skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah, I've gone from a place of not being able to judge my level of discomfort at all, to only being able to realize it hours after the fact, to eventually learning to notice it in the moment (after a lot of practice). I still don't do it perfectly, but it's a skill that I've found very valuable.
As a programmer who dabbles in painting, what you are describing is indirect lighting and subsurface scattering (leaves are sort of transparent, so from the back they look yellowish, and the sky is blue, so shadows have some blue in them).

In a full rendering pipeline (not the simplified one just for the effect) this would already be implemented, but it's a good thing to remember.
I don't know. I feel that if something is declared "unconstitutional" today, then it was always unconstitutional (from inception of or amendment to the constitution). Unlike "illegal" in which laws can come and go, so something that is illegal today can be legal tomorrow. And just like "ignorance is no excuse for breaking a law", I don't thing ignorance should be an excuse for doing something unconstitutional.
While I appreciate the lack of self promotion, I don't see any name or link for your project in either comment. Can you share one? I'm sure I'm not the only curious person.
Caveat: I formerly worked at Google.

What missing is that code being written by AI may have less of an impact than dataset that are developed or refined by AI. Consider examples like a utility function's coefficients, or the weights of a model.

As these are aggressively tuned using ML feedback, they'll influence far more systems than raw code.
I assume you're referring to the compute/energy used to run the completion?
(It's a combined kitchen / dining room fitted into a largish pre-existing room for the same purpose in an old farmhouse)
There's been a lot of talk about free speech on social media. A lot of it is bad faith political talk, but still, there is a lot of scrutiny of free speech on social media. Rightfully so, it's important for people to be able to speak in the modern "town square", but it's also important for people to run their own websites how they please.

We're targeting the wrong layer with our concerns about free speech. We should regulate hosting providers and enforce free speech on hosting providers, not on social media websites. People should have a right to host their content somewhere, but not the right to violate Twitter's ToS.

Unfortunately, relatively nobody cares about hosting. If Twitter bans a journalist people get upset, if Netlify caves to a slight bit of pressure takes a journalist's website down, nobody cares.
Agree. A visualization (or in this case a "sound-alization"?) is just some mapping of an abstract data set into a form more convenient for our evolved senses.

Without understanding the nature of the mapping, you don't really know if you're gaining some insight into the underlying process or just looking at (listening to) a cheap clickbait chartjunk.

From the youtube video description:

> Scientists at the Technical University of Denmark and the German Research Centre for Geosciences used data from ESA’s Swarm mission, along with other sources, to create a sounded visualisation of the Laschamp event. They mapped the movement of Earth’s magnetic field lines during the event and created a stereo sound version which is what you can hear in the video.
The soundscape was made using recordings of natural noises like wood creaking and rocks falling, blending them into familiar and strange, almost alien-like, sounds. The process of transforming the sounds with data is similar to composing music from a score.

So it sounds like this one is more interpretative and meant for popular engagement rather than scientific insight. There's probably some scientific insight to be had, but the level of depth is probably on the order of the accompanying usatoday pop-news text.
> So, LLMs face a regression on their latest proposed improvement.

A regression that humans also face, and we don't say therefore that it is impossible to improve human performance by having them think longer or work together in groups, we say that there are pitfalls. This is a paper saying that LLMs don't exhibit superhuman performance.
Family. Legacy. Meaning. Joy. There's a lot of reasons to have a child.
Not publishing results with p >= 0.05 is the reason p-values aren't that useful. This is how you get the replication crisis in psychology.

The p-value cutoff of 0.05 just means "an effect this large, or larger, should happen by chance 1 time out of 20". So if 19 failed experiments don't publish and the 1 successful one does, all you've got are spurious results. But you have no way to know that, because you don't see the 19 failed experiments.

This is the unresolved methodological problem in empirical science that deal with weak effects.
FakeCall malware menaces Android devices
The answer is "by brutest possible force".

It does trial division on the number in base 1 representation. That is, as a string of N 1s. It takes every sub-string of the number (except 0 and 1) and sees if you can reproduce the original in an integer number of steps.

^(..+?) is a substring of at least 2 characters at the beginning
\1 is a copy of it
+$ is the part doing the work: look for an exact number of copies, filling up the entire string

The ^.?$ part is "0 and 1 don't count".

It's basically equivalent to a for loop from 1 to N. Divide N by the number and look for a remainder. Except that the division is done in base 1, by duplicating the string over and over and seeing it it lines up.

Clever, but certainly not useful.
I don’t buy this. My child communicates with me using emotion and other cues because she can’t speak yet. I don’t know much about early humans or other sapiens but I imagine they communicated long before complex language evolved. These other means of communication are not second order, they are first order.
Then what's the point of ever talking about LLM capabilities again? We've already hooked them up to other tools.

This confusion was introduced at the top of the thread. If the argument is "LLMs plus tooling can't do X," the argument is wrong. If the argument is "LLMs alone can't do X," the argument is worthless. In fact, if the argument is that binary at all, it's a bad argument and we should laugh it out of the room; the idea that a lay person uninvolved with LLM research or development could make such an assertion is absurd.
Midnight Blizzard uses RDP to target 100 organizations in US, Europe
I was hoping for something interesting.
This is like saying more than a quarter of the code is from oss, examples and stackoverflow before LLMs.
Build Resilient API Clients: Implementing Retry and Circuit Breaker Patterns
> Maybe try a mid-size bank that operates in a few states if you are concerned with going too small

I disagree with this. Medium/regional banks often have the same dynamic where the people in the branches have to call in to centralized help lines to get anything done, rather than employees being empowered to exercise judgement and act. But yet their systems can be way less polished than the megabanks. And from what I've seen their fees are often higher and less forgiving (not that you should be paying fees anywhere though, as an individual retail customer)

My main combo is local bank/creditunion for cash/notary/medallion/safedepositbox/cashierschecks and then online-only large bank because it pays real interest and has a less janky UI. (although with the ever-ratcheting SMS login nags, I'm starting to question that last bit). Both refund third party ATM fees.

On the larger topic, I'm disappointed to see this regulatory push has very little to do with making sure users can get frequent automated access to their own transaction data. Continually verifying the transactions on your account is basically the necessary and sufficient condition for preventing the bank making you responsible for their being defrauded.
it's all about the angle, wood utensils are usually softer and rounder so they are safer.

I accidentally removed a little of the "seasoning" of a cast iron and in the following uses it started to come out around the scratch.

Where I live there's another plus to wood utensils, I can help the people that make them locally
Claude computer use first impressions
Like a True Woming Cowboy, 10-Year-Old Plans to Trick-or-Treat on Horseback
You can also repair their devices yourself using their repair program, but only if you have the capabilities as an individual, so I don’t see your point.
JetBrains is removing continuity discounts for new organizational subscriptions
Sabine Hossenfelder: This Theory of Everything Could Work [video]
I use Codeium in NeoVim and yes I find it very helpful. Of course, is not 100% error free, but even when it has errors most of the time it is easier for me to fix them than to write it from scratch.
If I had a network, I wouldn't need a dating app.
Think long; think wrong

( Flows off the tongue better ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ )
Go throw it away if you smell any odor. I'm glad even my cheap IKEA pots come with stainless steel handles. My even cheaper cast iron pans have, well, cast iron handles.
Such a clear and structured UI! Why has modern UI design gone so wrong? (It’s a rhetorical question.)
I don't fully understand it, but I think the difference is in the source of the gravitons rather than the detector. Dyson's earth-sized detector was imagined to be detecting gravitons produced by mass moving around within the sun, but this detector would be detecting gravitons associated with gravitational waves produced by ridiculously powerful events like black hole mergers, where two massive objects circle each other at mind-boggling speeds before colliding. It sounds like these are expected to produce vastly more gravitons, making a detection much more likely.
"Should I risk this?" is the wrong question in life. The burden of proof, as it were, is on those who are alleging a risk. I'm not gonna go through life worrying about every little thing just because it might be a problem. That goes double because people are constantly finding new things to worry about, most of which amount to nothing in the end.
> It kind of does though, because it means you can never trust the output to be correct.

Maybe some HN commenters will finally learn the value of uncertainty then.
Bit of a leopards-eating-faces situation there, no?
Google's Smart TV software will have a "dumb TV" mode (2021)
> It's a fair point of stuck w/ java8, yet the reference was about "modern java".

And I'm saying that even after writing the most of the first project (closing in on 100kLOC now) in 21, I still can't have records where the make the most sense (service boundaries) because libs and larger ecosystem don't support them.

> Also, if I had 1M LOC and my serialization/communication libraries didn't support whatever I've picked - I'd patch the libraries to support it.

1MLOC in java land is.. not unusual. And if you're talking about patching libs like jackson/jaxb/whatever, my good person, you truly underestimate how much actual work people have (where Java upgrade is a distant afterthought, I only did it because I wanted to scratch the itch and see how far I could push processes in my org), or how much impact that might have for a drive-by contribution. Updating such core ecosystem libs in java is no small feat. They are used absolutely everywhere, and even tiny changes require big testing. There is a reason you find apache libs in every single project, because they have matured over past couple of decades without such drastic rug-pull of a change.
Linus Torvalds Lands 2.6% Performance Improvement with Minor Linux Kernel Patch
Just another way cops can be terrible at their job and get away with it. If only citizens could use the Chappelle defense, "I'm sorry officer, I didn't know I couldn't do that".
"Join waitlist"

You had your chance.
I doubt that, as the less women in a field of work, the more likely an individual woman is to stand out and be targeted. Situations that put you frequently alone in closed offices with a single other person also contribute to the risk. Do you really think kindergarten teachers experience these things at work as often as software engineers?
Nobody negotiates net, but companies will keep in mind an employee's lowest possible tax bracket given their gross (and therefore their highest possible net) when determining the cost:benefit of offering marginal "material compensation" increases (vs other components of total compensation) — both during initial negotiation, and when trying to design later incentives.

Which is to say, if you're making USD$100k/yr working for Ericsson in Sweden (where you're in the highest, 52.9%, tax bracket for any marginal income above USD$83k), they're gonna be thinking differently about how to reward you as a high performer, vs if you were making USD$100k/yr at Google in the US (where that salary would instead just have you scraping the top of the 22% tax bracket.)

Google would almost certainly just give you more money — and would likely continue to do that indefinitely, as even the highest US federal tax bracket (37% at USD$600k/yr) isn't too onerous. Ericsson, on the other hand, might already rather offer you something non-monetary and "cheap" for them (e.g. a company car), rather than biting the bullet on a "substantial, productivity-incentivizing" raise (i.e. one that meaningfully increases your net income.)

And that is why precisely why salaries tend to be lower in many European countries (that have these high tax brackets); and why everyone in those countries instead expects / demands / enshrines requirements in law for tons of non-monetary benefits, like long vacations! "Purely salary" and "salary levels off, then tons of non-material benefits" are both Nash equilibria in compensation space; just very different ones.
Yeah, I get the impression that bagged salads are probably the most dangerous food item.
I'd believe this if every multiplayer game that doesn't have KLA was just rife with cheaters. Also, why is EA adding KLA to Battlefield 1 almost a decade after release?

I refuse to believe there is only one simple honorable objective when it comes to KLA. I simply do not care if companies can't figure out how to stop cheaters without it. What about our experience? You might complain about cheaters, but what if I can't even play the game because of KLA?

Played plenty of recent MP games on Linux just fine and cheating was never experience breaking.
> for all practical purposes

In fairness this ignores a lot of embedded work.

Java gets to cheat here a bit because they have some custom embedded stuff, but they are also not actually running on all CPUs.
I can think myself into forgetting strong passwords if I try to spell each character out in my head. But then I sit at a keyboard, relax, and automatically type it perfectly.
For one of your next trips I suggest a few months in Ireland, and if you could in particular spend time living in a slightly more rural or at least small-town type family.

Jaysus lads, that chap...
Christ, sure how would ya...
Holy lord! I've never heard...
My God, did you hear...
Lord help us and save us, she'd only...

And I'm leaving out the more vulgar variants here.

I'm not saying we'd beat some of the Arabic countries, but I definitely am saying we very well might give them a good run for their money. I'll consciously try tone it down if I'm conversing with a non-Irish person, and then with my family I'll let loose.

Maybe Americans use God-related idioms a lot less than us, of course. The U.S. is a relatively big place though, so I'd be curious to know if there aren't some corners closer to (rural?) Ireland's usage.
Here's a good writeup for .NET: https://hotforknowledge.com/2024/01/13/1brc-in-dotnet-among-...
Ye the compressed version is not nearly as good.

I would be fine though with like 10 times the wait time. But I guess consumer hardware need some serius 'ram pipeline' upgrade for big models to be run at crawl speeds.
poop i use a black plastic as my primary spatula
> I really want to love F# but keep banging my head against the wall.

Yeah. What's your opinion on Gleam?
I was a hacker before the entire stack I work in was common or released, and I’ll be one when all our tools change again in the future. I have family who programmed with punch cards.

But I doubt the predictions from men whose net worth depends on the hype they foment.
If you take the time to build an (S?)LM yourself, you'll realize it's neither of these. "Understands" is an ill-defined term, as is "applying logic".

But a LLM is not "simply" doing anything. It's extremely complex and sophisticated. Once you go from tokens into high-dimensional embeddings... it seems these models (with enough training) figure out how all the concepts go together. I'd suggest reading the word2vec paper first, then think about how attention works. You'll come to the conclusion these things are likely to be able to beat humans at almost everything.
I've been teaching a teenager how to code with smalltalk (Scratch): https://scratch.mit.edu/
We're in a Free Speech Golden Age
Thank you, that's great to hear :)
One example is Mac mini Colo (which I believe has been in business since 2010)

http://www.macminicolo.net/

Also, Amazon

https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/mac/
Everybody has to deal with the fact that their own goals don't line up with their organization. We all have to make a living.

But it's rare to find a case where you're literally funding a direct threat to yourself. Musk himself doesn't seem to care much about your personal life, but his allies certainly do.

And it's not just the obvious threat to gay and trans people. One aspect of project 2025 is the revival of the Comstock Act -- which will drastically reduce access to birth control. Even straight people will find themselves cockblocked by helping fund Musk.
People use plastic spatulas because they are worried if they use a metal spatula they'll scratch their non-stick pan.

People use non-stick pans because it's easier and they are bad at cooking.

If you don't understand why a stainless steel spatula would be preferable to a plastic one, maybe you're just not paying attention much to the world.
New Carrier Fluid Makes Hydrogen Way Easier to Transport
I guess my thought was, if a cursor just "jumps" or moves quickly in a mathematically straight line, probably an indicator. Or if inputs had almost the exact time gap between them for a series of actions.
It would be interesting to think about how it got it wrong. My hunch is that in the "think step by step" section it made an early and incorrect conclusion (maybe even a subtly inferred conclusion) and LLMs are terrible at walking back mistakes so it made an internally consistent conclusion that was incorrect.

A lot of CoT to me is just slowing the LLM down and keeping it from making that premature conclusion... but it can backfire when it then accidentally makes a conclusion early on, often in a worse context than it would use without the CoT.
This is why the DMCA must be repealed.
I actually prefer this style. Our past self in some sense is a different person than our current or future self.
Beware that some of the Geekbench number are the result of them suddenly gaining support for streaming SVE and SME just when Apple implements it.

I'm not doubting the number represent real peak throughput on M4. There is just a taste to the timing lining up so well. Also they don't take advantage of fully SVE2 capable ARM cores to compare how much a full SVE2 implementation would help especially at accelerating more algorithms than those that neatly map to streaming SVE and SME.

The single core performance gains of M4 variants over their predecessors are distorted, because the streaming SVE and SME are apparently implemented by combining what used to be them AMX units of four cores.
That is a neat idea. Hard drives could do dedupe from the ECC they calculate for each sector. The main issue with that is that the current ECC is optimal for detecting bit errors but doesn't have the same kind of statistical guarantee of uniqueness that SHA256 or MetroHash has. You need to be VERY confident of the statistical properties of the hash used in dedupe if you are going to increment the ref count of the block hash instead of writing the data to disk.
Server side can not do anything about ESP or aimbot as they rely only in information that the server must provide the to the client. ESP can be curbed somewhat by obfuscating objects not in their view, but how effective this is depends very much on map geometry as the server must send it at some point. It works okay in games like CS/Valorant (that already has it implemented for years) but does basically nothing in Battlefield/Apex/Escape from Tarkov as they have very open maps. Aimbot can be configured to be pretty much indistinguishable from the best players.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_30
Yes. Just like humans. It's called "checking your work" and we teach it to children. It's effective.
Counter-intuitively, it doesn't really add calories.

What a lot of people don't realize is -- in non-stick, virtually all the oil winds up in the food. Since it doesn't stick to the pan. With steel/iron, most of the cooking oil stays in the pan.

So yes you will end up using 3x or more oil. But you're not consuming 3x oil calories. It probably isn't any extra calories at all.
A lot of time and money goes into AAA games and I think there’s an inverse relationship at play where the higher the budget is, the more risk averse the studio is. So you end up with a whole suite of AAA releases that all play it safe and just copy small innovations from each other, nobody really daring to push the envelope too far.

I don’t really enjoy those games either any more. Too big, too long, and the gameplay feels more like running errands and checking off a todo list than having fun.

Release cycles in the 90s and early 2000s were pretty tight, slowly getting longer as storage and graphical firepower increased. 3D was totally new and studios were trying out all kinds of crazy ideas for games. These days you can basically expect 90% of mainstream releases to follow the same playbook.
Only scientists care about doing science. Most people are not scientists. Even scientists are not scientists in every field. We as the genereral population (including scientists in a different field) however care about science because of the results. The results of science is modern health care, engineering (bridges that don't collapse...), and many other such things that we get because we "have" science.
Tips:
1) use more oil
2) get the oil to the right temp
3) try cooking the egg at a lower temp
4) stir the egg more while cooking
5) don't overcook
>it would be trivial for the contract manufacturer to cost-down to (toxic) China brands without the client (Oxo) ever knowing. It would also be trivial to spot check these products on a mass spectrometer for heavy metal contamination but I never saw that done.

Aren't these contradictory statements? If it's "trivial" to spot check their product that is otherwise indistinguishable from the competition using mass spectrometry, why wouldn't QA do that? It -doesn't- sound like it's trivial for the supplier to rip off Oxo if it's "trivial" to use an industrial tool for quality control.

What am I missing here? Do you somehow have internal knowledge that Oxo does not do that "trivial" QC step?
We need to eliminate plastic wherever possible, especially where it might come into contact with food.

What I hate is even paper containers have plastic lids. I worry the plastic snap-off lid is shedding microplastics into my orange juice, or by beef is getting plastic strands when I cut in to the vacuum sealed packaging.
i think there have been many observations and studies reporting emergent intelligence