skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But drip irrigation doesn’t scale because you would need to lay + connect + pressurize + maintain hundreds of miles of hoses. It’s high-CapEx.

A “watering robot”, meanwhile, can just do what a human gardener does to water a garden, “at scale.”

Picture a carrot harvester-alike machine — something whose main body sits on a dirt track between narrow-packed row-groups, with a gantry over the row-group supported by narrow inter-row wheels. Except instead of picker arms above the rows, this machine would have hoses hanging down between each row (or hoses running down the gantry wheels, depending on placement) with little electronic valve-boxes on the ends of the hoses, and side-facing jet nozzles on the sides of the valve boxes. The hoses stay always-fully-pressurized (from a tank + compressor attached to the main body); the valves get triggered to open at a set rate and pulse-width, to feed the right amount of water directly to the soil.

“But isn’t the ‘drip’ part of drip irrigation important?” Not really, no! (They just do it because constant passive input is lazy and predictable and lower-maintenance.) Actual rain is very bursty, so most plants (incl. crops) aren’t bothered at all by having their soil periodically drenched and then allowed to dry out again, getting almost bone dry before the next drenching. In fact, everything other than wetland crops like rice prefer this; and the dry-out cycles decrease the growth rates for things like parasitic fungi.

As a bonus, the exact same platform could perform other functions at the same time. In fact, look at it the other way around: a “watering robot” is just an extension of existing precision weeding robots (i.e. the machines designed to reduce reliance on pesticides by precision-targeting pesticide, or clipping/picking weeds, or burning/layering weeds away, or etc.) Any robot that can “get in there” at ground level between rows to do that, can also be made to water the soil while it’s down there.
Dylan Schiemann on the Evolution of Dojo and Web Components (2020)
I have to wonder whether it was named after John Carpenter's “Dark Star”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Star_(film)
Rational design of efficient defect-based quantum emitters
Sometimes you do in fact spray water on leaves on hot days because the evaporation effect cools the plant.
nvidia chips are available for purchase around the globe, why would someone steal tech if they can just purchase it for consumer prices?
> failed to achieve most (all?) of the goals of the platform

This is precisely the attitude I would argue against. The "goals of the platform" are meaningless predictions made by people before the thing even existed. This is a standard of measurement that's appropriate for bean counters and congress people who ultimately wanted and expected just a cheap commodity space bus.
Conflict requires only one hostile party
> reCAPTCHA challenges remain a considerable burden on the web, delaying and often blocking our access to services and information depending on our physical and cognitive abilities, our social and cultural background, and the devices or networks we connect from.

I'm a visually impaired user, and watching captchas get more and more hostile to people like me has been... difficult.
Check out twisted fields: https://youtube.com/@twistedfields?si=U04aXhWmqWOaxlBf
AIR and Silverlight and co. was a weird moment in the web’s history
I feel like your comment proves my point. On one hand I am saying what the hell is it even? And on the other hand you are telling ME my happiness is just "because I have been conditioned to work". You did zero to address what happiness is.

Money is a way to transfer resources. Resources make people happy. Somebody with no food for 3 days is happy when they finally get food. Money buys food, therefor money can buy happiness. People like to say the opposite, but they forget money can also buy unhappiness, or when talking bout the extreme cases where somebody has 20 billion, would 1 more billion have any affect on their happiness? Oh shit, we are back to WTF is even happiness. For all we know 1B more to the 20B guy might make them more happy because they are now richer than their enemy or some other happiness driven from the count of money.

We can break this down in other ways too. Some people say family is what makes them happy. I can tell you that a family of 12 with no money is less happy than a family of 12 with enough money. Its the difference between having shoes, or eating in may cases. Its clear that happiness is a compactor, and money can change the outcome.
We can get to that when we pick the low hanging fruit first.
In Switzerland, they hold votes 4 times per year, in municipal, cantonal and federal referendums.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland
Any number works if you adjust the multiplier to preserve the 1000.../555... = 1.8 property. For example: https://www.online-python.com/Um4qevAzo2
> Now

Now?? This is literally the most affordable teenage engineering product I've seen posted on hackernews.
The switch port required heroic levels of efforts though I recall.
Eliminating Memory Safety Vulnerabilities Once and for All
Well that's a new one. Fixed. Thanks!
Yes, because with all the history of coups, invasion and illegal wars the US is definitely the side that wants "peace and prosperity"...
> To be fair, they modified Impact _a lot_.

You can't polish a turd. There would've been no point in modifying the engine a bunch if you hadn't given them a useful base to work with.
I think what makes learning fun is subjective and varies from student to student.

For me, what makes learning fun is the retroactive satisfaction I get from solving a future unrelated problem that incorporates the knowledge/skills I acquired at an earlier point.
There's nothing terribly difficult to writing specific routines in asm. It's kinda fun, actually. Assembly _in the large_ is hard, just because you need to be next-level organized to keep things from being a mess.
Travellers from Asia journeyed to the Greco-Bactrian kingdom of Ghandara (whose name is a corruption of Alexandria) and took Buddhism back with them to the east. This is fictionalised in the story 'Journey to the West'. Nippon TV in Japan did a cool TV series adaption of this story that was dubbed into English and shown on kids TV in the UK as 'Monkey', which was quite popular back in the day. If you spend enough time wandering around the British Museum you learn all this stuff.
> A Turing machine as an infinite long tape, and even if it takes 10 times the time to the heat death of the universe x<y will halt.

> Finite time is not practical time.

Sorry for my daftness but if x and y are both a transcendental number, for example pi, then x and y have infinitely many digits so the Turing machine that determines whether x < y is true will not halt, even with an infinitely long tape, or will it? What am I misunderstanding?

If you could recommend a source that explains the basics of these arguments, I’d appreciate it.
Of coursee.
I imagine it’s going to result in some ADA suits sooner or later, like when people went around suing business who didn’t have a ramp alternative to stairs.
Perhaps, my comment is seen in detachment from the article in question. The "blah blah" is actually part of the article, and serves to dismiss the verbosity of a formal description of RAM.

I do question the need for the verbosity of their own.

As a constructive advice, I do believe that a visual representation of the subject serves better not only to this context but also to the target audience.

As a side-note, I have a member of such audience still enjoying the summer break ... the wall of the OP text proved impenetrable, despite the initial interest.
I agree, I think this article is addressed more to the people on the fence rather than the hardcore introverts who feel certain that achieving their fullest lives doesn't require much social interaction.
https://archive.ph/mP9nT
JS engines like V8 are very good at JIT and optimization based on actual profiling. If we talk about pure CPU modeling, I suspect a good JIT will soon enough produce machine code on par with best AOT compilers. (BTW the same should apply to JVM and CLR languages, and maybe even to LuaJIT to some extent.)
A guide for hosting great demo days
In game development this isn't true for better or worse. There is a lot of sunken cost mindset in games that we just go with what we have because we have already invested the time in it and we'll make it work by any means.
It's the same thing actually

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41928749/pros-cons-of-re...
Honestly more than I would have expected.
That’s honestly way higher than I would have expected.
Yes, but the point of the joke was to make the loop longer, while keeping it somehow logical. I wish I managed to insert Purescript, Elixir, Pony and ATS somehow.
> the number of denarii kept going up.

It wasn't even minted by the 300s. There were multiple attempts to replace it with a new stable silver coin but none were very successful.

> Well, for one thing, most people wouldn't be able to afford a single gold coin. You might collect taxes from a province in gold; you're not going to collect taxes from a person that way.

Well yes, that was a significant problem. Often there was no other choice than to collect taxes in-kind and then the tax collectors either had to find local uses for all that stuff or sell it for gold that could be sent to the central treasury in Constantinople.

By the 500s the Empire was mainly only minting gold and bronze coinage which of course was very problematic (as you said gold is much too expensive for most transactions while bronze has the opposite problem). There were no stable, widespread silvers coins that were continuously minted until the 800s or so (Miliaresion) and then its value collapsed again after a few centuries when they went back to debasing during a period of economic crisis.

> There is no way for such a rare coin to be central to the functioning of the system

Well.. I accept that this is your opinion. Regardless, that's simply not how the Roman/Byzantine Empire worked. Gold coinage (or using gold solidus as the primary unit of accounting) was absolutely integral to its functioning. (moreover it was also central to international trade)
"Maybe this'll work" engineering
Midjourney v6.1 is Here and It's Impressive
It's a common way of speaking informal English.
And the gross revenue in 2021 for the Apple app store that same year was $85B. Alas, poor Apple just can't afford more reviewers to ensure every app has a meaningful review process and well paid workers who have a decent work environment. I assume they have a rushed quota of apps they must review per week.

Why does Apple deserve the 30% cut, again?
> reduces ANN expressiveness

But does it? It’s been my hypothesis for a while that every grad-trained NN is hauling around a lot of “nascent” nodes — nodes that were on their way to being useful, but haven’t received enough input yet to actually have their outputs be distinguishable from noise / ever influence the output. Sort of the neuroplastic equivalent of an evolutionary pre-adaptation.

If such nodes exist in NNs, they would be important to decreasing training time to learning new concepts given further training; but if there will be no more training, then they could be pruned for literally no change in expressivity (i.e. the optimality of the NN as an autoencoder of the existing training data.)
That's just a cultural difference. I've seen Russian developers getting into physical fights over code more than once.

Thankfully, western (and especially american) corporate culture is much more conflict-awerse.
Wait until you work in an industry where customers are extremely reluctant to upgrade and each one lands on a different release.

Then you have to start tracking the limitations and issues in 2-3 year old releases and the solution to issues is never “upgrade to the latest”.

At that point, source control starts feeling worthless.
I agree the title is sub-optimal, but I don't think it's terrible. It needs to appeal to a broad audience that may not know what DRM is, let alone how to remove it. In return for less accuracy, it becomes more understandable and meaningful to the average person.
Big Tech Doesn't Want You Anymore [Video]
It is important to note, especially given the positive view given to the guild system in this article, that it is written on a masonic philosophy page. The freemasons have a long and esoteric history that should be viewed with some skepticism. Secret fraternal orders have a sketchy history.

George Carlin has a famous comedy bit where he states "It's a big club and you ain't in it" [1]. My own feeling is that guilds of all sorts prioritize exclusivity for the purposes of bestowing power on some select few. As the article states "Master’s were few and far between". This is similar to how luxury brands maintain their high value: exclusivity. The standardization and guarantees of quality seem to be secondary to the pyramid scheme nature of ascension within these organizations (in the same way that the quality of luxury goods is often secondary to their exclusivity). It reminds me in some ways of the concept of "familiars" in vampire lore, humans who willingly toil away for their masters hoping one day to be elevated to the same level.

It is a complex topic because of the positives and negatives of these systems being highly intertwined. To this day in Canada there is an apprenticeship system for trades. However, it is no longer an inner circle of masters deciding who gets the special status, it is a regional qualification body with clear guidelines, training, testing and certification.

As a society we haven't at all gotten away from the degenerate aspects of guilds. Think of the association with the "golf/country club" crowd. Or things like the Skull and Bones [2] type organizations at elite universities. Or when people joke about the Illuminati. This article is arguing for that by presenting a rose-tinted-glasses view of the past.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyvxt1svxso&ab_channel=SkyEc...

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones
>Which people who are critical of the shuttle love to do because it allows them to ignore all the great research, study, and orbital practice we built up using the shuttle.

And people who are defenders of the shuttle both love to strawman the criticism, and love to pretend that all the great research, study, and orbital practice we built up using the shuttle could ONLY have been done by the shuttle, vs continued evolution of Apollo and concepts like Sea Dragon or the less well known Nova [0].

The fact of the matter is that the Space Shuttle was objectively, fundamentally a shit design. That's simply the physical truth. Putting the vehicle with all your valuable personnel and cargo on the SIDE of the enormous column of cryogenic explodey vroom is madness, which is why nobody ever did before and nobody will ever do it again. It adds major complexity and entire new realms of failure modes that simply do not exist, period, with a normal stack. It's near impossible to have proper escape modes the entire flight, and indeed the Shuttle did not. Both our lost shuttles with all crew would simply never have happened with other crewed rockets. Normally ones sitting on top can escape from failures below, and have [1]. Ice or insulation falling off a rocket during launch simply cannot hit the thing sitting up above it at all. Adding primary engines on is even worse, messing with many of the benefits of staging and adding huge worthless dry mass. Same with the huge delta wings, which not just further hurt $/kg but meant a hair raising high risk landing using a fat unpowered glider with a subsonic glide ratio of just 4.5:1 (a 737 for contrast is 18:1).

Then on top of all of that was all the political BS that it was able to fuel. The congressional pork that genuinely compromised the design further. And of course the effect of America taking its foot off the gas for a good long period vs continuing to evolve what worked.

The ultimate result sucked up enormous amounts of limited money and resources on fundamentally worthless activities as well as killing lots of people. We could have done much, much much better. The Shuttle was cool but also an albatross that badly set back US space potential. Thank goodness for SpaceX, and now a whole new crop of promising hungry startups at long, long last.

----

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_(rocket)

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_MS-10
I use it daily, and it's a time and effort saver.

And writing shell scripts that "mostly" work is what it does.

I don't expect it to work. Just like I don't expect my own code to ever work.

My stuff mostly works too. In either case I will be shaving yaks to sort out where it doesn't work.

At a certain level of complexity, the whole house of cards does break down where LLMs get stuck in a loop.

Then I will try using a different LLM to get it unstuck from the loop, which works well.

You will have cases where both LLMs get stuck in a loop, and you're screwed. Okay.. well, now you're however far ahead you were at that stage.

Essentially, some of us have spent more of our life fixing code, than we have writing it from scratch.

At that level, it's much easier for me to fix code, than write it from scratch. That's the skill you're implementing with LLMs.
Using Qt bindings sucks big time though. That's effectively still writing C++ code. You might as well stop pretending and write actual C++ code so you can limit yourself to having to deal with C++'s idiosyncrasies instead of those, plus the ones introduced by a second language, plus the ones introduced by a bindings layer.

It's unfortunate that a UI layer ties you into a particular programming language. It feels like something that should be provided by the OS somehow.
But if Apple pays TSMC $$$$$$$$ in advance to build a 2nm node production line especially for Apple, and it turns out the 2nm node doesn't deliver the hoped-for improvements in power efficiency? The money's already spent.
I'm kinda surprised captcha still exists. It's pretty clear that the robots have beaten it, and when they haven't you can hire armies of humans for the price of a latte.

Not that I want trillions of bots hitting up every resource on the Internet. But I don't see how to stop it at this point except by excluding a fair number of regular people.
Instead of differentiating c^(-xn) w.r.t. x to pull down factors of n (and inconvenient logarithms of c), you can use (z d/dz) z^n = n z^n to pull down factors of n with no inconvenient logarithms. Then you can set z=1/2 at the end to get the desired summand here. This approach makes it more obvious that the answer will be rational.

This is effectively what OP does, but it is phrased there in terms of properties of the Li function, which makes it seem a little more exotic than thinking just in terms of differentiating power functions.
One of the reasons that Apple does a bit of due diligence during the onboarding of a developer and establishing a developer agreement is to ensure they can reliably take legal action against developers that abuse the system.

The possibility of being banned from the Apple App Store ecosystem and/or legal reprisals is one way to deter unwanted behavior that can't be blocked through technical means.
I've always thought intelligence = ability to solve problems. And consciousness to be a completely separate thing.
I very much agree that fair use should be expanded, but I don't think it's the job of the court to do that. They are supposed to interpret the law, not write it.
You piqued my curiosity, so I looked for a paper. I found something tangential but fascinating.

"Naud and Sprekeler (2018) suggest that this could be achieved using a synaptic strategy that facilitates summation for simple action potentials arriving on the basal dendrites and depresses faster burst-like events arriving on the distal tuft"

Oh, its frequency multiplexing with a band pass filter. Same trick the analog phone system used to reduce the amount of wire needed in the network. Same problem, same solution. Convergent evolution.

I wonder if there's ways to do phreaking on neurons.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030645222...
I burned a bit as I read the article, esp the Bruckner quotes, as it's touching something I've been thinking on more frequently recently. These extroverted persons keep taking issue with introvertedness, as if it's a problem to be solved. They demand us to gain soft skills, to ditch WFH, to engage in small talk. And in a way, these things aren't that bad. Sure we can get out there and be fairly good at it, though it's usually a huge energy suck.

But, on the other hand... what about them? Should this always be a one-sided affair? How about some of the more extroverted taking a genuine stab at doing the kind of thing introverts tend to excel at, such as technical skills, engaging in topics in a deep way, and working alone? Without looking up any statistics I think I'm pretty correct when I say the vast majority of innovative effort has been performed by introverts, and mostly in their alone-time. Then extroverts cone along, take the results and market it, mostly for their own gain. So it's a threat when the status quo looks like it's changing, and rules need to be invented and enforced to prevent the works from falling apart. I feel like it's pushing me toward this - potentially radical - conclusion that society and the economy itself is designed to enslave the truly productive forces of introverts in service of extroverts who for the most part can really only do "make work".
Oh, yes you're right, I never read that properly, how odd. Well, it's been working fine and I can't be bothered but I'll keep this service in mind. Thanks!
> Next, let’s give ourselves an arbitrary write. To make the exploit a bit simpler, we’ll give ourselves an arbitrary memcpy.

They took Signal-webrtc & added a vulnerability to it.

Maybe maybe maybe there's some other means to exploit the lack of time check, but this feels like such a massive & overwhelmingly staked out nothing burger.
You couldn't have picked a worse article to post that comment on.
Ah, that's a missing link I hadn't thought of.

This was a result of converting degrees to radians. There is another way as well.

from math import sin, acos

def nines(repeat: int) -> float:
repeated = 2 / int('9' * repeat)
value = sin(repeated) * acos(repeated) * (10 ** repeat)
return value

nines(18)

I'm sure this can be edited to accept other values in the same way.

Took a while to convince me, but you got there.
i appreciate the article and the full examples. But I have to say this all looks like a nightmare to me. Going back and forth in English with a slightly dumb computer that needs to be pestered constantly and hand-held through a process? This sounds really really painful.

Not to mention that the author is not really learning the underlying tech in a useful way. They may learn how to prompt to correct the mistakes the LLM makes, but if it was a nightmare to go through this process once, then dealing with repeating the same laborious walkthrough each time you want to do something with Docker or build a trivial REST API sounds like living in hell to me.

Glad this works for some folks. But this is not the way I want to interact with computers and build software.
Amazing work!

FYI - in non-fullscreen mode, on my Mac / Chrome, the bottom of the viewport is cut off. So can only play in fullscreen.
Drip irrigation is a PIA to setup in my experience. This looks a lot easier.

You have to correctly size and adjust every nozzle and need different sizes of pipe as you get further from the hose. It's more difficult than you would think.

A lot of the pieces fit together by friction alone and are a pain to put together. You have to use boiling water to soften the pipes in order to connect them without breaking them. It requires quite a bit of elbow grease.

EDIT: I think I must have responded to the wrong comment. Rereading my reply doesn't make sense in context...
If your money becomes worthless?
Airlines are running out of 4-digit flight numbers