skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll try to explain it. The article used F#, but I'll explain using Haskell, and first I'll explain dome Haskell notation, because I learned it while learning Haskell.

In Haskell, you have types. Concrete types have names that start with an uppercase letter, and generic types have lowercase letters.

inc :: Int -> Int
inc x = x + 1

not :: Bool -> Bool
not True = False
not False = True

-- id returns whatever it's given unchanged,
-- no matter the type.
id :: a -> a
id x = x

You also have more complex types:

data IntOrChar = AnInt Int | AChar Char

You can match on the "AnInt" part or the "AChar" part. They're like tags.

-- Increment it if it's an Int, otherwise leave it
f :: IntOrChar -> IntOrChar
f (AnInt n) = AnInt (n + 1)
f (AChar c) = AChar c

The letter "n" is the name of a variable of type Int, and "c" is likewise the name of a variable of type Char.

You can have generic data types in the definition of a data tyñe and still add those tags. Generic type parameters are lowercase, just like in functions.

data Maybe a = Nothing | Just a

You could have functions that define the a type explicitly:

someFn :: Maybe Int -> Maybe Int

Or it could be generic over that type parameter:

someFn :: Maybe a -> Maybe a

"Maybe" is a type constructor rather than a type itself. You can also have other type constructors, e.g. this binary tree definition (which is recursive in this case):

data Tree a = Leaf a | Branch a (Tree a) (Tree a)

In function definitions, you can be generic over type constructors, too. You would write it like this:

someFn :: t a -> t a

That "t" could be a Maybe, or a Tree, or a list, or any type constructor.

In Haskell, Monad is basically an interface where it implements two functions: the infix function ">>=" and the function "return". The interface looks like this:

class Monad m where
(>>=) :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b
return :: a -> m a

">>=" takes two parameters: some "m a" value, and a function that takes an "a" and returns an "m b", then returns an "m b", where "m" is a type constructor like "Maybe", and "a" and "b" are simple types like Int.

Here's how you could write the Monad instance for Maybe:

instance Monad Maybe where
return :: a -> Maybe a
return x = Just x
(>>=) :: Maybe a -> (a -> Maybe b) -> Maybe b
maybeX >>= f = case maybeX of
Nothing -> Nothing
Just x -> f x

Here's how you could write it for lists:

instance Monad [] where
return :: a -> [a]
return x = [x]
(>>=) :: [a] -> (a -> [b]) -> [b]
xs >>= f = concatMap f xs
This feels like a side tangent, but why have you focused on technology for creative and curious childhood? I'm curious if you have considered the following:

I.e. Maria Montessori (founder of the Montessori methodology of teaching) did a pretty good job showing that's the natural state of kids, and there's quite a bit in her teachings about the importance of physical things, being outdoors, etc.

There's some pretty strong reasoning that technology might in fact be the problem, and while I'm sure you can make better technology with that focus in mind, it seems like a better approach might not be technology.

Here's a few articles that lead to this point:

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/honestly-its-probably-the-phon...

https://www.henrikkarlsson.xyz/p/childhoods
I’m not sure you’re making the same argument as the others in the comments above. I agree with your comment aside from your characterization of the others comments.

We’re still a democratic republic that can stop the enshittification of utilities (or whatever the problem de jour is). There are bad actors, but by and large, things are working and continue to be improving. Some things need to be bolstered, some things need to be replaced. Stagnation is not the answer.

What would you propose as the solution? All new ideas go through a centralized approval process? That experiment is already being run in other countries. If they start winning, the US will adapt or die.
ELIZA passed the Turing test in the same way a spooky halloween decoration can convince people that ghosts are real.
Still working on Kviklet:
https://github.com/kviklet/kviklet

Trying to make production database access easy while avoiding dropping a table in production.

Experimenting with websockets right now so you don't have to create formal requests like a pull request anymore but instead can have more fluent database access sessions while another engineer watches over your virtual shoulder.
For an interesting exploration of how even the simple physics of two blocks hitting one another can lead to surprising conclusions, I'd highly recommend this 3Blue1Brown video called "Why do colliding blocks compute pi?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYwFizhncE
Maybe I'm the problem but I didn't see anything in this article that communicated why the white Strawberry business should be saved. I mean I don't want the species to go extinct but I didn't get the sense that was a risk. Is it somehow better than the hybrid strawberry that came back from Europe?
Source? Never heard of it until today
Comments from before, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8089803
Google The Train to Heaven Wroclaw ;)
While I don't know which (if any) Python package manager will "win", I'm confident it won't be Conda or similar. I hope and pray not, anyway.
Realizing that you enjoyed being forced to listen to music you didn't decide to listen to doesn't mean you might be an asshole for not enjoying it at other times. That's ridiculous.
I got:

"There are no "r"s in the word "strawberry"
>For more context, YC doesn't judge your code, never has. It was never a code quality competition.

it shows
No need to repeat yourself, it serves only to self-gratify.
Nice, you should make it also be able to be browsed like a catalog that organized with animated screenshots.
This is wonderful, though I wouldnt want to move to Berlin I find this really useful to learn about Germany. I also find it funny because it epitomises how broken the EU is. It should not be this hard to move within the EU, alas, here we are. Thank you for putting this together for the folks that need it!
Counting shit, like cells, peaks in signals, people, inventory, fingers, and votes, is hard, tedious and important to business and life, so I don’t know dude, it seems like a great benchmark to me. Countless posts wasted on denying this simple and obvious fact.
IMO, saying Reddit "hates" anyone/anything is anthropomorphizing the lawnmower.
Verizon confirms a network outage is affecting mobile customers across the US
I sometimes wonder what’s more likely, that a towering intellect like Penrose is really advocating such weak conjectures or that he’s messing with us.
I ended up getting gifted a set by America's Test Kitchen. Their website is pretty bad, they actually have some fundamental books - chicken dishes, side dishes, fish dishes, etc with hundreds of recipes in each. Most recipes describe a couple of failed attempts, the reasons they failed, and why the final recipe works. Great for learning. Most are simple recipes that don't take a bunch of ingredients.

My cooking just accidentally went up a couple of notches after cooking a couple dozen recipes out of the books, and paying attention to their failure descriptions. Pretty great way to passively learn!
I put my money on it becoming an installation at Burning Man.
+1 no notes.
Currently we are throwing everything at LLMs and hope good things stick. At one point we might use AI to select best training data from what's available to best train the next AI.
It certainly can. Most people interact with the same organizations time and time again, so any visual indicator something is different can be useful. If you're used to seeing a bank logo on every email from your bank... and then you get an email without that logo... it's just one more visual indicator something is off, and it's more obvious than say... looking at the full email address behind the display name.

BIMI (and EV certs) should not be considered "for all organizations", but probably something worthwhile for organizations that transact in a lot of money and a lot of personal data.
It's interesting that using a PoW blockchain such as Bitcoin as a random beacon is another way of implementing a pre-commitment. Since blocks are created upon another, and have to meet PoW difficulty requirements, miners are effectively pre-committing to which class of random value is the next beacon, while the economics (and provably difficulty of PoW), makes it expensive for them to manipulate future random values by discarding valid PoW solutions with undesired beacon values. Basically for every bit in the PoW beacon value that you want to fix, you have to throw away half of the potential block solutions even if you have 100% of hashpower: expensive!

Related: another clever technique that can build on any random beacon is to use a long hash chain to actually determine the final beacon value. Zcash actually used this for one of their trusted setups. Basically, they computed SHA256(x) iterated billions of times, a serial computation that took something like a week of solid computing, using a particular Bitcoin block hash as the initial value. There's no way miners could influence this, as there was no way that they could do the serial computation fast enough to know what actual beacon value they were creating.
Disclaimer: I'm working on a competitor, open source Docker Swarm based PaaS: https://lunni.dev/

I’m keeping hand on Coolify and it is neat! It starts to feel a bit overwhelming though: you have Projects, Sources, Destinations, a separate Command Center which could be one button in the Servers section (SSH?), all stuffed in a single menu. Perhaps a redesign is in order?
Dictionary of Classical Mythology