skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What data leaks? What are you talking about?
I think this is a good policy, but keep in mind that addictive tendencies vary a lot between different people. This talk may not be enough for a lot of kids and it will be unnecessary for other kids.

For example, my parents never discouraged or curtailed my gaming in any way, yet I never had any trouble self-regulating — not because I'm just that good, but because the vast majority of games just don't scratch my itch.

To give you an idea, I tried super hard to get into WoW when I was a university student with a lot of free time, because that's what my friends were playing, but I just couldn't. There was just way too much grinding. I forced myself to play for about an hour a day, but I couldn't keep it and stopped playing altogether after two months. I made a few more stabs at trying to get into it of the next few years, but it never held my attention.

That game definitely had some really great gameplay moments (I LOVED doing instances with my friends, for example), but it was interspersed with so much grinding and fluff that it overwhelmingly felt like a chore to play.

This has generally been my issue with video games. Whenever I find a game that actually makes me want to play for 2 hours straight, I get excited and specifically set aside time to indulge myself as long as I want. It's such a rare and precious joy to get that much sustained pleasure out of a game.
Potentially related:

GLP-1 therapy increases visceral adipose tissue metabolic activity - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41326138 - Aug 2024 (118 comments)
No I was trying to see it could use tools/binaries that come with MacOS.
Also seems very impractical to embed this into a deployed product. How can you possibly hope to control and estimate costs? I guess this is strictly meant for R&D purposes.
> Language is fuzzy in exactly the same way.

No. Language can be fuzzy, yes, but not at all in the same way. I have just explained that.

> LLMs can create factually correct responses in dozens of languages using endless variations in phrasing.

So which is it? Is it about good prompting, or can you have endless variations? You can’t have of both ways.

> You fixate on the kind of questions that current language models struggle with

So you’re saying LLMs struggle with simple factual and verifiable questions? Because that’s all the example questions were. If they can’t handle that (and they do it poorly, I agree), what’s the point?

By the way, that’s a single example. I have many more and you can find plenty of others online. Do you also think the Gemini ridiculous answers like putting glue on pizza are about bad promoting?

> You think the probabilistic nature of language models is a fundamental problem that puts a ceiling on how smart they can become, but you're wrong.

One of your mistakes is thinking you know what I think. You’re engaging with a preconceived notion you formed in your head instead of the argument.

And LLMs aren’t smart, because they don’t think. They are an impressive trick for sure, but that does not imply cleverness on their part.
This was mentioned in OpenAI's report. People rated o1 as the same or worse than GPT-4o if the prompt didn't require reasoning, like on personal writing tasks.
While I do agree - you can (or should be able to) get any knife to shave. They may lack edge retention or proper geometry but slicing/cutting/chopping is doable with pretty much any knife, as long as you can sharpen them. I'd say getting any knife to cut tomatoes flawlessly with just a brick and some water is not a hard task.

That being said, I still prefer diamond stones (sharpening wise)
If you like this sort of thing, I strongly recommend also checking out the xonsh shell.

It's bash-like, but Python based. Works on both Windows and Linux. Has several of the benefits mentioned in this article. It's really nice that I don't need to learn another language for shell scripting - its language is Python, with some extensions to make it less tedious (e.g. easily executing commands without using os.system or subprocess).

Been using it since 2018.

https://xon.sh/
There was an open source licensing server that also managed software updates for clients over the network. I forget the name. It was cool. Lots of people contributed. I think it got so popular it ended up tailoring to enterprise. They did the hosting. It took time but it worked out well for that team.
Lowering corporate tax rates is just a race to the bottom.

Look at Apple paying an effective 1% tax rate on all European profits, just because some sneaky bois in Ireland decided that would be 'good for the economy'.

Was it good for Ireland? A little, though our reputation has suffered.

Was it good for Irish politicians? Have no doubt.

Was it good for Europe? Fuck no.

Was it good? Fuck no.
> For a fake drive, it'll take awhile

Or, for any mid to large sized real storage. Writing/reading 64GB takes a while, fake or not
The aging process will have the final word, but it’s a process. Nobody is healthy one day and in vegetative state the next.

It’s a good idea to live a healthy life, but you are merely shifting the odds. Many a health nut has hit 60 and found themselves with new problems every year, and each one is a small thing, but it adds up.
"almost no one" is consistent with the ultra-high income earners (e.g. top 10,000).

This article sites Piketty and Saez, "the top 0.01 percent paid an average total federal tax rate of 71.4 percent in 1960 compared to 34.7 percent in 2004".

Okay, 71.4% is not %90, but still pretty high.
> I like the idea too that they turbocharged it by taking the limits off during the "thinking" state

They also specifically trained the model to do that thinking out loud.
Another link with the same data in a table:

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-in...

It's funny. If you had 100 people in a room, there's one guy paying for about 45 people. And the next 4 people are paying for about 5 people each (20 total). And the lowest paid 50 people combined are paying for about 2 people total.

I think we should just not have the bottom half of income earners in the US pay any taxes. It wouldn't change the numbers much, and then it would be one less thing for them to complain about.

However, I don't expect anyone to put down their torches and pitch forks any time soon. It's too easy to use this to get people spun up, even above average educated people as in this forum.
And we only have blue LEDs due to the sheer stubbornness of Shuji Nakamura. If you haven't already heard the tale of its development, head over here and enjoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF8d72mA41M
The paper asks "why does this feature exist?" - probably they haven't gone far enough back in history (note I've worked on x86 clones I understand this stuff in far too great a detail)

Originally on x86 systems memory was in VERY short supply - SMM mode memory was the DRAM that the VGA window in low memory (0xa0000) overlaid - normal code couldn't access it because the video card claimed memory accesses to that range of addresses - so the north bridge when the CPU was in SMM mode switched data and instruction accesses to that range to go to DRAM rather than the VGA card .... that's great except remember that SMM mode was used for special setup stuff for laptops .... sometimes they need to be able to display on the screen .... that's what this special mode was originally for: so that SMM mode code can display on the screen (it's also likely why SMM mode graphics were so primitive, you're switching in and out of this mode for every pixel you write)
Really cool idea! Nicely done.

Excited to give it a try.
I added the date to fish_right_prompt in a darker grey. It's there but it's very subtle. Fish is also smart enough to delete the fish_right_prompt text when your cursor gets to it so it doesn't get in the way of long lines. Here's what I use:

function fish_right_prompt --description 'Write out the right prompt'
set_color 666666
date +'%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S'
set_color normal
end
This might be an area of opportunity where you could open source it however require a license for enterprise/business use.

We use CodeMeter. It is possible your product may be competitive to other SW license server products.

https://www.wibu.com/us/products/codemeter.html
Please note this is fixed:

> The researchers alerted Apple to the vulnerability in April, and the company issued a patch to stop the potential for data to leak at the end of July
I can't recommend a Pinecil enough. It's cheap as chips and basically has all the best features of other irons I've used. No complaints, I've half a mind to stockpile them and hand them out as gifts to nerd-inclined friends.
Why? Most people are capable of fixating at a single point with basically no perceptible eye movement.
> Also: we're not on the cusp of WW3

yeah and we all know that there would be no more war after ww1.

proxy conflicts between big powers are very dangerous.
Back in ye old days, TAB autocompletion was a big deal when it was new. It was then a big deal when it got a bit fancier in zsh. And it's stagnated since.

Now, with fzf in combination with other tools, I often ask myself: Why isn't this the default in most shells? When I now use bash, it seems very archaic.

Yes, there are a lot of improvements one can do with shells. I should start making a wishlist.
It's worse than that if you're a business. If you simply want to use Docker Desktop on Mac, you're required to get Docker Team ($15/user/mo for <100 users) or Docker Business ($24/user/mo for 100+ users). Even if you want literally zero of the cloud features you're required to pay this amount.

I highly recommend OrbStack (https://orbstack.dev/) instead. It's $8/user/mo for businesses and you get something that is faster, easier on your battery, and more simple to use. We switched hundreds of engineers over to it at Instacart and it was seamless.
So you are saying tool maintenance (well any maintenance) is important?
Oh yeah the waking up thinking there’s “stuff in my bed” happens to me at least once a week.
Can anyone recommend an affordable hot-air tool for SMD rework that takes 110V? All of the cheap options I could find were 220V only and wouldn't do low enough airflow for smaller parts.
Germany does not mandate that TOR end-node providers are expected to log their users. Saying that not logging someone who went through your end-node is intentionally hindering the police would be like accusing a shopkeeper of intentionally hindering the police because they didn't make of record of every person who entered their storefront.
I blame Microsoft for enshittifying Windows 11 to the point of nobody wanting to "upgrade" to it.
> Also... telling that they choose to benchmark against CodeForces rather than SWE-bench.

They also worked with Devin to benchmark it on Devin's internal benchmarks, where it's twice as good as GPT-4o: https://x.com/cognition_labs/status/1834292718174077014 https://www.cognition.ai/blog/evaluating-coding-agents
> As for sitting an extra foot off the ground - that’s very useful in very common conditions like snow on the ground

Only if the snow is unplowed and has piled up more than a foot or two. And arguably most people shouldn't be driving in those conditions anyway. I do just fine driving up to and around Tahoe in my AWD coupe, even in conditions when I probably shouldn't be out.

> or unpaved roads, or whatever else.

Which 90% of SUV/truck buyers will never, ever see.

And for the snow conditions where high clearance matters, more than half of SUV/truck buyers will probably never see those, either.
netstat is now considered too old to be used in new code.
haha collective action is interesting, but I dont see how a union would help with an acquisition or merger walking away
Show HN: Generate Go structs from multiple JSON objects
If you need to unmarshal arbitrary JSON or YAML data (e.g. consuming data from a REST/JSON endpoint with no defined schema) then https://github.com/twpayne/go-jsonstruct will automatically create your Go structs for you. What's special about go-jsonstruct compared to other JSON-to-Go generators, is that go-jsonstruct can accept multiple documents as input and generate the most specific Go struct into which all of the documents can be unmarshalled. You can give it a few example responses from your REST/JSON endpoint and go-jsonstruct will infer the struct for you.
OpenAI O1-Preview
Curious if anybody has seen any good results. My narrow task (handwriting recognition) has always been best on gpt-x. So I guess I'll move to o1.
“… the court has ruled that evidence-backed conclusions regarding fabricated data cannot constitute defamation—which is probably a very good thing for science.”

“Probably good for science”? That is science!
Computer Science becomes MORE interesting as computers become more capable, not less. There are so many things we could be working on, but we still waste so much time on boring libraries, configuration, implementation details that we simply don't get to experiment enough.

Just like nobody programs on punch cards anymore, learning details of a specific technology without deeper understanding will become obsolete. But general knowledge about computer science will become more valuable.
That’s such a great idea, I’m annoyed it never occurred to me. Many times I just slip in a ‘date; <cmd>; date;’ and then get annoyed when something is taking too long, but I forgot to timestamp it.
Its only value is to get foreigners a H-1B. Otherwise it's useless. Masters in CS won't help. Just go read the course content yourself.
"There is no such thing as society."

- Margaret Thatcher.

Always odd when people quote Thatcher as if she was some kind of economic genius, rather than the architect of record unemployment, decline in manufacturing, record inequality and homelessness - all of which ought to sound familiar to Americans.
The headline sounds like the perfect premise for a sitcom. I'm smelling Emmy...
> > computability and programming just aren’t that related

> I … don’t think I understand

That's such a Haskell thing to say!

Ok, I'm teasing a bit now. But there's a kernel of truth to it: a good model of the FP school which forked off Lisp into ML, Miranda, Haskell, is as an exploration of the question "what if programming was more like computability theory?", and fairly successfully, by its own "avoid success at all costs" criteria.

Computability: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computability_theory

> Computability theory, also known as recursion theory, is a branch of mathematical logic, computer science, and the theory of computation that originated in the 1930s with the study of computable functions and Turing degrees.

Programming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programming

> Computer programming or coding is the composition of sequences of instructions, called programs, that computers can follow to perform tasks.

Related, yes, of course, much as physics and engineering are related. But engineering has many constraints which are not found in the physics of the domain, and many engineering decisions are not grounded in physics as a discipline.

So it is with computability and programming.

> “therefore you can write any programme in Haskell” which, while true

It is not. That's my point. One can write an emulator for any programme in Haskell, in principle, but that's not at all the same thing as saying you can write any programme in fact.

For instance, you cannot write this in Haskell:

http://krue.net/avrforth/

You could write something in Haskell in which you could write this, but those are different complexity classes, different programs, and very, very different practices. They aren't the same, they don't reduce to each other. You can write an AVR emulator and run avrforth in it. But that's not going to get the blinkenlichten to flippen floppen on the dev board.

Haskell, in fact, goes to great lengths to restrict the possible programs one can write! That's one of the fundamental premises of the language, because (the hope is that) most of those programs are wrong. About the first half of your post is about things like accidental null dereferencing which Haskell won't let you do.

In programming, the tools one chooses, and ones abilities with those tools, and the nature of the problem domain, all intersect to, in fact, restrict and shape the nature, quality, completeness, and even getting-startedness, of the program. Turing Completeness doesn't change that, and even has limited bearing on it.
I agree with your suggestion with one caveat: having a Master's degree when switching to a dev role would be very beneficial. Both in terms of how it looks on paper and in terms of competency.
> so the world of consumer debt doesn't work that way.

Yes, but I laid out how national budgets and household budgets are fundamentally the same thing: The flow of cash coming in must meet or exceed the flow of cashing going out. I'm surprised this detail is completely lost on you.

>I don't think there is a date. As long as the US has a stable and powerful economy, people with money will want somewhere to put it.

That's the thing, isn't it? It's not an absolute guarantee that the US will continue to have a stable and powerful economy ("past performance is not a guarantee of future results", as any good investor will tell you). Lest we forget, US credit ratings were lowered following one of the many recent shutdowns we had, and the world at-large is slowly but certainly shifting from Pax Americana to Pax Sino.

So again, what happens when the gravy train stops? We don't know when that is, we don't know if the train will stop in the first place, but we have to have a plan in hand because debts must be paid.

>The literal answer is that it all gets paid off all the time, according to the payment schedule of each individual security, but we continually reissue debt because there is literally zero reason not to.

Yes, the issue is where do we draw the line between reasonable amounts of debt incurred and unreasonable? Spending more money than we make is fiscal irresponsibility, borrowing money to make up for the shortfall is merely a workaround and borrowing money to pay back borrowed money is disturbing.

Where do we consider we are borrowing too much? This line can and should be constantly reevaluated as necessary and appropriate, but first of all do we even have such a line? I don't think we do, which is why the national deficit is such a hot topic.
So I can run orbstack and then still use "docker run ..." etc commands like usual?

I'm pretty happy with docker desktop generally, but looks like it stopped updating for the version of osx I'm using on my 2019 intel mbpro, so I'll definitely consider alternatives for it there ...

Thanks for sharing !
The utility I usually get from these kinds of tools so far is more like an extremely good reference or helper to something I could definitely figure out if given enough time. E.g. figuring out the best way to clean up a specific syntax error, setting up a class and some obvious base functions I'm going to need in it, helping me figure out where I might have went astray in solving a math problem.

The tools have not been at "and now I don't need code tests & review, mathematicians in society, or factbooks all because I have an LLM" level. While that's definitely a goal of AGI it's also definitely not my bar for weighing whether there is utility in a tool.

The alternative way to think about it: the value of a tool is in what you can figure out to do with it, not in whether it's perfect at doing something. On one extreme that means a dictionary can still be a useful spelling reference even if books have a rare typo. On the other extreme that means a coworker can still offer valuable insight into your code even if they make lots of coding errors and don't have an accurate understanding of everything there is to know about all of C++. Whether you get something out of either of these cases is a product of how much they can help you reach the accuracy you need to arrive at and the way you utilize the tool, not their accuracy alone. Usually I can get a lot out of a person who is really bad at one shot coding a perfect answer but feels like their answer seems right so I can get quite a bit out of an LLM that has the same problem. That might not be true for all types of questions though but that's fine, not all tools have utility in every problem.
What's the precedent set here?

Models that hide away their reasoning and only display the output, charging whatever tokens they'd like?

This is not a good release on any front.
It's an interesting and severely non-trivial debate, and there's no way to 'prioritize'/'curate'/'feature'/'select' content (which controls what passively-browsing users are likely to see, unless they search or click to specific users/topics/groups) without in some way "imposing your] views".

For example, all other things being equal, should known-false or misleading claims be treated equally to unknown or factually correct ones? Should posts from an account with a history of posting those be treated equally to accounts that don't? And of course who gets to determine what constitutes 'accurate'? How do we prevent community voting being misused?

With every election, we are edging closer to legislating (in the US or EU) definition of social networks as a 'public good' with accompanying regulation requirement. Equally we've seen enough evidence of politically-slanted moderation or attempts to influence moderation in many countries.

(This stuff is non-trivial. What about accounts that are accurate about one set of topics (e.g. the Chinese economy) but sloppy on others and post outright garbage on a third? What about accounts that 'merely' retweet or boost content, vs post their own 'original' content? Should online journalists be held to a higher standard than average users? What about 'news personalities' like the Alex Joneses of the world?)

I'm very sure this debate will be revisited after the impending US election/ TikTok divestment/ Telegram controversy.
Consider that taking 5-10 graduate courses and writing a master's level thesis or project will generally take all of your free time and a bunch of your savings over the course of two or more years. (I sure hope you're not thinking to take on debt for this!)

And while you'll absolutely learn some things and find yourself excited about some ideas in those couple years, you will forget almost all of the stuff your learned within a few years of graduating because you won't be continuing to get your hands dirty and won't be building on the knowledge. Technical knowledge does not "stick" if you don't use it.

If you're a hungry learner and have the free time and money, you can go back to school for whatever you want. This sounds adjacent to your work, at least, so that's something. But remember that formal education is only the first and smallest step in learning a technical discipline, and it sounds like you want to continue PM'ing rather than transition to a technical IC, so you won't be continuing on the later steps.

If you're just trying to be the best technical PM you can be in your industry, there are almost certainly far more time/cost/stress-efficient ways to do so.
Eco's got about as rigorous a definition as you ever see, but it's pretty broad and could easily apply to any nostalgic / conservative movement. (Which is fairly common in authoritarian ones anyway.)
What Remains of Edith Finch is the most powerful interactive fiction I have encountered - and it beats all others by a huge margin.

It's not even a game, really. But extremely powerful.

Annapurna didn't make it, BTW. They were the publisher.
Huh? You just needed to use a usenet app, some of which were quite easy to use.
What?? It had much better anti-stalking features at launch than its competitors like Tile.
You can specify the max length of the response, which presumably includes the hidden tokens.

I don't see why this is qualitatively different from a cost perspective than using CoT prompting on existing models.