skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> An economic system based on "to each according to his need" has been tried many times.

Have there been any attempts since the rise of the smartphone and the Internet? I'm only aware of attempts that predate them and those two things have changed capitalistic societies dramatically, for better or worse.
This whole train of metaphors is just bizarre and wrong. Singers who aren't good enough to make it on their own are never heard of or discussed. Ground meat made from poor quality meat is poor quality ground meat, and people do, in fact, grind the good stuff to make good stuff.

And I'm sure that plenty of people who could start a business on their own could start a business with the help and support of like-minded partners, and might even be better off for it. I'm not sure where we get the idea that founders must be lone-wolf savants.
I mean I do consider a world where Adolf Hitler would have just been a unremarkable painter and Shiro Ishi doing boring research possible.

Yes, sometimes you have to use force to keep people from harming themselves and others but I don't see how this is related to the topic. I reject any form capital punishment though obviously some situations require killing when a person can not be stopped otherwise.
I love this work. I might claim it (and some of its antecedents) is the most important distributed systems work of the last decade.

Why? It addresses the central question in distributed (and multi-threaded!) system design: when do we need to coordinate between systems? This is important for exactly the reason that the James Hamilton quote says. Successful scalability requires avoiding coordination. Scalable systems (and efficient systems, and fast systems) are the ones that minimize scalability to the level absolutely required by the guarantees they want to offer.

As the authors say:

> As system builders, of course, we are interested in the complement of this space: what can be achieved, and, importantly, how can we achieve it while minimizing complexity and
cost? The CALM Theorem presents a positive result that delineates the frontier of the possible.

This tool for thinking about what possible systems we can build is one that's very understandable to most programmers:

> A program P is monotonic if for any input sets S,T where S ⊆ T, P(S) ⊆ P(T).

A program is monotonic if, when you run it on a subset of its inputs, you get a subset of its outputs. As you run it on more data, the set of true things may grow, but it never shrinks.

> A program has a consistent, coordination-free distributed implementation if and only if it is monotonic.

Now we have a useful roadmap to designing scalable distributed system, fault tolerant distributed systems, scalable parallel compute code, and fast multi-threaded code. Using the definition we can identify whether a program is monotonic, and if it is we know we can implement it without coordination. If it is not, we can decompose a program into monotonic and non-monotonic parts, and (if all goes well) take advantage of the non-monotonicity. In many cases, we can do tons of parallel work and only coordinate a couple times.

> Conflict-free replicated data types (CRDTs) provide an object-
oriented framework for monotonic programming

More conceptual clarity! CRDTs are widely used, and widely talked about. Why do they work? Because they provide ADTs for writing monotonic programs.
>We knew up front that, whatever solution we picked, it should be accessible, easy-to-use, free and preferably open-source.

I'm not a Microsoft Word fan, but why does their tool need to be free and open-source?

They went to great lengths to explain how the performance of the tools is so important; only to exclude anything you might have to pay for or is closed source.

Who cares if you have to shell out a few bucks for something if it works well and provides great value (i.e. saves you more time and hassle than the money you paid for it)?
Cloning a functional piece of hardware that behaves like the original yubikey doesn’t imply the clone looks and feels like the original. It sounds to me it’s like someone would make a clay copy of a key. I don’t think the attacker gets to replicate the manufacturing process to make an item the same shape and size as the original.
We don't collectively contribute to save shareholders. When a bank goes under the depositors are made whole through government insurance programs. Shareholders get nothing.

In 2008 I believe bailouts did go to companies to keep them afloat (and thus helped shareholders). However, TARP returned a small profit for the government, so it didn't end up being a gift of free money overall imo. (reasonable people can say that the bailouts were excessive and introduced moral hazard for sure).
Americans are helping the rest of world get used to 70 degrees being nice weather
I like AnandTech's tag line (rip): Lunar Lake: Designed By Intel, Built By TSMC (& Assembled By Intel)

https://www.anandtech.com/show/21425/intel-lunar-lake-archit...
This is not how these kinds of things should be designed for the web.

Instead of putting resources in the root of the web, this is what /.well-known/ was designed for. See RFC 5785:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5785

Instead of munging URLs to get alternate formats, this is what content negotiation or rel=alternate were designed for.

I’m not sure making it easier to consume content is something that is needed. I think it might be more useful to define script type=llm that would expose function calling to LLMs embedded in browsers.
Maybe I'm out of date, then! I don't enroll new keys very often. Paypal is a great example of a service that I would like to support multiple keys, though, so it's disappointing that they still only support one.
> From a 2020s standpoint, this seems highly undesirable, as it makes software less predictable and goes against modern design principles.

Says who? I'm not aware of any modern design principles that say anything about this sort of thing.

> argv[0] is ignored (mostly)

Pretty much any program I've written that has a --help option uses argv[0] to print out the usage string, i.e.:

printf("%s [--some-arg] FILENAME\n", argv[0]);

> First off, argv[0] can be used to fool security software

Then that security software is poorly written. On Linux, the correct way to find the binary of a running process is by calling readlink(2) on /proc/$PID/exe. Assuming security software like this is going to have a lot of OS-specific code, it seems fine to me to expect they use it (and then have to do other things on other OSes).

> Another argument against this design is that if you have two programs that are so similar that it pays off to consolidate them into a single file, is there really a need for two separate programs/program names?

The author is talking about shutdown and restart being symlinks to systemctl on systemd-based systems. But what about something like busybox? busybox contains hundreds of programs, all conveniently in a single, statically-linked binary. On my system it's about 800kB. While I agree that even 250MB is not a big deal for most systems these days, it certainly is a problem for, say, a WiFi router that only has 8MB of flash.

> Ultimately, nobody wants to be bothered by argv[0].

False. I find it useful, and am not "bothered" by it at all. And I suspect security folks aren't really bothered either: the ones that actually know what they're doing look at /proc/$PID/exe when they want to find the binary backing a PID.

This article is kinda lame, and it seems like the author's objections are mostly based on ignorance.
This actually sounds like a great idea, I've often wondered with some of the advanced city simulators like this if this might be possible. Seems like a good use of AI if it had access to all those data sets local government GIS folks use (hopefully) to align this sort of data to make these virtual representations.

Problem I think would be most folks that might even do this as a hobby probably don't have that access to GIS and other data (cheaply) like they did here, and government workers are government workers, so nothing interesting will usually ever happen there. Certainly not in the US with any government entity I've worked with here at least
The latest standard is from 2019: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8766229

There is still some flexibility in implementation, for example how and whether FMAs are formed for a given compiler when FP_CONTRACT is ON, and in the standard itself in things like when tininess is detected.

But to your point if you stick to the basic operations in the standard, and don’t enable FP_CONTRACT and FENV_ACCESS in C/C++, have a bug free compiler and don’t use fast-math, you’re good to go.

[edit to add a caveat about compile-time constant folding which is a whole can of worms]

[edit again to point out that the C/C++ standards allow for implementations to compute intermediate results at higher precision, so a compliant implementation can use all 80 bits on x87 when computing expressions]
What exactly does the evaluation entail? Ask a bunch of naughty questions and see what happens? Unless the model can do nothing, I imagine all of them can be tricked into saying something unfortunate.

Naughty is in the eye is the beholder. Ask me what a Satanist is, and I would expect something about a group who challenges religious laws enshrining Christianity. Ask an evangelical and discussing the topic could be forbidden heresy.

Pretty much any religious topic is going to anger someone. Can the models safely say anything?
It’s not really a big leap from “everything came from something extremely highly ordered that preexisted everything” to “maybe that thing is or has a Mind”.
Not as far as I can tell. The phrasing of the question test does not acknowledge such ambiguity to start with, and by forcing them to answer one way or the other the test does not allow the users to signal perceived ambiguity even if they wanted to.

So how could the point of this exercise possibly be to find the range of ambiguity?
The world is not just stuff!
Can somebody put together a law suit where LLM regulations can be argued as a first amendment violation? The powers that be are trying to indirectly regulate speech here
That was my first question - what is "safety" and what is their methodology for evaluating it? Who evaluated that methodology and why it is the right one? Is there a meaningful safety benefit to this evaluation, or just a CYA exercise?
A government agency determining limits on, say, heavy metals in drinking water is materially different than the government making declarations of what ideas are safe and which are not. The degree of subjectivity of such decisions alone should make one wince at the notion let alone how subject any "standard" could be from undue political influence of whatever party is in power moment to moment.

The government trying to set a standard in this case is so unlikely to reduce harm in that opposing the idea on principle should be considered the most reasonable, and less harmful, position.
It's for laptops, so no, it won't be 275W. Peak is 37W: https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-unveils-core-ultra-200v-lu...
The only reason legit docs are hard to find is because they don’t have Google ads on them and they don’t do SEO.

The solution to the problem isn’t AI. The solution is to break Google’s stranglehold on the web by regulating it.

The solution is to get government up to speed by making it contemporary, so it can understand and respond to current issues. Not leaving it up to people who had their time several decades ago and can’t let go.
> Those that exist today would, but no kernel would have to work like that.

That's a pretty weird argument. "Yes, what you say is completely correct, but let's imagine a world where you were wrong."

We have what we have, today. We should form conclusions and make decisions based on things that exist, not on things that we might dream up.
When I was in high school, I was taught basic darkroom techniques for altering film postfacto -- even doing so without doing a negative transfer -- by an old artist friend of mine.

If you're willing to do some basic home chemistry, you can do quite a few things to film during development that will alter in predictable ways the outcome; a favorite of mine is that adding a small amount of buffer solution into your developer and stop bath at the right time can adjust the light curves, which can turn a nighttime photo into a daytime photo if you do it right.
82 F = 28 C is where I usually start
Yes! I'd love to better understand what your friend has in mind. Feel free to get in touch at: chad@constructural.ai
Running or virtualizing DOS-era software can be non-trivial: see, for example, Windows 98 vs TLB cache invalidation behavior in modern CPUs https://blog.stuffedcow.net/2015/08/win9x-tlb-invalidation-b... requiring a patch. Any code that does loop counting to estimate cycles for sleep() will also overflow (hello, Pascal CRT Error 200!) requiring a different patch.
It's not about how an RGB monitor produces the color, it's about how it's perceived. #00ffff ("Cyan" or "Aqua" [1]) looks bluer to me than green, while #008080 ("Teal") looks significantly greener, despite both colors using equal amounts of blue and green in RGB.

1. https://htmlcolorcodes.com/color-names/
> They are claiming up to 48 TOPS which exceeds Apple's M4's reported 38 TOPS.

38 TOPS at 15w in a tablet*

This is up to 48 TOPS at up to 37w

Something tells me the full 35w M4 will be somewhere above 48TOPS..

This is still a huge leap forward for Intel, especially integrating memory on die. I doubt it topples M4.
PACE does use (EC)DH. Not sure if that’s vulnerable as well, or if this is once again a footgun specific to (EC)DSA.
One of these days, I'll write a TypeScript reinterpretation of an early version of the Macintosh Toolbox, and a little sandboxed web environment for its software to cosplay in
Truly, Phoenix is a monument to man's hubris.
None of those are actually things we need to worry about. Humans have already been doing all of that stuff at scale without LLMs.

AI isn't even slightly helpful for weapons manufacturing or nuclear enrichment. The techniques are well known and have been extensively published in open literature.
Then why would you write that previous dismissive stuff?
Reminds me of all the people that decided to move to Florida and got a home close to the beach/water and are now mad about the cost of insurance.
Beta for the Small Business Lending Data Filing Platform
Of course they want this. Now they get to do all the fun and profitable stuff and all responsibility is on the government which certified the models.
Predicting Program Properties from Big Code
The sound she makes when an ant bites her was so funny when I heard it the first time, anyways really cool project
The first amendment of the US constitution suggests that the government shouldn't pass laws that "abridge freedom of speech." While public school boards (since 1982) have greater leeway in restricting what is available in schools, whether or not the first amendment is violated likely depends on the reason why a book has been banned. At least some of the books that are banned are considered classics of literature that have (for decades) been used in curriculums around the country (e.g., "Anna Karenina", "Catch 22", "Flowers for Algernon", etc.)

The fact that you can get the books in libraries (which are also under pressure) or find them online is irrelevant -- it's a question of government power.
What is a one time password?
Yes, it really comes down to motivating users to play your game, either through network effect or by just being that good.

I was just pointing that the amount of time isn't the real issue, it's the competition for that time. Of course, the tighter that time is the tougher the competition will be, and the better a singular live service game needs to be.
https://www.nist.gov/aisi
The argument isn't that solar will be too cheap, the argument is that it will be cheap enough that lots of it will be built in situations where the grid doesn't have any spare capacity and won't be connected to the grid.

You are starting from the conclusion or whatever.
If the 100F heat comes with very low humidity (which is what I'd expect in AZ), it'd feel nicer than the weather we get in Kansas (except maybe for this year; this year was cooler).
> it's about highlighting a problem exists and that it's worth solving.

If so, then I disagree with the premise of the article, fundamentally. I don't see a problem. If someone is writing security software and doesn't already know about the mutability of argv[0], and doesn't know that (on Linux at least) /proc/$PID/exe is the only correct way to gt the binary backing a process... well, then they have no business writing security software.

There is no problem here. The author is making a big deal about nothing, either because they have a weird axe to grind, or because they're ignorant.
Layoffs at Fly.io
"Tiltowait 'em all and let the gods sort 'em out."
Sites generated by LLMs
Winemaking uses far more, but does it really have to? Does the $10,000 bottle of wine really that much more labor in it to justify that price? or are value and labor only loosely related? If I get lucky and find some diamonds on the ground, have I labored a lot for the value of those diamonds on my patch of dirt compared to your patch of dirt. There's no value with absolutely zero labor, sure, but there's clearly a difference between a carpenter making 100 chairs, and a programmer making 100 copies of a program they wrote.
https://www.nist.gov/aisi

I think the progress has been pretty good. You should read up on their efforts.

This is kind of a pilot to develop further testing frameworks.
It got those votes within just a couple of minutes of being submitted
I don't think that really follows. If the OS wants to track this, it should canonicalize the path to the executable on startup, and then stash it somewhere.

(And a program could do that itself, if it wants to.)
In the article's case, requiring a PS5 or a gaming PC is sure a deterrent.

That's where other live services will try hard enough to be at least on the Switch, or even better, work on mobile.
None of the government interference involves actual safety. If the government wants to set standards for systems that could cause actual physical harm like surgical robots or flight control systems then that's fine. But what we're talking about here are just LLMs that output text and images.
Coming soon (I’m certain) is the ability for consumer-accessible LLMs and their ilk to analyze millions upon millions of pages of documents. That poses what Pentagon types no doubt perceive as a national security risk.
LaTeX in a repository can be accessed also using Overleaf which is a cool online platform that takes out a lot of the hard things about LaTeX. I highly recommend to anyone that haven't yet tried Overleaf to use it.
Koda Farms, California Rice and Asian American Dreams
the heat doesn't require you to go outside and do work, the mornings are also dramatically cooler. if they were to head out for a walk at 1700 it would be dangerous, but unlike shoveling snow it is optional
I think your point is that packages should be removed only if they stop working, with which I agree.
Making PostHog insights quicker with LLMs?
Hi,

I’m planning to use PostHog API to build a faster way to answer complex analytics questions.

When I build 1 PostHog insight, I find myself wanting to make a bunch of followup insights.

Example:
I want to build an insight that answers:
- What is the split of users who used this feature Y based on their roles?

Then I’d find myself wanting to know:
- How did each role-specific cohort use the feature Y?
- What other features do they use a lot in our product?

And each of answer I have to figure out what is the best way to select the correct set of events, filter the right cohort & timeframe, etc…

So I want to build an abstraction layer on top of PostHog. It’d use LLMs to make the HogQL that would produce the cohort that I want as context. That same layer will also answer any question I have regarding that cohort context.

Another use case: I would like to also be able to combine quantitative data with qualitative data. For example, if I had an interview with user John@acme.com. And he mentions that he used this feature Z a lot.

I want to be able to make a query that tells me:
- Ok, how many times have he used it in the past month?
- Who are other users with similar cohort profile? Have they been using this feature in the same way?

The same abstraction layer now can combine qualitative data (interview transcript) and quantitative data (PostHog events) to produce those Insights quickly.

I heard that lots of YC startup folks use PostHog for product analytics. Just wondering if anyone has the same issue, or is it just me?

I’d love to have a chat for research purposes. Or if anyone wants to beta test!
The micro service is not micro anymore.
I'm building a website that allows video discovery without toxic algorithms
Would love feedback. I'm new to website design and building and am self taught
I'm slightly more than mildly curious what these instructions would be
The first hard drive I bought for my home PC was 20MB, and I thought "there's no way I'll ever fill this"
Oh, it’s insane to question or be critical of those waste-producing activities, yeah sure.

I think this attitude and choice of words shows such an agressive disregard for other views and opinions, it feels pathological
Sure, Brazil is widely known for football, samba, and terrorism.

terrorists: noum.
1. People that disagree me.
2. People I dislike.
Companies can’t build data centers fast enough, and Intel is losing money? Blockchain hype and AI hype should have provided record profits, no? An ice cream store in the desert should make money. Why can’t Intel?
> Your view is called Social Darwinism

The only thing either response to your original reply have done is provide uncontroversial and non-conspiratorial reasons why Mondragons are extremely rare. Calling that Social Darwinism is like calling you a Stalinist, a slander based entirely on a superficial similarity of your rhetoric.
Currently? I don't think so. There are no binding US regulations at all. These companies are voluntarily working with NIST (and why not, free labour. Also the potential to influence any future regulations).

In the future... I suppose it depends on what regulations they pass.
Here's a video from my state Department of Ecology explaining why you shouldn't do this, and why you are actually making it worse for everyone. Cursory web searches on the topic say the same thing. Bagged recyclables can't be sorted so they just get diverted to landfill.

You could actually make the world a better place by throwing your bagged recyclables in the trash because then you aren't actively harming the recycling process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhLGcSVZJnM
> If you would have told me in the 1980's we would still be using x86 based chips in 2024 I would have laughed at you.

In the late 1970s, Gordon Moore believed that their next ISA would last the lifetime of the company. Now, technically, he thought their next ISA would be in the 8800. But it was such a drawn out failure they came up with the 8086 in an emergency 3-week sprint.

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3282307
I wonder if they have read the study that showed that mentioning AI in a product description significantly reduced intention to buy. It seems intuitively plausible and a significant and measurable effect in the study.

[0] https://news.wsu.edu/press-release/2024/07/30/using-the-term...
Build your own Debian live images (via Web)