skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's even more ridiculous than all that. We had "large" work-ready trucks as long as vehicles have been on the road that were all noticeably smaller in every dimension except payload. At some point suburban dads flipping the fuck out over their own notional masculinity drove the truck market off a damn cliff. Now 100/1500 series trucks are complete bullshit for towing and can't even fit a full sheet of plywood in the back without dropping the tailgate or propping it up on something. I swear I'm -this- close from trading my full sized truck in for one of those weird little Japanese deals with the actual full sized bed and built in dump (!!) and just hire out my towing to someone else.
As far as I can tell both founders are American, not Chinese.
Yes! We don't charge for SSO, but thankfully we've only had our largest customers ask for it -- and every time it required significant back-and-forth to get it set up. Basically every time somebody comes in with a new IdP, I have to go stand up my own instance so I can figure out what weird combination of options will make it work, because I'm convinced nobody actually understands SAML.
It's sad in the same way it's sad that we still have war. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary.
Just make it precise enough to identify individuals, and some government secret agency will find a way to foot the bill.
Show me where on the chart PPACA came into effect.

https://www.kff.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Figure-1-12.p...

It should be obvious, right?

I don't deny that it sucks that health insurance is so expensive. Of course it sucks. And I have tons of empathy for anyone who is suffering under the expenses. But blaming our current costs on PPACA is just not supported by the evidence I'm seeing. If you have other evidence I should look at, I welcome it.
And if the FTC Act and similar legislation provides them the necessary powers, then the courts will rule that way. If they do not, then the legislative branch can always amend the FTC Act, assuming it isn’t found unconstitutional.
I've been trying to find it for years but about 20 years ago when that guy from New Zealand was trying to build his own cruise missile for under $20k I found a DoD paper that had a line I'll paraphrase that stood out to me: 'the DIY cruise missile will become the AK-47 of the 21st century'
The person writing said email
What is ICP?
I blame the investors making bad bets based on FOMO.
Don't Believe the Big Database Hype, Stonebraker Warns
This article summarizes some takeaways from Stonebraker's paper “What Goes Around Comes Around…And Around…”[1]

For those unfamiliar with Stonebraker, he's a luminary in the DB field[2].

80 years old and still very active (:

[1] https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2024/whatgoesaround-sigmodrec20...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Stonebraker
Does HOV lanes add a level? Saw these in Arizona and always wondered how much expense the separate HOV flyovers added to the interchange cost.
Your response is nonsense. We don't know how consciousness arises from matter but we do have significant understandings about knowledge, reasoning, modeling, visualization, object permanence, etc. etc. that are significant parts of how the human mind works. And we know LLMs have none of these.

The point of my colored shape example is that it is an illusion that there is anything resembling a mind inside an LLM. I thought that was obvious enough I didn't need to explain it further than I did.

As far as the original commenter's credentials; there's lots of people who should know better but buy into hype and nonsense.
Kind of like the "install this software" as part of the interview process.

"My hourly rating for figuring out your bug is $X".
My kingdom for this approach to take the place of (some/all) leetcodes.
My partner got me this shirt and I love wearing it, not because of any sort of state pride just because I think it's absurdly hilarious.

https://hivemill.com/products/smbc-texas-shirt
I had a bug squash interview today. I found it nice, but also frustrating.

It was nice because I didn't need to practice and I knew exactly how to debug the thing.

It was frustrating because my personal laptop is from 7 years ago (from college), is slow, and the dependencies and editor don't work out of the box for an a new repo. Additionally, I'd prefer to use IntelliJ like I do at work but again, that's too heavy for my computer to handle so I resort to vscode and have to figure out how to use it. So then the interview becomes debugging my environment instead of debugging the problem. Maybe that's a useful signal, but it's not really bug squashing anymore then.

So overall, it was still requiring learning but there was not a very good way to test in advance (how do you test all possible repo structures?)
Yeah, that's an odd claim when it is more the adequate to say that MIT is closely observed by other technical institutions worldwide.

The difference in approach, outcome and size of expenditure between MIT and the University of California System in their negotiations with Elsevier interests university libraries everywhere when considering their own publications strategies. It is great that both institutions have been open about their budgets, their negotiation stance, and the outcome.
I think it would be nice if the toast popped up and hid in a tray and you could expand it and see a toast history with timestamps.
Is the implication here that if insurance is too expensive it is because of obamacare and nothing else?
I just signed up for the free version. Claude Sonnet does properly use malloc/free to manage the buffer where GPT-4o screws up (Yay!) It manages to gets through the whole process of initializing a graphics device and grabbing a queue from the device. It took some questionable shortcuts to get there (and didn't leave any comments explaining those shortcuts and the problems they could cause down the road), but fine, the code works.

After that it goes completely off the rails by trying to issue draw commands before binding a graphics pipeline, which is both illogical and illegal. After a lot of prodding, I did manage to get it to bind a graphics pipeline, but it forgot about the texture.

So Claude Sonnet is definitely better than GPT-4o, but it still feels raw, like a game of whack-a-mole where I can get it to fix a mistake, but it reintroduces an old one. I also have to be the one offering the expertise. I can prompt it to fix the issues because I know exactly what the issues are. If I was using this to try to fill in for a gap in my knowledge, I would be stuck when I ran the code and it crashed - I would have no idea where to go next.

Update: Took about 50 min of experimenting, but I did get Claude to generate code that doesn't have any obvious defects on first inspection, although it cut off about halfway through because of the generation limit. That's the best result that I've seen from an LLM yet. But that's after about a dozen very broken broken programs, and again, I think the domain expertise here is key in order to be able to reprompt and correct.
Is the worldwide peace in the room with us now?
No, I'm aware of how people think about people that don't go to top schools.
The use of the gender-neutral plural pronoun to refer to the dog instead of he/she/him/her.

...my dog is getting agitated because they're on leash...
Its not supposed to do your work. Its an assistant.
I thought the name was inspired by a cheap, easily available lubricant that comes in handy for every home.

I've tried many simple servers for experimenting with simple static websites (HTML, CSS, JS). I'm currently settled on LiveReload[1] and BrowserSync[2]. LiveReload attaches to other tooling and is more straightforward, while Brower-Sync when looking across a few multiple browsers (out of habit). I'm not particularly fond of tooling that attaches to an IDE, but I like more of the ones that I can pipe with arguments. But then again, I do straightforward stuff these days.

LiveReload should also be easily attachable to a simple `python -m SimpleHTTPServer 8000`.

1. https://github.com/livereload

2. https://browsersync.io
I don't mean to be snarky, but... and?

As a reminder, the sitting POTUS announced the suspension of their reelection campaign on X. It wasn't announced on CNN or the NYT or via WH direct broadcast, it was on X. These events will be written about without any political rose-colored-glasses in 100 years from now.

You can regurgitate your genuinely stupid rhetoric all you want, but I hope you understand that nobody of any importance, relevance, or power agrees with you -- in fact, they haven't for a few years now if you've been paying attention to anything in reality.

Nobody cares about the things you're enumerating. But, even if they did, Musk is better on those points than anyone you're going to suggest.
> The less labour rights a country has, the more competitive a country's businesses are. If you can keep your workers in quasi-indentured servitude, you're going to be more profitable than a business that can't.

Counter point, you are conflating each individual business profits and motives for the profitability of the economy and country. But each business doesn't exist in an a vacuum, but inhabits the same environment for getting workers. By making it easier to start new companies, and to compete, by banning non competes, the surviving business might actually be more profitable than the ones before.

Example: California doesn't have non compete, and it rules the tech world, with a lot of the more profitable tech companies there. While each individual company might benefit if it was suddenly allowed to do non competes, they benefit way more for being located in such a center for innovation.
The results of a brake failure would probably propagate through a larger amount of traffic if everyone was packed more densely.
I went through the same thing last few years. Ended up joining a venture capital firm as a technical researcher and love it.

I focus on crypto most of the time, and sometimes robotics, AI or developer tooling. I mostly talk to startups about their tech and do due diligence to make sure they know what they're doing.

I read a lot of whitepapers and go to technical discussions at conferences to know where the industry is going to see where we should be investing.
What a misleading title. It gives the impression that it was permanently shut down, when the truth is otherwise:

"... a spokesperson for Green Hill High School confirmed that the school has closed its library ahead of the 2024–2025 school year to sort through its entire collection of books to ensure that they are in compliance with H.B. 843, which went into effect on July 1."
Noncompetes are terrible and should be banned as a matter of public policy. But it's a legal atrocity that the FTC gets to, by fiat, throw out massive numbers of existing contracts, because they woke up one day and decided they are suddenly "unfair competition" (mind you, not lack of competition). They could just as easily decide that companies "compete unfairly" by making employees better offers - and in fact did exactly this during the FDR administration!
> I've written a lot of tests, I think this would have taken 3-4x longer to do by hand. Surely an hour?

I guess my point is I'm skeptical.

I don't believe what you had the end would have taken you that long to do by hand. I don't believe it would have taken an hour. It certainly would not have taken me or anyone on my team that long.

I feel like you're projecting that, if you scale this process, so say, having 5 LLMs running in parallel, then what you would get is you spending maybe 20% more time reviewing 5x PRs instead of 1x PR, but getting 5x as much stuff done in the end.

Which may be true.

...but, and this is really my point: It's not true, in this example. It's not true in any examples I've seen.

It feels like it might be true in the near-moderate future, but there are a lot of underlying assumptions that is based on:

- LLMs get faster (probably)

- LLMs get more accurate and less prone to errors (???)

- LLMs get more context size without going crazy (???)

- The marginal cost of doing N x code reviews is < the cost of just writing code N times (???)

These are assumptions that... well, who knows? Maybe? ...but right now? Like, today?

The problem is: If it was actually making people more productive then we would see evidence of it. Like, actual concrete examples of people having 10 LLMs building systems for them.

...but what we do see, is people doing things like this, which seem like (to me at least), either worse or on-par with just doing the same work by hand.

A different workflow, certainly; but not obviously better.

LLMs appear to have an immediate right now disruptive impact on particular domains, like, say, learning, where its extremely clear that having a wise coding assistant to help you gain simple cross domain knowledge is highly impactful (look at stack overflow); but despite all the hand waving and all the people talking about it, the actual concrete evidence of a 'Devin' that actually builds software or even meaningfully improves programmer productivity (not 'is a tool that gives some marginal benefit to existing autocomplete'; actually improves productivity) is ...

...simply absent.

I find that problematic, and it makes me skeptical of grand claims.

Grand claims require concrete tangible evidence.

I've no doubt that you've got a workflow that works for you, and thanks for sharing it. :) ...I just don't think its really compelling, currently, to work that way for most people; I don't think you can reasonably argue it's more productive, or more effective, based on what I've actually seen.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Obviously there's something controversial about noncompetes but to me they seem problematic on their face, like something that violates basic contract law and shouldn't require explicit banning by the FTC, congress, or anyone. A judge should find them unconstitutional or something.

Let's say this was marriage, and you had people requiring spouses sign a "noncompete agreement" with marriage, so that the person, upon divorce, agrees not to date or marry anyone else within a certain distance, which amounts to hundreds of miles.

Is there really any question that that would not be an enforceable contract?

It doesn't seem any different to me legally.

It might also seem extreme but I also don't see how this doesn't violate the 13th amendment ban on involuntary servitude. You're not working for the employer, but you are in effect providing some labor benefit to them against your will, without compensation.
Based on my research, I would suggest seL4 microKernel running on ARM-64 hardware with Genode built variant of Linux.

AFAIK seL4 is the only formally security verified kernel for specific hardware. See their website for verification status of different hardware configurations.

The closest widely used system is Apple OSX which in turn was evolved from CMU Mach.
The critical aspect is keeping the smallest possible attack surface, which is why capability based message-passing microkernels are more resilient than monolithic kernels.
The issue is the dismantling of Chevron deference. For 40 years regulatory authority has been granted and written by Congress with the understanding that Chevron defference was the law of the land. Now the Supreme Court is demanding a level of specificity that isn’t practical and it means rewriting may decades worth of legislation. Given that SCOTUS has also decided to upend statute of limitations as it pertains to challenging established regulations we are going to enter a period of regulatory upheaval.
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive,
not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet
tropes.

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously;
don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Please don't comment about the voting on comments.
It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

source: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

HTH
Honestly, the only thing I have found somewhat useful with LLMs is to get smarter tab complete and to occasionally fill out small methods in classes, and finally writing unit tests and adding documentation. it saves me a little time on mostly improving test coverage and readability. But until I give it some examples it usually hallucinates even method names within the class that are very similar but slightly different and some of the time saved is lost by having to fix it's mistakes. I would say it's improving my LoC output by maybe 5-15% max, but the tab complete is nice when writing code.
My previous company did. In fairness one of the problems the company faced was way too many languages being used in-house. Combined with the difficulty in getting Clojure talent, and it was inevitable that the Clojure went out.

The Clojure systems got migrated to Golang and C#
Yes, thanks.

My understanding from a lot of Google/browsing is that my new HP has will a Windows Product Code in the BIOS (or UEFI) and, from that product code, will permit installing either of Windows 10 Home or Windows 11 Home.

Right.

Thanks for the URL. That is for

"Create Windows 10 installation media"

and

"...download and run the media creation tool."

Believe I did try that. Soooo, tried to run that "tool" on Windows 7 Professional, taking the option to create media for "another computer", but got a message that now that tool won't run on 7.

So, looks like I should try running the "media creation tool" on my new HP with Windows 11. Then use that "media" just created to install 10 on the new HP.

While doing that work, also create install media for Windows 11 just in case at some point would be glad to have it.

Thanks.
You apparently missed the bit where redundancy in communication is a feature, not a bug. "It ensures that even in less than ideal conditions the message still gets through."
Let me help you with that. They don't. If 1 in 50 1500 owners ever hook the thing up to anything heavier than a utility trailer (these can cheerfully be towed by a VW golf) I'll kiss your ass. They're also bullshit for hauling materials since a big chunk of the cargo space got eaten by the now pervasive luxury full sized back seat. The following is an abridged list of tells that a truck owner would be better off with a station wagon:

- the wheel wells are clean

- it's got a tonneau cover on

- no hitch receiver, it's empty, or there's no rust on the ball

- aftermarket anything (lights, step bumpers, lift kit, etc

- no dents, major scratches, or foreign materials on the bed or tailgate

Full disclosure: I have a Dodge 1500 in the driveway right now. In my defense the used truck market is fucking insane, I got this basically new for 60% of what a thoroughly used mid-sized truck would have cost me, and I actually do construction and timber work so the thing gets worked.
Jumping through a bunch of bureaucratic hoops and writing a 500 page report doesn't make you right.
I'm guessing AI won't be great with anything nontrivial related to pointers for a while since they require actual thinking
> Many procedures were vague, and drawings were hard to understand. The Navy has a feedback system for this, but it often takes months/years to resolve.

When I worked for a DoD contractor I worked on a system that was designed to tighten one such feedback loop. The publicly-available copy regarding this unclassified effort [1] says that it was

> [a] framework for an end-to-end Change Request (CR) workflow system that will improve turn-around time and speed to the fleet. We are leading the innovation of a paperless cockpit through the design and development of an eFC mobile application that will provide responsive, reliable information for our aircrews on mobile devices at the touch of a button.

I thought that it was a pretty novel idea - it was certainly the most technically-progressive project I worked on when in defense contracting by a country mile. When I attended a program picnic at the Captain's house, however, I found no shortage of people who were skeptical of what we were building. When I pressed them for reasons why it basically amounted to "I learned what we have years ago and I don't want to change". Institutional rot is very real.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20240821032432/https://webdev.am...
There are prestigious open-access journals that are curated in exactly the same way Elsevier ones are. Curation is completely orthogonal to whether a paper is owned by the publisher cartels.
Maybe visit them a bunch with the kid for a while to hook them on the drug, then stop doing it and renew the invitation for them to move. That's what my parents did to my grandparents.
Yes, but on the other hand Congress is so dysfunctional the choice is often regulatory/executive action or nothing.

Even if you think the back and forth isn't worthwhile, it's actually not politically avoidable because the other party will still play this game and you end up with a back and forth around an equilibrium further from what you might want.
Any restriction or control on how a worker can make a living post-employment in a supposed free-market economy is indeed completely unreasonable. But hey, we're completely accepting of "free market" business executives, investors, owners, etc openly enjoying numerous market restrictions. And we use health care to drastically reduce competition in the employment market by both making it more risky if not outright dangerous to your health and financial well-being to quit your job (even a minor medical injury or accident could bankrupt you) and this also makes it nearly impossible to directly compare compensation between different employers, soooo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In many countries if you want to have an employee bound by a non-compete, you have to compensate the employee for that restriction ('garden pay', I believe?), because by restricting who they can work for, you're by that very nature restricting their ability to seek the most competitive pay. Not to mention, if going to work for a competitor would cost you, say, $1M - then surely you can afford to pay them $50k; that's the deal of the century, in fact! Allowing corporations to foist the cost of a non-compete onto the employee is a pretty American concept.

"But but otherwise it would be really expensive!", I hear the Entreprebros screech. "I couldn't possibly be in business! Muh Burn Rate!"

My response is, "...but I thought you said the employee going to work for a competitor is such a huge financial/competitive threat to your business that you should be allowed to restrict how they can make a living to be able to afford food, housing, transportation, to care for their family members, and so on? Which is it?"...and then I point to all their European competitors who seem to be doing just fine with these supposedly infeasible prohibitions on uncompensated non-competes (and requirements around greater benefits, lower work hours, greater workplace rights, etc.)

Technically non-competes should be illegal simply because the contract bears no benefit or compensation to the employee in exchange for the restrictions imposed that wildly benefit their employer. There's zero benefit to working for an employer who requires one versus ones who do not, but the employer gains (by the very nature of the claim of how necessary the noncompete is!) a great deal.

The situation is absurd. Imagine McDonalds requiring their burger-flippers to not work for any competitors because those competitors might benefit from proprietary McDonalds business practices, training, etc. We'd laugh them right out of the building and point out how stupid it is because all other things aside, where the fuck else is a McDonalds burger-flipper supposed to work, except a place that is likely a competitor to McDonalds?

But Google, MS, Amazon, et al do it to tech workers - even ones who work positions that are compensated an order of magnitude less than engineering talent - datacenter technicians, and it's okay?