skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The word "housewife" is interesting - the job of housewives has historically been to spin thread and make clothes, which was at the bare minimum 40 hours a week of work. This is on top of cooking, cleaning, and childrearing, which was its own full-time job.

There's this myth of the idle housewife which was true, but only for the aristocracy and in the last few decades, the upper middle class (who are tooootally separate from the aristocracy, yes sirree). Most housewives, for most of history, have worked full-time.
He is a CEO. The intended audience is always shareholders in his company.
This finds the mode (most common element), not the median.

Wouldn't you also need to keep track of all element counts with your approach? You can't keep the count of only the second-most-common element because you don't know what that is yet.
The auto-export of declared types was what killed it for me
The problem can be traced back to ASCII/typewriters only including three sets of paired characters, plus inequality signs, which is not enough for programming languages.

We really need five sets: grouping, arrays/indexing, records, type parameters, and compound statements. Curly braces {} are also overloaded in JS for records and compound statements, leading to x => {} and x => ({}) meaning different things.

Square brackets wouldn't work for parametric functions because f[T](x) already means get the element at index T and call it.
IIUC TFA, you could hook the syscall that shows all eBPF programs
Less developed it, more selected for it - IME.
"99% of IDPs in an enterprise setting are configured to refuse being framed (for "security" reasons)"

No need for the quotation around "security". Clickjacks and other forms of attacks involving iframing authentication providers are a real threat.
My Solopreneur Journey with Feedrika.com: Tackling Marketing Like a Developer
> What makes him keep saying this. Does he know something that we don't know?

It works for Musk every time.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding but the whole point of any messaging system is that the sender "doesn't know how to process the message" and it's up to the receivers to process it and coordinate amongst themselves. Otherwise you could just do the processing where the message was sent. For non-OOP examples you have most service architectures.

So from that perspective an int-float object would be built by composition and the containing object would receive and process the message before dispatching to it's component objects as it saw fit to accomplish the task of being an int-float object.
if you go to something like https://beta.maps.apple.com/asd you bypass the browser check.

works on firefox, but it's a big sluggish.
> AI or not, has there ever been a 50 year span in human history where the majority of jobs didn't get redundant?

Yeah, many. For tens of thousands of years you were either a hunter or a gatherer. Even after agriculture shows up something like 12000 years ago, the job of farmer, craftsman, soldier, etc. were pretty stable.

Job churn really only begins to happen with industrialization, and that process is only something like 200-400 years old depending on where in the world you are.
It's MSB radix sort. I think LSB radix sort is not generally as useful because even for fixed-size inputs it often makes more passes over most of the input than MSB radix sort.

Your comment makes me think it would be swell to add a fast path for when the input range compares equal for the current byte or bytes though. In general radix sorts have some computation to spare (on commonly used CPUs, more computation may be performed per element during the histogramming pass without spending any additional time). Some cutting-edge radix sorts spend this spare computation to look for sorted subsequences, etc.
> I *misunderstood
Yes and: IIRC, long-term governance of coops has been a challenge.

Coops have been vulnerable to "hostile takeovers" (I don't know what to call it), transmuting from benefitting members yet another rent seeking enterprise that remains a "coop" in name only.

I was a long time member of PCC and REI. As I understand it, both experienced juntas. Histories I'd love to understand better.

I've read that most farmer coops also fell prey, becoming profiteers, from helping to harming their members. IIRC, there was even a personal account here on HN by a dairy farmer.

In conclusion, I'd LOVE for coops to be the norm. My biggest concern is how to structure coops to remain true to their mission and resilient to enemy action.
As a guy with wide shoulders, I only fly Southwest because I can see and choose to sit next to sometime that does not also have wide shoulders. Otherwise flying is really uncomfortable or even painful for both of us. I’ve been a loyal customer for a decade but will be done with Southwest if they do this.
It's not just GitHub and it's not just because they don't want to pay bug hunters. In my career, I have escalated multiple bugs to my employer(s) in which the response was 'working as intended'. And they wouldn't have to pay me another cent if they acknowledged the issue.

In my experience, there was two reasons for this behavior:

1. They don't want to spin dev cycles on something that isn't directly related to revenue (e.g. security)
2. Developers don't have the same mindset as someone who's whole job is security. So they think something is fine when it's really not.
In any realistic scenario, those shares would quickly be diluted to nothing when the company needs to raise money from capital markets. Unions are in general a much better way to protect workers.

The real power disparity between capital and labor is that capital is concentrated and labor is diffuse. Every worker negotiates with the corporation as an individual over compensation and worker rights. When you have a union negotiating the contract, then both labor and capital are concentrated and on a more equal footing, producing more equitable outcomes. Giving employees a tiny ownership stake doesn't really change the power disparity at all.
>This will be a problem when there is a very high possibility of mass unemployment when advances in AI will make most jobs obsolete.

We've been here a few times. Not with AI, but with the agricultural revolution (hunting and gathering became almost obsolete), the industrial revolution (physical force became almost obsolete, if it was not needed in conjunction with intelligence), the computer revolution (tedious data processing became obsolete), the internet (messengers and mail, as well as local businesses became almost obsolete)...

Every time, large swaths of human work were made nigh-obsolete, but societal progress needed people to find other niches to work in to expand our societal wealth. If everybody just laid down their work and didn't look for anything new, some other civilization would have taken over, because somebody there would.

>UBI. This allows people that are jobless to still contribute to the economy and keep (local) businesses alive.

If the money they use is not backed by value production it will make everything more expensive, since the purchasing power of that currency depends on less value. Local business will be the last to be kept alive, because UBI will need to be lower than working wages to motivate others to continue working whose work is still needed. Local businesses have the habit of being more expensive. UBI receivers will be the last people able to afford that luxury.

>I think making the UBI low enough that most people will still work is exactly what would cause inflation.

Why? The more people work, the more value is being produced by this society, the less inflation there should be, due to costs being lower.

>If the UBI replaces wage, the amount of money in circulation wouldn't change, so no inflationary pressure.

But nobody worked for this money, since it's a redistribution it will have inflationary effects. Because there's the same amount of money, with less things to buy for it.
> simply because they get extinguished by others with more capital.

Unless you go to where capital isn't concentrated (i.e. rural areas), then co-ops are everywhere. It is not uncommon to be able to get your groceries at a coop, your gas, your phone/internet services, you name it.
On favour of humans, people have usually seen the numbers thousands to millions of times in their lifetimes, while chimps would have seen them few dozens of times at best. So "training the same time" for humans and chimps is def misleading, would love to see this with an abstract or uncommon characters like Japanese (for a Western audience).
Apple has a lot of technical solutions that mean data is collected, but is never associated with a particular user.

As an example, location data is shared with Apple, but it’s associated with a random unique identifier rather than your account. When your trip ends, your device switches to a new identifier. Traffic information is only shared if a certain threshold of users travel on a route [1].

Other examples include the entirely on-device photo scanning, the same rotating identifier system for transcripts of Siri interactions, etc. and, of course, being the only major cloud provider to offer E2EE on everything.

Not perfect, but a huge difference from their competitors.

[1] https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Location_Services_White_P...
Well, if this is how you think, then I am afraid no useful advice is going to penetrate your preconceived notions of inferiority. It is actually possible, and happens every day at every company, that meaningful relationships exist across managerial lines or levels of seniority; it is simply an existence proof because it exists all around you. But if you are someone who rejects the evidence in front of your eyes, or feels like you are too unique/special that "normal advice" doesn't apply to you somehow, then I am sorry but you are stuck until you address these deep-seated issues about inferiority and viewing everything through a lens of enmity.

FWIW, I actually personally hold two conflicting beliefs at the same time: I distrust capitalism and dislike the distribution of power between the capital-owning class and the working class in society, but I also understand and appreciate and respect the amoral ruthless effectiveness of capitalism. So, I can emphasize to some degree about the moral unfairness of an amoral corporation holding your livelihood over your head, but I can also build real relationships based on human connection, while compartmentalizing the human part away from the structural imbalance of capitalism part.
What I'm hearing:

1) Security is important.

2) The government should subsidize our infrastructure costs.

3) The government should restrict chip and code deployment in other countries to keep AI here.

4) We need to build up a bureaucracy of some kind to regulate this tech.

I'm not at all sure what "democratic AI protocols" is supposed to mean, but the main thrust of this piece isn't substantially different than most of what we've been seeing from Altman in his lobbying efforts. Translated from lobbyist-speak, to me this says "My company is losing its lead and isn't confident we'll be able to keep up going forward. I need you, the governments of the world, to do something about that ASAP. Here are some vaguely national-security-related justifications you can use to sell it to your voters."
> once

The many systemic market failure modes of capitalism are well documented and written about at great lengths.
I'd first ignore the "in tech" part, and ask if a lot of men are lifting weights these days because of:

- The massive shift in routine work & home activities, over the past century-ish, away from often-strenuous physical stuff, to paper-pushing and button-pushing. Just as children instinctively engage in play, many adult males may crave physical exertion.

- Modern "manhood", at least for the 99% in most western countries, seems seriously messed up these days. A whole lotta guys may be trying to compensate and/or assert their identity with weight lifting and similar "voluntary masculine" activities.
> I wonder how true that is.

The fact that the middle shelf of a supermarket is usually the first one to be empty is quite compelling evidence.

> I guess it’s your first time buying detergent it might work but most people I know have a specific detergent and they buy the same one no matter where on the shelf it moves.

Just to validate that assumption: Would you say this is the same for toilet paper? Soap? garbage bags? Sponges? Pencils? cooking-oil?

There are lots of commodity items I use where I don't know the brand, I cannot even tell how often I switched the supplier of them in the past year...

Subjectively, most people _I_ know buy out of a pool of detergent-brands, all looking quite similar (and most belonging to the same parent company).
If they are bombarded with advertisement inside and outside of the shop, and maybe a stacked palette of a different brand of detergent, many of them will "try" this new product instead and end up expanding their pool of brands they will buy.
The article you linked mentions "Lack of budgeting and financial planning" and "Social pressures" for reason of living paycheck to paycheck. And those are self reported values.

Last 60 years we experienced enormous growth of advertising - is it really hard to believe that many people are having big problems with limiting their spending.
"AI is as revolutionary as nuclear weapons and the internet. The government should spend hundreds of billions on it." – CEO of an AI company who will be the beneficiary of all that public spending.

Looking from the outside, the AI hype is pretty much over. Yes it is still an important piece of tech and will still continue to evolve, but I don't know too many people, whether regular joes or world leaders, who still consider it an existential threat to humanity or really think about it much at all.
Does the fact, that any linear time algorithm exist, indicate, that a faster linear time algorithm exists? Otherwise, what is the gain from that bit of knowledge? You could also think: "We already know, that some <arbitrary O(...)> algorithm exists, there might be an even faster <other O(...)> algorithm!"
What makes the existence of an O(n) algo give more indication, than the existence of an O(n log(n)) algorithm?
I just tried it on Firefox with https://beta.maps.apple.com/abc, and all the POIs are incorrectly placed (at least in South Africa) and the roads are right-angled and un-named.

Also, Apple makes an absolute mess when contributing to the OpenStreetMap project. For example, their contributors make any informal / illegal shortcut part of a residential street when it isn't.
Ah, sensible internationally recognized easy to divide units of weight? No thank you comrade!
Robot dog with blowtorch stops weeds
The thing is, there are two "webs"

As much as third party cookies are dangerous and unnecessary in a personal browsing setting, they are unfortunately a fact of life in the wonderful world of enterprise. that embedded Salesforce widget inside the SAP module of the Atlassian tool runs on a toxic mix of iframes and single-sign-on, and no-one in the company wants to have to go and rewrite it because someone at google wants to make the world a better place
> “arduous, long, and expensive process” of approvals, as well as being forced to meet higher (and more expensive) standards for things like sidewalks,

I now live in a neighborhood with about 200 homes all built right after WWII, all 3 bed/1 bath 1,200 sq. ft. with minor variations[0]. No sidewalks! Pedestrian-friendly access is not cheap.

[0]by now, many have been modified to add a bath/bedroom
I can smell your fear.
There's not much connection. Typescript's record types aren't sound, but that's far from its only source of unsoundness, and sound structural typing is perfectly possible.
Yes, they basically move towards server-side integrations and tracking.
It's that the primary browser vendor is an ad company.
Browsers have the ultimate power here. You can’t make something with the tracking power of third party cookies unless browser APIs let you.
That's besides the point. Of course they need a test fleet. But in the absence of that, there's a very real chance that the existing bug triggered on customer machines but not their validator. This thread is speculating on the reason why their existing validation didn't catch this issue.
> Popular websites that allow user content to be uploaded or linked do cost that much to run, due to content moderation.

Reddit outsourced most of it's moderation to unpaid volunteers.
Just wanted to say thank you for this article - I've read and shared this a few times over the years!
It's not like all of the extra wealth is frozen in some account. People hold the wealth in assets and investments.
> We forcibly allocate capital less efficiently

Efficiency with regard to what goal? The current allocation of capital in the US is quite inefficient if we're interested in the welfare of the public. Billionaires have far more capital than they know what to do with, and since they're unaccountable for their investment choices, they strongly tend to steer the economy toward vanity projects. Meanwhile, many families can't put food on the table, and infrastructure is falling apart.

Whatever it is about this system that you find "efficient," I don't find it valuable. The Chinese state takes a rather strong hand in allocating capital, and that has treated it fairly well over the past few decades. A mixed economy where private capitalists are not solely responsible for investment choices, and where ownership of that capital is more evenly distributed among the public, could fix a lot of problems.
Thank you! Definitely went on a lot of hacker side quests with this project and the article.

And makes me happy you like the applets. I really like creating interactive articles, they can help so much with understanding, https://ciechanow.ski/ articles are the perfect example of this. It's crazy how easier something becomes to grasp if you can play around with it.

Haha, the badge idea is definitely cool! I do fear for my less technical relatives becoming a target of a predatory app that should be free. Would be nice to quickly find good solutions. My trick is normally to search for "github" and find some random programmers project that is free of any monetization strategy e.g. "memory matching github"
https://archive.is/Jn5xv
yes, fair enough
> Unless I'm off here, I struggle to see how increased demand and decreased supply wouldn't impact inflation.

We're rapidly approaching the situation where 10 factory workers can be replaced by a single worker supervising some robots.

At some point the decrease in employment will not significantly impact productivity for a large sector of the market.

A properly implemented UBI scheme will be significant enough to allow a large part of the population to seriously reduce their income, either by working way less, or not working at all. Only that way can the amount of dollars in the economy stay relatively the same.

I think therefore the assumption that supply would diminish while demand increases is wrong.
IMHO, it is University-level vs College (vocational college) difference.
Industry should not require University-level training from workers. Academy should.

Plumber or electrician don't need university degree, only professional training till you design whole sewer system or power grid for city.

So, yes, bifurcate CS to science and trade. And fight requirements for Bachelor/Major degree in jobs offerings.
even more so, in this case, they are getting the Russian influenced version of what the war is like... "it's just a border dispute"

in reality it is the largest war in Europe since WW2
I'm going to argue that Lisp already won.

That is, other programming languages have adopted many of the features of Lisp that made Lisp special such as garbage collection (Rustifarians are learning the hard way that garbage collection is the most important feature for building programs out of reusable modules), facile data structures (like the scalar, list, dict trinity), higher order functions, dynamic typing, REPL, etc.

People struggled to specify programming languages up until 1990 or so, some standards were successful such as FORTRAN but COBOL was a hot mess that people filed lawsuits over it, PL/I a failure, etc. C was a clear example of "worse is better" with some kind of topological defect in the design such that there's a circularity in the K&R book that makes it confusing if you read it all the way through. Ada was a heroic attempt to write a great language spec but people didn't want it.

I see the Common Lisp spec as the first modern language spec written by adults which inspired the Java spec and the Python spec and pretty much all languages developed afterwards. Pedants will consistently deny that the spec is influenced by the implementation but that's absolutely silly: modern specifications are successful because somebody thinks through questions like "How do we make a Lisp that's going to perform well on the upcoming generation of 32 bit processors?"

In 1980 you had a choice of Lisp, BASIC, PASCAL, FORTRAN, FORTH, etc. C wound up taking PL/I's place. The gap between (say) Python and Lisp is much smaller than the gap between C and Lisp. I wouldn't feel that I could do the macro-heavy stuff in

https://www.amazon.com/Lisp-Advanced-Techniques-Common/dp/01...

in Python but I could write most of the examples in

https://www.amazon.com/Paradigms-Artificial-Intelligence-Pro...

pretty easily.
> someone at google wants to make the world a better place

Someone at... where?
> good historical track record

Please cite some sources that are not communist countries. You know, “just socialism.”

You way want to also ignore the existence of Norway, much of Europe, and popular US federal programs too when you're doing this exercise.
> we have robust monitoring and observability infrastructure in place to spot trends ahead of time

can you share the tools you use for monitoring and debugging performance issues in a sharded Redis architecture?
We actually have two mechanisms: laws/regulations and customers voting with their wallet.

Since we see that a majority of customers consistently go with the cheaper option, we know how they feel. So the "better" firm gets outcompeted.

So regulation, you say. But those regulations are set by governments voted in by the same consumers. Their preference for lower prices is clear, and government follows their preference.

Is your suggestion that the government go against the will of the people and apply those pro-worker-coop regulations anyway?
Most companies aren't "major companies". I'm for busting up the big monopolies, but I'm not for throwing the baby out with the bath water and imposing communist reforms on all businesses, most of which are small and generally well behaved, just because some big ones with pathological behavior exist.
First fossil chromosomes discovered in freeze-dried mammoth skin
This is already possible with Google Tag Manager. It was here on HN recently.
"Firefox added [ad tracking] and has already turned it on without asking you"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40954535
People like doing meaningful work that benefits their customers. I think that employee owned businesses tens to treat their customers better than companies that are owned by private equity, pension funds or other investors who never touch the product or interact with the customers.
you can but it's several orders of magnitude more expensive. ad networks would have to propose backend integrations to each website, it just wouldn't be profitable unless the sites are huge
> reboot into another OS

As I said: garbage for snapshots
> non-biased journalism sources

No such thing, and definitely not the AP.
Musk reveals photos of Dojo D1 cluster – equivalent to 8k Nvidia H100 GPUs
Misread no, you didn't read.