skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I just gave it another try after my last failed attempt. (https://tomverbeure.github.io/2024/05/20/Tesla-FSD-First-and...)

I still find it shockingly bad, especially in the way it reacts, or doesn’t, to the way things change around the car (think a car on the left in front of you who switches on indicators to merge in front of you) or the way it makes the most random lane changing decisions and changes it’s mind in the middle of that maneuver.

Those don’t count as disengagements, but they’re jarring and drivers around you will rightfully question your behavior.

And that’s all over just a few miles of driving in an easy environment if interstate or highway.

I totally agree that it’s an impressive party trick, but it has no business being on the road.

My experience with Waymo in SF couldn’t have been more different.
Thrust augmentation nozzle (TAN) concept for rocket engine booster applications
Summary is they’ve rolled out AI chips to their devices quickly but are approx two years being others in AI response quality.
I commented on exactly this elsewhere in the thread. It’s hard to understate how insanely useful it is to be able to painlessly edit earlier history even when there are later threads of work based on it.

Also in my experience everyone says “my default workflow is easy” when you talk about an alternative VCS but in every other context they complain about how often that workflow starts getting exceptional: rebase conflicts, stash conflicts, WIP commits, uncommitted work accidentally blown away, etc.
> On the other hand...

Stories like this remind me what a harsh reality college was. People like that knew college was worthless and were just attending to pass the time and get their degree. They came with the skillset to get a job from day one out of high school. Basically these types of kids can join a team, and be completely self sufficient within days, taking complete ownership of everything they touch.

I've had the privilege to work with 1 of these kids and it's amazing to watch. You give them little and they do a lot. I didn't read the article but my issue with some new gen ppl is those who make it without any struggles, say, they graduate and immediately get a job, they get really arrogant and refuse guidance or feedback. They write shit code that never looks at the bigger picture and get upset if they don't get praised.

> The IT job market has been tight since the end of 2022

Trump messing with H1-B visas really helped raise wages and mobility IMO.
You misread my comment. I think solving problems like finding genetic patterns in cancer is exactly what we should be investing in. That is not even close to the largest resource sinks for AI model training right now. In the resources were going into generally making AI better, great. They're not. They're going until training models for mediocre consumer "gee-whizz aint that neat" products.
Anyone who believes Tesla beats Google because they are better at collecting and handling data can be safely ignored.
This just reminded I forgot I have had a Copilot subscription. It has not made any useful code suggestions in months to the point of fading from my memory. I just logged in to cancel it. Now, I need to check my other subscriptions that I can cancel or reduce to a lower tier.
Correct, it's a mathematical dimension.
From my experience, it is getting better over time, and I believe that there's still a lot of relatively low hanging fruit, particularly in terms of integrating the LLM with the language server protocol and other tooling. But having said that, at this point in time, it's just not good enough for independent work, so I would suggest using it only as you would pair-program with a mid-level human developer who doesn't have much context on the project, and has a short attention span. In particular, I generally only have the AI help me with one function/refactoring at a time, and in a way that is easy for me to test as we go, and am finding immense value.
At the bottom of the article you linked: "Hulchanski said that focusing on immigration as a cause, and promising to reduce it in order to bring housing costs down, is 'just another way of avoiding the real discussion, that we need systemic change.'"

Focusing on immigration is convenient (riles up nativists and doesn't threaten entrenched interests), but it is not what is causing the housing crisis or inflation
I wish the article explained wtf conker is.
Is Google treating Dropbox the same way? Sounds like it could be anticompetitive behaviour.
Works most of the time, Fails at the worst time - Supervision absolutely necessary...
Would you feel comfortable pushing generated code to production unaudited?
Ask HN: Need for SaaS app to transform your spatial data for rendering/querying?
Imagine there are TBs of raster and vector data in your S3, and you'd want to have the ability to render/query those files without bringing in Postgres or setting up your infra.
Does it solve a problem for you? I'd love to build an app given that there is enough need!

I work in the GIS space as a data engineer and I've seen this problem quite a few times but not sure if it's that big, things are either too expensive or slow and harder to scale with spatial data IMO

(Maptiler/Mpabox don't provide querying ability out of the box)
LLMs are great for simple, common tasks, i.e. CRUD apps, RESTful web endpoints, unit tests, for which there's an enormous amount of examples and not much unique complexity. There's a lot of developers whose day mostly involves these repetitive, simple tasks. There's also a lot of developers who work on things that are a lot more niche and complicated, where LLMs don't provide much help.
What's up with Germany?
The most annoying requirement is their Play Store delete account url. We have an API where we can delete the user’s account. But no, Google wanted a stupid url.
I also have heard that, multiple times. I don't buy it. I think there are at least two experiments that could show the difference.

First, you could time the travel of light from one place to another. To do that, you need synchronized clocks. The easy way to do that is to start with clocks synchronized at a central point, then very slowly move them from the central point to the endpoints. Why very slowly? Because you have to worry about time dilation with the clocks. For small v, the difference in the rate of time is approximately v^2/2c^2 (to first order). The amount of time you have to maintain it is t = d/v. The corresponding difference in clock time still approaches zero as v approaches zero, so in principle, the clocks can be arbitrarily close to each other in time if you just move them slowly enough.

But what if c has different values in opposite directions? Well, then time dilates different amounts for the clocks going in opposite directions, but the amount of time dilation for each clock still approaches zero if the velocity is low enough.

Second: If you have a cyclotron or synchrotron, with charged particles moving in a circle in a magnetic field, and those charged particles are moving a significant fraction of the speed of light, if the speed of light is not uniform, their motion should deviate from a circle. Why? Because the force on them due to the magnetic field should be the same, but the acceleration should be different depending on what fraction of the speed of light they're moving. (Due to increased mass, if you think of it that way. If you don't, well, the equation doesn't change.)

I think that some experiments would fail to show a non-uniform speed of light, but I think experiments could be devised that would show it.
I imagine this situation is kind of unique. Once a company finds out the features they sell will be integrated into the 1st party platform, and they have a chance to get out of the business, and they know they’ve got competitors that Apple could turn to next, I imagine Apple would be getting a steep discount. Especially if it’s an aqui-hire — peace of mind the employees will be taken care of.
Don't forget the time Brewster tried to run a bank -- Internet Archive Federal Credit Union. Or that the physical archives are stored on an active fault line and unlikely to receive prompt support during an emergency. Or that, when someone told him that archives are often stored in salt mines he replied, "cool, where can I buy one?"
Sometimes you have to kill orphans too!
Unsolicited advice: Try to get someone to review your resume and other materials (grades, cover letters, recommendation letters, official documents, etc). Ideally by someone like a recruiter, the schools career center if there is one, or even just a personal friend. Preferably someone with recent experience.

No judgement, but you might be missing something or doing something "wrong" without knowing it. Being ghosted absolutely everywhere sounds strange regardless of how the market is doing. CS as a field is not dead yet.

As for the field not caring about you: nobody owes you anything. That doesn't mean you should just roll over and give up. And it also doesn't mean you should take shit from abusive managers "working you to death". There are good people and companies out there, but you need to go out and find them. I work only 4 days a week, prioritize my family, and my employer accepts that.

Compared to so many other jobs CS is still a lot better than other options and will continue to be viable for a long time. You're absolutely not too late.
Ehh I’ve seen the opposite line of thought too. People with kids and mortgages crave stability and aren’t trying to job hop every 18 months.
this reminds me of the guy who couldn't get hired because it was casually difficult to have the experience: https://www.reddit.com/r/dontyouknowwhoiam/comments/t5kcwc/t...
Reading this makes me willing to bet that this capital intensive investment boom will be similar to other enormous capital investment booms in US history, such as the laying of the railroads in the 1800s, the proliferation of car companies in the early 1900s, and the telecom fiber boom in the late 1900s. In all of these cases there was an enormous infrastructure (over) build out, followed by a crash where nearly all the companies in the industry ended up in bankruptcy, but then that original infrastructure build out had huge benefits for the economy and society as that infrastructure was "soaked up" in the subsequent years. E.g. think of all the telecom investment and subsequent bankruptcies in the late 90s/early 00s, but then all that dark fiber that was laid was eventually lit up and allowed for the explosion of high quality multimedia growth (e.g. Netflix and the like).

I think that will happen here. I think your average investor who's currently paying for all these advanced chips, data centers and energy supplies will walk away sorely disappointed, but this investment will yield huge dividends down the road. Heck, I think the energy investment alone will end up accelerating the switch away from fossil fuels, despite AI often being portrayed as a giant climate warming energy hog (which I'm not really disputing, but now that renewables are the cheapest form of energy, I believe this huge, well-funded demand will accelerate the growth of non-carbon energy sources).
Such debt would be cancelled and is not problematic. The problematic one is government owing money to citizens or institutions (domestic or foreign).
If USA owes 100B to a pension fund in Japan and Japan owes 100B to pension fund in USA then there is no way to cancel it. Governments have to pay the money back with interest and at some point it becomes significant burden to tax payers. It's problematic especially when those tax payers aren't the ones who benefited from spending the debt was taken to finance.
If you can learn git in a morning, you can definitely learn jj in 12 minutes
Way to for profit news cnn make the number one story paid only. Just woke up just want to read this article, can any help?
Phenomenal consciousness is alien to us: SETI and the Fermi paradox
I seem to get to chime in on questions like this repeatedly (those karma points won't delete themselves.) Lets watch hackernews stubbornly avoid conversations about power and in this case how its accumulated to instead myopically focus on the technical/symbolic stand-ins for power.
it sounds like the authors are suggesting that additional energy usage caused by stress can, in isolation from other causes, be a mechanism for disease. But that doesn’t make much sense:

- our metabolisms are adaptable, so why wouldn’t this increase in energy use simply be offset by an increase in energy production? It can’t be that people who are stressed in general aren’t getting enough energy, because that would correlate stress with weight loss, but I would argue that there are plenty of overweight people with stress.

- if the argument is that an increased metabolism by itself is the culprit, then why wouldn’t people with higher metabolisms in general — like anyone who exercises regularly, but certainly athletes — not also experience more disease? If your answer is “that’s different for some reason”, then that means that increased energy usage and metabolism is not by itself the cause, which suggests it may not be the cause at all.

Furthermore, even granting the supposition that stress requires increased energy usage, their abstract doesn’t make much sense:

- “Living organisms have a limited capacity to consume energy.” Okay, so that means that no matter how stressed we get, there’s a cap to the energy we can use. But how is that relevant, since it also applies to exercise or other energy utilization by the body? Why does a limited capacity to consume energy only apply to stress?

- “Overconsumption of energy by [stress handling] brain-body processes leads to … excess energy expenditure above the organism’s optimum”. Thats basically a tautology, but more importantly, it doesn’t tell us that energy consumption above “optimal” — which seems extremely vague — is a bad thing.

- “In turn, [excess energy consumption above the optimal] accelerates physiological decline in cells, laboratory animals, and humans, and may drive biological aging”. So that “may” is a pretty good reason to dismiss this, since again why wouldn’t this lead to increased disease among athletes or anyone with higher metabolism?

- “Mechanistically, the energetic restriction of growth, maintenance and repair processes leads to the progressive wear-and-tear of molecular and organ systems” Maybe, but why are they energetically restricted if metabolism has increased to provide more energy? And again, why don’t we then see increased disease and aging in anyone who exercises regularly, since that exercise not only uses energy that restricts growth, maintenance and repair, but exercise causes more need for repair.

I think the core problem is that it’s all going to boil down to how you define “optimum”, which the authors conveniently don’t. The authors are going to be left with defining “optimum” as meaning “that energy usage which does not cause disease”. But that’s no different than simply claiming “stress causes disease”, so this model describes nothing, since it tells us nothing about how to identify non-optimum energy usage or how non-optimum energy usage causes disease.
Aww shit open in the app and I don’t have to pay
This paper reminds me of the “insight” / factoid that all mammals are basically born with the same rough number of heartbeats, and then they die. Smaller animals like mice have shorter lifespans and faster heartbeats. Larger ones like whales and elephants have slower heartbeats and longer lives.

The humorous (and obviously false, though apparently not if this paper is out there) corollary is that any exercise and non-sedentary lifestyle means you lose years of your life
Memories of 1920s
Yes, they work flawlessly for me.
Would you feel comfortable pushing human code to production unaudited?
For my I have a company subscription for Copilot and I just use the line based autocomplete. It’s mildly better than the built in autocomplete. I never have it do more than though and probably wouldn’t buy a license for myself.
This is an opinion almost certainly based more in emotion than logic, but I don't think I could trust any sort of fully autonomous driving system that didn't involve communication with transmitters along the road itself (like a glideslope and localiser for aircraft approaches) and with other cars on the road.

Motorway driving sure, there it's closer to fancy cruise control. But around town, no thank you. I regularly drive through some really crappily designed bits of road, like unlabelled approaches to multi-lane roundabouts where the lane you need to be in for a particular exit sorta just depends on what the people in front and to the side of you happen to have chosen. If it's difficult as a human to work out what the intent is, I don't trust a largely computer vision-based system to work it out.

The roads here are also in a terrible state, and the lines on them even moreso. There's one particular patch of road where the lane keep assist in my car regularly tries to steer me into the central reservation, because repair work has left what looks a bit like lane markings diagonally across the lane.
Also they talk a lot about data centers and cloud compute, but do not mention chips for on decide inference.

Given where mobile sits in the hierarchy of interfaces, that is where I would be placing my bets if I were a VC.
Yeah, it's actually frustrating that even when writing Go code, which is statically typed, it keeps messing up the arguments order. That would seem to me a pretty easy thing to generate.

Although it's much better when writing standard REST and gRPC APIs
I learned in college
Geometry class that you can transform a square to an equilateral triangle in 11 cuts or so

So I wrote a matlab program to draw the shapes, and cut them
out, and it works

It’s mathematically exact, not just approximate

Still surprises me after 20 years, so I want to find this old program again lol
I've recommended his book PAIP despite the AI in the title because you can take it as about the craft of programming (I mean things like style and efficiency, not the bare beginning of being able to code at all) -- using old-fashioned AI as the subject matter. To learn better coding you gotta code something.

https://github.com/norvig/paip-lisp
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_debt_crisis

Everything old is new again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrhJcqgXrlw
sounds like a bug
Under President Clinton 25 years ago there was a budget surplus.
Anyway every time it happens from now on I'll make a post on hacker news and that way I'll be able to narrow down the cause and timing. The homeless are awful. I should write that everyone in San Francisco is awful given the enormous amount of stalking gaslighting and typical assholery. It's like it's Spanish for disappointment.
> The responsibility doesn't shift, it always lies with the human.

Indeed, and that goes for the person or persons who say that the products they sell are safe when used in a certain way.
> However, why would the contributors to jj not just try to make git better by addressing these weaknesses?

Because the git workflow causes a lot of the difficulty and fixing it involves making a new concept: mutable changesets with a unique id which are built on top of immutable commits.

jj isn’t just some bugfixes or a few porcelain improvements, it deeply changes the way you approach things. And there’s a pretty decent amount of unlearning of subtly-broken concepts you need to do.

None of that could ever make its way into git.
Drivers are part of the OS
Apple isn't very good at UX. They just have the manpower to fix things until the CEO stops complaining.

Three things come to mind regarding bad Apple UX:

1. USB ports on the back of a screen

2. No separate Copy/Paste keys, or Undo/Redo keys.

3. Magic mouse with a USB port on the bottom (so you can't use it while charging).

4. Sideways traffic light on top of windows

5. Maximizing windows to full screen is hard to do.
What will be the advantage of having a bunch of obsolete hardware? All I see is more e-waste.
I've been using that one for a long time now. I recall that when I got started with Syncthing (some months to a year or two ago?), it seemed to have been the folk wisdom to use Syncthing-Fork, but I don't recall what the reason was.
This is so much fun. I did the same for a Discord server full of philosophy nerds, and the bot would say all sorts of things that started out profound-sounding and ended up absurd (one of our favorites: “I think therefore I am not italian”)
Might as well start calling it McDonnell Douglas Starliner ;)
I see the same results as my TabNine+Template generator+language server as I do with things like CoPilot. I get TabNine issues when the code base isn’t huge. I think also tossing away language servers and template generators for just LLM will just lead to seeking “proper predictive path”. Most of the time the LLM will spit out the create-express/react-template for you, when you ask it to customize it will guess using the most common patterns. Do you need something to guess for you?

It’s also getting worse because people are poisoning the well.
I think it’s a nicely summarised challenge to boot.

It’s doubtless to me that thinking happens without intermediary symbols; but it’s also obvious that I can’t think deeply without the waypoints and context symbols provide. I think it is a common sense opinion.
Will ICANN drop .io if the British Indian Ocean Territory ceases to exist?
I really want to use KeePass and its ecosystem but the password sharing story isn't great there. I and wife have a lot of shared passwords and Bitwarden works really good for that. So, I don't know what's a good viable alternative for us.
I wrote a program to launch and kill tight loop threads such that Windows Task Manager's performance graph would spell out text (though of course with spaces below lines in letters filled out).
How about for people "without autism" that have some of the characteristics (probably everyone), trying to examine their own mental workings (ideally more people) ?

How about for people with "mild autism" that have now been labeled by the medical system as being distinct from people "without autism", even though the main difference was merely passing some arbitrary threshold?

The difference with cancer is that cancer is an unequivocal negative. You can't be just "a little cancerous" and just embrace it. Whereas autism we're seemingly talking about variances in distinct components of what makes up intelligence. So setting some arbitrary threshold below which you're "fine" and above which you have a "problem" is really an artifact of the medical industry and larger economic system rather than actual mechanics.
Overall, the US is doing things that were supposed to be impossible a few decades ago. And Treasury keeps printing money. More importantly, the debt markets are relatively healthy.

Nobody talks about 'crowding out' anymore.

I don't follow monetary policy anymore, but I do know this era is unique and the old rules really don't apply anymore. The fact is, there aren't really any good places to put your money except for the US, and the Us is taking full advantage of that.
Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe

https://www.lockss.org/

This is a brilliant system relying on a randomised consensus protocol. I wanted to do my info sec dissertation on it, but its security model is extremely well thought out. There wasn't anything I felt I could add to it.
Broad vaccination of populations against a variety of diseases wasn't a thing until a lot later. The antibiotics at the time were very limited and selective.

Btw., the protests still were the thing that got the change at the time, not the technology!

Seems to me any causal link is weak at best. Claiming that humans have no agency when it comes to society is rather a very strong claim that needs a lot of evidence. Usually people make the change, not technology (it wasn't machines protesting and overthrowing governments in Eastern Europe in the late 1980s, for example).