skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
VCs mostly make money by selling a narrative about investing in the next big thing and then collecting management fees, not by beating the market. If the public sours on AI we need a new hype to replace it and keep tech money flowing at the same rate. A lot of funding seems to follow fads and be disproportionate to value generated (I remember when there were a bazillion people building social networks because that was hot).
Thank you for your response. I feel like creating a solution to create "e-commerce stores in one click with pre-imported products" is kind of impossible.

I'm looking for a SaaS idea that's worth it. Do you think there are alternatives to this idea that could be interesting?
for example checkout this page: https://awesome.facts.dev/awesome/microsoft/vscode
I would guess because alienation of labor is considered "marxist thought" and that makes americans start foaming at the mouth
Those Hisense tandem LCDs had some significant issues that they weren't able to iron out, they had trouble with poor response times, ghosting, and color banding. Flanders Scientific also used to make tandem LCDs for ultra-high-end professional monitoring, which was a market that could tolerate high prices and poor power efficiency in the name of performance, but even they have migrated their HDR monitors over to QD-OLED now so I think the consensus is that tandem LCD is a dead end.
You’re probably naricistic and miss the point of freedom and what the community wants. If everyone wants to gamble all jobs would be at the casino because that’s what people want to do.
Heh, people said the same thing in the 80s when all of our "greatest minds" were working in Finance.

The last time our great minds were put to a task that most people agree bettered humanity was in the 60s, when working as a government scientist in the space program was considered the best job you could get.
Do they find a way or are the ways engineered to squeeze every Cent out of them?
Sure it did. Setting off bombs in residential areas will always have non-combatant casualties.

"Intent" mind reading or not. This is what happened and is a terrorist act.
First open-source K8s operator for Slurm detailed – are these two married now?
I dunno. People often say moderation is hard, I think I summarized some reasons why. But my point was that I don’t think they apply in this case. It is possible moderation isn’t hard, or that it is hard for reasons I missed.
> No you're mixing things. I said acts of privacy (with listed examples of reporting large transactions) are made illegal, then you went to only money laundering.

How did I move to money laundering? Are we reading the same thread? The comment I initially replied to specifically said, "Why is any attempt at financial privacy deemed money laundering"?

> you were being duplicitous. Your premise is a lie designed to mislead the audience.

It's quite the opposite, but your personal swipes are pretty uncalled for, so I won't continue.
This may sound crazy, but one way to keep it enjoyable but remove all the negatives could be to allow profit-driven betting only using non-liquidisable, non-transferrable tokens which cannot be aquired or topped up for money. Make the betting industry operate on a flat subscription based model in which token top-ups cannot be correlated with customer payment.

That way gamblers can continue to bet their betting-coins like crazy, show off their big wins, and maybe even exchange large amounts of "earnings" for non-cash prizes, arcade style, depending on what the betting platforms decide to offer to the market. However, win or lose, there must never be a way to top up or increase token wins by spending more money on said platforms.

Edit: Maybe, with effective regulation ensuring gamblers cannot open (and thus spend) more than X simultaneous gambling subscriptions across the market, large betting-token earnings could be allowed to be exchanged for cash prizes, to the extent the gambling platform may consider it profitable. Of course by its very nature this would make top cash winnings orders of magnitude lower than when betting actual money, given the flat income stream. But that would itself be the point, providing no incentive for gambling business to encourage addiction for greater profits.
Now if rule 34 doesn’t apply here, I’ll be damned
* Make all bets above a certain threshold public information with the bettor's name and wager amount like political contributions.

I think this would result in some sort of credit score, which would be used by countless institutions. At least people wouldn't be able to hide it from their family. When a person wins the lottery, their name is supposed to be public although there's ways around this.

Obviously, it would create a black market for anonymous gambling, and lots of people would use an intermediary.
Anyways life more about the time budget
This is something I'm starting to pick up and use from a mentoring and onboarding perspective. By now, I fairly openly wonder if someone needs conceptual or architectural clarification, technique on handling a thing, or a solution right there. And when we should have a follow-up call in the first two cases.

And having both thoughts and material available for a specific -> general, as well as a general -> specific path around is very good, because in more complex topics, it helps to be able to do both. Let them get a grip on some concrete things, then bring in the abstract ideas. Or let them learn the abstract concepts and show them how they can do concrete things with it.
This doesn't make it acceptable. We can want better.
> If you block the spam sites, their stories still show up in your feed with a note that you blocked the site.

Users' respect for Apple is matched in magnitude by Apple's disrespect for users.
The effect of using a large language model to respond to patient messages
The elephant in the room is it doesnt work with iOS/Apple eco system
Can we please, move this comment to the top?
> That's just not feasible and you know it

Irrelevant. The law does not care about feasibility of breaking it.

If I decide to run a hit man business, that's also infeasible. Dealing with the arrests and fines would be too much. The conclusion then is not to bend the law to make murder legal. The conclusion is my business is illegitimate, and it's the civic duty of my Country to make sure it fails.

> Whose side are you actually on?

The people making the content that corps are profiting big off of. They should pay a license.
Neither is the relevance of your comment about it and yet here we are.
It's more like the US is a vassal of Israel. Obviously, we bend over backwards for Israel
> in which case they will unwittingly accept a sanctioned entity and then the indictment will scream bloody murder that this was basically all about not doing KYC

Example? Every one I can think of involved the bank not doing KYC, criminals taking advantage of it, and evidence at least some people at the bank knew what was happening. (Usually because authorities told the bank they were doing business with criminals and the bank responded by shuffling things around so they could continue doing that business.)
So where’s the productive output?
Your counterparty was almost certainly KYCd if the receiving bank deals in USD or receive from a bank in us jurisdiction.
Obviously it can't be linear forever, if you assume the crack is along a circumference then eventually there will only be a tiny piece of metal still intact between the two halves, and one would expect it to fail far before then.

These kinds of failures tend to be linear until they are not, and the failure mode is catastrophic. If I were in charge I would have already shut off that module on the risk/benefit analysis of catastrophic loss of the station vs. not being able to evacuate as quickly in a less catastrophic emergency. Maybe they are worried they won't be able to get the hatch open again if they can't equalize the pressure again?

For historical reference, consider Aloha Airlines Flight 243[1].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243
Oh, a day later, I realized that there have been some of these questions of yours answered, but previously:

> I also didn't see information about trade-offs experienced in the transition to Rust on these projects.

Yeah, I mean that's just not the topic of this particular post. But they have talked about it. Specifically this, from 2023:

https://opensource.googleblog.com/2023/06/rust-fact-vs-ficti...

> I'm under the impression that it can take many engineers multiple years to begin to feel productive in Rust, is there any measure of throughput (even qualitative) that could be compared before, during and after that period?

That is something that people say, but Google found differently. As that post says, "more than 2/3 of respondents are confident in contributing to a Rust codebase within two months or less when learning Rust. Further, a third of respondents become as productive using Rust as other languages in two months or less."

On this one:

> Were the engineers able to move as quickly in this (presumably) new-to-them language?

Regarding "presumably," 13% had Rust experience, but the rest did not.

They say "a third of respondents become as productive using Rust as other languages in two months or less" and "we’ve seen no data to indicate that there is any productivity penalty for Rust relative to any other language these developers previously used at Google."
I haven’t owned anything on blockchain in my life.

But I’m not so sure the naysayers are right about blockchain though. The ecosystem is still growing and apparently replacing cash in countries that don’t have a functional currency system.
Let's say it like it is, it is the legalization of profiting off of an addiction that is the mistake.
This would be a great comment without the fake quotes.
The short answer here is that NVIDIA doesn't like Cloud Service Partners using RTX cards, as they are "professional" cards (they are also significantly cheaper than the corresponding data center cards). IIRC, A40, L40, and L40S have ray tracing, and might be more available on CSPs. Otherwise, the GPU marketplaces that aren't "true" CSPs will likely have RTX cards.

Paperspace (now DO), Vultr, Coreweave, Crusoe, should all have something with ray tracing.
Looks like a 3-d printed 40 teeth gear.

https://sariel.pl/2009/09/gears-tutorial/
> If the calls first pass through a memory safe language as what gvisor does, isn’t the attack surface greatly reduced?

The runtime may be memory safe, but I'm thinking of the GPU workloads which nvproxy seems to pass on to the device via the host's kernel. Say I find a security issue in the GPU's driver, and manage to exploit it with some malicious CUDA workload.
For the CNN Underscored Money example, none of the writers or editors on the site work for CNN. They're all contractors who work for Marketplace, an affiliate marketing company. The site is hosted on completely separate infrastructure from CNN Underscored, just skinned to look similar to it. They even have a different privacy policy just for CNN Underscored Money. If CNN had major oversight or control of the content on CNN Underscored Money, you would think they would host it themselves rather than allowing an affiliate marketing company to independently operate the category.
'They all do this' isn't a good excuse when 'this' is deceiving the consumer. I am so sick of marketing/branding people faking everything, and wish they could all be shipped off Golgafrincham.
CNN became unreliable and started turning out propaganda years ago. Monetizing it is just the next step.
> In the human world, traits that a ripe for manipulation in a free market would result in lower purchasing power. Thus, less ability to afford children and pass on the traits

This is mostly nonsense
bluntly put you can pay taxes only in that currency and governments have power to enforce it, meanwhile btc has only as much power as currencies you can exchange it to. If you couldn't exchange btc to fiat, it would lose value rapidly.
Structuring (splitting up cash deposits to a bank so that they don't trigger the bank to file a CTR) comes to mind. It does have a mens rea component, but the money being entirely clean doesn't make the act not-structuring, IIUC.
She was excellent at whatever she was in. An absolute icon of cinema. RIP Maggie Smith.
Selfless shill of a blog post I wrote & shared last week:

Move Fast & Document Things [1]

My goal wasn't to be philosophical but share actual tips on how our small team [2]
enforces (not automated, not AI, but deep, hard reviews) a culture for
writing code for ourselves and each other.

All my personal friends who are engineering leaders at other orgs said
"We do the same thing but you actually wrote it down".

Would appreciate ↑ if it brought anyone value!

[1] https://olshansky.substack.com/p/move-fast-and-document-thin...
[2] https://github.com/pokt-network/poktroll/graphs/contributors
There's no accounting for taste, but keep in mind that all of these services are currently losing money, so how much would you actually be willing to pay for the service you're currently getting in order to let it break even?

For ChatGPT in its current state, probably $1K/month.
If American Federalism Were Like Swiss Federalism, There Would Be 1,300 States
They legalized online gambling basically. It's a online casino, using sports as the random medium. Casino for all.
Their collection of vintage gum scrapings perhaps?
Or from Abelson (one of the SICP authors) similar, approximately:

Code should be written for humans to understand and only lastly for computers to understand.
People learn things differently.

I really need the "core concept" first, before diving into examples, (unless the core concept is extremely simple).

Many tutorials are like hand-holding Lego building. Here's your Lego pieces, watch me and follow me in building this toy project, and you'll know how to Lego at the end of the day.

I just don't function very well in this model. I want to know how and why decisions are made. I want to see things from the author's perspective. I want to know how the Lego pieces each feels like, and how they connect to each other, and how you arrive at certain designs in a certain way. Trying to follow tutorials before at least some high-level, conceptual discussion, feels to me like I'm trying to reverse-engineer something that I shouldn't need to.

Most of the time if I'm approaching a new library or framework, I read read the introduction texts, and skip the "Getting started" code samples. Usually, there's going to be some sort of "Advanced" section where a lot more talking and discussing of concepts happens, and that's what I'd like to dive into first. I'll go for the API references next, try to grasp what the important interfaces look like, and finally I'll get back to the basic code samples in the beginning of the tutorial.
Here is a fuller expansion of the thinking behind my sentence you quote.

The usual construction is:

- in order to have a peaceful and ordered society, citizens renounce the use of violence and interact only by peaceful means

- citizens of a city/region/country delegate the use of violence to the government (the "sovereign state")

- the government's use of violence is carefully circumscribed by laws and use of governmental laws outside these circumstances is forbidden

Which ends up defining government as the agent with the exclusive authority to use violence in a geographic region. And by extension has a monopoly on the use of violence, for the safety and freedom of all concerned.

"Breaking the sovereign state’s monopoly on violence", in this interpretation, would be to say that some or all people have recourse to violence, and in the worst case are not restrained by law or government. It's in this sense that I think that "breaking the sovereign state’s monopoly on violence" amounts to distributing access to violence more widely.

The consistent application of these ideas would require that citizens not have the right to resist government application of force. In my view, the second amendment is not a carve-out of (i.e. an exception to) this doctrine if it is understood to be applicable to resisting force applied by other citizens, not by government.
Just add more swearing and off color jokes to everything you do and say. If there is one thing we know for sure its that the corporate AIs will never allow dirty jokes.

(it will get into the dark places like spam though, which seems dumb since they know how to make meth instead, spend time on that you wankers)
> What "critical" intervention rate are you talking about? What network magically supports the required low latencies to remotely respond to an imminent accident?

I was being vague - Waymo tests the autonomous algorithms with human drivers before they are deployed in remote-only mode. Those human drivers rarely but occasionally have to yank control from the vehicle. This is a critical intervention, and it seems like the rates are so low that riders almost never encounter a problem (though it does happen). Waymo releases this data, but doesn't release data on "non-critical interventions" where remote operators help with basic problem solving during normal operations. This is the distinction I was making and didn't phrase it very clearly. I think those people are intervening at least every 10-20 miles. And since those interventions always involve common-sense reasoning about some simple edge case, my claim is that the cars need that common-sense reasoning in order to get rid of the humans in the loop. I am not convinced that there's even enough drivers in the world to generate the data current AI needs to solve those edge cases - things like "the fire department ordered brand new trucks and the system can't recognize them because the data literally doesn't exist."

> First, models work outside their training sets.

This is incredibly ignorant, pure "number go up" magical thinking. Models work for simple interpolations outside their training data, but a mechanical failure is not an interpolation, it's a radically different change which current systems must be specifically trained on. AI does not have the ability to causally extrapolate based on physical reasoning like humans. I had never experienced a tire blowout but I knew immediately what went wrong, relying on tactile sensations to determine something was wrong in the rear right + basic conceptual knowledge of what a car is to determine the tire must have exploded. Even deep learning's strongest (reality-based) advocates acknowledge this sort of thinking is far beyond current ANNs. Transformers would need to be trained on the scenario data. There are mitigations that might work: simply coming to a slow stop when a separate tire diagnostic redlines, etc. But these might prove bitter and unreliable.

> Second, these companies test such scenarios all the time.

No they don't! The only company I am aware of which has tested tire blowouts is Kodiak Robotics, and that seemed to be a slick product demo rather than a scientific demonstration. I am not aware of any public Waymo results.
AI algorithms alone definitely don't represent "energy" in a meaningful way, but high-quality data is a commodity.

Part of the AI scam peeling back the facade on every AI product and realizing "oh this is actually pretty useless unless we already have high-quality automated data systems internally at $ORG", and the advancements in AI only make that nominally more accessible. No, synthetic data is not the solution, and Copilot won't build you a robust data platform.

Digitalization and digital literacy are long-term trends that AI is at the whim of, but pretends otherwise.
Analog tvs would change in the middle of frames if you swapped channels.

Digital tvs are cursed to wait for the next key frame in the video to start displaying and providers are a-okay with very long waits for key frames as it improves their encoding efficiency and thus allows them to squeeze more channels on the lines.

It's apples to oranges sadly.
Wikipedia is free for everyone to edit. The policies are strongly aligned with the pursuit of truth. Both parties can have truths in their favour, if editors are in a left wing bubble they may just be more exposed to truths from a left perspective. Here's where you can help! If you identify bias, feel free to remove charged language, and add new ideas with reliable citations. Here's a list of sources considered reliable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2...

Extensive discussions of the decision making process for each source is documented in this list.
I suppose you're right - to highlight the implied, or shall we say, permitted interpretation, I was forced to give a contrasting interpretation, when the source text was indeed purely factual.
Jason Bourne also didn't carry lots of gadgets. I think Craig was somewhat light on it too.
Unless you're already exercising 20 minutes a day, eating very healthy, meditating and engaging in appropriate weight training and making all your doctors appointments, unproven possible interactions from chemicals measured in PPB are so far down the hazard list it doesn't even make the top hundred.
Bitcoin's advantage is mainly its name recognition and unchanging nature (== trust and protocol stability). You could never get the necessary support for any meaningful changes.

For people who want proof-of-stake there are plenty of coins doing that. Etherium is probably the best known most established option.

But no coin really solves the other big challenge of crypto-currency: barely anyone uses them as currency. Most of those that do do it for illegal purposes: ransomware payments, marketplaces for illegal goods and services (including the malware SaaS providers), illegal money movements etc. But for the vast majority of people it's more like digital gold than like digital cash: an investment vehicle that derives its value from its limited supply.

As an investment it doesn't actually create economic value (unlike investing in real companies), so you need to have a pretty positive view of the other use cases to judge the overall impact as positive
> If wp.org is part of the foundation

It is not.

> a8c is intentionally obfuscating their ownership of wp.org

Automattic (my employer) does not own WordPress.org

There is no obligation on WordPress.org's part to provide free services to WP Engine. WP Engine uses trademarks in misleading ways while WordPress.org has a license from WPF to use the trademark.
It's hard to imagine US/Russian relations improving in the coming years. It might be easier and safer to retire the ISS sooner rather than later.
What are your thoughts on Dr. Leemon Baird's Hedera Hashgraph?

https://www.swirlds.com/downloads/SWIRLDS-TR-2016-01.pdf
> Blaming the victim here

I'm not of the opinion that multi-billion dollar corporations can even be victims. They have too much capital and political power to be victims of anything.

> So they aren't preventing shoplifting with the cabinets, but the cabinets prevent shoplifting. The mental dissonance here is astounding

You're misunderstanding.

The cabinets DO prevent shoplifting, obvious. The question is SHOULD THEY? I think corps jumped on the opportunity without the proper analysis.

> put darn near everything in cabinets, not the highest risk things

Right. Which is why I'm shocked you don't believe, or refuse to consider, the fact that these corps DID NOT do the proper risk analysis here. If they're putting penny items behind locks my mind naturally will wonder if that's worth it.

Instead, you're concluding that the shoplifting must be so incredibly severe that even penny items must be locked up. This seems wildly unreasonable to me. What, is every other person a mass shoplifter?
> first would be every ideological 2nd amendment supporter

Owning a gun doesn't break the government's monopoly on violence because owning a gun isn't violent. Firing a gun at a shooting range isn't violent. (Most people don't consider hunting violence.)

Reasonable 2nd Amendment supporters grant the state its monopoly on violence. They just want the means by way to revoke it. (Or, more realistically, make its abuse more difficult.)