skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The goal in increasing rates is to cool the economy by reducing construction, i.e. housing starts

That may be a goal, but it isn't the goal. The fed doesn't directly control interest rates on new construction, they control the fed funds rate. Their changes impact the cost for banks to borrow money regardless of the type of loans they underwrite. Increasing rates should decrease demand for new construction, but it decreases demand for existing homes as well. It also negatively impacts employment and many other areas, basically if your run on debt the higher rates hurt.

> We absolutely already know. The contractionary effect of a raise in rates is largest in the short term. You can't have a lagging effect after rates are cut if there was no contraction to begin with.

What makes you say that? Lagging effects after a rate cut aren't directly controlled by, or limited by, what effects we currently have - they wouldn't be lagging if the effects must have already happened. More importantly in my opinion, contraction isn't an absolute and requires a baseline for comparison.

After rates are cut we can't distinguish between a contraction relative to where we would have been without intervention. Comparing against a gross number isn't particularly helpful.

For example, say we had a house worth $100k and it was on track to be worth $110k next year. If we intervene and now it will only be worth $105k next year, wasn't that functionally a contraction induced by the intervention even though it didn't fall below the present value of $100k?
Brady has a presentation about Idris where he shows Type-Driven development (where you write code that could typecheck with some holes and you get the compiler to help you figure out the missing types for your "whatever/something" untyped variables)

https://youtu.be/X36ye-1x_HQ?t=5m15s
Several folks have already mentioned that ChatGPT with search returns the correct answer to your question (with a source to explore directly).

I really think this latest release is a game changer for ChatGPT since it seems much more likely to return genuine information than ChatGPT answering using its model alone. Of course it still hallucinates sometimes (I asked about searching tabs in Firefox Mobile and it told him the wrong place to find that ability while citing a bunch of Mozilla help docs), but it's much easier to verify that by clicking through to sources directly.

It feels like a very different experience using ChatGPT with search turned on and the "Citations" right side bar left open. I get answers from ChatGPT while also seeing a bunch of possibly relevant links populate. If I detect something's off I can click on a source and read the details directly. It's a huge improvement on relying on the model alone.
There is also already a Reliable Transport Protocol used in Cisco's EIGRP.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/enhanced-inter...
Our country (the US) was not designed for public transportation. Renting a car is fine if you never want to leave your suburb. Many people where I am at commute 100mi to the bay for work.

I think Elon's bet on driverless vehicles is stupid. It just won't work outside cities. Car culture in America isn't going anywhere.
> could theoretically just be queried from some sort of knowledge base

Google bought Freebase in 2010 [0] and scaled it [1].

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freebase_(database)

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Knowledge_Graph
That was a good post. Vector Embeddings are in some sense a summary of a doc that's unique similar to a hashcode of a doc. It makes me think it would be cool if there were some universal standard for generating embeddings, but I guess they'll be different for each AI model, so they can't have the same kind of "permanence" hash codes have.

It definitely also seems like there should be lots of ways to utilize "Cosine Similarity" (or other closeness algos) in databases and other information processing apps that we haven't really exploited yet. For example you could almost build a new kind of Job Search Service that matches job descriptions to job candidates based on nothing but a vector similarity between resume and job description. That's probably so obvious it's being done, already.
These charts use "employment" in a very pedantic way. They don't look much at underemployment nor the shifts in proportions of salary ranges.

I believe they also count gigs. So I could run Doordash for under minimum and be "employed" technically.

The other dangerous thing is "averages". This is one of the special cases where you need to look at the lower quartiles. The average/median can look great, but if we have an entire quartile unable to pay rent we'd be in trouble as a whole.
> can't be copyrighted because they're considered functional instructions

by that logic software shouldn't be copyrighted either!
I believe that Eclipse 2.x already had most of these features, but it certainly was in almost all 3.x versions as far as I remember. That IDE was amazingly far ahead of its time. Even 20 years later, tools like VS Code feel like a shocking regression in capabilities to me.
> But then as a matter of policy, why is Rust meaningfully different than something like using Valgrind with C++? Of course there are substantive differences from a developer's perspective.

I did not say they were the same or even equivalent, though I was sloppy with synecdoche and didn't specifically mean Valgrind. My point is that unsafe Rust without Valgrind is more dangerous than C++ with Valgrind, and the feds are not adequately considering this when thinking about how large organizations might rewrite their C++ applications.

"We will rewrite it in 100% safe Rust" is guaranteed way to eliminate virtually all C++ memory errors. It does not follow that "we will rewrite it in 95% safe Rust, except for the tricky bits" will eliminate 95% of C++ memory errors.
I tried fuzz testing and found a crash
I don't know.

We used to defer this to journalists, effectively. While individual journalists often lied and misrepresented the truth, there was some responsibility within the industry to tell the truth, and newspapers did print retractions and corrections when they got it wrong. The editorial content was strictly separate from the business of running the newspaper, so editorial decisions were (mostly) not influenced by commercial decisions and free to pursue The Truth as they saw it.

That, sadly, is no longer the case. And we have no good replacement for it.
But only federal corporate taxes went down. Can't local municipalities add a corporate tax for property ownership?
The main argument against local corporate tax is that the corporation can just move to a low tax area (Delaware/Ireland). But with land ownership, that doesn't really apply.
The entire selling point of DDG is that its search results are not personalised. This is not a flaw.
Practically all diesels have turbos. You have literally have to go back to tiny tractor engines form
The 60s to
Find ones that aren’t. Turbos already provide a ton of back pressure. What’s downstream of that is pretty irrelevant
We are building a new social media platform where people can enjoy content and join debates without worrying about language barriers (e.g., https://powtain.com/pow/KVbf5Q).

Hiring (SG and SF base): cv@powtain.com
I haven’t received any in California either.
> Now we just need Oracle to decide not to want to maintain the Virtualbox kernel modules

If I remember correctly you can already select KVM as the backend in Virtualbox. And in Windows you can use HyperV as your backend. Not sure about MacOS land.
Or psychology or therapy. Psychiatry is paying $300 an hour for a ‘coach’ to prescribe you a pill so you don’t have to talk to a psychologist or coach or therapist.
I even flagged (since removed) a couple of posts I. This thread from zero history accounts. Obvious astroturfs.
Why do you need incentives? We're talking about the "do art all day because you're bored" phase of the singularity. If people exist, they'll do it because it's just fun to do.
Man, talking about crashing trains of thought: you fail to grasp the fact that the conversation is about MacOS, not iOS, that there is no contradiction between "blah platform" and control over people, and even that the fact that other phones exist doesn't negate the deficiencies of this specific phone

> conservatively at least 1% of apps

That's another made up number of yours, with a similarly made up qualifier

> the market perceives that the reliability of the device is shit

Since the vast majority of devices aren't so locked down, isn't "the market" yelling at yout that you're wrong?
Engineering is about making certain that stuff works before it enters production. If we claim to do software engineering, then that's just a simple part of doing our job. Everything else is just tinkering and hacking (the bad kind).
Crawl budget is relevant to every site in Common Crawl.
Fair point, but the instances where people want something interesting and big, that is often as much a plus as anything yes?

Lab grown gems like this for lasers, etc. are a different beast entirely. Can we even grow a coke bottle sized pure emerald?

Maybe, if so that would be pretty neat too. But for a different customer yeah?
YAY!!!
are we gonna have more formal verification???? woohoo!!

oh its about memory safety.
The AGPL is easy to comply with, even for SaaSS corporations. It should not cause any fear. Just either use the code unmodified, or release your modifications to your customers.
Super handy. I wish there was a way to create an issue as well from the email as well.
god seL4 everywhere would be awesome.
WordPress.com was a predominant WordPress host for a long time, and now they no longer are. That's exactly the point I'm making.

> Literally all they have to do is avoid a scenario where no one wants to use them. ... That is a lot easier than trying to be a high-growth company.

I don't really think it's as easy as you make it out to be. Easier? sure. Easy enough to sustain the company once Ghost gains more alternative hosts? I dunno.
Thanks for the warning, I guess I'll need to watch out for that in a few years.
I'm in the middle of ADHD diagnosis. Might still turn up something else, but ADHD or adhd/Asperger's is where my bets are.

If this works and helps with chronic, pathological procrastination, it easily "produces" a few hours of productivity per week (that wouldn't be there otherwise).

With 20 hours per month, it's enough value that it's not that high threshold for it to be "profitable". Even a no brainer for high grossing vocations like SWE in USA.*

I'm bookmarking this thread and will see it after the diagnosis and next salary.

*I'm not a SWE, but I'm a factory worker in Norway, making me top 1% anyway. This explains why the profitability equation gives a positive result for me.
Shameless plug: If you are on a Mac, check out RecurseChat: https://recurse.chat/

A few outstanding features:

- Fast: Import ChatGPT history, loads thousands of conversations at once.

- Floating Chat: spotlight / ChatGPT desktop app like floating window.

- Customization: You can add any OpenAI compatible API (including X.ai) as a model, and just edit the url/model id

- Chat with files: Not as complete as complete as a RAG solution for now, but we feature simplicity. Basically you can drag and drop PDF files onto a session or add files/folders to a model (like custom GPT) to start chatting.

- And, yes we support light mode! And several light mode code themes as well
> They typically borrow the form and structure of an in-person conference without considering whether those still make sense online, and whether the goals of an online conference should even be the same as an in-person conference.

Been having a similar debate with a client about their (remote) company all hands. If it’s just going to be a few execs talking at the camera, it shouldn’t be a live group video call.
> You know that in your research field p < 0.01 has importance.

A p-value does not measure "importance" (or relevance), and its meaning is not dependent on the research field or domain knowledge: it mostly just depends on effect size and number of replicates (and, in this case, due to the need to apply multiple comparison correction for effective FDR control, it depends on the number of things you are testing).

If you take any fixed effect size (no matter how small/non-important or large/important, as long as it is nonzero), you can make the p-value be arbitrarily small by just taking a sufficiently high number of samples (i.e., replicates). Thus, the p-value does not measure effect importance, it (roughly) measures whether you have enough information to be able to confidently claim that the effect is not exactly zero.

Example: you have a drug that reduces people's body weight by 0.00001% (clearly, an irrelevant/non-important effect, according to my domain knowledge of "people's expectations when they take a weight loss drug"); still, if you collect enough samples (i.e., take the weight of enough people who took the drug and of people who took a placebo, before and after), you can get a p-value as low as you want (0.05, 0.01, 0.001, etc.), mathematically speaking (i.e., as long as you can take an arbitrarily high number of samples). Thus, the p-value clearly can't be measuring the importance of the effect, if you can make it arbitrarily low by just having more measurements (assuming a fixed effect size/importance).

What is research field (or domain knowledge) dependent is the "relevance" of the effect (i.e., the effect size), which is what people should be focusing on anyway ("how big is the effect and how certain am I about its scale?"), rather than p-values (a statement about a hypothetical universe in which we assume the null to be true).
Unsinkable ship, with design flaws…
I'm into woodworking and carpentry, I don't usually don't hire carpenters because they'll do a better job than me I hire them because I don't have the time to do the job myself.
Thanks for the insight. I had never considered this even though i researched quite some oddities in UTF-8 parsing myself over the years. It's the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to ways to breaking things in software, i find. Time to go over my code again.
My dad routinely spends way more than three hours per day watching television.
func TestWhatever(t *testing.T) {
// ...lots of code

_, _, _, _, _, _, _ = resp3, resp4, fooBefore, subFoo, bar2, barNew, zap2
}

Like, I get it, it's a good feature, it caught quite a lot of typos in my code but can I please get an option to turn this checking off e.g. in unit tests? I just want to yank some APIs, look at their behaviour, and tinker a bit with the data.
Mass availability of LLMs has made it much easier to adopt EMACS and Org Mode because you no longer need to read the docs to be a power user. I can ask an LLM how to do literally anything in EMACS and it will either tell me an existing function or show me how to write a new one. This is a feature that I haven’t seen still in the most popular editors. What would be most powerful is something like Cursor but applied to the editor config, where the editor itself gets more powerful and more suited to your needs the more you use it.
It is when you outsource to one Nedry and his coke habit!
Wow! if the industry is pushing it must be good right? Just like the megapixels wars for cameras.
This is exactly what the Fitbit Ace LTE does. So far it's been great since my daughter has no desire to ask anything else on it besides increase physical activity to get prizes
We just see it differently.

My last attempt, cooking for my family. Let's say a robot can make a 100x better dinner than I can, why would my family want me to cook them food, even though I like it?

See what I mean? It's nice you enjoy it, but you're going to be 1% as good as what you could have, so it's likely not going to be worth doing the things you like doing, even if you like the journey?
Why pay when better code's free?

Plus KVM is GPL right? That means more open source code (albeit spaghetti, given the origin)
> To paraphrase a recent conversation I had with a friend: "in the USA, can illegal immigrants vote?" has a single truthful answer ("no" obviously). But there are many places around the web saying other things (which is why my friend was confused). An LLM trawling the web could very conceivably come up with a non-truthful answer.

There are many jurisdictions where some illegal immigrants (Dreamers) are allowed to vote, including New York City[1].

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/09/new-york-all...
It’s easy to imagine a dozen ways to weigh things and they can’t all be right…

So perhaps recruit some small group of math minded HNers and see what insights and ideas they wring from access to the fully voting history?
I’m a recent convert to emacs, the experience with clojure is just so much better. The best experience I’ve ever had programming with a tool honestly.

Org mode is a bit of a mystery to me thus far, collapsible sections are great but could you expand on what is so helpful to you and how you use it?
Crichton novels are excellent at that kind of technical dystopian/disaster.

(Well, not obviously dystopian, more ‘oh shit, that is how we’d be fucked isn’t it). Alien and Aliens also had a similar feel in their writing, except in real life there is rarely a Ripley there when you need one.
The general population is not equipped to handle hallucination. No they will not be equipped to handle it any time soon. The elderly and the small children will never learn in time.
I wrote another comment relating to case folding: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41784627
Hmm I watched the video [1] and in the games where it had an unambiguous improvement, the improvement in reflection quality is extremely stark and noticeable. Anecdotally, when I was playing Black Myth Wukong recently, there were some shiny environments where full path tracing really made a huge difference.

So I guess it's just a "gimmick" in that relatively few games properly take advantage of this currently, rather than the effect not being good enough.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBNH0NyN8K8
So, the way I deal with this is to provide an exit condition in the loop that is triggered in a non-deterministic finite way by the model checker but that is not triggered at runtime. This allows for termination, which is required as part of the model check, while maintaining the loop.

The best way that I've found to model check software is to decompose the software by function, defining function contracts and invariants along the way. To reduce complexity, shadow functions that follow the same function contracts and maintain the same invariants can be substituted. A shadow function uses non-determinism to exercise the same range of behaviors that the real function provides in a way that is simpler for the model checker to verify. When verifying a function with the model checker, you can substitute functions it calls with these shadow functions to reduce the complexity of the model check.

The example server I'm using for the book initiates a TLS connection with the client. Each connection is maintained by a fiber that enters into a command-response loop. When verifying this loop function in the model checker, I can shadow the functions that read the command and send the response. As long as these shadows follow the same function contract as the function, I can verify that the loop function is correct. For instance, the read command function returns a command in the output variable on success that must be freed by the caller. The dispatch function that dispatches the command and sends the response expects this command to be valid and treats it as read-only data with a lifetime that is beyond the lifetime of the dispatch function. Finally, the loop cleans up the command. All of this can be specified using the function contracts defined by this function as well as the semantics of the real functions and the shadow functions. We know based on the contracts that we expect this command object to be created on success, and we know based on the abstract model that it must be cleaned up. If, for instance, we freed it before calling dispatch, the abstract model would find a UAF counter-example.

If this sounds like a lot, there is a reason why I'm writing a book on the topic of practical model checking in C, with a mature well-worked example that mirrors a real-world application.
Combined with the all to human reflex of engineers to insist that it isn’t their implementation/design that is wrong, it is reality which is wrong. Clearly.

Because if we just didn’t do that, then it would all work.

In particular, see folks talking about Self Driving hah.
I think you have the wrong impression. Apple M2 does not have hw ray tracing. M3 and M4 do.
What’s the difference between a union type and a disjoint union type? In that C# proposal I couldn’t tell which syntax was which branch of your dichotomy.
UE5 supports fully path traced lighting and Black Myth Wukong is a recent example.
This is a very impressive demo, this seems very early in a what might in hindsight be an “obvious” direction to take transformers towards
DNScrypt-proxy on openWRT + Unified blocklist text file is far superior than any of the alternatives in the comments.

It’s not an ”out of the box” solution. But when it’s set up you get encrypted DNS requests and network wide ad blocking.

All in a few megabytes.
I think the opening questions are strong and the answers are valid but weak to the point of insubstance.

Hallways. Con suite. Room parties. Cafe. Whoever is sitting near you at a talk. The filk room. The dealer room. The art auction. The gaming room. The movie room. The panels that involve the audience. That excellent question or that excellent pun someone said in the lull. The dance. The weekend long game of icehouse in the hallway with giant pieces on the floor. Meeting authors face to face and having conversations. Winding up at the diner with people you only just met.

Any of those things from sf cons that tech cons don't have, that's unfortunate, but the principle still holds. None of that exists via zoom. The collectivism of "we all decided to do this this day, and we all recognize that everyone else did too" is something, but it's just not very much.
Nb: the site is desktop only
Well, it's your site, so you can do what you want with it, but I don't believe what you just wrote is logical at all. Sometimes, you just want to see, in general, how one language compares to another when one uses intrinsics and the other doesn't, without having to click through every single benchmark across multiple versions to find one without intrinsics. This is just bad UX and waste of time.
Not this shit again. It is just as much of a scam as when you tried to shill it here last year, and the year before.

Stop taking advantage of people with neurodevelopmental conditions to line your pockets. It's scummy behavior.

Snake oil bullshit pushed by charlatans.
Days ahead to consider your civics & what they mean to you might be a solid idea?