skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Weird outrage bait over a feature that doesn't have to be used and is off by default. I don't know why people are losing their minds over this other than some pavlovian Microsoft response.
So even when the feature can be disabled (but not uninstalled), Microsoft will at least make sure that "no means no" and not silently enable the feature again after an OS update right? Right?!

I guess/hope the EU is already on it though.
We don't even understand how the brain functions completely, not even close. Until we have a complete understanding of how our own GI works down to the exact bio-mechanical level, we can't achieve AGI.

That's the theoretical basis and path for achieving AGI (if it's even possible). I'm tired of all the "we stick enough data in the magic black box blender and ta-da! AGI!"

Every giant technological break-through throughout history has had a massive underpinning of understanding before ever achieving it. And yet, with the AI bubble somehow we're just about to secretly achieve it, but we can't tell you how.
Fair point for new cars, I neglected to state I was only talking about buying used cars. Personally, I buy used cars because the amount of depreciation makes them an incredibly good deal, it seems to be an irrational cultural thing. I find it amusing that I get comments like "I didn't know you were so rich" for driving an old Porsche Boxster I got for $8k on Craigslist... always stored indoors and looks like new- and has been as reliable as a new car in 4 years of commuting. A new low end economy car at 3x the price is way too expensive for me.

Most individuals selling a used car, especially wealthier ones, aren't too interested in getting the most money from it, but just want it gone to move on with their lives. Not so with dealers, if they can't get you to pay a huge margin over what they bought it for (a price you could also buy one for) they'll wait for another buyer.

I'm not fundamentally opposed to buying used cars from a dealer, but when I've researched fair market prices, I've usually not been able to talk them down to anywhere close to them... whereas I've had many times where private sellers took an incredibly low ball offer I wasn't really expecting them to take.
Doesn't really make sense to me. For one, it's not silent, just quieter than you'd normally expect from a supersonic aircraft. It's not stealthy; radar will see it. It can't fly low and still be fast, so it can't hide from radar behind terrain. It's much slower than ballistic missiles, hypersonic glide vehicles, etc.
You should keep asking every once in a while.
This.

I don't know why, but I find it easy to imagine a future where real programmers who understand both the craft and the art from its lowest fundamentals to the highest levels of abstraction are the equivalent of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel.
It is relevant, because you require expertise to make rules. That seems fairly obvious to me but I suppose some segments of the political spectrum advocate blind rule making.

> delegated to congress

Right, and Congress has made that law, and that law says it's delegated to the FTC. What, Congress is simultaneously expected to make every single rule ever but they don't even have the rule making power to... delegate? That's too far? Seems absurd to me, almost intentionally insane with the end-goal of kneecapping rule making as a whole.
This is a very late-XIX century development. Geometry used to be an integral part of physics, vide Newton's Principia.
The disagreement here seems merely to be about what we mean by “AGI”. I think there’s reasons to think current approaches will not achieve it, but also reason to think they will.

In any case anyone who is completely sure that we can/can’t achieve AGI is delusional.
> a few dozen super rich people

Overture is an airliner [1]. With a $5k price target (I’d guess $10k), their market is habitual business-class travellers. Not even the low-end private jet crowd.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boom_Overture
Microsoft are conducting a massive experiment to find just how badly you can treat locked in consumers before they switch.

They are plumbing the depths so well it is legitimately hard to imagine what new madness they could come up with next.
Does anyone know how the 10,000 Starlink satellites and the other 30,000 LEO competitors by the end of the decade are going to affect spotting near-earth objects?

I would have a hard time believing "not at all".

Vaguely related this is my favorite amateur astronomer spotting accident ever, capturing supernova an hour before it happened which hasn't been done before:

https://www.popsci.com/amateur-astronomer-photographs-birth-...

makes me wonder when the sky becomes so difficult to see through if we are going to lose all that enthusiastic effort
It'll break up and partially burn up, partially turn into smaller meteorites, before hitting the surface of the Earth.
At most a little over one year ago, I installed Signal Desktop to open a link in a message I had received on my desktop. This is, apparently, deliberately unsupported, since the app claims that "[f]or your security, chat history isn't transferred to new linked devices". So no, the user experience of WhatsApp is miles ahead of Signal, at least if you want to use a real computer.
> That's what jury instructions are for. The judge can instruct the jury to ignore pretty much any facts and consider any subset of what really happened that they want. So they'd just instruct "did they access the system? Were they authorized? If the answer to the first question is yes, and to the second is no, the verdict is guilty, ignore all the rest".

The only real protection is the fact that you can vote whatever way you want and not even a judge can compel you to state your reasoning.
It is called duality. For each linear program that is maximizing, you can find a dual linear program wich is minimization. They both have the same optimal objective value. Thus one serves as a lower bound and the other as an upper bound on the optimal objective value. The gap between them is used to measure the closeness to the global optima.

Great thing is that you can find the dual really easily and each feasible solution of the primal problem can be used to get a feasible solution of the dual.

The math behind that is really neat.
I’m not optimistic about AGI, but it’s important to give credit where credit is due.

Even assuming the public breakthroughs are the only ones that happened, the fact that openai was able to make an llm pipeline from data to training to production at their scale before anyone else is a feat of research and engineering (and loads of cash)
China's Economic Paradox
"The principles, basic admin & debugging part can be learned in a couple of hours,"

In principle, yes. In reality I've gone looking for a resource that I could do this with and come up short.

(I am starting to get really annoyed at things where I can find a million "paste this bit to do that thing" and there are so darned many of those on the internet that any hope of finding a good resource that gets to the underlying structure such that I can figure out how to do these things myself is virtually nil. It seems like this is getting worse as the search engines continue their trend of taking your query as a vague suggestion of the sort of thing you're looking for.)
SELinux suffers from a reputation problem. It gained that reputation early on, while default policies were still very immature and overly restrictive.

One crucial change for the better was leaving third-party software in a permissive state. From that point onwards, disabling SELinux is cargo-cult sysadmin'ing.

SELinux is not hard if you understand its basic principles. But no one bothers, because SELinux is the bogeyman.

Yes, writing policies means getting knee-deep in macros, and it's hard because many services try to access anything and everything. But almost no one needs to write a policy.

At most you need to tell SELinux that some non-default directory should have some label. That's not hard.
Physics research gets funded because of applications, existing or promising, for curiosity, fundamental science, the economy, medicine, and national security, etc. Since math can help physics research, that research is funded and motivated to make applications of math, old or new. Math alone is less involved with applications.
> Until we have a complete understanding of how our own GI works down to the exact bio-mechanical level, we can't achieve AGI.

This doesn't make any sense.
AFAICT it's only going to work on Copilot+ branded systems anyway, and currently only the Snapdragon ARM machines have a beefy enough NPU to meet that criteria. Both Intel and AMD are working towards getting that certification with their upcoming CPUs though.
Looks like this is a WSJ article about the same topic discussed previously [1] on HN about the article [2], with the figure that illustrates the waves at [3].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41247085

[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-024-00692-2

[3] https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-024-00692-2#Fig4
I'd love to use one of these at work (or a similar product) but they've been banned because they ship the data off to some other cloud somewhere so they've been deemed a security risk.
Pavlovian response implies a repeated trigger, looks like you answered your own question
It's a highly risky bet, but not fundamentally unreasonable. One might believe that Ilya's research was genuinely critical to OpenAI's current situation. If one takes that premise, three potential corollaries follow: (1) OpenAI will struggle to produce future research breakthroughs without Ilya; (2) OpenAI will struggle to materially move beyond its current product lineup and variations thereof without said future research breakthroughs; (3) a startup led by Ilya could overcome both (1) and (2) with time.

An alternative sequence of reasoning places less emphasis on Ilya specifically and uses Ilya as an indicator of research health. Repeat (1), (2), and (3) above, but replace "Ilya" with something like "strong and healthy fundamental research group". In this version, Ilya's departure is taken as indication that OpenAI no longer has a strong and healthy fundamental research group but that the company is "compromised" by relentless feature roadmaps for current products and their variations. That does not mean OpenAI will fail, but in this perspective it might mean that OpenAI is not well positioned to capture future research breakthroughs and the products that they will generate.

From my perspective, it's just about impossible to know how true these premises really are. And that's what makes it a bet or gamble rather than anything with any degree of assurance. To me, just as likely is the scenario where it's revealed that Ilya is highly ineffective as a generalist leader and that research without healthy tension from the business goes nowhere.
I think this analogy is starting to go off the rails.
I think that's pretty obvious, no? Behavioral controls. You add a web cam screenshot to that desktop screenshot and sell real attention signals to advertisers.
Some viewers prefer livestreaming, and we see streamers catering to those audiences. It depends on the streamer, but often times there is much stronger sense of community when there is a live, topic-oriented chat, especially when the streamer engages with the chat. This is not something you can satisfactorily replicate with prerecorded streams.

Streaming is also much more low-cost to produce, editing can often represent an unwanted source of complexity and loss of creative control.
n=1 but my mother-in-law has been rocking Mint since late 2019. It does everything she needs and hasn't had a single question about it since 2020. I apply updates when I visit her house every few months. Don't recall any issues with that, either.
> the real hope is a military purchase

This has been explicit for at least 2 years [1]. It’s why I think their idea of an airliner (and in-house dry super-cruise engine) isn’t just vapourware.

[1] https://aviationweek.com/shownews/farnborough-airshow/boom-u...
"A good IDE"

I am also waiting for world peace! ; )
I'd be more comfortable with it if MS didn't have a long and well documented history of overriding user settings via patches to turn on features that users had explicitly turned off.

If MS wanted people to trust them to honor settings, they shouldn't have ignored settings for decades.
Better URL: https://remarkable.com/store/remarkable-paper/pro
A solution that people disable in practice is the least effective solution.
They already tried that with the XBox One Kinect. That one did backfire quite hard.
You could try the YC cofounder matching site: https://www.ycombinator.com/cofounder-matching
i hate this so much, i hope the ability to disable/delete this will come soon.
[dupe]

More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41409882
I personally believe that Prettier strikes a decent balance between being configurable vs being opinionated. I've used formatters that are much less opinionated than Prettier (e.g. the last time I used XCode it only handled indentation by default). ESLint also teeters on the edge between configuration vs convention quite well in my opinion, especially given the fact that browser JS and server side JS have vastly different linting requirements. I also love the extensibility of ESLint. Being able to write your own linting rules is a boon on productivity. Having access to custom framework specific linting rules is quite nice (I couldn't use React without the react-hooks/rules-of-hooks third party ESLint rules).

> Some JS, some TS

I think the JS community has done remarkably well amongst dynamically typed languages in settling on one form of gradual typing and adopting it fervently (Flow no longer has any market share at all). Whereas the last time I checked Python still had the Mypy/Pywright divide, and Ruby had the Sorbet/RBS dichotomy.

Ultimately though, most of your critique boils down to the fact that JS (unlike Rust and Go) isn't maintained by a single monolithic entity, and therefore there's no one to dictate the standards you're looking for. If Deno were the sole caretaker of JS for example, we'd have a standard linter and formatter devoid of complex configuration, but Deno doesn't control JS.

This is a consequence of JS being a collaborative product of the various browser vendors, TC39, and the server side JS runtimes that have adapted JS to run on servers. The advantage of this of course though is that JS can run natively in the browser. I think that's a decent tradeoff to make in exchange for having to wade through dependencies with different ideas about when it's appropriate to use arrow functions.
This is the well known litany from string theorists to try and justify the inordinate amount of money threw at them to get back nothing of physical value: no falsifiable prediction.

Instead of reasoning on the worth of the effort spent in this direction to investigate nature (a very tangible companion) they try to steer the discourse toward this nonsense. We spent >50 years listening to these tales and the time has long passed since we are required to stop playing with these smoke and mirrors.
Mere internet access (which you can’t really remove) and shiny UI elements are the problem.
I'm running Linux for decades now without problems. Gaming was Windows' last bastion, but SteamOS is looking more and more attractive. So maybe I can get rid of that crapware personally.
> On the other hand, I'm kind of baffled that we're still talking about "AGI" in the context of LLMs.

I'm not. Lots of people and companies have been sinking money into these ventures and they need to keep the hype alive by framing this as being some sort of race to AGI. I am aware that the older I get the more cynical I become, but I bucket all discussions about AGI (including the very popular 'open letters' about AI safety and Skynet) in the context of LLMs into the 'snake oil' bucket.
If someone means “Debian and derivatives” then they should say “Debian and derivatives” not just “Debian” IMO, particularly when comparing to RedHat which also has a number of significant derivatives.

TBH I've always considered Ubuntu (and by inference its derivatives) more of an “inspired by” in relation to Debian, given it is generally closer to Testing then Stable and has many notable changes on top, more so as bigger changes have increased over time (snaps being so ingrained that they are almost required, for one).
The Clean Code Debacle and Rhetoric Tricks [video]
Makes sense… my note taking is more like highlighting and such, since I later get those out into my project documentation
I agree, I think. I would say it like so, that maths is a sort of highly technical, rigorous language, but like any language it will describe what you want it to. It is easy to think that it is describing the underlying terrain, but it is actually working on three (shared) and model which have of the terrain. So, as we consider different things, maths will follow.
Not everyone has a son-in-law tech admin.
At this point the problem isn’t really the feature and if it’s optional or not, the problem is the comms and roll out are such a dumpster fire that it’s confusing everyone.
It can be disabled. It says so in the first paragraph.
Appreciate the detail. Are you affiliated with these projects?
Yup. I love Debian and use it on all my home computers. I think the author hit it on the head when he described the security as inconsistent. Some maintainers put a great deal of thought into the security implications of the software they are packaging, including contributing to the AppArmour profile. Others ignore it, and others yet are openly opposed to it.

RedHat can declare that everything on the system is going to have SELinux policies following consistent guidelines on what to lock down, and all employees will work with the security team to make this happen. That is harder to do in a community driven project like Debian where ownership and work is widely distributed and entirely voluntary. It can really only happen when the goals are already a strong part of the culture and there is buy-in for specific rules to achieve those goals. For example, Debian's strong free-software requirements have been there from the beginning and so most Debian volunteers are self-selected to agree with or at least tolerate them, and even that has frequent arguments. Security culture is much more mixed, and there are a lot of people in the free software community who think that security starts and ends with fixing bugs when they are found, and push back hard on suggestions that anything more is needed. It is going to take a long time to change that culture.
Not an author but

1) It is usually done on a single machine. Often times even on single core.

2) Spikiness of the solve time is a real problem in practice.

3) You get partial solutions but they tend to be fare apart but with great improvements.
I haven’t touched SELinux. How does it compare to Systemd (presently my standard for “ubiquitous despite terrible UX”).
Apparently it's only disabled by default because of "security concerns". That sounds a lot like after those "concerns" are fixed (or rather "no longer in the news"), it will be enabled by default.
Research mostly, lots of these techniques are used for speech synthesis and occasionally image models (not LLMs)
This happened recently with price gouging disguised as inflation as well.

It seems to be a common business tactic for corps at over over a certain size.
Recruitment is down because one key demographic is no longer signing up. WiFi speeds are the least of that demographic's concerns.
I never had any real problems with selinux, I've been using CentOS since version 5 something and with even just a cursory understanding of selinux I got by. Plus you could just disable it entirely by changing one setting so distro hopping for just this one thing seems a bit extreme.
> Its not about whether it is understandable or not -- it is NEW FEATURES!

I guess I still don't understand. Your concern is new features will do what exactly to old Rust code?
I don't think the USSR is a great example. The region has been under the thumb of authoritarian dictators for a 1000 years and those who most strongly disagreed with this have for that millennium either left or died leaving behind a nation largely populated by the children of people willing to go along to get along under such a system. Cultures and circumstances leave a mark on a people not least by the process by which survivors are selected.

If anything the current situation stands to worsen that situation with smart young people who might contribute to a better future dying or fleeing.
The same was true for signing in to Windows with a Microsoft account. Like my sibling said, this happened before.
I don't get why the Canadian price is CA$929 when the US price is $579.

That's an "exchange rate" of 1 USD = 1.6045 CAD. That is a far cry from the actual exchange rate (which is 1 USD = ~1.35 CAD).

And ReMarkable isn't the only company selling products at rip-off pricing to Canadians.

This absolutely sucks.
Imagine being in a position where you can spend $1B on a high risk gamble, unconcerned if you lose it all, all in pursuit of more wealth.

Simultaneously too wealthy to imagine and never wealthy enough. Capitalism is quite the drug.
> They are the exact equivalent of shipping a developer's laptop off to the datacenter and replicating it as a production image.

If you're building your containers on a developer laptop and then pushing them to the registry from there, yes.

You can also not do that and instead have all builds happen on a CI server that isn't ever touched directly by anyone, like you should really be doing to build any artifact that gets deployed to production, container or otherwise.
Everything is terrible and breaks in weird ways, including Windows. It has so many weird bugs and broken behavior that people just kind of ignore because it's "default".
Thanks for that.

Good read, and it also parallels discussions in mental health forums where people with dissociative mental health issues generally recommend against meditation, or at least some types of meditation (e.g. walking meditiation is ok, watching your observer/stillness/awareness types are not).
But you'd have quickly realised it was the wrong way around if you looked through it. He didn't look.
As of yesterday, the latest chips from AMD (stryx point) and Intel (lunar lake) are considered Copilot+ ready
Presumably take it to their garage/lockup, get a locksmith (or someone similar on the police force) to hook through the window to open the manual door release, open/pick any remaining barriers to entry, and collect the video, I assume.
Writing this on an iPad - have bought like 5 RM2s for myself, employees and kids. It’s a great device. I just ordered the Pro. It comes very close to replacing a pad of paper, and has a bunch of quality of life benefits over paper. I’m not saying it’s better than a pad of paper, but it’s the first eink device I had used that offered a principled alternative.

I mainly use it for my journal/planner, using like a 1200 page PDF. Could I have that PDF on my iPad? Yep. Do I? No, the experience of the ultra high quality iPad color, pixels, brightness, interface, UI, all that just puts your (my) brain in a different space.

Anyway, it’s not for everyone, but I think most people who give it a try for note writing prefer it to the iPad.
Easy now. I'm only speculating on optics here.
Small dinosaurs are very worried.
People should be already upset even if things planned now will start working as expected by Big corp in 5-10 years.
Assuming you can fluently speak in a language expected of a refugee and are not from a country that has your prints on file...
>Gaming was Windows' last bastion

Not by a long shot. Windows-only enterprise software (QuickBooks, SolidWorks, etc.) is the last bastion, and that bastion is going to hold for a long time.