skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you tried to come up with a “lightweight” Unicode alternative it would almost certainly evolve right back into the clusterfuck that Unicode is. In fact the odds would mean it would probably be even worse.

Unicode is complex because capturing all the worlds writing systems into a single system is categorically complex. Because human meatspace language is complex.

And even then if you decided to “rewrite the worlds language systems themselves” to conform to a simpler system it too would eventually evolve right back into the clusterfuck that is the worlds languages.

It’s inescapable. You cannot possibly corral however many billion people live on this planet into something less complex. Humans are too complex and the ideas and emotions they need to express are too complex.

The fact that Unicode does as good of a job as it does and has stuck around for so long is a pretty big testament to how well designed and versatile it is! What came before it was at least an order of magnitude worse and whatever replaces it will have to be several orders of magnitude better.

Whatever drives a Unicode replacement would have to demonstrate a huge upset to how we do things… like having to communicate with intelligent life on other planets or something and even then they probably have just as big of a cluster fuck as Unicode to represent whatever their writing system is. And even then Unicode might be able to support it!
Why a Memphis Community Is Fighting Elon Musk's Supercomputer
In mine the VS crew is the minority by far. VS is much worse, especially without ReSharper and at that point why not just use rider.
Claude Shannon was the Fabrice Bellard of his time (or is it the other way around?). If he were around today, his projects would constantly be on HN.

I am curious to know if there's a gene for these incredibly driven, very intelligent people that also _finish projects_.
> Search engines tend to produce neutral garbage, not harmful garbage (i.e. small tidbits of data between an ocean of SEO fluff, rather than completely incorrect facts)

Wasn't google AI surfacing results about making pizza with glue and eating rocks? how is that not harmful garbage?
For me the window is laggy and takes a few seconds to resize or move. It's also not reliable when prompting sometimes it just sits there with no output and I have to quit and restart. I've since uninstalled the desktop app and I'm happier with the "Add to Dock" web version.
I am pretty sure Ive had cavities taken care of that were not cavities. Ultimately its a small procedure and nets the dentist a few $100 bucks - and the patient can't be bothered to get a 2nd opinion.

Maybe this is where AI helps with analysis of x-rays. Is there really an urgent issue? Or can it wait?
I’ve noticed the common employee doesn’t really understand that executives aren’t going to tell them any material non-public information at all hands meetings.

Or that the answer to “will there be any more layoffs?” is never going to be answered truthfully or satisfactorily.
Sure. But there's always been dark alleys where people freely said things that respectable memebers of society would lose their jobs for saying.

That doesn't mean that those words aren't curse words. In fact, it's a sign that they are curse words. It wouldn't be so edgy to say them if they weren't so heavily frowned upon by "polite society"
My education was expensive and our industry hasn’t turned into that.
Why not? I can see a future where Maps becomes the core of Google's business. It's already their strongest offering, together with YouTube. In every other field Google has been beaten.
The reason the headline doesn't say which iconic gun-makers is apparently because it was a whole bunch of them:

> At least 10 gun industry businesses, including Glock, Smith & Wesson, Remington, Marlin and Mossberg, handed over names, addresses and other private data to the gun industry’s chief lobbying group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
Great question.

First of all, llvm has clang, which means that llvm as a whole is equipped to understand C (and C++ and Objective-C) both at a high level (abstract syntax tree, all types as declared by the programmer) and low level (SSA form, only the types that are meaningful for sound analysis and optimization).

I think that CIL was a really big deal before llvm and clang. Back then, it was a more approachable alternative to trying to fiddle with C than using GCC, since GCC has a steep learning curve. But in the last 15 years or so, most of the research that would have been done in CIL before is now done in llvm. That’s because llvm is much more complete and it’s designed for ergonomics, specifically in the case where you just want to mess around and even if you’re a newcomer to the compiler. The docs are great and the APIs are top notch.

I think that LLVM’s SSA form is especially good for doing sophisticated analysis and instrumentation of C. I’ve used that a lot for my C experiments. Clang’s AST is really great, too - and it’s amazing for doing higher level stuff where you want to see the original C types and declarations before lowering.

I suspect that there is very little that CIL can do for you that can’t be done in llvm more straightforwardly. And llvm+clang support all of C, plus the adjacent languages (C++ and others).

So, it’s cool that CIL is still around (having alternatives is good, generally) but in my opinion as someone who does experimental work in C compilers, C language extensions, and static/dynamic analysis of C, llvm completely subsumes CIL.
Depending on where you live/work, there may be conferences you can attend that are local to you. Then you won't need lodging, and transportation is less, and maybe meals, depending on how far away.

But, if you're not getting anything from the social aspect, and interactions before and after the talks or in the hallways; then conferences aren't a good use of your time. Mostly the talks get recorded and uploaded and are freely available. Sounds like, for you, spending a day reviewing those later is probably better than spending two or three days attending.

But I think you get different presenters for an in-person conference vs a virtual conference vs a periodic video creator. So there's a point to these things even if they don't work for everyone.
I remember that time! Magical!

I also remember the IPO. Didn’t have any money at the time, but still wish I had invested… or gotten my parents to invest.
Yes, and no. User does not care how it is implemented, or how it works.

This is clearly same domain: search.
"Disorder," at its most basic, simply describes a lack of order, which is not the same thing as a congenital disease. These days, we tend to over-identify with a given diagnosis, as if it were a permanent condition. People talk about their ADHD diagnosis as if it were a fact as permanent about them as their eye color. And for those that have struggled with ADHD their whole lives, it can certainty feel permanent. But if your room's in disorder, you _can_ tidy it up—, even if it takes you all year. "Disorder" in this sense is a description of state, rather than an inherent property.

Furthermore, the attention which is in disorder with ADHD is a skill which can be acquired. You can train your attention like you train a muscle. There's a real proliferation, these days, of medical and chemical treatments for ADHD. And many of them really help people. But if your goal is to build muscle, maybe what you need isn't a steroid injection, but an exercise. Some of the best ways to train one's attention are the oldest. Zen Buddhism, for example, has been around for fifteen hundred years or so, and has a lot of evidence behind it. If you sit in zazen for a full sesshin, at around ten hours a day for a week or two, you will undoubtedly start to develop strong powers of attention. But even ten minutes a day is effective. Hard work, daily, at training your attention, _will_ turn disorder into order.
Did really you just compare India to Nazism?
NPM Malware Campaign Leverages Ethereum Smart Contracts to Evade
> Just like Apple's upload is on by default.

The blog post is about how it was off and then got silently toggled on.

> Singling out Apple here

I'm not a journalist covering tech companies. I'm an Apple user complaining about something that happened on my own Apple devices. It's silly to characterize that as "singling out Apple".

I do use Chrome, though, and it never silently switched that toggle back on. If it did, I'd definitely blog about that.
Wisdom tooth extraction (when there isn't an obvious need) is probably not backed by evidence[0][1]

[0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1963310/

[1] https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
I had this experience a couple years ago. I hate dentists man
The murder is a tragedy, of course, but I would hesitate to blame the cellphone. There’s overreactions, and then there’s… this.
Some people in the 1990s thought that open source, particularly the GNU suite, killed off the market for “cheap and cheerful” dev tools, thus we haven’t had a Borland ever since. Today innovation in programming tools tends to come from the hugest companies (Microsoft, Oracle, Google, Facebook) and even successful open source tools such as the LLVM-based compiler suite owe a lot to big funders like Apple.

(Possibly Jetbrains is an exception, though my take is their attempts to introduce new languages like Katlin and radical frameworks like MPS haven’t been as impactful as getting the bugs and slowness out of Eclipse)
That's the trajectory of most businesses. A startup innovates, grows big, doubles down on what makes them profitable, and milks that as long as it can. It's very, very rare that a company will ever have multiple breakthrough hits, if they do it's usually from acquiring innovative startups (YouTube, Instagram, Oculus, etc).
Unfortunately it seems like this is just how a lot of the world works at this point. Take a communal goodwill, then try to exploit it into the ground for your own profit while making everything else far, far worse for literally everyone. Privatize the gains and socialize the losses as an intentional, foundational strategy.
Until there's an Ultramax+ Pro 2
Different Cleopatra
Totally agree. Chatgpt is at the start of the enshittification circle.
Jhourney's "super secret" master plan
Comcast Explores Spin-Out of Cable Network Business
Thanks for the mention! Glad to see people are still finding enjoyment with PlantStudio. Still hoping to bring it to the web someday.
Agreed. I gave up on trying to navigate the fraud. I've gone once in the past 15 years because my wife begged me to. I have yet to regret it whatsoever.
There were a lot of Cleopatras so this may be a different, less famous one.
Back in the early 90s, when Apple was literally building their first product line with the Mac, they would come out with their second big honking powerhouse Mac: the Macintosh IIx. It blew everything out of the water. Then they would come out with their next budget all-in-one machine. But computing was improving so fast, with prices for components dropping so quickly, that the Macintosh SE/30 ended up as impressive as the Macintosh IIx with a much lower price. That's how the legend of the SE/30 was born, turning it into the best Mac ever for most people.

With how fast and impressive the improvements are coming with the M-series processors, it often feels like we're back in the early 90s. I thought the M1 Macbook Air would be the epitome of Apple's processor renaissance, but it sure feels like that was only the beginning. When we look historically at these machines in 20 years, we'll think of a specific machine as the best early Apple Silicon Mac. I don't think that machine is even out yet.
May well be outside the GP's living memory, though. Further, they weren't really making any money at that point.
I would like to see someone use the most generous parameters possible and simulate the statistics of the first cple amino acids evolving into our homo sapiens sapiens chromosome set randomly over the course of just 4b years.

(selection is irrelevant here; we could even just model it as always-select-for-beneficial-mutation for extra graciousness).

Mind you, even if a beneficient mutation occurs, it is still not guaranteed to be passed onto the next generation. It would have to randomly occur over and over again.

I'm not confident that it's gonna be very convincingly in favour of the random mutation model.
Chinese launch startup Cosmoleap secures funding for rocket chopstick recovery
This is a great point for what I was trying to explain about where we currently stand with these models - we seem to be hardware constrained in relation to the trade off between rote learning, full memorisation of information and the model's ability to use what it knows and generalise to achieve an outcome.

Your experience aligns with what I've seen: 4o and o1 are better at filling gaps from each other where there should be an upward trend of intelligence instead of having to jump around as we do currently.

So the real question is: are these models forgetting their skills, do we need to make them larger? Does distillation and generalisation work?

So many questions that might end up as LLMs being unable to escape the problem of catastrophic forgetfulness.
Hmm as a very stupid first pass...

0. Generate an embedding of some text, so that you have a known good embedding, this will be your target.

1. Generate an array of random tokens the length of the response you want.

2. Compute the embedding of this response.

3. Pick a random sub-section of the response and randomize the tokens in it again.

4. Compute the embedding of your new response.

5. If the embeddings are closer together, keep your random changes, otherwise discard them, go back to step 2.

6. Repeat this process until going back to step 2 stops improving your score. Also you'll probably want to shrink the size of the sub-section you're randomizing the closer your computed embedding is to your target embedding. Also you might be able to be cleverer by doing some kind of masking strategy? Like let's say the first half of your response text already was actually the true text of the target embedding. An ideal randomizer would see that randomizing the first half almost always makes the result worse, and so would target the 2nd half more often (I'm hoping that embeddings work like this?).

7. Do this N times and use an LLM to score and discard the worst N-1 results. I expect that 99.9% of the time you're basically producing adversarial examples w/ this strategy.

8. Feed this last result into an LLM and ask it to clean it up.
No, you fundamentally misunderstand what clickbait is.

The difference is that I explained myself and gave an external source instead of just repeating the same claim over and over.
Layer Health | https://www.layerhealth.com/ | Boston / NYC (Hybrid) | Full Time |

Layer Health is an AI/ML startup spun out of MIT by David Sontag, leveraging LLMs to transform how clinical data is understood and used. Our systems are actively deployed in life science companies and major healthcare systems, providing an AI layer for our customers to make sense of their health data, and ultimately help positively influence patient outcomes. We're now exiting our seed stage and are building the team to meet the needs of our growing customer base.

Work Location: HYBRID in Boston (back bay) or NYC (grand central)
Headcount: The software team is now 8 (~12 overall)
Stack: mostly React + Typescript Frontend / Python Backend // GCP

Open Roles (note that all roles require a MINIMUM of 4 years of work experience)
* Fullstack Engineer (Frontend/Product)
* Sr ML (Ops / Infra / Research Engineering)
* Data Scientist
* Software Engineer, Backend/Platform
* Software Engineer, Data Infra
* Product Strategy / RWE

Email me at mike-c@layerhealth.com for more info
I think the parent comment was referencing that, at least in the US, dentistry is treated differently in many ways. For example, it’s a different health insurance with its separe premiums and limits, and you’ll never find a dentist in a hospital; instead they have their own offices.
Costa Security | Lead / Senior Engineer | Chicago / Bay Area Preference (Open to Remote) | Full Time
Hi everyone. We are Costa, and we are building the next generation of network security.

>> who we are

At Costa, we believe in a world where it is easy to share information with good actors, and easy to protect it from bad ones. And we need help from great people to get there.

Our founding team has gone from garage to IPO before. We have experience at big companies (Amazon/Meta) and small. We are remote today, but have a preference for people near us (Bay Area/Chicago). We may not be fully remote in the future. We are early in our journey. We are backed by some great VCs. Now is an exciting time to join.

>> what we do

We are building an infrastructure as code network security platform that runs everywhere. We help our customers easily move their compute between clouds, data centers, the edge by making networking and security understandable, repeatable and seamless.

Our first product gives network and security teams a single, seamless interface to deploy, configure and manage complex hybrid overlay networks and security services running within those networks.

>> seeking great people

We are hiring our first product engineers. We are built on a modern stack: Ruby/Rails + StimulusJS, Golang, Kubernetes, Terraform, Packer and Wireguard. We are looking for backend, frontend and SRE/Devops engineers. Ideally people are familiar with networking and security concepts. Help build our engineering culture, one that embraces mutual respect, shared responsibility and continuous curiosity, and prizes an intellectual honesty that fosters both confidence and humility.

- Lead Platform Engineer - Design and build the Costa Platform Control Plane (Rails+). The Control Plane is responsible for deploying, scaling and managing a distributed mesh of software defined networking (SDN) controllers

- Product Engineer - focus on dev & client tools - build out our CLI in Golang, API SDKs etc.

- Devops Engineer - Build out our infra deployment automation and work with the lead platform engineer for the deployment functionality of our control plane

If you are interested in protecting information and want to be part of a dynamic team that enjoys working together to build something great, we invite you to apply.

Careers Link: https://careers.costa.security
In other news - Life expectancy of the universe is finite
Pichai inherited one of the most difficult challenges: he had to figure out how to grow revenue right as search revenue was plateauing and money was becoming expensive, all against the headwinds of Google's culture. Your comment is a good example of the headwind: I can't think of another company where a greater share of its employees actively despised the industry that paid for them all to be there.

Google's culture wasn't a problem – and maybe a good thing! – when you had a gigantic money printer working in the background, paying for everything. But it was there, ready to be a problem once times got tough.
new HN game: predict which order the archive.is link or pedantry comes in. if you get the order right, you get one point. if you get sucked into a pedantic argument, you lose
How does this argument square with them driving a $150k BMW?
I would go multiple routes with Apple if you're able. They tend to be pretty good with in warranty and even out of warranty.
Apparently, you forgot to click the "don't hallucinate as much" checkbox. How silly of you.
The triggering of the action is a direct consequence of the information an event contains. Whether or not an action is triggered should not be the responsibility of the event.

If you are writing events with the intention of having them invoke some specific actions, then you should prefer to invoke those things directly. You should be describing a space of things that have occurred, not commands to be carried out.

By default I would only include business keys in my event data. This gets you out of traffic on having to make the event serve as an aggregate view for many consumers. If you provide the keys of the affected items, each consumer can perform their own targeted lookups as needed. Making assumptions about what views each will need is where things get super nasty in my experience (i.e. modifying events every time you add consumers).
I said I gave offers even for folks that didn't get it working. :D

I was more using this as a way to discuss code. And "2sum" is a pretty trivial problem to solve linearly. Especially if you allow high level language use.

(To directly answer the question, there was more than CRUD. Probably still more CRUD than folks would expect.)
Not had that myself, but have known people in the UK reporting the same.

Me, I had mine "professionally cleaned" for the first time in my life about 9 months back, and they've felt permanently a bit off ever since.
Software Engineer ( React Native )

Location: Bangladesh

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: React, React Native, iOS, Android, TypeScript, Redux, Redux Toolkit, Jest, zustand, reanimated

Résumé/CV: https://www.pixellog.io/

Email: mrpmohiburrahman+hn [at] gmail.com

---

- 4 years of experience working as a React Native developer, including remote work for a Turkish company.

- Open Source Contributions:

- react-native-contacts ( 1.6k stars, 44k weekly downloads on npm): [PR link]( https://github.com/morenoh149/react-native-contacts/pull/763)

- react-native-device-info ( 6.5k stars, 508k weekly downloads on npm): [PR link]( https://github.com/react-native-device-info/react-native-device-info/pull/1673)

- react-native-template-obytes ( 2.3k stars): [PR link] (https://github.com/obytes/react-native-template-obytes/pull/371)

- react-native-bottom-tabs ( 311 stars): [PR link](https://github.com/okwasniewski/react-native-bottom-tabs/pull/38)

- Zed Editor Extensions ( 47.2k stars): [PR link](https://github.com/zed-industries/extensions/pull/1275)
So let’s say we’ve got 28 possible characters (alphabet + period + space), you have a 1/28 chance of getting the first character right. So it follows that a string of length n is (1/28)^n because you have to hit each character correctly in a row. If we can do x guesses a second, and we know on average how many tries it takes on average to get our string right (28^n), we can divide and get an estimate of time. Though we could do it faster, or slower depending on our luck.

With multiple searchers it’s trickier, but we use the probability complement (probability of all possible events must add to 100%) to figure out the chances that our searchers all miss, and subtract that chance by 1. This gives the chance of at least one agent getting it right. Two searchers looks like 1-(27/28)^2 for the first char, and you can follow the same logic for any length string.

Your answer will heavily depend on your assumptions - how fast the computers guess, what they can guess, etc. But searching in parallel would speed things up dramatically. If you had like 100 computers searching simultaneously, 3 or 4 would likely get the first char right every time, giving you a big speed up on the problem.
Back in the 90's, (pseudo)science was trying to calculate the odds that a computer virus would self-assemble in memory.

That's all fine and dandy, but the reality is that even if it could happen, it still would not be executed. So the whole exercise was moot, and a huge waste of funding. It didn't even manage to sell product.

This Monkey/Shakespeare study is similar, in that the entire premise is nonsensical and its conclusion overtly obvious. They could just as well spend millions to study the sound of one hand clapping.