skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Docker’s the best cross-distro rolling-release package manager and init system for services—staying strictly out of managing the base system, which is great—that I know of. I don’t know of anything that’s even close, really.

All the other stuff about it is way less important to me than that part.
Curious who you are using in CN for higher-speed FPGA boards, if you can share!

I haven't seen these as directly-advertised options at any of my usual suspects.
I wasn't aware of that, but still the linked article is only depicting and talking about the earlier electrum coinage, while saying "gold, silver" in the headline.

Not sure why this is on HN anyway ... a useless article with minimal information, and not news in any shape or form!
So, in the Swiss Water process, caffeine-free coffee is made by soaking the beans in... caffeine-free coffee?

(My initial though was, "then how do you get the cafeeine-free coffee in the first place", but I see the answer is that you can decaffeinate liquids by running them through charcoal filters... something you can't do with solid beans.)
Yeah, there's a really interesting phenomenon that I've observed that goes with that. If what you're describing was the main way people used it, I'd be very satisfied with that and have actually been chewing on ways to potentially bring those kinds of concepts into the more "mainstream" programming world (I'm not going to go way off on that tangent right now)

What I've seen many times though in my career that awkwardly spans EE and CS is that people forget that you can still... write equations instead of doing everything in Simulink. As an example I was looking at a simplified model of an aircraft a couple months ago.

One of the things it needed to compute was the density of air at a given altitude. This is a somewhat complicated equation that is a function of altitude, temperature (which can be modelled as a function of altitude), and some other stuff. These are, despite being a bit complicated, straightforward equations. The person who had made this model didn't write the equations, though, they instead made a Simulink sub-model for it with a bunch of addition, multiplication, and division blocks in a ratsnest.

I think the Simulink approach should be used when it brings clarity to the problem, and should be abandoned when it obscures the problem. In this case it took a ton of mental energy to reassemble all of the blocks back into a simple closed-form equation and then further re-arranging to verify that it matched the textbook equation.
No, and that is a big problem, search doesn't make money either. People will not actually pay the cost for AI once they have to.
Also S1000-2 is not rated/controlled past 1GHz. It shouldn't vary that much so for small runs the risk is minimal. But for volume production that's exactly the sort of thing you never want to have to investigate in hindsight.
WhatsApp has 100M MAUs in the U.S.
And what about the other option? Not firing them?

What about trying to work with them to make them a better employee?

Sure, there are some who genuinely just want to take as much as they can and give as little as they can get away with, but they are, without a doubt, a tiny, tiny minority of people. By and large, people want to be able to contribute and do good work.

The problem is, the current system doesn't allow this. It says if you're not hitting the ground running day 1, you're a liability. It says no one will ever be trained on anything, so even if you know Java, PHP, and Kotlin, if you aren't also a several-year veteran of AWS, Kubernetes, and Agile, you have no chance. It says the one thing that matters is Line Go Up, always, and if we ever suspect you might not be contributing as much to Line Go Up as you could be—even if you're not actively making it go down—then you are a problem and need to be forcibly corrected or removed.

So instead of investing in a system where employees feel valued, and know that if they need to shift from one specialty to another, or come in without 100% of the skills expected of the position, they can take a little while and be trained to do what's needed, we treat people like things, and then justify it by saying they'll make everyone else's pay lower if they're allowed to stay.
I agree with your comment for the most part (particularly the IDE situation)

I do want to callout that while Racket started off from Scheme (and still maintains compatibility with a bunch of it), it should be considered a different platform at this point and solves a bunch of the problems you called out with Scheme - macros are apparently much better, continuations are usually delimited, has user-mode threads and generators, so you very rarely need to reach for raw continuations, a very nice concurrency system, large stdlib, and Typed Racket also adds static typing.

The DrRacket/SLIME experience is great for smaller projects. I do agree that the language server needs more love.
However I still think it gets a lot of stuff right, and is much faster than Python/Ruby due to being powered by Chez Scheme.
Exactly. They are not dumb search!
The elephant in the room is monetization for people writing this content that perplexity (and then other search engines) will show.
List of Poisonous Fungus Species
> Nothing prevents people from investing also in other companies if they feel like

I thought you just said that this isn't a viable option for most people? Now it is on the table?

> are you implying they are "too dumb" to consider the possibility

For what it's worth, reading through this thread, it seems like you were the one who claimed most people don't have "market knowledge"...
C’mon. OpenAI is a large company now with 1000+ employees. You’re really going to air this hot take?

- if they release a model “they’re just releasing models without use cases”
- if they release safety guardrails “they are just doing this to avoid launching models”
- if the release has a waitlist “they’re losing their velocity”
- if they launch without a waitlist “they weren’t considering the safety implications”
- if they hired a top researcher “they’re conspiring to out spend open source”
- if they fire a top researcher “there’s too much politics taking over”
Curious why you need the map to always point to north?
It set off the flamewar detector, plus users flagged it.

See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41071722.
Windows has Virtualization Based Security [1], where if your system has the right hardware and the right settings, it will use the virtualization support to get you a more protected environment. IO-MMU seems like it was designed for virtualization, but you can use it in a non-virtualized setting too, etc.

[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/de...
I don't know a lot about parser theory, and would love to learn more about ways to make parsing resilient in cases like this one. Simple cases like "ignore rest of line" make sense to me, but I'm unsure about "adversarial" examples (in the sense that they are meant to beat simple heuristics). Would you mind explaining how e.g. your `as` stripping could work for one specific adversarial example?

function foo<T>() {
return bar(
null as unknown as T extends boolean
? true /* ): */
: (T extends string
? "string"
: false
)
)
}

function bar(value: any): void {}

Any solution I can come up with suffers from at least one of these issues:

- "ignore rest of line" will either fail or lead to incorrect results
- "find matching parenthesis" would have to parse comments inside types (probably doable, but could break with future TS additions)
- "try finding end of non-JS code" will inevitably trip up in some situations, and can get very expensive

I'd love a rough outline or links/pointers, if you can find the time!

[0] TS Playground link: https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?#code/AQ4MwVwOwYwFwJYHs...
It's also still ambiguous how much compute it takes to run, and by extension how much it will cost to use.

They might be scrambling to optimize it to the point that it's feasible to ship.
That feature is also part of Google search's AI
Not saying the SearchGPT will or will not be accurate, but this demo was certainly made in After Effects. Who knows where the copy came from.
Do you think HN will suffer greatly from AI bots digesting the site?
In places like SF and NY, the homeless live right in the city center (so far at least). In places like Paris and Copenhagen, they get relocated out of town into the suburbs where there is less traffic and they are less noticeable.

It's not about the absolute number of homeless as it is about the public perception of homeless. The reason California has a "homelessness" crisis and France does not is that France keeps it at the periphery and tourists never see it.
It's a bit of surprise that most of the things work most of the time, given on how shaky basis are they build.
600 BC is hardly 'before (sic) prehistoric times'
IN the mids of the entire AI bubble bursting, OpenAI decided to make some more news in the future tense, what a surpise
> If you're a restaurant, user can actually order right from the chat. or voice.

So, instead of giving 30% fee for DoorDash or Wolt about visibility, we start giving that fee for "some-AI-search-tool", and they don't allow selling food cheaper than you get by using the AI search process ordering. I don't like this era.
Too bad it's only a waitlist. iFixit apparently published fake repair guides [0] that then got crawled by ChatGPT for training [1]

[0] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Data+Connector++Replacement/147...

[1] https://chatgpt.com/share/e52dc4dd-77e6-48a5-a7ca-77e3dfa39e...
> Now days most people don't even bother to change their wallpaper. Live a little!

There are some nice communities around custom desktops, like https://www.reddit.com/r/unixporn/top/?t=year (despite the odd name)

For other OSes there’s also https://www.reddit.com/r/desktops/top/?t=year

That said, for many the defaults are sufficient and I guess people just use what’s there out of the box to get things done.
I see. I guess I see part of the problem you're trying to solve as reflected in the language of "failed" and "error" as opposed to framing say non-replication of a prior false positive as a "correction" or "additional evidence" (against a prior false positive). It may not matter to everyone but some funders might wince as research they've funded as being "failure" or "error." Just something to consider.
That's exactly my point? Both had to learn?
Ya, the styrofoam is almost as shocking as what this solvent might be doing to the bodies of those who drink it.
Synthetic caffeine has been commercially used in beverages and medicine for over 100 years. I believe that most caffeine consumed today is actually synthetic, but it's hard to find a good citation for its prevalence. Most of the web pages mentioning synthetic and natural caffeine are spam for "market research" reports or natural health woo.

You can see section "2.1. Production and use" for some relevant information about synthetic and natural caffeine production, as well as dated 20th century statistics about synthetic production:

"Coffee, Tea, Mate, Methylxanthines and Methylglyoxal"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507027/
>In 2012, an industry-wide coalition of hardware and software makers adopted Secure Boot to protect against a long-looming security threat

This joke never gets stale, wait it is not a joke ?

I still believe the only reason for this to exist is to eventually turn general computing devices into a locked down Cell Phone Spying Device.
I presume that in terms of the OpenAI Assistants API (i.e. what you’d be using if you have a specific “use case”), search will be just another built-in tool (like the code interpreter) that an Assistant can be told to invoke.

(And “SearchGPT” is probably just such an Assistant, with the currently-hidden tool forced on.)
Why not try low caffeine variety like Laurina? It's about 1/3 to 1/2 the caffeine of Arabica.
Watch TV commercials over the years. The older ones are laughable. They steadily get more sophisticated as the years go by. That's because the customers get more sophisticated, too. You might call it evolution in action :-/

Political campaigns also get more sophisticated. Scott Adams has an interesting podcast where he breaks down the latest manipulative persuasion techniques used.
currently using supermaven.com, claude 3.5, and aider.chat.

as i said in separate post, claude works well, but you can still catch it slippin sometimes.
You realize GPT-4o was released in May? And the new Facebook models within the past week?

New models are coming fast too.
> Why is making downstream have to switch to `await import()` that big of a deal?

> You can use async/await in CJS just fine. Sure, sometimes you may need to resort to some ugly async IIFE wrappers because CJS doesn't support top-level await like ESM does, but is that really such a big deal?

It might seem like a small amount of work, but for a library one must to multiply that small amount of work by the number of users who will have to repeat it. It can be a quite large amount in aggregate. And, for what benefit? So I can drop one line from my CI config? It just seems like a huge waste of everyone's time.

Also, as a library user, I would (and occasionally do) get annoyed by seemingly unnecessary work foisted on my by a library author. It makes me consider whether or not I want to actually depend on that library, and sometimes the answer is no.
Maybe this is an excellent time for prompt injection :)
> Getting answers on the web can take a lot of effort, often requiring multiple attempts to get relevant results.

Don't get me wrong, search has become extremely problematic, ... but how much effort does it take really? Compared to writing a letter, reading a map, walking half a mile etc?

The google results for "music festivals in boone north carolina august" are completely adequate. If not then you search again, sure. What makes that "a lot of effort" compared to "asking follow-up questions like you would in a conversation"?

According to Sequoia Capitol there is a $600B hole in this sector at the moment, which continues to grow.[1] They need to invent something akin to the global smartphone market, over the next 2-4 years. Some thing new that solves significant problems for people that aren't already solved for free.

[1] https://www.sequoiacap.com/article/ais-600b-question/
If I were making a search engine or AI crawler, I would simply pose as Googlebot
And using the correct keywords. SEO is dead, long live SEO!

Also I imagine that my area is pretty niche (not many people talking about documentation on HN) so I may have less competition
Yeah, nix shells are also worth mentioning. Planning to integrate them into my workflow in the future. :)
Spurious Correlations: Correlation is not Causation
Show HN: Magic Color Picker
The future will be “AI PCs” with a powerful on-device chip that can filter out on-screen ads, but enabled only by subscription.
Unlike curing cancer, the IMO problems were specifically designed to be solvable
Bing has been doing this for a while, using GPT-4. I don't see how OpenAI can substantially improve on that experience.
> like trusting values from BIOS to create files in your fs root

if you can't trust your BIOS, how are you going to be able to trust anything else on your system?

It all starts with the BIOS being (password or otherwise) protected to not be modifyable without authentication and then goes into secure booting your signed UKI (or whatever other signed way). From there you can have it mount your encrypted drive or load another signed root image.

That is like the minimum needed to be able to trust that what you are running is indeed something you can trust and nothing random has been inserted inbetween.
>Clever forms of "dumb search" that leverage compute, DNNs, RL, self-play, and formal languages are not dumb at all

Right. My point is that you're attacking a position that no real critic holds. Of course we're in agreement then!

"Clever forms of dumb search are not dumb" feels a little like kicking down open doors. We were always going to agree.
This is in a way very good, as it will be another differentiator between smart people and others: average Joe will indulge himself in hallucinations while a few will retain the knowledge of querying a search engine, citing a source and critically think of what they read.
"GPT5 is harder than we thought so maybe we can make money competing with Google?"
> but i know nothing of electrical engineering or robotics.

A few words of advice from someone who has been dabbling for a decade or so, but never really managed more than some half baked prototypes and a few kit builds. You need to consider these three trade offs: time, skill, and money.

Time: If you have a lot of time, you can learn what you need to learn to build a robot. Learn 3d modeling/printing to make a chassis (my local library has a 3d printer if you don't want to buy one). Learn how to piece together microcontrollers, motor controllers, BMS, and sensors, etc... And learn how to program everything to work together.

Skill: If you already are pretty good building things, programming, etc... you can leverage those skills. For a robot chassis, it can be done with things around your house, but you need to have the skills and a bit of creativity to make a good one. If you know the arduino ecosystem pretty well, you can pretty easily put together a prototype board, etc...

Money: You can buy a prebuilt chassis, or a board that has integrated motor controllers and BMS, etc... This will save you time and you will probably end up with a nicer end product than what you could build yourself. Of course the more you lean into this, the closer you are getting to a kit build robot. And FWIW, a kit robot is probably going to be cheaper than mixing and matching prebuilt components + some DIY.

Also, it kinda depends on what you want to do. Do you just want a little robot that drives around the house (cheap and easy). Or maybe does some line following (also easy). Or do you want a self-balancing robot, or a robot arm (a bit harder and more money). Or something really fancy like a self landing model rocket or a self driving lawn mower (expensive and difficult). You will probably want to start with the easy stuff first, just so you can get a feel for it. And then move up the difficulty ladder from there. But from my experience the time/skill/money trade off goes up fairly exponentially. Getting a half baked prototype for a simple rover is a weekend long project. But doing something really sophisticated or polished is months/years of effort (unless you want to drop some coin to speed things up). It is a fun hobby, but it does require a bit of investment before you start getting impressive results. If you think you and your kid are up for it, then dive right in. But if you think this might be more of a short term curiosity, then a kit or something similar is probably your best bet.
Andrei Alexandrescu is awesome; around 2000 he gave on talk on lock-free wait-free algorithms that I immediately applied to a huge C++ industrial control networking project at the time.

I'd recommend anyone who writes software listening and reading anything of Andrei's you can find; this one is indeed a Treasure!
> But what does the author argue is a violation?

This question seems to suggest that there is some external or higher referee for this peace treaty. There isn't. The real cop was inside you all along.

Lots of things can be violations, like using highly motivating, low information communication like Rush Limbaugh or Tucker Carlson.

The response to a violation is also a violation - aka an escalation. There is not a bright line between peace and war. War is a failure of negotiation. People lose faith in negotiation when they feel they are unrepresented or that the other side is cheating.

The greater point is, faith in negotiation is very valuable, but easy to destroy.
If I'm understanding correctly, the median is actually guaranteed to be in the larger of the two pieces of the array after partitioning. That means on average you'd only discard 25% of the array after each partition. Your selected pivot is either below the median, above the median, or exactly the median. If it's below the median, it could be anywhere in the range [p0, p50) for an average of around p25; if it's above the median, it could be anywhere in the range (p50, p100] for an average of around p75.

Since these remaining fractions combine multiplicatively, we actually care about the geometric mean of the remaining fraction of the array, which is e^[(integral of ln(x) dx from x=0.5 to x=1) / (1 - 0.5)], or about 73.5%.

Regardless, it forms a geometric series, which should converge to 1/(1-0.735) or about 3.77.

Regarding using the average as the pivot: the question is really what quantile would be equal to the mean for your distribution. Heavily skewed distributions would perform pretty badly. It would perform particularly badly on 0.01*np.arange(1, 100) -- for each partitioning step, the mean would land between the first element and the second element.
Probably because the benchmarks with higher models are, at this time, negligible. Increasing transformers and iterating attention might be a dead-stop for more capable models beyond 2T parameters. But, I'm not sure.
This model also puts a lot of risk on the employees. It’s basically forcing investment in the same company that pays your salary. An investment that has less liquidity than standard investments. It’s like putting all your retirement fund into your company’s stock.
Try https://maps.here.com
Can you please stop posting ideological battle comments to HN? You've been doing it a lot again lately, and we have to ban such accounts.

I don't want to ban you again but if this keeps up we're going to have to.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
you end up searching for a pub called graphite and get 10000 results about graphite bars because it's a more common term and bar = pub, right? contrived example but that seems to happen to me every other month at least
You can't detect LLM output with any reasonable rate. You'd have both false positives and false negatives all over the place. If you solve that part on its own, that will be a SOTA method.
Because reading nonsense inside an infinite debatable context is fun. I know what you're talking about and frankly I'm not impressed.

You know why people like these chat systems? Because it straight up saves time. When a system is made it to indexable, "context dependent", and "creating a certain experience" it just begs to be summarized and made to be something you can use. That interpretable work is.... Pointlessly difficult.

A good example: discord. A vast number of communities are designed to be "experiences" where you have to pour hours of your time to adapt to their little fiefdoms if you wanted to obtain any useful information in the form of important information on a topic. Try doing this in any serious fashion and you will quickly be wasting more of your time than you want.

Yeah so maybe chatgpt gives you the occasional incorrect fact. I haven't had that happen in any way, shape, or form. Furthermore: just be critical of your information. Not hard, and they are already working on fixing that.

Especially for people that are bonafide adults time is worth more than "the pride of human work".
> And when you aggregate enough individuals you have something approaching objectivity.

No, you just have a lot of individuals who make a similar subjective call.

> In other words, statistically speaking, what is the best poise and posture to have as a public figure?

That's an entirely different thing. You're talking about monetization, and even then, you're talking about the sort of monetization that prioritizes maximizing income over all other considerations. That's certain a legit worldview, but it's far from the only one.

> is as lazy

Expressing an opinion counts as lazy now?
Agreed. Highly recommend giving it a go for anyone who hasn't tried it. I'm a heavy (paid) chat gpt user, but for anything that I know in advance the answer will benefit from a web search (because it needs recent data), I use perplexity.