skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I understand that you are optimistic about evidence-based instruction and curricula in math, but the disastrous reading curriculum you have discussed was rolled out with much the same "scientific" study and fanfare as "evidence-based" teaching is today. As an example, take a look at all the science that surrounded "whole language" teaching of English. The skepticism you see of "common core math" and a whole new set of math teaching techniques is somewhat rooted in the experience of the same sort of thing happening through the last 20-50 years with mixed results.

As a society, I honestly think we are a little too hooked on scientism. Not science itself (which we don't do nearly enough of), but treating the output of scientific research like a religion. In the few pieces of educational science that are actually proper blind studies, the p-values are abysmal. It's worse than psychology. And yet, every ~10 years, "the science" gives us a new way of doing things that turns out not to be any better than the old way (and plus it's new so nobody knows how to do it). As it turns out, "the science" in education usually means "a small cohort of very good, very enthusiastic teachers tried this, and their outcomes were better than their peers." I assume you can see the problem with that. There is no "phase 2" trial of this stuff or anything controlled, just a rollout of a new method.
I mean, sure, if you insist and make site-level negotiations with yourself about the value of the content.

Here’s a simple example for me:

I search Google for how to perform an operation in an Excel spreadsheet. I skip past the obvious ads at the top first. I click on a promising result on a user forum, but first have to click through a popup and then have a banner covering a third of the screen and a small inset screen with a video. That’s too much for me. I stop and go back to Google. I pick another option. And I may remember that forum is not worth the click in the future.

We make decisions like this online and offline every day. The fact is there are many valuable sites and services that are ad supported and done so responsibly. Not all, but many. Ad blockers are a blunt tool. Installing one on grandma’s browser is a constructive use, but not just because “ads are bad.”
> If your AI travel agent books vacations to the correct destination only 90% of the time, it won’t be successful.

Well, I don't agree. I think there are ways to make this successful, but you have to be honest about the limitations you're working it with and play to your strengths.

How about an AI travel agent that gets your itineraries at a discount with the caveat that you be ready for anything. Like old, cheap standby tickets where you just went wherever there was an empty seat that day.

Or how about an AI Spotify for way less money than current Spotify. It's not competing on quality, it can't. Occasionally you'll hear weird artifacts, but hey it's way cheaper.

That could work, imo
Onwards to the papers to the trail to make penis pills.
It certainly does - if you remain current then not a lot has really changed.

If you understand the principles of control systems and how an electrical grid works, this is broadly "just" a grid stability concern.

To some extent this feels like an issue of IoT-ification of things that we otherwise understood just fine! Maybe the real issue is how we blend cyber security knowledge into other sectors, and quantify and ensure it is present?
There weren't any movies to download (besides porn clips) in the ISDN days and your hard drive probably wasn't big enough to hold a movie.
Regardless of whether Google has broken the law, the arrangement is clearly anticompetitive. It is not dissimilar to owning the telephone or power wires 100 years ago. Building operators were not willing to install redundant connections for the same service for each operator, and webmasters are not willing to allow unlimited numbers of crawlers on their sites. If we continue to believe in competitive and robust markets, we can't allow a monopolistic corporation to act as a private regulator of a key service that powers the modern economy.

The law may need more time to catch up, but search indexing will eventually be made a utility.
They "could" do anything you can posit. This doesn't seem unfortunate - their incentives are well aligned with customer preference.
> The announcement has already attracted widespread praise from creatives online

I love how the evidence for this is three tweets from Internet randos. I’m sure I can also find three tweets condemning this from “creatives online” in no time at all; if not I’ll just post it myself.

Why do we need these useless “‘many’ twitter users liked blah” news, again? Just tell me “blah happened” and stop there.
Dijkstra’s degree was in mathematics.

And yes the average mathematical theory is indeed flat compared to a large monolith like google3.
its quite cynical, dont you think. you can benefit in both - morally and in business.
You can share calendar and see events on tesla screen with “navigate” button.
Those are like its most basic and widely used functions, and I've never seen an implementation that's lacked then. Have you?
if you're some Python contractor company, the angle makes sense. but of course, very few AI companies are out there trying to help others solve problems.
Check ou r2ho.me, I'm sure you could have great synergies for lowering price
Yeah how am I supposed to raise millions of dollars without a working product by selling yesterday’s tech??
This is really cool, looking forward to trying it out. Love the name as well
And the ones that remain have terribly reduced morale and lose productivity.
It's an even worse calculation when you consider that going from 8 GB to 12 GB of LPDDR4X costs only $7 to use the larger chip. If I'm already paying over $100 after customs then I'll also pay another $10 for 50% more memory ffs.

The price is already uncompetitive for the hardware so might as well throw in all the bells and whistles, since anyone who's buying these is doing so for the software support ecosystem anyway.
It seems to me at least, yes.
You still need ptxas, but this piece of Software technically isn't deployed in the datacenter, if you AOT compile your kernels. Its usage seems more than fine, especially considering you could just run it on a system without Nvidia GPUs or old Tesla GPUs while still targeting eg. sm_89.
If using ptxas compiled kernels in the datacenter counts as indirect
datacenter usage, I don't know.
Also, technically you are never presented with the GeForce software license during the CUDA download and installation process, which sparks the question if it is even applicable. In this case, all you would need is the open source driver and you could stuff as many consumer GPUs in your datacenter as you want.
However, it technically governs all software downloadable from nvidia.com. I'm no legal expert if this matters, but I would assume consumers would be fine, but companies may be held to a higher standard of seeking out licenses which might govern what they are about to use.
2024's Hugo Award Winners Announced
Did this Google VP write the article all by himself?

I am an executive at a faang.. and I doubt it :)

press release stamp

Why can't everyone who helped write it be credited?
So I am a neophite in this area, but my thesis for why "this time is different" compared to previous AI bubbles is that this time there exist a bunch of clear products (or paths to products) that work and only require what is currently available in terms of technology.

Coding assistants today are useful, image generation is useful, speach recognition/generation is useful.

All of these can support businesses, even in their current (early) state. Those businesses have value in funding even 1% improvements in engineering/science.

I think that this is different than before, where even in the 80s there were less defined products, amd most everything was a prototype that needed just a bit more research to be commercially viable.

Where as in the past, hopes for the technology waned and funding for research dropped off a cliff, today's stuff is useful now, and so companies will continue to spend some amount on the research side.
How is its addon support now though, in general? I stopped using it last year since it was pretty slow on iOS but more so because its addon support was very wonky.
To give the standard example:

Consider a state machine where each state is a function, and you transition into a different state by tail-calling another function.

State machines can have arbitrarily complicated graphs, that would be hard to put into a simple loop.

(However, you can do something like a 'trampoline' to remove the mutual recursion.)
as seen on froscon this year :)

(https://media.ccc.de/v/froscon2024-3125-moderne_linux_komman...)
Probably more we don't even know about.

(offtopic: was looking at your profile, you joined HN the same week as me almost 12 years ago. how the time flies!)
They choose to make the content available to parties that I can impersonate. I respect their decision by impersonating them.
Today I went to physical Walart to buy some butane canisters.
I remembered that I also needed a fridge water filter. Of course it was 20% more expensive in Wallmart than Amazon.
The link they provided is the disclosure. You'd be surprised to find out this is the business model of the radio for years and why most radio stations that need profits only play recent songs, and usually the same songs over and over until new ones that are pushed by labels come out.
Really someone just needs to spotify this shit. Scrape everything and hand out pennies based on who attracted what eyesballs.
Not everyone in the industry is an NPC chasing the Current Thing.
> This one proof, the work of a hundred mathematicians or so, is tens of thousands of pages long and took half a century to complete.

Now compare that to google3 or any other large software. It’s absolutely tiny. A paltry edifice in comparison both in pages and man hours as well as mathematical complexity. Boolean structures get monstrously huge.

On the subject of proofs and the verbosity of traditional mathematical methods, this note[1] is interesting. It provides two fun little examples of shorter than normal proofs.

It amuses me that just as mathematicians persisted in writing out “is equal to” for decades after Recorde gave us =, there will probably continue to be holdouts who write out “if and only if” instead of using ≡ for many years to come.

[1] https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/EWD107...
>ISP tollkeeper

ISPs are terrifying organisations I wouldnt wish this system on the world.

Everything else you said makes sense.
The Ruum
> if Google can't manage to correctly enforce their own TOS

The penalties for violating terms of service generally have no teeth (they close your account, they don't sue you for damages), and you don't want it to be otherwise because ordinary people are constantly violating the terms as well, which are written specifically with the intent that everyone is constantly violating them so the company can always claim that anyone is in violation.

But if you close a scammer's account they just make a new one. Which is why violations of the law need to be handled by law enforcement, who have to prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt but then can impose a penalty that actually acts as a deterrent.
You need much more than that for a good education. While I do agree that smart devices are not necessary, you still need a lot of extra materials for most subjects. You need various kinds of maps for geography and history, you need many images of animals and plants for biology, you need teaching manuals for every subject, you need various books for literature to read poems and prose, you need various materials for arts and crafts. Not to mention when you get to advanced subjects you need a heck of a lot more, at least for practice.

Having many of these materials in a digital format on a smart device can help a lot in terms of cost and availability. It's not critical, and I very much understand the downsides of having an always-connected device that kids are used to play with, but it's also not at all 0 cost to go entirely to paper.

I'm sure your time in math classes at Caltech that were only chalkboard and notes was extremely productive. But some lectures require more materials (you can't have a good lecture on Alexander's conquests without a map of what he actually conquered), and a full education requires much more than lectures. You're not going to be a good EE student if you can't model a circuit in Spice or draw one in some *CAD.
Trump posts deepfakes of Swift, Harris and Musk in effort to shore up support
It’s not that hard, you just collect a lot of data. Much easier with a robot turning the knobs. Predict the next sample based on input and knob settings.
Also the number of Tesla Semis built is a very small amount, around 200.
We are using it to create a self-contained opensource plugin. How does this "undercut" VCV?

Their main model is based around having a "limitless" store where users can buy "premium" modules. And having a plugin-version that allows loading these dynamic modules. This is not something that Cardinal allows and goes straight into the philosophy of a "self-contained" audio plugin.

If anything it's an easy (and free) stepping-stone for users to try a plugin version of Rack and then buy "the real deal" when they want the full-on VCV Rack experience.

The two can easily co-exist. They can even load each other as plugins.
Huh? I think you're missing what I'm saying.

You're saying Android Auto, especially in rentals, is essential for music and navigation, and that you don't know what you'd do without it. I'm saying, Android Auto isn't essential - the phone that you brought with you on your trip can literally do all of the same things. Heck, Android Auto is basically more akin to a mirrored screen, because it's your phone doing all of the work anyway.

It might not be on a screen that's built in to the dashboard, sure, but you've got all of your "essentials" in your pocket no matter the car nor the car's amenities. Find the most optimal spot to set your phone, plug it in via audio cable or bluetooth audio, et voila.
Time to make a complainGPT with access to police so it can complain about users want to complain about directly to the police !!!!
Signalsmith Audio always has great posts. Their article on pitch shift is also worth a look! I have also posted before:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36706588

Speaking of reverb, I implemented a Dattorro reverb (https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~dattorro/EffectDesignPart1.pdf) in Rust before.

https://github.com/chaosprint/dattorro-vst-rs

It's based on Glicol source code here:

https://github.com/chaosprint/glicol/blob/main/rs/synth/src/...

You can play with it here:

https://glicol.org/demo#handmadedattorroreverb

Also you don't want to miss the Tom Erbe's reverb patches in Pure Data. Patches demonstrating several types of reverb (Schroeder, Moorer, Moore, Gerzon, Dattorro):

https://tre.ucsd.edu/wordpress/?p=625
I will say in 2024 i feel like for/of or forEach would at least let you avoid the boilerplate of an index.
> What if the user's current need is to not play music?

Then don't play music. You are asking for something that only works in a dystopia.

Either the machine tries to understand "what I need now" from partial information and will not play me music when I want to listen because it thinks it "knows what I need".

Or the machine actually is hooked up to my real time health data and possibly brain activity to actually know what I need.

I definitely don't want to have a personal computing machine thinking it knows what I want and deciding for me in such a way, or to have such access to my internal state.
> they could default to only allowing apps to be sold in the country of the vendor, then expand from that to countries with an extradition treaty with the vendor's country.

You don't even need an extradition treaty. Just require some collateral for selling outside your own country. Then people selling within their own country (i.e. probably most people) don't have to post anything but are automatically in the same jurisdiction as the victim. Whereas scammers from other countries forfeit their collateral, the amount of which is set based on the amount of scams coming out of their country.
> The programmer is in the unique position that his is the only discipline and profession in which such a gigantic ratio, which totally baffles our imagination, has to be bridged by a single technology.

I think that for example environmentalists, who coined the phrase "think locally, act globally" and contemplated an already existing world population on the order of 10^9, might beg to differ. Or, say, astronomers. Or physicists. Yes, people often have poor intuition about large numbers. No, the resulting problem isn't remotely unique to CS.

> The second radical novelty is that the automatic computer is our first large-scale digital device.

Yet small-scale digital devices such as mechanical relays - or, for that matter, light switches and push buttons - were well established by Dijkstra's time. The scale isn't relevant to that concept; experience is, and students in the 1980s had plenty of reasonable mental models for a bit of data as an abstraction (or the hardware storing it, or a boolean value in a program).

> To do so, however, is highly dangerous: the analogy is too shallow because a program is, as a mechanism, totally different from all the familiar analogue devices we grew up with.

As if students would never encounter stepwise functions in math class (or much stranger beasts for that matter)... ?

Metaphor and analogy are simply at the core of how people naturally learn. We are not machines that can be deliberately and directly programmed with an understanding of novel systems. The imperfections of the metaphors we use, are no more a problem than the leaks in the abstractions we create in our programs.

> Unfathomed misunderstanding is further revealed by the term "software maintenance", as a result of which many people continue to believe that programs —and even programming languages themselves— are subject to wear and tear.

I can only imagine what Dijkstra would think of today's "ecosystems".
It's just not convincing. When your tools start moral posturing instead of building great software that gets out of the way it's all down hill.
Where do I put this .reg file on my Chromebook?
I'd say it's quiet naive to think otherwise, so I wouldnt call that cynical.
A non-publicly traded company doesn't have to strictly adhere to the bottom line. If they have steady cash flow, and the people running the company have a strong stance on AI, why would they have to change? Their app is fantastic, and if someone wants to add AI slop to their Procreate workflow they can just import/export from/to an AI slop app.

It’s a good rule of thumb that the profit motive will make everything worse, but it’s not like it happens 100% of the time with no exceptions (unless publicly traded)
What do you mean `trying to GPL VCV`? The Rack 2.0 project was always licensed `GPL3.0-or-later` so we are using it exactly as intended.

Cardinal also contains MIT, BSD and CC0 modules. As long as all the code is compatible to GPL3.0-or-later since everything is built into a single static binary.

A lot of work has gone into due diligence in order to vet all the resources that have gone into the project: https://github.com/DISTRHO/Cardinal/blob/main/docs/LICENSES....

The value proposition that Cardinal offers by being self-contained is one of stability, backwards-compatibility and being able to easily share patches with other users without having to download or buy anything additional.

See the differences document to better understand how the projects compare: https://github.com/DISTRHO/Cardinal/blob/main/docs/DIFFERENC...
They couldn't possibly know about trail cams though.
> Both mechanical design and electronic design are harder than program design. The number of people who did really good mechanism design is tiny. There were only two good typesetting machines, over most of a century - Merganthaler's Linotype and Lanston's Monotype.

That’s a good example and of course it immediately brings to mind TeX, which is an equally monumental if not greater achievement. Certainly there’s no denying that TeX has considerably higher dimensionality than the pre-computerized hot type setting machines. Especially when you include all the ancillary stuff like Metafont.

Also recall that Dijkstra was a systems programmer in his industry career. He was well aware of the complexity of the computing hardware of the day—which was cutting edge electronic design. The semaphore wasn’t invented as a cute mathematical trick; he needed it to get hardware interrupts to work properly. Something which THE managed and Unix, among others, never quite did (although it did get to mostly good enough if you don’t mind minefields).

> There are far more good programmers than there were good mechanism designers or electronics engineers. Programming is not really that hard by the standards of other complex engineering.

Most programmers are incapable of writing a correct binary search, let alone something the size and complexity of TeX with only a handful of relatively minor errors. Programmers capable of that level of intellectual feat are indeed few and far between. I suspect they’re more rare than competent EEs or MEs.

Most programmers are more comparable to the guys cleaning the typesetters, not the ones designing them.
I'm not an expert, but there are some financial ramifications associated with laying off too many people in proportion the the company size, at least in California, since people who have been laid off can claim unemployment benefits.

There's also the risk of wrongful termination lawsuits if you're hiring someone full-time only to immediately lay them off for not impressing you enough.

It is much simpler to hire someone as a contractor. You may not even have to go through HR to do it.
I agree, and I wish it were otherwise. Why is it so difficult for me to have a home network where things can just work? Why is it a mess of configuration and self signed certificates? It seems like nobody is incentivised to provide this, because nobody providing me with devices, services, and so on lives in my house with me. They need my data and my control pathways to go via them, not to stay in my house.
In this case, when it's backed by a data set based on other people's work.
>very few people wanted a (more or less) general purpose chatbot.

I mean, I still don't. But from a cynical business point of view, cutting customer servce costs (something virtually every company of scale has) of 99% of customer calls is a very obvious application of a genera purpose chatbot.

expand that to "better search engine" and "better autocomplete" and you already have very efficient, practical, and valuable tools to sell. but of course companies took the angle of "this can replace all labor" instead of offering these as assistive productivity tools.
And they have 30K users and serve 600K queries a day while Google serves some 8.5B a day apparently.

Love Kagi but they’re definitely not replacing Google anytime soon.
I don't find coding assistants to be very useful. Image generation was fun for a few weeks. Speech recognition is useful.

Anyway, considering all these things can be done on device, where is the long term business prospect of which you speak?