skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://archive.is/rS3ze

how is this stressing a grid that has to shed huge amounts of load to maintain availability off peak? instead of shedding the load, just price it effectively and the demand will even out and be a more efficient use of the fuel or generating station. the problem with our energy infra is a lack of consistent demand, and both AI and proof of work create the demand and a consumer of last resort that would make generation way more efficient.

afaik, the main compute load is done in training, not in the queries. this article sounds like astroturfing a pretext for regulation under the auspices of "climate."

also, the diminishing value of cash is accelerating so taking todays dollars and putting them into tomorrow's energy is probably the most fundamentally sound economic use of capital today.

power generators were loaded with debt and used as public sector slush funds (in canada where they were nominally publicly owned) and now the companies are not very productive because they have to pass on the debt service cost to consumers, and prevent anyone from entering the market to offer competitive service that would interfere with that debt service. if you build new energy infra, you need to protect it from managers piling it with debt to loot it, but if you solve that real problem, demand is not a "problem," it's the most valuable thing in the universe.
Alleged M4 MacBook Pro packaging leak highlights a few new upgrades
You mean the free product Microsoft Clarity that everyone uses?
That sounds like an obfuscated way of saying that pre-internet brands shouldn't be allowed to compete with tech bros.
Varlink was specifically designed to be available as early as possible when the kernel is booting and requires virtually nothing apart from good old sockets. But yes, definitely getting yet another one vibe from this.

Then again, Dbus is not really what I would call an incredible piece of software - we are very much in the adequate territory if even - so anything shaking up the status quo can’t be too bad.
Sounds like a liquidity even to me. Time to pay taxes on 150B in equity.
See their ISPD 2022 paper, which goes into more detail about the value of pre-training (e.g. Figure 7): https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3505170.3511478

Sometimes training from scratch is able to match the results of pre-training, given ~5X more time to converge. Other times, though, it never does as well as a pre-trained model, converging to a worse final result.

This isn't too surprising -- the whole point of the method is to be able to learn from experience.
Why is it a good thing?
consequentialism in action: https://www.athensnews.com/news/local/louisiana-gov-huey-lon...

(although I guess every consequentialism has to have a steep discount factor, otherwise putative desired consequences arbitrarily far in the future could be claimed to justify obviously undesirable actions today? Note also that Gov. Long didn't die in bed.)
I love that Twitter is linked as tl;dr.
It hasn't been launched.
There’s a saying I’ve heard that this reminded me of, “if you owe the bank two dollars, that’s your problem, but if you owe the bank two billion dollars, that’s the bank’s problem.” I think it’s relevant because it shows how responsibility shifts as things scale. If you owe the bank a little money then you are just a regular customer and you deal with the bank’s policies. But if you are a big player then it’s up to the bank to negotiate with you and come to mutually agreeable terms.

These companies that have many big data centers are now big players. If they are stressing the grid they will need to be part of the solution in expanding the capacity and infrastructure, either by paying more to the electric companies or by including power infrastructure in their vertical integration. Microsoft has the right idea by investing in Three Mile Island, I think other big players will do similar things.
> Cobenfy, set to launch in October, will have a list price that would cost about $22,500 a year. The influential Institute for Clinical and Economic Review this year estimated that a price in line with expected clinical benefits to patients should be in the range of $16,000 to $20,000 a year. Bristol Myers Squibb executives say most eligible patients are covered by Medicare or Medicaid and wouldn’t pay the list price.
> you're also part of the "I'm going to call anything I don't like 'violence'" crowd.

Every law is a control program for violence - this is what laws are for. While I agree that "no laws" don't work, I am part of the "violence should be used with utter care" and "violence is the utter last resort" crowds. :-)
Yea your right.
It will suggest a tweak to config if it sees live reload times going past 4s. That seems to help a lot on my 2019 MBP.

I hear you on point #2 though. The Red Hat IntelliJ plugin for that seems janky to me. And JetBrains own plugin doesn’t seem great either. In fact I don’t know if I’ve ever seen autocomplete in a Qute template ever.

Shame, because the rest of the stack is so damn good.
> I'll defer to your assessment of CS programs. I studied a science but not computer science. In my experience, an Ivy league name is worth a huge amount in prestige.

Fair enough! I can't speak for the sciences - only Engineering/CS.

CS/Eng is much more driven by defense and private sector funding, which is biased towards National Labs, which are overwhelmingly managed by public universities.

At the federal level, the DoD and DoE has held this bias for decades due to a mix of pork barrel politicking as well as the fact that public university graduates tend to be overrepresented in career civil service roles.

I personally know a couple SES types who purposely redirected CHIPS and IRA funding to flagship universites due to a bit of a grudge against the Private School IVorY tower (though lack of STEM research capacity also played a role)

> Also, the contacts one makes at an Ivy or a Stanford are leagues ahead of what's available at a public school.

As someone who attended an Ivy/Ivy Adjacent, I highly disagree, at least in Eng (and Eng adjacent roles like PM/EM/Sales/Entrepreneaurship and even VC to a certain extent)

Middle management turned upper management in most tech companies tended to attend flagship publics in the West Coast/TX/Midwest plus some elite privates like Stanford/Claremont Colleges/USC/CMU, which impacts recruiting as well.

Ime, other than Penn and Cornell, Harvard and other Ivies are not as well represented compared to a program like EECS@Cal, CS@UT, CS@UW, etc.

Most upper level Ivy grads I end up meeting tend to have done grad school at an Ivy (MBA@Wharton/HBS/CBS/Johnson) but undergrad at a public university either domestically (state flagships) or abroad (IIT D/K/B/M to Wharton pipeline)

Stanford and MIT are a different story, but they also have much more rigorious admissions and student body.

In addition, a lot of my professional (not age - precocious little scamp ain't I [0]) peers in Eng/Sales/VC leadership are at the "sending kids to college" stage, and most of them are sending their kids to flagship public and private engineering programs - not Ivies.

This has a downstream impact on the network, as parents will help their kids and their kids friends get jobs and referrals. I personally know a Tech Billionare who sent their kids to a top public CS program despite having the option to send them to MIT or Harvard due to the larger network of mid-level managers turned founders/VCs from that school.

And as you can probably tell from this conversation, I'm probably not in favor of giving a leg up to hiring or funding Ivy/Ivy Adjacent graduates, and I am in a position to make that choice. There are plenty of others like me.

Tl;Dr - the tech industry has made upward mobility easier by overemphasizing work experience over Ivy/Private pedigree to a certain extent.

[0] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Uofjc65LEJM
And it will go from 9% to 90% over the century. Big tech companies might as well avoid the middleman and evolve into the power generation business, although it's not hard with an open design of a solar farm in the desert.
Kay's ideas about "messaging" were never communicated well.

He seemed to be arguing for a pure imperative style. You send a message to make something happen. This is the opposite extreme from pure functional programming.
A style of programming where everything is an imperative statement with no return value might be possible.

GPU programming is kind of like that. Neural nets are like that. There's an analogy to biology, which doesn't seem to do function calls but does push information around. That apparently appealed to Kay.

Functional programming makes things local. Pure imperative programming makes things global. This is hard on human programmers. It takes more short-term memory than most humans have to work in pure imperative mode.

Kay was heavily into discrete-event simulation. That's what Simula had objects for, and that's where Smalltalk got objects. All those objects are sending messages to each other, driving the simulation forward. The original Smalltalk paper has discrete-event simulation examples.
It's possible to build a GUI as a discrete-event simulator, with all the widgets sending one-way messages to each other, but that's seldom done. Discrete-event simulation became a tiny niche in computing. Kay thought of it as a central organizing concept for computing. That's not where the field went.
The number type in JSON is 64 bit float, limiting integers without loss of precision to 2⁵³-1.

BigInt is a new concept and not technically supported. So whether it works in your random library of choice is probably a potshoot.
"Use within JSON: Using JSON.stringify() with any BigInt value will raise a TypeError, as BigInt values aren't serialized in JSON by default. "
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...
Yes, exactly. But with a better sensor and optics.
Red flags galore. You should divorce immediately. Not the asshole.

I do fear, in the long term, what happens to those chat logs?

Surely they will be used for training later on, and being anonymous doesn't always work out.

Will the viewer be more AI bots? Human employees? Law enforcement? A dump on 4chan?
Under a different administration in the previous 4 years.

Any large institution takes some time to change, senate confirmations for the leads of major agencies don’t occur immediately upon swearing in of a new President - it’s often months later. Then, after that occurs, change from the top down occurs.

Additionally for any sufficiently large group of people it takes a long time to get people to take any sort of collective action, let alone an organization with processes, years long funding and contracts already in place. Then there are sometimes/often legal challenges to the awarding of contracts, the issuing of regulations.

How long do you think this study would’ve taken to execute by itself? Okay now how long do you think it would’ve taken to plan the methodology for what they should do to execute. Before that they have to have a proposal of what they would like to study and then get the money approved / allocated to do the previous work I just mentioned, such as a detailed methodology.

Again, this administration has been in charge of the FTC for only 3 ish years and had to probably rebuild it towards focusing on holding businesses to account.

Not quite sure what else you’re expecting, it takes companies as well many months and even years to change focus, or to deliver a robust product. And that’s generally with an agreed upon a singular focus.
> could be a simple SSR site, but frontend devs don't like writing anything but SPAs

It might be worth asking why that is.

I used to write a ton of SSR'ed pages back when that was really the only option we had (before people introduced jQuery and AJAX), then I wrote SPAs (mostly Angular & React), then again SSR'ed websites (Java/Spring/JSP with a ton of more-or-less vanilla JavaScript) and now I've been on a Vue-based stack (w/ Astro/Vite for SSR) for a number of years. And these were all applications with dozens of teams working on them in parallel and a corresponding number of components & LoC.

Personally, I wouldn't want to go back to traditional SSR stacks (Spring/JSP, vanilla PHP, or Python w/ Django or Flask) ever. People often vastly underestimate the complexity of good UIs. They might start simple ("could be a simple SSR site", as you say) and, before long, the wheels come off the bus and they look at a big unmaintainable ball of vanilla JS on top of HTML templates that are directly coupled to the database schema, with global CSS styles permeating (infecting) the entire code base.

In my experience, there is a certain amount complexity that is inherent to a good UI. It doesn't matter whether you use classic SSR, or modern frontend frameworks like Angular/React/Vue/Svelte/SolidJS, or new kids on the block like HTMX/Turbo/… — that complexity will still be there. However, with modern frameworks you've at least got a chance to tame that beast.

More specifically, what modern frontend frameworks give us is: 1) Modularization into components, 2) scoping of styles, 3) type-safety, 4) unit-testability of components, 5) component-local state management (≠ insanities like Redux), 6) clear separation between view/UI logic and business logic.

If you can replicate these features using a bespoke version of JSP or HTMX or whatever, great! But if you can't, I'd personally rather pick a well-established frontend framework like React or Vue. Yes, your developers might still mess that up and produce shitty code, but the chances of them messing up in a classic SSR stack (without the aforementioned features) are so much greater.
> you make each pixel rigid and have the joints between pixels flexible

Alternative 1: Assemble about 3 million individual rigid pixels of an iPhone screen on a flexible substrate, keeping the gaps flexible.

Alternative 2: Produce a single flexible screen piece, requiring no per-pixel assembly.

Which alternative, to your opinion, is likely to cost less?
This was happening to me on an M1 until I realised it wasn't a Universal Binary and reinstalled the correct version.
> Because how is the core logic supposed to figure out how much the clock frequency changed

It is frequent for such logic circuits to use clock generators made with a so-called ring oscillator, i.e. with a chain of inverters containing an odd number of them, which is connected in a loop. The clock period will be a multiple of the delay through a logic inverter.

In this case the actual clock frequency tracks exactly all changes in the permissible clock frequency, regardless of their causes, including temperature and mechanical deformation.

> As the capacitor rolls up into a cylinder shape, the copper-air-copper capacitor has the dielectric (air) get thinner-and-thinner.

I am not sure which is the copper-air-copper capacitor to which you refer. On a PCB, there are parasitic copper-air-copper capacitors between traces, but they have very little influence on clock frequencies. On a normal integrated circuit, there is no air. The metal layers are separated by insulator layers and the top metal is covered by a passivation layer. This flexible circuit should also be covered by some passivation layer.

Replacing in your argument the copper-air-copper capacitor with a copper-insulator-copper capacitor, any circuit has two kinds of capacitors, those that are made intentionally, with two overlapped metal electrodes and a very thin insulator layer between them, and the parasitic capacitors that exist between any metal traces.

Your argument is valid for the parasitic capacitors, because the distance between traces will vary with bending and some parasitic capacitors will become larger, while others will become smaller. The effect of each of the parasitic capacitors on the permissible clock frequency is small and the global effect of all parasitic capacitors is unpredictable without a concrete circuit layout, because their changes with the bending may compensate each other.

For an intentional capacitor, the effect mentioned by you also exists, but in most technologies for integrated circuits the thickness of the insulator of the capacitors is very small in comparison with the lengths and widths of the electrodes. In this case only a very small part of the electromagnetic field is outside the internal space of the capacitor and its influence on the value of the capacitance is negligible. Perhaps the capacitors made with this flexible technology are not as thin in comparison with their area as in other technologies, in which case the effect mentioned by you could be measurable, but I doubt it.
IMO deadlift is another good one. If you could only do a single lift, I think you could make a pretty good case that it should be deadlift. Works damn near every muscle in your body, and gets your heart going pretty good too.
> Go is a language that I started learning years ago, but did't change dramatically.

A lot of people underrate that quality I feel. C had that quality but pushed it to neurotic levels where it would change so slowly even when it needed to do it faster. Other language in contrast change too fast and try to do too many things at once.

You do not often get credit for providing boring, stable programs that work. I hope they continue to do it this way and do not get seduced into overloading the language.

We have a lot of fast moving languages already, so having one that moves slowly increases potential choice.
Thank you, yes this is my problem which most commenters here are missing.

I'm using Jellyfin server and Infuse on Apple TV, so I don't have a great way to force-slurp a file on first read, at least not without patching Jellyfin. And I'm not super eager to learn C#.

Even if I were streaming to mpv, most of my lan is only gigabit which is much less than what my storage array can put out.
In distributed computing, a few layers of abstraction up, an analogous technique of sending two identical RPCs to distinct backends can be used to reduce tail latency.
IP - unlike actual real property - is not really defensible by property owners, other than using state monopoly forces. IP is also very hard to globally enforce. Why should society - all societies - pay for such enforcement? IP can only be protected when it's least valuable to all - including the owner: when it's not disclosed/distributed. So, it's a give and take: accept distribution and accept that some people will not care about your "rights" OR don't distribute (and don't benefit from non-distribution)
I believe it is recommended to not use gobin/gopath anymore.

go test ./… tests all files in the project, so I assume build does something similar.
Sigh.

Varlink is designed for IPC, so the expected data rate is maybe hundreds of messages per second in the worst case.

JSON can be parsed at 3 Gigabytes/second [0]. Even unoptimized stdlib parsers in scripting languages get 50 MB/sec.

That's more than enough, standard library support is much more important for a project like this.

And if there is ever a reason to send tar archive or video data, there is always "upgrade" option to switch to raw TCP sockets, with no JSON overhead at all.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19214387

[1] https://github.com/TeskaLabs/cysimdjson
You might be right, only they can say. I just don't take their statements in a press conference at face value, but yeah there is that silver lining.
OpenAI did it so I don’t see why Apple couldn’t. They process data on the device and already have the Siri precedent, which receives, stores and analyzes data from every invocation. I don’t think there’s anything inherently new and unknown as far as data is concerned.
The FDA is under regulatory capture by the pharmaceutical industry, and their approval or lack thereof is one of the most unreliable measures of the safety and efficacy of psychiatric drugs in particular. Schizophrenia diagnoses are almost entirely subjective in nature (there's no reliable biochemical or biomolecular or biophysical test for the presence or absence of the condition) - really the whole field of psychiatric care for mental health issues is about as useful as tuberculosis experts were in the 1850s, before Koch's demonstration of the infectious microbial nature of the disease.
Adventures in the land of substrings and RegExps (2016)
I’ve actually seriously been thinking of using WebAuthn to “authenticate” every single page load with a passkey unlocked by a biometric device only, so that I can be sure that every single page load had a meat finger on TouchID or a meat face in front of FaceID before showing the page to them.

In the future I imagine that there will be biometrically secure browsers that will be required for top security applications, that can guarantee that a single physical person is actually physically present while using it.
I really think the library search is more of something you inherit from other languages, though database drivers are something you need to go looking for. The standard library has an adequate HTTP router (though I prefer grpc-gateway as it autogenerates docs, types, etc.) and logger (slog, but honestly plain log is fine).

For your database driver, just use pgx. For migrations, tern is fine. For the tiniest bit of sugar around scanning database results into structs, use sqlx instead of database/sql.

I wouldn't recommend using a testing framework in Go: https://go.dev/wiki/TestComments#assert-libraries

Here's how I do dependency injection:

func main() {
foo := &Foo{
Parameter: goesHere,
}
bar := &Bar{
SomethingItNeeds: canJustBeTypedIn,
}
app := &App{
Foo: foo,
Bar: bar,
}
app.ListenAndServe()
}

If you need more complexity, you can add more complexity. I like "zap" over "slog" for logging. I am interested in some of the DI frameworks (dig), but it's never been a clear win to me over a little bit of hand-rolled complexity like the above.

A lot of people want some sort of mocking framework. I just do this:

- func foo(x SomethingConcrete) {
- x.Whatever()
- }
+ interface Whateverer { Whatever() }
+ func foo(x Whateverer) {
+ x.Whatever()
+ }

Then in the tests:

type testWhateverer {
n int
}
var _ Whateverer = (*testWhateverer)(nil)
func (w *testWhateverer) Whatever() { w.n++ }
func TestFoo(t *testing.T) {
x := &testWhateverer{}
foo(x)
if got, want := x.n, 1; got != want {
t.Errorf("expected Whatever to have been called: invocation count:\n got: %v\n want: %v", got, want)
}
}

It's easy. I typed it in an HN comment in like 30 seconds. Whether or not a test that counts how many times you called Whatever is up to you, but if you need it, you need it, and it's easy to do.
Unless we come up with newer more efficient algorithms and specialized hardware for implementing AI.
I don't get it (really, not pretending). I know many SPAs are crap, but if SPAs were inherently crap, then all SPAs would be at least kind of crap.

So, I see those website below as examples and ask myself: What's wrong with those:

https://vitepress.dev/

https://www.solidjs.com/

Both are SPAs. Fast, small, working very well.

Ok, they need JS to work. But honestly, how many people are not using JS because they can't (as opposed to because they don't want to). And how many have so low end devices that running the JS is a problem? People watching videos all day on their smartphones. So, the days where processing JS for creating the DOM is a problem are over. Esp. if using fast frameworks like Solid, Preact, Vue or Svelte.

Of course there're website that load 20 MB JS of analytics and spyware. Those are slow not because they're SPAs but because they do all this additional (of course unwanted) stuff. Also accessibility issues are not caused by using SPAs or not. Svelte even has accessibility warnings built-in.
_journal_mode=wal&_busy_timeout=200 seems to work well enough.
Nah, it was some smallish company’s SAAS thingy. This was maybe 2015.
Please don’t make the web more inaccessible to assistive technology users