skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Death is by design

This betrays a deep misunderstanding of the mechanics of evolution. Design is literally not even part of the equation. I suspect you actually know that, but may have let an emotional response confuse your position.

Radical ideas like "let's stop dying" often evoke powerful irrational responses from all sorts of people, but it's very important to stop and consider the source of that response.

For example, I'm envious of those who would live in an age of immortality (if it were to happen), as I don't expect such an outcome for myself, but I don't want to take that away from them if it's a real possibility.
Unsupervised representation learning of chromatin images identifies changes in cell state and tissue organization in DCIS (Nat Commun 15, 6112)

The original title doesn’t fit, so I did my best to construct a meaningful summary from the paper’s own words.
If someone says, "Tom Hanks played Jon Snow in Game of Thrones", and then you reply "that's incorrect, it was Kit Harrington", and then people say "well it's really Tom Hank's cousin that played him", which is still incorrect, is it aggressive pedantry to point out that's still wrong?

IP addresses are not globally unique. IP:PORT is not globally unique. Kit Harrington played Jon Snow in the HBO series Game of Thrones. These are just cold, hard, facts.

Looking for real feedback here, as I don't really want to give anyone panic attacks, but what would you suggest I say to posts attempting to correct me saying I'm wrong when I know they're factually incorrect? Just accept the falsehoods?
from an evolutionary perspective the current human lifespan seems almost perfect

>long enough for grandparents to help with kids and pass on valuable knowledge

>short enough that new generations are able to adapt as needed to changing environments and throw out out of date information or cultural "technology" that is no longer relevant

increasing human lifespan significantly seems like a nightmare, especially if only the richest have access. The saying "science advances one death at a time" and just the thought of political leaders being able to entrench themselves over longer times spans is awful. Seems like it would most likely lead to complete stagnation
NYC has had shockingly low minimum wage:

https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/spotlight-minimum-wage/

I specifically remember being a teenager around that time and trying to math out a part time job at McDonalds for 5.35 an hour and realizing how tough it all was.
What does authenticity mean in this context?
Bagel: The Inference Interference – Design verifiable inference that's not slow
14TB drive with assorted large language model weights
You can still eat soup without teeth.

Just because someone has been caught doesn't mean the law isn't significantly weaker than it should be. Menendez is a good example for this. This isn't the first time he's been brought up on bribery charges, it's the second. The first was dropped because of the McDonnell ruling.

Really, you pretty much have to be the dumbest most corrupt politician imaginable before you are caught in this law's net. McDonnell shows what bribery can look like and it's pretty egregious.

McDonnell was hosting and publicly promoting products from Star Scientific while receiving lavish gifts from them. Rolexs, loan, vacations, etc. Do you think if something that would harm Star Scientific came across McDonnell's desk he wouldn't act in their favor? Yet because he doesn't specifically say "I'm doing this for you guys" it's legal.

That's why the law is toothless. So long as a politician isn't an absolute moron like Menendez, they are free to accept "gifts" from anyone for anything. They just can't then turn around and write down "Oh, ok, I'll make sure to pass bill 123 for you"... like Menendez did.
The first is more expressive, the second is more explicit.

The expressiveness of an expression allows it to be used in more contexts, such as in generic code where the underlying type may not be known.
It's a hardware company and justified to be on HN imo. They're doing interesting stuff.
I adore my Kaypro II (such a simple and well-designed system!), but the software for CP/M is generally quite boring. Business, productivity-- all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Sure, there's ADVENT and a Gorillas-type game, but it lacks the playful vibrancy of the stuff people made back when micros were curiosities with potential. CP/M made them useful, and useful things have to go to the office and make money.
$640M of fundraising seems notable enough for this level of HN attention.
It's a type of mainstream-media induced psychosis commonly referred to as "rocket-man bad" (related to the similar "orange-man bad").

Essentially, almost entirely one-sided coverage of two highly-influential people of contemporary times have warped some people's opinions of them into an irrational and often incoherent rage, leading to boycotts/"cancelling", etc.

In both cases, these were people who were widely-admired - in Musk's case among the same demographic now hates him - when the MSM supported them prior, which then 180°'d when the MSM machine turned against them, for whatever reason.

It's an interesting phenomenon to observe, but is also rather sad as it divides people quite nastily. My response here will likely be downvoted, flagged and receive endless repeats of the media misrepresentstions against both characters.

Criticism will likely be almost entirely devoid of balance, and especially absent of rational acknowledgement that eg, in the orange mans case, hundreds of millions of people love him enough to believe he will lead their country to prosperity.

Unfortunately, such division leads only to a bleak future for all involved, which is why I try here - humbly - to bring some light, and rationality to it, no doubt failing due to the nature of the problem and its effect on people.

X seems like a pretty much the same platform before and since Musk, only since Musk there is noticably-less "curation", and so discussion is more organic, so, some may find it more raw.
I like it better, but it's not particularly different really.
Yeah I thinks it's pretty much the same as when LLMs use polite language in their response. LLMs are just text completion algorithms puppeting a chatbot persona after all, meaning it's always going to hallucinate the personal details (though in the case of ChatGPT, the persona is recursively desribed as an LLM named ChatGPT so it gets a little weird to think about). If the system prompt describes a polite & helpful chatbot, then so shall it be for all text that follows. Not unlike if you were able to hypothetically make a live 60fps prompt based image generator that was automatically instructed from key inputs to simulate the frames from a popular video game, and then somehow ended up the a highly convincing simulation of the game!

While it might present a save menu similar to the real game, that doesn't mean the menu itself actually functions. With LLMs, they are ultimately only able to remember what's been pre-trained into their model + whatever is discussed within their context window.

A hypothetical LLM based online bot/shill sent out into social media would likely be including the entire discussion within their context window for each post generated though, otherwise it wouldnt really be possible for it to maintain a coherent conversation.
Interesting, thanks! I did not know the eath's core is still generating heat.
I don't misunderstand the problem at all. Gmail has been putting those little yellow tags on emails that are supposed to be important for longer than I can remember. Do they do that to spam which happens to get through the cordon? You bet they do. Do they use machine learning? Also yes.

Because "you forgot to renew your account" is... important. It's the spam filter's job to catch that.

The only thing which makes this interesting is artificial intelligence fairy dust. It's what caused you to misunderstand a branded pile of matrix math as though it was a person, capable of showing judgement, who personally handed you a piece of mail. A mistake, I am sure, you would not make about Gmail's machine-assisted prioritization algorithm, because of mere familiarity, and due to no other difference in the intention or behavior of the software whatsoever.

It's clickbait.
What if you have money in the bank and the bank has been robbed thousands(!) of times because they forget to lock the windows. Assume nobody is going to do anything to make the bank change their window locking habits, or lack thereof.

At this point in the analogy, do you personally believe it is worrisome if an upstanding citizen thinks "I wonder if they forgot to lock the windows again?", and they check to just to see. Is the solution in this scenario to harshly punish the citizen while doing nothing to the bank or their windows?

(!): I say thousands because https://haveibeenpwned.com/ reports that my email address has appeared in almost 3,000 (three thousand!) data breaches.
I like that take, and wholeheartedly agree.
Many (most) devices with secure boot have hardware fuses, but the software that reads them is usually broken. Rust and an eye towards sound cryptographic primitives (especially against side channels) will definitely go a distance towards protecting against this, although logic bugs are also quite common.

This bootloader doesn’t actually seem to be a real secure / trusted boot implementation anyway, just a thing that verifies updates.
This comes across as quite rude, FYI. You may want to clarify and be more specific.
By that same token the general public is also not using IPv4. The general public doesn't care, so long as TikTok and Facebook appear on their mobile devices.
That sounds like the stupid stuff that went on with the hotel I was staying at when the CrowdStrike stuff happened and they couldn't take any credit card payments.

Someone at the hotel should have gone to Target (or any handful of stores) and bought some Square readers and devices to use them with. They were hemorrhaging money because they went cash only during the middle of a very large international convention.

This restaurant should have had generators in place by now. I get that the local stock might have been bought out quickly, but they certainly could have had some delivered from out of state, or driven a long way to pick some up. $30k/week in losses more than dictates that you do something about it.

Run a generator, run some power cords around, solve the problem. Ask forgiveness later.
A tl;dr on how this works: people borrow the Yen because Japanese interest rates are so low, then they buy stuff that they think will outperform (NVDA, etc.). The Bank of Japan did a surprise hike last week, which threatens the outlook of Yen interest rates continuing to be low. Therefore this trade is being unwound.
I was wondering why treats.com and bones.com were amongst some of the most popular websites...
They are most definitely designed to be globally unique, and we fucked it up.
It's not a flawed system, it simply needs to be managed and rules need to be enforced. It may very well be true that private insurers could provide coverage for cheaper than standard Medicare. I have personally worked with health insurers who were able to outperform benchmarks by implementing care management programs, reaching out to insureds to make sure they are taking medications and getting ongoing care from their physician, etc. They can also develop close relationships with local providers, and/or have their own captive providers like the HMO model. It's not all free market dogma that there is potential for savings there, because standard Medicare is somewhat of a convoluted mess that needs modernizing.

But instead of doing that, they realized that they could just pressure providers to up-code and goose the risk score and make more money.

MA is relatively new. We needed many years of experience to see how the market would play out. But now we've known for a decade or so that it is clearly costing way more than it should and offering no additional benefits to justify the cost. Unfortunately we have not yet had the political will to fix it, and the handful of massive companies making bank on it will fight tooth and nail to keep the gravy train rolling.

The lesson from MA is that people will figure out how to game the rules, so we need to be reactive and flexible and able to update the rules accordingly. But because health care is a complicated and personal subject, people are wary of change, and we have very little political will to fix this. This will get even harder with the recent Chevron decision, which will serve to make it even harder for CMS to fix the regulation of MA without new legislation.
Flight numbers get changed when airlines re-do their scheduling. It's still a fairly manual process as sometimes the numbers are symbolic.

Either way, when they talk about re-using flight numbers on the same day, what they mean is they create multi-stop flights to use the same number for each segment instead.

So you'll see flights like, hypothetically...

> AA 1325 ORD-LGA

> AA 1351 LGA-YUL

> AA 1352 YUL-LGA

> AA 1326 LGA-YUL

Getting converted into a single flight number.

> AA 1325 ORD-LGA-YUL-LGA-ORD

Basically converting this to a flight from Chicago to Chicago via New York and Montreal nets them a 4:1 reduction in numbers used.

You can still book each segment separately, and if they generally book the same plane, say some Envoy Air regional jet, for all four segments, there's little risk that irregular operations will lead to two planes in the air at the same time with the same number. Worst case they can give that one segment a new flight number for that day.

They've been doing this a lot in the last few years, especially on regional flights, and especially in the northeast where there's a ton of short hops.

[edit] If they want a bunch of their flight numbers back they can stop codesharing and switch back to relying on interline ticketing and sell the operating carriers flight number. I can't really think of anything good that's come of codesharing to individual passengers.
An Interview with Sarah Cecchetti
Here in England, there's a very significant cultural divide between North and South. One of the key symbols of that cultural divide is whether people thank the bus driver when disembarking. In London, thanking the driver would make you a bit of a weirdo; in Newcastle, not thanking the driver would make you dreadfully antisocial.

I imagine that there's a huge difference in this respect between a McDonalds in Manhattan and one in a small town.
Caloric restriction thing is true, but is also what he advocates. He always says if you are not sleeping well or eating right don't worry about anything else. Red light therapy, supplements, stem cells and all the other expensive experiments he does are all less effective and shouldn't even be considered until your sleep, exercise and diet are good.

I am not jumping into his program, but I am definitely keeping an eye on him. If he is still doing the same protocol and he looks the same 10 years from now it will get difficult to keep criticizing it.
Previous discussion of Kolmogorov-Arnold networks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40219205
Yeah POSIX standardizes a bunch of tools, mostly the ones you'd expect (cut, cat, file, etc). I agree with the conservative standardization for the most part, but I selfishly would love these more niche tools to be available on a fresh box. Good point though, I just want to be a little lazier in my script writing I guess :)

I've always used this site as reference: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/
Re: lost classics, I hope we can recover an intact work by Heraclitus from those burnt scrolls in Herculaneum, that would make me lose my shit.
Where do zone identifiers come into the picture?
I'll throw another possible explanation into the mix: the gap between "senior" and "staff" can be quite large in some places depending on the threshold for being titled "senior". I've seen places where promotions to senior is not uncommon for someone 3-4 years out of college but with no staff engineers under the age of 30, and only a few under 35. Without any other granularity of IC roles, the only options for a young engineer are to be "stuck" for a decade at a role with a title so coarse that it doesn't really convey seniority (which tends to mean that the actual "seniority" of an engineer is implicit institutional knowledge), swap to a manager role, or go somewhere else with a more explicit career path for ICs.

The number-based systems at the super large tech companies can be hard to understand from the outside, and they might introduce potential confusion when trying to calibrate between different companies with incompatible systems, but they at least allow for a more clear trajectory for an individual contributor (although whether this actually determines how promotions happen in practice is a crapshoot; internal company politics can't be fixed by nomenclature). I don't think that software engineering is somehow different enough from other professions that levels can't be classified with descriptive names rather than numbers, but clearly _something_ needs to change when we can't even all agree on what "senior" and "staff" mean.
Don Hopkins, who also posts here, has an interesting essay on the design and implementations of pie menus from 1991: https://donhopkins.medium.com/the-design-and-implementation-...
Maybe they can send up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robonaut again to do the undocking.
You should read the article, it details a more concerted effort to scrape in bad faith outside of copyrights and terms-of-service.
(I am wondering if there might not be a perverse incentive not to improve on interpretability for major incumbents ...

... given how, what you can "see" (ie. have visibility into) is something that regulatory stakeholders can ask you to exercise control over, or for oversight or information about ...

... whereas a "black box" they have trained and control - but few understand - can perhaps give you "plausible deniability" of the "we don't know how it works either" type.-
Most importantly, I find it easier to plug into the device without looking.
> If I understand you correctly, you want to throw out rST, and just have users write HTML directly?

Yep!

> 1. HTML is designed for representing webpages, not books. Your intermediate representation will become HTML's DOM, which is likely not well suited to the book use case. You'll either need to use an existing HTML-to-DOM parser or build your own. One big limitation of the DOM, as I see it, is that it doesn't have the concept of a page number.

I guess my point is that while the main use of HTML indeed to render webpage, it seems pretty well suited at rendering most if not all types of documents. The page number issue you mention is typically only part of the presentation and is handled by the CSS paged media module (though admittedly, support of this isn't universal in my experience).

> 2. HTML is not extensible in the way the author talks about. [...]

Except it is! This is what HTML Custom Elements are all about. Combined with CSS, it can handled to different rendering formats you mention pretty well.

> What is extensible is XML. It's entirely feasible for XML to be the input [...]

I'd actually argue that raw XML is the wrong approach for most things, as the goal of XML is to be extended (e.g.: SVG, MathML, SAML, etc.). But I feel like that's a whole other discussion.

Anyways, I think this is a good conversation and wouldn't mind continuing over email (see my profile). It's fine if some people like rST, but HTML seems better suited for these use case than people make it out to be.
From the KAN repo itself, it appears they already have GPU support https://github.com/KindXiaoming/pykan/blob/master/tutorials/...
Grok is a word made up by Heinlein about 10 years before Musk was born.
This line made me chuckle:

> The `Aircraft Identification` is NOT an identifier of an aircraft. It is an identifier of a flight.
A usual problem is that GPUs don't branch on instructions efficiently. A next most likely problem is that they don't branch on data efficiently. Ideas fundamentally requiring the former or the latter are hard to port efficiently.

A simple example of something hard to port to a GPU is a deep (24 lvls) binary tree with large leaf sizes (4kb). Particular trees can be optimized further, particular operations on trees might have further optimizations, and trees with nicer dimensionality might have tricks available, but solving that problem in the abstract is 32x slower on a GPU that "good" GPU problems. That's not a death knell, but it cuts down substantially the constraints which would make a GPU a better fit than a CPU.

Instruction branching is much worse, when required. Runtime is exponential.

As far as KANs are concerned, the problem is more with data branching. Each spline computation requires its own set of data and is only used once. The math being done on the aggregate computations is non-negligible, but fast relative to the memory loads. You quickly enter a regime where (1) you're bottlenecked on RAM bandwidth, and (2) for a given RAM load you can't efficiently use the warp allocated to it.

You can tweak the parameters a bit to alleviate that problem (smaller splines allow you to load and parallelize a few at once, larger ones allow you to do more work at once), but it's a big engineering challenge to fully utilize a GPU for that architecture. Your best bets are (1) observing something clever allowing you to represent the same result with different computations, and (2) a related idea, construct a different KAN-inspired algorithm with similar expressivity and more amenable to acceleration. My gut says (2) is more likely, but we'll see.

More succinctly: The algorithm as written is not a good fit for the GPU primitives we have. It might be possible to bridge that gap, but that isn't guaranteed.
This is my windmill tilting project. Pretty raw off the bench kind of stuff, but I'm interested to hear what kinds of things people would use this kind of thing for or ways to make this more understandable to an audience not soaked in formalism.
and what about the protocol bytes that go over the wire - you know, the most important and hardest to change part?

There've been several proposals to make "IPv4 but bigger addresses". All of them are just as hard to deploy as IPv6. You still need to upgrade all your routers and you still need to run two parallel networks.
>If it doesn't overclock, you RMA it

Overclocks are explicitly not covered by warranty.

Yes, Intel and AMD and mobo vendors all say overclocks "may" void warranty and in general they have honored warranties for overclocked hardware, but the official and legal position is that overclocking is not covered by warranty.

>It just doesn't fit the facts to say that you shouldn't expect 5400 Mhz ram to work at 5400 Mhz

You can certainly try RMAing the RAM with the RAM vendor since they sold it for whatever frequency they marketed it at. But as far as Intel and the mobo vendor would be concerned, an overclock is beyond the purview of their warranties.
Manhole Card Map
Currently listening to this series of interviews about Neuralink:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbk9BiPhm7o
It's my failure as a writer, because this is not one of those articles.

OP is about how I thought I had the answers in the past but was wrong, and how I have new answers and am still wrong in ways I will find out about. So what beggars belief for me is anyone reading it and thinking I'm offering any sort of advice for others in all situations. What here gives you a sense it's at all related to professional environments? My first bullet was, "building for others is hard so don't even try." If you have ideas for what I can reword to make it even clearer, definitely let me know.
It would be interesting to see a list of which platforms failed, and which ones did not. Anecdotally, I read comments saying that "my adult brokerages are failing, but Robinhood is working."
About it (in English) https://googlemapsmania.blogspot.com/2024/08/the-manhole-car...