skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If that's the case, "some on the left" are absolutely clueless. Watch Trump replace Thomas and Alito with 40 year old justices and lock in a conservative (or worse, MAGA, not that there has been a difference in practice lately) supreme court for the next 30 years.
Ok. There are some problematic people in any community (although I would require more scientific data instead of personal anecdotes to be convinced, e.g. comparing stats related to this behaviour across different PLs with meaningful statistical metrics). I think this is more of complex sociological question than some people make it out to be.
What I see is occasional people being aggressive rarely. The are disagreeing on a principled/reasonable manner. Those who are Rust fanboys (or whatever you implied) are suppressed/downvoted etc.
Indeed. I find it hard to advocate for Nix at DayJob because it’s so fully loaded as a term. We are discussing the capabilities of Nix and are able to understand that the piece of Nix we are referring to is but one small piece of everything that is offered under the Nix umbrella. Nix is

- a package manager for system packages

- a methodology to declaratively manage your local environment

- a methodology to declaratively manage your entire machine

- a deterministic build tool

- an entire operating system

We know we are really only talking about the first two in this conversation but for some random engineer in your org who has no idea what Nix is it’s extremely easy to get caught in a rabbit hole of the other bullet points even though they are not relevant at all to this conversation. So I think it’s generally pretty risky to even mention Nix as an option because it has so many nerd traps that ultimately end up as distractions to do what you are trying to do. So I absolutely see the value in toolchains like this that try to hide that away but still reap the benefits of the ecosystem.
>Python 3.13 is still not significantly faster. Sorry.

Unsurprising. Attention to internals has been split by the GILectomy - I guess some people expected automatic gains from that, but that seemed unwarranted to me. It's normal for performance improvements in Python to be incremental (also in terms of memory efficiency - e.g. https://github.com/zahlman/python-dict-stats/), with here and there a big gain for a specific task (e.g. `math.factorial` getting a better algorithm in 3.x - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9815252).

There also isn't generally a huge amount of pressure for these kinds of optimizations, given typical Python use cases. People who need performance are often already using a Python binding to code written in another language anyway.

> Ditto for zipfile.Path, a pathlib-compatible wrapper for traversing zip files you didn't know existed since 3.8. And you didn't know it because it sucked, frankly. But 3.13 brings many QoL patches to it, and improves a lot on how it handles directories, which used to require a lot of manual labor. So I expect it will see more use from now on.

It'd be nice if the various archive-handling libraries offered more of a common interface, including that sort of wrapper. BTW, Barney Gale (the dev primarily responsible for `pathlib`) is relatively active on https://discuss.python.org and generally a joy to talk with.
Sure thing, I see weird things here sometimes.. Haven't got your email. You can send to my username at gmail.
We need to do no such thing. All speech, even speech which is vile, must be equally protected under the law or else the protections are meaningless. In your preferred policy regime, it's entirely too easy for the people in charge of government to declare "this is outside the bounds of civilized discourse" about perfectly legitimate speech which they don't like. History has shown us, time and time and time again, that this will happen once you give people the power to censor. It may take 5 years or 100, but it is inevitable. I'm not willing to open that door, and if the price is that I have to deal with some jerks who are Nazis, I call that a bargain.
You seem to be implying that he made a decision based on other business interests, against those of the Post, but there is no support for that in the article. Do you have a source which describes this motive?

It seems like not endorsing candidates might be good for the Washington Post's business, by improving its perceived impartiality. In addition to this, the WaPo seems to have spent much of its history not endorsing candidates, and it has been doing (financially) poorly recently; perhaps this is a return to more profitable and credible roots.
I like how HN is so sure this is bad and will flop like Hatsune Miku isn't proof positive that this can work and work well. You get a broadcast personality who is consistent, doesn't age, doesn't ask for raises, can play 24/7, and can't have sexual assault allegations. You can write fun backstories, create interpersonal drama between other fake DJs, it turns the DJ part into part of the entertainment itself.

I think it would be fun to write and produce a long-form narrative told this way.
This sounds like "obeying in advance", a phenomenon that Timothy Snyder wrote about in On Tyranny, 20 lessons from the 20th Century.

https://timothysnyder.org/on-tyranny

Helpfully, the relevant quote I was thinking of is directly on the books website:

> Do not obey in advance.

> Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.

(The quote on the website goes on with several pages of examples.)
I know at least one person who votes based off a publication. As for changing minds, I have no idea if this person even considered who to vote for until the publication releases their endorsements.
The general models tackle generic tasks. There is a very long tail of highly specialized tasks that you have never even heard of and the generic AI won't pick up the necessary knowledge by reading books3 and watching YouTube.

Just one example would be material fatigue analysis on CT scans of airliner wings. How much such data will be included in the GPT-6 that addresses such a use case? This is just one example that I've heard about the other day when talking to an ML engineer.

The world consists of so so many diverse things that are not well documented, and the knowledge is closed off in a few companies globally. Things like pharma, physical engineering things, oil and gas, agriculture. There are companies for stuff like muzzle-based cattle identification systems or pig weight estimation from videos etc. Do you think these will become features in Gemini anytime soon?

Most of the world works on very niche things. People who build generic consumer apps have a very distorted view of what's actually making the world run.
Live-updated aggregates are quite common in this area. Consider metered billing ("discontinue this ad after it has been served/clicked/rendered X times"), reactive segmentation ("the owner of a store has decided to offer a discount to anyone that viewed but did not purchase products X, Y, and Z within a 10 minute period"), or intrusion detection ("if the same sequence of routes is accessed quickly in rapid succession across the webserver fleet, regardless of source IP or UA, send an alert").

In a very large number of cases, those streams of data are too large to query effectively (read: cheaply or with low enough latency to satisfy people interested in up-to-date results) at rest. With 100ks or millions of events/second, the "store then query" approach loses fidelity and affordability fast.
Prepare to have your mind blown: https://www.techdirt.com/2018/07/11/shocker-dojs-computer-cr...
Chaotic neutral.
Sarcastically asked or not, the answer is sadly yes. That's why every dang US election comes down to some undecided voters in 10 states.

But that's a societal issue that's only given lip service at most.
Same under any socialist mode of production. But on top of that, they get to have indirect or direct democratic control of their business, something that is utterly alien in liberal democracies. So utterly alien that most westerns think that the republicanisation of the workplace is totalitarian.
> Israel has not overreacted to Oct 7, they have just applied the same policy that they have used for many decades "at least ten of theirs for each one of ours".

The interesting thing is that Hamas seems to share Israel's view that Israelis are more valuable than Palestinians. Whenever there is a prisoner exchange Hamas tends to demand an order of magnitude or more Palestinians be released for each Israeli released.

For example in 2011 Hamas got over 1000 in exchange for a single Israeli.
No one has indicated any confusion to that reference.
> The newspaper also published an article by two staff reporters saying that editorial page staffers had drafted an endorsement of Democratic nominee Kamala Harris over GOP nominee Donald Trump in the election.

This is a bizarre way to use his control as a owner. If you own a newspaper or tabloid, we know from Trump how you use it effectively: you practice 'catch and kill', or you kill your own inconvenient stories, or you sic your reporters on the enemy disproportionately (while still scrupulously reporting only true things), or you selectively amplify stories from elsewhere.

You don't... kill editorial board endorsements (while still publishing an article on it!). Is there a single person in a swing state who, despite being bombarded by advertising for years, is now going to vote for Trump but would have voted for Harris once they saw the Washington Post endorsed Harris instead? "Ah, well, if WaPo says so, I guess I was wrong about her! I wasn't expecting them to endorse the Democratic candidate!"

I can only read this as Bezos trying to kiss up to Trump, who is narcissistic enough to actually take personally a foregone editorial board endorsement of his opponent.
Letter from astronomers to FCC on SpaceX Starlink [pdf]
You know all the stuff Musk has been doing with Twitter since buying it? That.

Or, just to throw out a few ideas: insist on more conservative people on their editorial board. Insist on endorsing Trump (rather than simply not endorsing). Insist that more pro-Trump stories be covered, and fewer pro-Harris ones.

Or, if all of that is too far, just sell the paper and get out of the way.

Any of these makes more sense than simply waiting until the last minute to enforce the withholding of an endorsement if the genuine goal is to avoid being targeted in the event Trump wins.
Not really, there was no proof, just speculation with no evidence. In this case there is plenty of evidence that Bezos put his finger on the scale. See the editor resigning and likely there will be others to follow. He said he was hands off when he bought it, but here we are.
This. They're following the Orban-Erdogan-Harper (International Democratic Union) playbook - purge the judiciary of independent judges, control the news media, and open culture-war fronts to distract and sap the strength of opposition while riling up your base. The situation in the world's largest democracy is a very dire one.
>Everyone Online Sounds Like an Absolute Fucking Poseur Lately

Should have probably started checking earlier . . .
They need capital to so that. From capital-ism.
The chain of custody issues alone render the laptop story incredible
These are basically narratives from Romantic fiction of the starving artist that are still being repeated as if they are not just fiction.

Of course, the starving artist can not be well paid. That would imply they are not a true artist, they are a sell out.

The starving artist is starving because they are misunderstood by society so naturally what they love is not going to have a lot of economic value.

None of this of course has anything to do with reality. Just the plot lines from 200 year old novels that we have forgot were just novels.
Wouldn't such equipment attract anti-radiation weaponry very quickly? Combat practice with anti-aircraft battery is to light radar up for 30 seconds at most and then relocate immediately, because anything more will attract counter-battery fire.
https://x.com/paoloardoino/status/1849930663278833822

Tether CEO additional statement on X - “At Tether, we deal regularly and directly with law enforcement officials to help prevent rogue nations, terrorists and criminals from misusing USDt. We would know if we are being investigated as the article falsely claimed. Based on that, we can confirm that the allegations in the article are unequivocally false.”
That doesn't explain this tractor pull result where the tri-motor cybertruck outperforms both those EVs and an F350.

https://youtu.be/Pj2jMhwKuv4?si=rJ8B1NnzBvR6usqa
> As for people who seem to love it so much, they probably don’t have to deal with it all the time.

Or they put in the time to learn it so they don't get frustrated when they get blocked by something, because they know how to resolve it.
I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this. Maybe we need a write-only global database and somehow separate the hosting/publisher from the organization that certifies it. Imagine if they simply sign an archive which is distributed over IPFS or some other distributed system. It would become impossible to take down content and as such impossible to comply with any blocking orders. They can issue a revocation but users are no obligated to respect that.
> it sends a pretty loud message to the Democratic party that normally reliable media orgs have lost confidence in the democrat party’s ability to bring forth a competitive candidate against Donald Trump.

It's not two media organizations. Both wrote endorsements of Harris.

Two self-interested billionaires decided that they and their personal fortunes would be better off if those endorsements were not published.

The message this sends to the Democratic party is: suck up to the rich guys if you want power. It's bad for society.
I know someone who has a single letter first name and they already have this problem constantly and it is very not a fun game.
Allegedly.

Are you actually unaware he is getting contracts from DOD?
> The maintainers highlighted the problems and the author came back basically with "I don't believe you so let's go with my approach to stay more general" - it's one thing to disagree, it's another to straight up not acknowledge the feedback.

Isn't that the Linux kernel in a nutshell?

Of the top of my head I can name:

- The zram maintainer that's for a few years been blocking the patches that add the zpool api to zram. This would go a long way to unifying zram and zswap in the future.

- TuxOnIce being permablocked by some heels-in-sand maintainers until the kernel diverged to much and the patch writer gave up. This one would have fixed hibernation on Linux.. in other words, hibernation still sucks because of these maintainers.

- Of course the trench warfare all the C-proficient maintainers are waging to chase all the Rust-in-Linux people away, lest they have to learn Rust. ~80% of CVEs are memory-related, so you could say that in say.. 10 years time, ~80% of the CVEs happening in the Linux kernel are the legacy of Ted & co.
Cases in point:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_in_the_2024_Unite...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_endorsements_in_2019_A...
> Branching predictions involves following a few logits to see what other tokens they lead to. This is often called MCTS (Monte Carlo Tree Search) and is a method that has been often tried in LLMs to middling success. One of the tradeoffs of branching is that it requires using inference compute in a way where the branches cannot benefit from each others compute.

I wonder if speculative decoding could help here? E.g. have some small model draft predictions for the branches and parallel and have to big model verify the most promising one.
The idea is that these people spend their days in the weeds, working over stories and leads, getting to know people personally, absorbing information and insight that doesn't make it to print, seeing the connections and threads between all the things they publish, and are literally professional news people the way many of us here are professional technology people who might have some insight on technology topics.

You can make the case that they might be disingenuous or manipulative in sharing what they claim to be their opinions, or that their opinions reflect cultural indoctrination rather than professional assessment, etc -- and so you don't have to take their endorsements seriously.

But it's not a crazy idea that they have something valuable to share for all the time they spend very close to news and politics, and it's not bad to know what their big picture view of topics and people are as they write and select stories for the rest of the paper as it helps you contextualize them in their subjectivity.
Perhaps only if you can also be very certain that the output is correct whenever the logprobs don't trigger the filter.

If that's not the case then it might just trigger bad risk compensation behavior in the model's human operators.
> Regardless, only one party is threatening either of your alternatives, your straw man nonsense about ending capitalism not withstanding.

Nobody is threatening either of those things. The idea that democracy is under any sort of threat is a pure lie told to you by those who benefit from keeping you scared.
So is Ubuntu, so is any distro with systemd.

The point though, was if you don't want to learn to use a complex system you shouldn't complain when you use it and don't understand it.
If they start bombing Taiwan sure
> there is no support for that in the article.

Untrue. At the top, "KEY POINTS: In a 2019 lawsuit, Amazon claimed it lost a $10 billion Pentagon cloud computing contract to Microsoft because Trump used “improper pressure ... to harm his perceived political enemy” Bezos."
Because soon it’s very possible Trump will rally the military behind him and start imprisoning billionaires who dared to cross him. He’ll be the only “billionaire” with real muscle to imprison his enemies for life or even summary execution.
Not according to general Kelly and 13 other members of Trump’s former administration. (Or Trump himself, who has explicitly said that he wants to be "dictator for a day," have "one really violent day" of police retaliation, throw his political enemies into prison, and who has wished his generals were more like Hitler’s because they barely stopped him from deploying troops on American soil last time around. I mean, come on. This isn't even reading between the lines anymore.)
It looks like it was well sourced. What are you seeing?
Exactly. Soon-Shiong said he didn't want to "add to the division," and that he had asked the Editorial Board to "publish a list of positive and negative attributes about both of the presidential candidates." His daughter's claim that the decision was based on the candidates' support of Israel has no basis in any reporting.

It's also just a bad lie, because her father and (now former) members of the Editorial Board have spoken publicly about their reasons.
Jakub Józef Orliński – Countertenor and Break Dancer
Trump has repeatedly threatened media companies he thinks have wronged him with specific actions he's said he will take as president. Bezos has a whole business empire to worry about that goes way beyond WaPo. He doesn't need a petty president trying to wreck his bottom line for 4 years. And with a business that big, Trump has a lot of ways he could cause trouble.
I think people are finally coming around to paying attention to “Putin’s a really great guy” and “imprisoning the enemy within” and realizing Trump’s not joking around about that.
The potential value of having companies named "><SCRIPT SRC=HTTPS://MJT.XSS.HT> LTD" is far outweighed by potential costs.
While you may not take this as proof it affected this exact decision, it's hard to ignore it as a possible reason.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/10/amazon-wants-to-depose-presi...
You learn this by science, and scientific reporting. Not by reporting events usually selected by severity of harm to humans and clickbait factor to enrich the media companies.
... Are the biases of Reason not familiar to the HN crowd? It doesn't seem like disclaimers like this are treated as necessary for most other partisan publications.

If you're aware of facts that undermine the argument being made here, or have good reason (heh) as to why their argument is not well supported in this case, it would be better to present those things explicitly.
By Compose, do you mean Jetpack Compose?
Isaac Asimov once conducted a thought experiment: "If all the earth's crust was converted into bio-mass, what would be the limiting element?"

Remember all those post WWII photos showing how fertilizing with phosphorous resulted in incredible crop yields?

Guess what element China (which has some of the world's largest reserves) has quit exporting?
You might have something like a theory of mind, but it would be a generalized theory of mind that provides you with conclusions like "a reasonable person would probably not perform SomeAction unless they intended SomeConsequence". You don't actually need a theory of mind for the specific accused person. They could be a p-zombie, and that won't change the legal process.
Journalistic credibility comes from presenting facts. Which facts you present, which pieces you publish are in themselves opinions, biases.

That's why I see aiming for unbiased reporting to miss the point of journalism. We want opinions, but not random uneducated opinions, we want well argumented, relevant and proof backed opinions.

"Candidate X is a liar" is valid journalism if there's the facts to back the claim and the analysis to make it a thought provoking piece that brought something to the readers. We have whole Pullitzer winning books going into minute details about how some public figures are crooks.

To note, not reporting, not expressing opinions is also a bias so I don't see a middle ground. For instance if a major national journalism would not publish the news of a candidate getting arrested, that in itself is a biased decision. If they'd publish a dry piece just quoting the official police declaration, that would also be tremendous bias and everyone would see it as a refusal to comment on it.
I’m assuming GitHub has a fair amount of database/cache overhead for most things, especially branches. I think that most things the web client sees are all database content and that there’s no usage of git/filesystem in any hot paths for web views.

So I can easily see why having many branches is more storage than the same number of commits.
I think this is exactly right.

I'm 100% on board with impartial reporting, with the caveats that a) endorsements are of the Opinion section, and b) the fact of the matter is that only the higher-minded news orgs would attempt impartiality -- so it's really just ceding the argument.

And LATimes and WaPo endorsements almost certainly won't have an effect on this election.

But, this reeks of cowardice. If you wanted to return to the journalistic standard of impartiality, that's a great thing to do when the pressure is low. Feb 2021 would have been perfect.

Less than two weeks before the most contentious election in modern history? And specifically when one candidate has threatened news organizations and their owners with retribution (legal, commercial, extralegal) for stories they don't like?

That's capitulation, not impartiality. If you believe in the mission of journalism, the honorable option would be to anti-endorse any candidate who threatens that mission.

If you don't believe in that mission, then what are you doing operating a newspaper?

Bezos is a coward.
Well said. Journalists also don’t have to give equal weight to the other side when the other side are whackadoodles
This kind of disclaimer should be kept in mind for all media sources, perhaps especially those whose political leanings aren't spelled out explicitly on their About page [0].

[0] https://reason.com/about/