skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This.

We give too much importance to the "Periodic Table". It's just a man-made microlang. Nature is unconcerned with it. There is much more beyond it.

P.S. While I'm criticizing the PT, might as well mention that I think we've probably done people a diservice by giving misnomer names like "Hydrogen" and "Oxygen" to these elements, which is completely disconnected from the mathematical beauty and patterns that those names represent.
> Obviously if the test itself is invasive (e.g. has a dose of radiation) then that is something that needs to be compared against the potential benefit.

A test isn't always a binary 'you have X ' . Look at PSA screening for prostate cancer starting in your 40s is not recommended for that reason.
There are too many variables in bike fit, user preference, etc., for this to be viable.
My wife is T1D and she is really scared about the idea of moving to a closed loop system with a pump, but her endo is constantly pushing her towards it even though she is keeping her A1C at like ~6% with her Dexcom CGM.

The concern is the the G7 CGM seems to have times where it is so wildly off with readings that a closed loop system could kill her. This weekend the CGM was saying she was all the sudden at 40, but she was at about 115. I am scared to think what would happen in the night if the closed loop system thought it needed to raise her blood sugar... Logically I know it wouldnt raise it to a point that would cause medical harm, it would still put it higher than would be ideal for her health.

Maybe there are differences between the different brands, but the G7 from Dexcom's big selling point was "no more calibrations" and the FDA approval for that tagline, and we've been seeing a need to calibrate more than the G6, which is disappointing. Granted... sample size of n=1 so...
This is a surprising view given that I'm T1D in the UK and the healthcare I've received, along with the tech, support and collaboration with diabetic consultants has been first class. You are making an assumption that every doctor is like the one you have (I guess), but its simply not the case.

Good luck with your programming, but the agenda you're pushing for it is remarkably short-sighted.
I mean, the reddit company did go public, so things like this were inevitable.

Also things like the API fiasco, and also small annoyances like the fact that when you click on an image on reddit, it now goes to a wrapper html page instead of just the actual image (this was one of the reasons reddit was better than most social media...).
No, they don't need to be a biologist to understand the current situation of physicalism versus dualism. Physicalism is extremely well established in the literature as compared to dualism, of which there is barely if any evidence. You are looking for a philosopher of the mind, not actually a biologist, who can speak on these issues, as biologists and indeed scientists in general are not philosophers, while the debate is philosophical in nature.
Publication servers like arXiv + overlay journals. I‘d love that.
What you need is concurrency. And async/await is just one form of concurrency.

I don’t see why you would need threads to create a stackful coroutine implementation. However, what you would indeed need is a much more heavy runtime.
The thing with Lance Armstrong popularized idea (especially in US) that cycling is exceptionally infested with cheating.

But there is doping even in curling.
stealing a model and building the entire AI community is a very very big difference :

Fine tune, update, Run model without very deep domain knowledge, that's what we receive as an outcome.

If you are a software engineer and you steal a model in some close format of Open AI , you will not get lots of benefits even if you understand the format of that model, it's a complex beast by all means.

This is a playbook how anyone can run it.

So yeah, big corp is evil from one side, but oh well, think of North Korea, Russia etc level of evilness and what they can do whit that.
Can't it be divided into multiple parts to have a more meaningful discussion? For example the terminology could identify four key areas:

- Open training data (this is very big)
- Open training algorithms (does it include infrastructure code?)
- Open weights (result of previous two)
- Open runtime algorithm
You might want to check with a lawyer or, at least, with Google, what does "fiduciary responsibly" mean.
> Architects likely do not have a choice.

Architects don't have a choice, CTO are well paid to golf with the CEO and delegate to their teams, Auditors just audit but are not involved with the
technical implementations, Developers just develop according to the Spec, and
Security team just are a pain in the ass. Nobody owns it...

Everybody get's well paid, and at the end we have to get lessons learned...It's a s*&^&t show...
I see so many mechanical bugs in my farm equipment, I have to question your notion that other engineering disciplines are actually held to a higher standard.
That's sorta Musk's primary operating mode. See also: the whole Twitter purchase fiasco (for a recent example), or the expensive lawsuit against the actual co-founders of the larger, more-successful tech company that bailed out his failing startup as a favor to him but didn't stroke his ego enough on titles (for a "this has always been his way" example)
If time intervals are truly discrete and you don't need to union two different sets of time intervals, then you can keep track of free time intervals and scheduled times separately.

For a wide variety of time slots, keep separate start-time-ordered maps of free slots of size 2^n-1 to 2^(n+1) and search smallest possible first which should be O( log_2 (buckets)) for earliest-possible or O(log N) for arbitrary desired start time, assuming number of buckets isn't too huge.

I'm curious if a heap would be faster than a btree; I think the speed tradeoff is how long it takes to re-add the portion of the free space back to the data structure. With luck, a btree should only need to move a free space entry within a single node which should be very fast.

If appointments are cancelled, insert an appropriately-sized free space into the data structure. Coalesce adjacent free space (probably fastest in a btree) and move to a larger size bucket if necessary.

For high concurrency also use a rotating series of buckets by time interval so that you can entirely drop structures once they have aged off (maximum time interval end is less than now() ), with your free space at the end of each bucket overlapping the next to at least the duration of the maximum appointment length with special case handling to allow an appointment to overlap two buckets (shrinking free space in both). This should allow full multithreaded processing unless every reservation is soonest-available-appointment.

Appointments can live in a hash by their key or ID with their (start,end) interval as the value for O(1) lookups on appointment deletion.

As others have pointed out it's a lot like malloc algorithms with the constraint that you care about address order (time). So linked lists of free buckets of size 2^k become time-ordered maps, and rotating ephemeral maps to account for unbounded time plus the analog of thread-local storage for concurrency.
You are right. I already saw it on other replies. Thanks for pointing it out here as well.
From MDN[1]:

> In some browsers, changing the display value of a <table> element to block, grid, or flex will alter its representation in the accessibility tree. This will cause the table to no longer be announced properly by screen reading technology.

1. <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/display#tab...>
it can not call dbus methods. can it?
how is it better than say "qdbus" or dbus-call?
apart of course from the TUI vs CLI aspect?
What if to each publication of a non-null result, academics are given the opportunity to publish their nulls as well, if only as a appendix or better, a counterpublication to their main conclusions? I don't buy the argument that papers need be of max-n length, now that documents and journals can be easily stored and distributed.

I would love something like Living Papers [0][1] to take off, where the null an non-non results could be compared interactively on similar footing.

[0]: https://github.com/uwdata/living-papers

[1]: https://idl.uw.edu/living-papers-template/
Self-transfusion can be detectable now that they have the athlete biological passport. At least, that's the intent of it. If your red blood cell count goes up faster than is naturally possible, they'll be able to tell. This can't keep you from doing it very gradually, of course. Plus, basically all of these guys sleep in altitude tents now to boost red blood cell production via low oxygen. I don't think anyone has been caught doing it yet, but it's also possible now to use a carbon monoxide inhaler to induce hypoxia and boost red blood cell production that way. Escape Collective did an investigation into a few months ago. That is pretty dangerous, but it's hard to believe not a single person would at least try, and it can't be detected. It's not even actually banned right now, though UCI did ban huffing xenon gas to do the same thing. Detecting carbon monoxide huffing seems undetectable even in principle, though, since it's a naturally occurring pollutant. You'd effectively be banning riders from ever smoking since that would produce a positive test.
Interesting read, I (a Norwegian citizen) traveled to the US (OSL -> CPH -> SFO and back) in July and was surprised by some parts of the procedures at the airport. Some notable parts of my experience:

- There is no longer the paper form you filled out on the plane/prior to customs. You fill out online forms (visa or ESTA in my case) months before you travel.

- Upon arrival customs and immigration took my fingerprints and photo. My passport and ESTA were in order and I have traveled to the US several times before (and well, I am a privileged ethnicity from western Europe), and the agent didn't do any questioning about purpose of travel, accommodation, etc this time. That has happened to me on previous trips though. This type of questioning always makes me feel uncomfortable and afraid to say something wrong, so that was a relief. I would certainly not begin to argue with the agent about opting out of the biometrics at this stage.

- My checked bags were not inspected by customs. On a previous US trip I did find a notice that the bag had been inspected.

- On departure, at the TSA bag check there were the full body scanners you step into and raise your hands. I didn't see any information about opting out anywhere, though I wasn't actively searching for it. There was nothing in particular that made me consider that my face was being scanned in detail here.

- At the gate I was surprised that boarding check was via facecam. This was the first time I have seen this and I had not considered that my pictures from before could be used this way. Everywhere else and all other times I have traveled you board with the barcode/QR on the boarding card and without any ID check.

So in my experience (as an admittedly privileged traveler) the system is optimized for efficiency and "convenience", but certainly not for privacy. There isn't much information to find about what you must do and what you are able to opt out of. Just do the same thing as the person in front of you in the line, ad infinitum. I know I should be more concerned about privacy in general, but the stress of travel and anxiety about doing something "wrong" and somehow getting in trouble with these agencies make me (and probably most others) accept these things.
Senators demand OpenAI release data showing it keeps its AI safe
Sure, those all compute as well, hence are computers and therefore fall within my question. Just because one is only familiar with silicon based computers does not mean that that which takes in input and emits output by other means is not itself a sort of computer. That is in fact part of my question, as, why biological systems are not given the same scrutiny.

This is part of why I don't see any compelling evidence why we are not biological computers, much as it pains people to admit so.
Keep in mind, in Bangladesh, no newspaper can say anything more than the government allows them to. And each newspaper reported the protest to be peaceful.

The students reacted when the pm threw a attacking comment toward them, and they were still peaceful in their reaction. Then then student wing of the party started attacking and things got violent
You can have some written to spec. "Please write uncertain answers to every question in this textbook", say, if you want your AI to sound a little more humble or uncertain when it doesn't have a full answer.

A hundred million will buy you a lot of writing.
> "intelligent" things in front of your code (load balancers, WAFs, browsers) start doing unpredictable things

I've never had that happen, but instead have had "intelligent" caching mess up my requests that returned 200 multiple times. Granted, most of the times it was a bad header that did not specify no-cache, but as far as I know, error codes are never cached. With 200 and caching, error body would continue to be returned for the cache's lifetime.

> It also makes JavaScript fetch calls easier as your catch block will most likely be a hard down scenario.

This I agree with, Javascript syntax just sucks for error handling.
I did another one back in 2001: https://ldoor.sourceforge.net/ .
There’s lot of programming models that don’t require async or it’s complexity. Not everything is a web server that needs to serve 100k requests.
Olympic sailing classes such as the Laser have been doing that for years, they could do that for cycling as long as they provided an array of sizes.
No end to end encryption. No thanks.

Plus as an Australian company the government can backdoor it without anyone legally being able to speak about it.
Will you be offering a Schrems II compatible alternative?

I'll stick to Livebook for the most part but know some companies that might be interested.
Here, take these: ae ue oe
So that when year 99999 ends, the Y100K bug can happen, I guess. No idea why having fixed-length 5- (or even 6-) digit strings for years is preferable to normal, variable-length decimal notation we use for numbers: 48, 112, 988, 1122, 2024, etc. The year is a number, treating it as a lexicographically-imbued string only matters for things like ISO 8601 (20240724T vs. 020240724T) but even then, it's already properly ordered: both "99991231T" and "099991231T" sort before "100000101T".

But hey, everybody has their small idiosyncratic pet peeves: I've ran twice into the same person here on HN who just can't stand term "x64" because it's "unofficial", but somehow refuses to use e.g. "EM64T" for it as well.
Fwiw, I used to think this way too but LLMs are more RAG-like internally than we initially realised. Attention is all you need ~= RAG is a big attention mechanism. Models have reverse curse, memorisation issues etc. I personally think of LLMs as a kind of decomposed RAG. Check out DeepMind’s RETRO paper for an even closer integration.
Nice piece, Liz is completely right, the immoral sell-out of the super-rich is on full display here for once.
The two are nowhere near comparable
Satellites had to suddenly maneuver during May's solar storm
Maybe it's just me or something temporary (I use Old Reddit, like all right-thinking folk) but for the past couple of days the image wrapper page seems to have been sent to the glue factory. I'm just getting the image now, unadorned.
John Ousterhout Reflects on "A Philosophy of Software Design" [video]
We were causing mass extinctions with pointy sticks as the state of the art, in charismatic mega fauna no less. As common the mythical era of "not causing mass extinctions" never even existed.

Even when humanity was at its lowest creating the genetic bottleneck we were nomadic because we ate the prior area empty. Now we've progressed to sedentary lifestyles being possible long term and even soil management. The only path out is up.
So, only the west should be able to use AI to kill people because they're the good guys?
A new experiment to find the climate-proof coffee of the future
That doesn't fix the problem at all. No matter how many statistical tests you run on a sample, you can't get around the fact that the sample may not be representative of the population or the underlying phenomenon.

You need different samples. There isn't a statistical trick that gets around this.

For example: let's say there's a cancer with 20% survival rate. You test a treatment with 25 experimental and 25 control patients, 40% in the experimental group survive[1].

You can analyze this with a bunch of statistical methods. You can ask different questions about the patients, focusing on well-being rather than simple carcinogenic remission. But ultimately, the thing that happened in this study is that 50% got better and no fiddling with numbers or changing the questions you ask is going to change that underlying phenomenon. You can check for blood markers of cancer: you get 50% have no blood markers. You ask them questions about how they feel: you get 50% feel better. You body scan the area where tumors were: you get 50% no longer have tumors.

You have only tested one phenomenon in one sample, and that essentially amounts to 5 people getting better.

[1] I know this is not how cancer treatment studies work exactly, this is a simplified hypothetical.
Which Amex card? The ones I've seen cap the total purchase amount for rewards for gas/groceries at a low enough level that the rewards max out at a few hundred a year. (Cash Magnet's cashback is universal and unlimited, but the 1.5% rate is less than Wells Fargo Active Cash's 2%.)
Compact atmospheric water harvesting device can produce water out of thin air
Ehrlich's reagent on its own can only tell you that LSD is present, but usually it's recommended to use multiple reagents to confirm that nothing else is present as well.
It is much simpler (and therefore less resource-hungry) than bash.
I deeply regret every minute spent on and kilobyte of text contributed to reddit.
Maybe they are arbitrary but they are the rules. They are the reasons the sport is how it is today.

And considering that there is actual competition and innovation, these are good rules.

Feel free to organize your own competition using the "blind maze" rules, maybe it will become a success, but it will be a different sport, which will test different skills. They can coexist, not one lamer than the other.
This is exactly why we have build defguard (https://defguard.net - https://github.com/defguard/defguard).

From what I can tell you, good security is hard - we have prepared the product exactly as you describe on various levels (vpn, identity, SSO, Yubikey provisioning, etc) and prepared the architecture to be secure (multiple segments support: intranet, DMZ, proxy for exposing only public endpoints and functionalities publicly)…

What I observe in a year of the project being public and analysing heavily the landscape, similar projects, Reddit of what users are seeking and what problems they have is that: a lot of people and companies value comfort more then security (even if they will not admit it publicly), because security is hard. That also means there is w niche and need, but… it’s really hard to build a secure, easy to use and deploy security system…

Hope you don’t give up and peruse!, as it’s worth fighting about security and privacy
there are audio-only and 360p versions. in addition to 720p and 1080p.
Viola's Room
Omg I love this. For like 20 years I’ve joked about “The Journal of Null Results and Failed Experimenrs” and it looks like you and your friends are actually doing it.

There’s so much to learn from these cases.
PHP, MySQL, Apache - basically allows one person to the work of multiple teams using more “modern” tech.
Myeah. It can happen.

But then I think of my friends playing football (or 'soccer' for those American inclined) and they're always injured. And they can actually see where they're going.

VR is more active than gaming while sitting down. That offers some health benefits too but also some risks. Most of those can be mitigated by a clean environment and proper barrier setup.

In other words, water is wet.
Because it's Cl- ions in salt vs Cl2 in gas.
I like the 401->autokick back to homepage pattern.
Using psychoactive drugs is incredibly normal and has been practiced for thousands of years by humans. In fact it is one of the most human things you can do because many other species don't exhibit this behavior. We should be working in the interest of reducing stigma of drug use to reduce harms associated with it. Drugs are illegal because politicians wanted a way to crack down on communities that didn't agree with their policies, it is simply a form of control. Have you never asked why alcohol is legal and cannabis or LSD are illegal? Fear and control.
The AI job interviewer will see you now
I'm prediabetic with two T2 parents and a T2 grandparent and my primary care doctor is entirely unconcerned about it.

My lowish tech solution to delay (and hopefully prevent!) the onset of T2 is to use a glucose monitor every 2 hours, every day, and create a database of foods with my postprandial blood sugar reaponse at 1.5 and 2 hours. I also keep track of how exercise affects my blood sugar.

Over the last couple years, I have gotten great data on the foods which spike me and the foods which are neutral to my blood glucose.

A lot of foods doctors/the internet tout as "diabetic friendly" (like beans, lentils, corn in any form, brown rice, buckwheat groats, non-granny-smith apples) spike me like crazy. Other foods are totally fine (bananas, snap peas, nuts, steel cut oatmeal, fermented dairy, fish).

Having an autoimmune disorder on top of the prediabetes, I've learned that the only one who cares about my health and longevity is me. My doctors care about my inflammatory markers and nothing else.
Your links do not support your conclusions (actually, I don't believe there are any in your comment). Yes, while you can repeat something often enough for it to appear true, it may not actually be true; this is a vacuous statement that does not need to be stated. My comment about LLMs are generally analogistic, they are not meant to be taken concretely on current implementations.

You have not actually answered my question however, your comment is a deflection of what I'm asking, so I will ask again, why are biological beings not considered computational? They do the same thing a general computer can do. And again, by "computer," I do not necessarily mean silicon-based, Von Neumann architecture computers.
I propose we change the term enshitification to engoogleification in regards to the internet.