except for rhetorical ones.
I would be curious to know if anyone tried using one of the newer data-warehouse databases (Clickhouse, Snowflake, etc) as an OLTP database, to run their crud app.
JavaScript Static vs. Dynamic Object
I've always favored this down-to-earth characterization of the entropy of a discrete probability distribution. (I'm a big fan of John Baez's writing, but I was surprised glancing through the PDF to find that he doesn't seem to mention this viewpoint.)

Think of the distribution as a histogram over some bins. Then, the entropy is a measurement of, if I throw many many balls at random into those bins, the probability that the distribution of balls over bins ends up looking like that histogram. What you usually expect to see is a uniform distribution of balls over bins, so the entropy measures the probability of other rare events (in the language of probability theory, "large deviations" from that typical behavior).

More specifically, if P = (P1, ..., Pk) is some distribution, then the probability that throwing N balls (for N very large) gives a histogram looking like P is about 2^(-N * [log(k) - H(P)]), where H(P) is the entropy. When P is the uniform distribution, then H(P) = log(k), the exponent is zero, and the estimate is 1, which says that by far the most likely histogram is the uniform one. That is the largest possible entropy, so any other histogram has probability 2^(-c*N) of appearing for some c > 0, i.e., is very unlikely and exponentially moreso the more balls we throw, but the entropy measures just how much. "Less uniform" distributions are less likely, so the entropy also measures a certain notion of uniformity. In large deviations theory this specific claim is called "Sanov's theorem" and the role the entropy plays is that of a "rate function."

The counting interpretation of entropy that some people are talking about is related, at least at a high level, because the probability in Sanov's theorem is the number of outcomes that "look like P" divided by the total number, so the numerator there is indeed counting the number of configurations (in this case of balls and bins) having a particular property (in this case looking like P).

There are lots of equivalent definitions and they have different virtues, generalizations, etc, but I find this one especially helpful for dispelling the air of mystery around entropy.
And it is supported! https://orkes-conductor.slack.com
Your question is leading, which is unfortunate.

SQL Server; NT kernel
I always lament that since at least 1980s or so, it seems the vast majority of the control characters were never used for their intended purpose.

Instead, we crudely use commas and tabs as delimiters instead of something like RS (#30).
This whole story with the „c“ smells like bs to me.

Your conclusion sounds more believable than his story, it was not the capital c that maybe cost him thousands of pounds, but that his lawyer is incompetent or did not even exist.

It sounds like a justification to himself, that this could have happened to anybody and it’s just bad luck, but in reality he f*cked up and it was preventable.
I love Looker Studio, that’s free with Google Cloud.
Feels like a very specific anecdote. There is no reason Spirit planes won't smell or United planed always will.
if u count the time spent on it, its actually costing us
No, it's just the two things: naming things, cache invalidation, and off by one errors.
>able-bodied layabout

The issue here is the layabout is likely that way not from his own doings. There are many people you think are normal and fine, but are some degree of mindfucked and just want to find peace, quiet, guaranty, safety, basically the tranquility of mother's bosom because they got kicked too hard too many times.

Those are (IMO) who are your likely layabouts, who need to salve bleeding minds. Depression is high, suicides and deaths of despair are high. There is always an exit from the matrix and people commonly call it selfish to take it. I do not agree with this sentiment. I am not on that journey myself but have known others who were; though, I am introspective enough to understand that often times we can play key roles in other peoples' lives and we really need to try and be there for support and understanding as much as possible. Quit assuming bad faith, or the worst intentions in people even if it's Nash. We have to try to maintain the mindframe that others are acting in good faith, or at least as good enough faith as [they think] they can while trying to survive.
Conventions really don't bother me, I'm happy to adapt. Even case insensitivity, while not so common on Unix, can generally be dealt with. Underscore insensitivity though is kind of wild and breaks a lot of things (and a case insensitivity exception for the first character only, while tacitly admitting there really is a problem here, is just adding even more inconsistency).
All those arms-reduction treaties are accompanied by some regime of mutual inspections and checks. Each party visits the other's facilities and counts stuff, assesses production and storage capabilities, paperwork, etc. And compares those results to their otherwise-obtained (read: by spies) data about the other party's weapons counts.

Of course it isn't foolproof, and each party can and will maybe try to sneak a few more warheads somewhere. But those inspections at least provide some rough limit on the sneakiness, because if they had more than X% more, we would have noticed or so...
They do exist, although I think they're mostly supported/promoted in the Raspberry Pi space, like OSMC or LibreElec.