skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Looking past the childish antics, don’t you think it’s kind of rich that;

1) The party which has been kvetching the most about being deplatformed and canceled by mainstream media and colleges etc. is now in power and in the name of promoting free speech promises to go after institutions in academia etc. that are full of their political opponents (who lean left) for “claming down on free speech and calling it disinformation”

2) One man bought Twitter and controls everything about the platform, some things definitely increase freedom of speech (eg proliferation of neo nazi and openly antisemitic viewpoints) and some of his own decisions clamp down on it (eg overnight declaring that “cis”, the opposite if “trans”, is a slur and cannot be said on Twitter anymore)

3) The same man will now be heading up D.O.G.E., the bureau of government efficiency, together with another private sectir billionaire (who got public sector money) to defund many public sector things, or at least make them more efficient

To sum up, we’ll be in the strange situation where the party in power is concerned about increasing freedom of speech (usually the counterculture wants this freedom while the ones in power want to repress dissent). We will have the world’s “most free social network” actually OWNED AND CONTROLLED by one guy, who happens to also work for the government, in fact head up a new government agency tasked with defunding others, and is a super-Fed.

People on the left will start to question the optics and unusualness of all this. Will the MAGA party (the acronym GOP seems very outdated) in good faith encourage speech against themselves, and will the owner of X, while heading up a major new agency in the federal government, also encourage loud criticism of their own activities?

Or will their algorithms — which one man will continue to ultimately control — silently (and maybe only as an emergent behavior) prioritize what they want and suppress what they don’t?

As long as Zuck controls Facebook (sorry, “Meta”), Elon controls Twitter (sorry, “X”), and a few on the top control Google, YouTube, TikTok etc. I do not see true power for the people. “Freedom of speech” is just another expression the owners and corporations co-opted and hijacked to mean “controlling a platform” and “owning an audience”.

Why do we simply donate our audience and content to these platforms? Because they have the backend software infrastructure and we don’t.

I believe that we need open source alternatives that anyone can host, that no one can own the entire network. Not even Durov. Mastodon and Matric and Bluesky are a good start. I’m working on my own too:

https://community.qbix.com/t/growing-your-community/305

And yes, it is possible for the entire ecosystem to make money serving the people with open source infrastructure, just like Wordpress, Drupal etc. Here is how it could work:

https://qbix.com/ecosystem
And who exactly controls the Earth, such that I would want to leave the platform due to mismanagement?

Also, the "nothing else is like twitter" argument is both wrong (lots of social media platforms are bigger) and irrelevant (it assumes that having something like twitter is a net positive -- the validity of which assumption I am not convinced).
Online interactions aren’t any less complex, they’re just different. Newer generations are more online and less fan of an idea of an “office culture”. This all seems based on the idea that just because something happened before, the only way to reproduce it is to replicate its setup. Times have changed & people have changed since. Office work will continue to exist but some magical “work culture” isn’t just thanks to the office. And 20 people can change trajectory but they’re absolutely nothing without the 180k to stir the boat.
I'm so glad someone else besides me says this.

This really is at the root of so many of modern societies problems.

And really the biggest disappointment of the 21st century. How can we possibly still be this primitive 8-/
Secret Service Says You Agreed to Be Tracked with Location Data
Maybe it's a Sentinel Island sort of situation. The technology gap is vast, we've had ships wreck there or unauthorized visitors approach the island but though they attacked them both we've left them alone and haven't attempted to recover any of the "modern technology" that's abandoned there.
For non-rent-controlled apartments this will just raise rents by the amount of the fees.
I don't see that, but I do see a fair bit of ultra-bright LEDs set to strobe mode because some study somewhere said that was the most visible to vehicles. Now I get blinded and dazzled by both oncoming and leading bikes.

I don't know why bike headlight manufacturers are so damn insistent on improving safety by blinding everybody else in the vicinity. Why do so few bike headlights have a "low beam" mode? Instead its 1,000,000 lumens in a 180 degree cone turning night into day but burning out the retinas of everyone else on the trail.
The social contract of employment is broken. People name and shame all the time - which is fair.
Feature request: the Get it on Google Play button should take me to Google Play and let me install the app. I'm not giving you my email, I don't want spam.
> Someone on X summarised it pretty accurately

That screed sounds less like it was aiming for accuracy and more like it was aiming to be inflammatory. But what do I know, I haven't had a Twitter account since 2014.
Musk was left-leaning not so long ago. I follow left-leaning media (WYT, Pod Save America, etc...) and right-leaning media (Ben Shapiro, etc...) equally and see both posts without any issues. If the left-leaning people leave Twitter, the new platform will become an echo chamber the same way Reddit, gab, parler, and Truth Social are.
While it's true that there are things that cannot be directly measured with data , that point cuts in both directions. Perhaps some rare and critical person who is happy in the RTO environment will create something of extraordinary value -- but also someone rare and critical could leave because of the RTO environment. So if you don't have data to suggest that the effect is stronger in one direction than the other, it's not a great argument for any particular policy.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2024/09/wor...
X is not a place for "debate". It's designed to optimize for rumor mongering and mob outrage. Which is not a good recipe for a "signal" useful for any kind of decision making.
>You haven't made any kind of case that The Guardian is "undermining the free flow of information"

I view it as an attempt by a group of left-leaning media/news outlets hoping to de-crown X out of its popularity as a neutral forum for expressing political views.

Yes, these are my opinions or ... "comment replies". People can post their comments or fact-checks, the things Guardian people don't like to engage with.
It's ridiculous for any media to have a political bias, defeats the entire purpose of the media if it's already skewed when it's consumed.
are futures markets gambling in your eyes because speculators can participate?
Yeah, but that subsidy is not likely to disappear in 2 months.
What ruined Dorsey for me was the crypto nonsense. I didn't use Twitter but it seemed like he was the typical asocial self-loathing nerd for a while. Then he went full on savior-syndrome and tried to use Twitter as a marketing tool for NFTs and cryptocurrency, more or less signing the platform's death warrant. I don't know a single person that actually enjoyed Twitter's brazen embrace of crypto.

If he was still a bumbling nerd with a sympathetic plight then people would have an easier time defending him. But his aimless endorsement of radical nonsense is basically a mirror to Elon's own behavior, unfortunately. I don't trust Dorsey with power anymore.
No, its owner does that.
Agent Protocol
Normally when I think of passive aggressiveness I think of a contradiction in between what someone says and what they mean or only communicating something negative indirectly rather than directly.

The Guardian is being direct as far as I can tell about what they do not like and why they are leaving.
"They got too used to an era where they could talk and the public couldn't talk back"

Maybe--a lot of folks made the same point in the mid 2010s when news outlets began shutting down comment sections on their sites. They usually said it was the "toxic" atmosphere. But I imagine they really didn't like when the top comment was pointing out some obvious error (of fact, logic, grammar etc) in their article. I actually remember pointing out an error of fact on the gaurdian itself back--some review had made some ridiculous point because they were confusing the Aramaic and Amharic languages--and seeing the article later updated and my comment removed.
The Guardian is not a platform, it is editorialized content.
This lazy "everyone is bias, therefore bias doesn't exist" argument is nonsense, and is just FUD thrown about to cover for extremists when people point out their extremism.

Many news organizations pursue as unbiased a voice as they can. The Guardian is not one of them. Here's an organization attempting an objective rating of media bias, if you're actually interested in the topic: https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart
It's exactly the same meaning but with the sign reversed.

Turns out identity politics is a terrible idea. Now the Guardian et al are finding out exactly why when the people they disagree with are doing it too.
Do you have data to prove that? If not, then leaders have every right to go with their gut instincts.

Give me an example of a company that is immensely successful (massive growth) like say OpenAI that are fully remote
Bluesky Live User Counter
Fake news: someone built a new thing and was testing it in a Navy training range or was using it to spy on the test range and some Navy aircraft entering or exiting the range managed to take video footage of it.

The truth: an advanced intelligence capable of interstellar flight traveled dozens if not millions of light years to visit Earth and chose to fly perpendicular to a bunch of F/A-18s in a Navy training range and then disappear, never to be seen again by man or machine. They ignored all of the locations of industrial activity, all of the people, the land, the animals, the unique geologic features, the vast expanses of earth covered by multiple overlapping forms of radar and cameras pointed at the sky, and flew over an empty-ass stretch of ocean COINCIDENTALLY when some F/A-18s were there.
While possible it does not absolve the reader of ensuring that they are consuming information from a range of sources.
From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42130210
Musk claims a lot of things. Amplifying right wing propaganda and conspiracy theories, often from his own twitter account, is not politically neutral.
> curious if this will be creatively interpreted so that the broker is mandatory but supposedly represents the interests of both LL and tenant, so the tenant has to pay anyway

The problem with the old system was I was paying a guy who didn’t have any obligation to me. Dual obligations means the broker can at least be sued for a conflict of interest if they hide something or don’t do their job. It’s a step in the right direction.
> To undo this we will essentially need the same amount of energy again that we got out of it when we burned it

Amine based carbon capture at the smokestack captures about 90% of CO2 with a 20% energy penalty. There's a new natural gas turbine design that captures 100% at no energy penalty (Allam cycle).
Community notes are not impartial, they are written and approved by the users who sign up to do so (and actually take the time to do this unpaid labor).

Thus, they tend to reflect the biases of the kind of people who most want to (and have time to) write and approve community notes, drawn from the pool of people who use your site.
Java is heavily based in Smalltalk and Objective-C, even if it has a C++ like syntax for mainstream adoption.

https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/stuff/java-objc.html

Even Java EE was actually a rebooted Objective-C based project done internally at Sun during the OpenSTEP days, aka Distributed Objects Everywhere.
This may help

https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/
I can't high-five this enough.
I've recently noticed reminiscent effects in Arcane. They have some vfx that quickly alternate between yellow and magenta or yellow and blue. Not full frame.

I think they look rather striking. It's a shame that kind of thing is a danger to some.
I know someone who was in the air force.

He told me they are more likely to hire you if you have a bunch of speeding tickets.

'nuff said.
They're quite different product lines, serving different markets. The heatsink you'd need to cool something like the 9800X3D would be the size of the Mac mini itself. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K costs roughly the same as the entire M4 mini, has twice as many cores (4x as many threads), and its advertised base power is twice the M4's maximum.

There's nothing wrong with comparing them, but they don't seem to be in the same market.
This tired and unfunny 'joke' might at least be relevant when it's a little-known individual announcing their departure, but less so when it's a national newspaper with 11 million followers.
Francois Chollet is leaving Google
Yes, a user was banned for sharing the Vance dossier

https://www.fastcompany.com/91198871/why-x-suspended-journal...
If the consultancy takes off, I can indeed imagine my writing taking a back seat (I'm assuming Bile Blog just stopped writing and didn't sell out). Now that I pay rent through sales and engineering, taking time off to write is hard to justify. If we manage to hit our goals and I still have time in my week, the writing will continue. We're not going to scale indefinitely, though I think we may end up hiring a few people so that we can be eligible to fix government systems.
But iiuc, an EA algorithm needs to keep an entire population in memory at once.

I don't think this is the case for diffusion models.
Gentrification and moral panic killed warehouse parties and raves.
Opinions are one thing. X has become a bastion of conspiracy theories and outright fabrications with it's hyper-partisan owner leading the charge.
The hearing test on one of the images shows a ‘profound loss’. Does the hearing aid feature work for such a significant loss, or does it disable for any result beyond moderate loss?
Journalism should have a bias for the truth. But one political camp has spent decades working the refs, calling truth-telling "bias", and even building parallel media ecosystems that project a message completely detached from factual reality. I don't know how we come back from this.
The issue is that a huge chunk of journalists have been horrifically addicted to Twitter from long before Musk's time.

Realistically everyone in that field should've bailed the second subscribers got bumped to the top of replies across the website.
My personal experience in the two years or so has lead me to conclude that a lot of employers have started wanting medical paperwork for much more inane cases than they historically did, and in response, a lot of medical providers have started saying "no" to such requests, since they (pretty reasonably, to me) don't want to be in the business of saying "yeah they were sneezing for 3 days maybe don't make them come in", or such inane things.

Of course, this screws over people with problems who could get such paperwork before but didn't need to, as well as people who existed in the gap where they didn't need that before so now if they try to report it, they're going to get questions about "why don't you have a paper trail of this?", as well as "you didn't seem sick".

Because, shockingly, if you tell people, directly or indirectly, that you prefer the people who don't have an illness, they will learn to cover it up real well, or they get fired or quit when everyone but them gets promoted.
That's a very silly conflation.

The Guardian is a newspaper. They broadly have two sections: reporting and editorial. Reporting is basically that. Now you can (correctly) argue that there is bias on the reporting side in how they choose to cover certain stories, how they choose what stories to cover, etc but there are still minimum standards they adhere to, like they won't knowingly print anything objectively false. They'll issue corrections and retractions if necessary.

The editorial side is quite literally opinion. The Guardian, like any publication, can issue their opinion on a given political race. But you know that's opinion. They'll argue why for their position. You can agree or disagree with their reasoning or conclusions. But it's intellectually honest.

Now compare that to Elon and Twitter. It's not even remotely the same. Twitter has an algorithm to decide what to show people. He's used it to push his own posts [1]. His own posts have openly pushed conspiracy theories [2], things that are provably false. This can go as far as pushing literal Nazi conspiracy theories (aka the Great Replacement [3]) and make sure as many people as possible see it.

It is utterly disingenuous to conflate the two.

[1]: https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/14/23600358/elon-musk-tweets...

[2]: https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/5/20/23730607/elon-musk-...

[3]: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/elon-musk-...
What if I specifically want to consume media that is biased towards technological exploration and advancement?
I don't see this at all. I've had a twitter account since it started but I never found ti that useful until the past couple years. I don't see the point in Threads or Blusky except as short lived tantrums over the owners politics.
Robinhood launched a new feature where we could bet on the presidential candidate. I've heard of a couple others too, so I think that laws were created and funded by competitors, and they defined what was legal in a way that excluded polymarket.

I think in this case, polymarket allows betting on anything, competitors got betting on the election legalized (https://www.barrons.com/news/last-minute-legal-ruling-allows...), so they get the cash from polymarket's idea then get them banned/stopped long enough to take their market share.

VC's call it Regulatory Capture, politicians call it corruption.
Yes, although the number of parameters is not directly linked with the flops/speed of inference. What's nice about this AE architecture is that most of the compute (message embedding, and merging) is done at low resolution, same idea as behind latent diffusion models
The hoax shoe fits perfectly:

Immaculate Constellation

becomes

A luminous nation's celestial tic
Make a hypothesis about what you expect to see every step of the way.A manifesto
Some might hold a popular delusion that X is a neutral forum for expressing political views.

X is not a neutral forum.
Sort of amazing. Sounds like LitRPG come to life.
Well, it is the Guardian leaving rather than being banned. If they think the site is unbalanced, then they’ve just made it worse.
Looking for beta testers for my side project: A LeetCode companion app
Hi all!

After countless late nights coding after my day job, fueled by probably too much coffee, I'm finally ready to share my side project with you - LCKit!

I built this iOS app for LeetCoders who love tracking the progress. Like many of you, I love tracking my LeetCode stats - it keeps me motivated. So I built a way to visualize our progress with clean widgets right on the home screen. What started as a personal project might be helpful for others too!

Two Ways to Join:

1. Be a Beta Tester via TestFlight: https://testflight.apple.com/join/5UANrnUU

2. Pre-order now: Be among the first to get it on launch in App Store. (Nov 30) → https://apps.apple.com/us/app/lckit-analytics/id6737440341?p...

Really excited to hear your thoughts and make it even better with your feedback.

Cheers!
There are multiple errors in the logic here, but the biggest one is you're trying to prove causation with correlation (and implicitly at that). Which to iterate my understanding, its this:

Google was founded and everyone worked in an office together, Google is a $2.5T marketcap company, therefore Google's work culture could only be created, fostered and maintained in an office setting and therefore Google is successful because they all worked an in office together.

You can't actually prove the assertion that being in office makes the difference here at all. For instance, the article you linked t talks about the way two friends collaborated. The backdrop happens to be an office, but the office setting itself is not what made the collaboration successful. Merely, the fact they shared so much and worked collaboratively so closely is what let them to be successful, but nowhere in the article does it say "well we could only do this if we were in person with one another". The office is the backdrop to the story, its not the reason it happened.

Also, you're throwing an entire field under the bus that our entire industry definitely builds on, which is business & management theory (aka social science), but if we couldn't use social science to make informed decisions, why do so many startup founders read things like 'Zero To One'? (which is a book form of the notes that Blake Masters took while Peter Thiel was teaching CS183 at Stanford University in Spring 2012)
I think it's making the age old claim every generation makes that "the youth nowadays are ruined".
Not quite the same.

There’s a bit of difference between encouraging votes for the good of the people and encouraging votes to help you personally.

But if I’m mistaken and Harris promised the Guardian a govt position they could use to pass laws to help them personally, do tell.
> param: string & Not<"">

Is this even a type anymore? It's checking against a specific value.
Why would netflix put their blog on medium?
> Fun fact: Unlicensed stations began streaming jungle music from onboard ships off the coast of Britain, hence the expression "pirate radios."

Didn't pirate radio broadcast from boats predate Jungle by about 20 years?
The article mentions Bomberman on the Nintendo 64, but they made a mistake — there were actually 4 different Bomberman games on the Nintendo 64, and the one featuring Jungle music is Bomberman Hero, not the one whose box art they used (Bomberman 64).
But uh... isn't it possible that one exists and the other does not?
Exactly: two completely opposing points! I agree that identity politics is a terrible idea.
Likely that passes for analysis on Twitter, these days.
Fwiw, we didn't mention any probabilistic data structures because they don't satisfy some of the basic requirements we had for the Best-Effort counter. HyperLogLog is designed for cardinality estimation, not for incrementing or decrementing specific counts (which in our case could be any arbitrary +ve/-ve number per key). AFAIK, both Count-Min Sketch and HyperLogLog do not support clearing counts for specific keys. I believe Count-Min Sketch cannot support decrement as well. The core EvCache solution for the Best-Effort counter is like 5 lines of code. And EvCache can handle millions of operations/second relatively cheaply.
It is definitely nerve-wracking. But when things are going well, there's a kind of zen to it. They have the advantage of doing the same thing every day. They know the plan, and they stick to it.

Until something goes wrong with the plan -- somebody calls out sick, the refrigerator fails, an order gets messed up and has to be re-cooked -- and the rhythm gets disrupted. The dining room is full so new orders are getting backlogged, and more mistakes get made because you're off your game...

It's not for the faint of heart. It doesn't have to be as unpleasant as some TV shows make it out to be. But it's a whole different kettle of fish from cooking at home.
There's no such thing as unbiased media. The inescapabilty of bias isn't a problem - the problems are undue bias, lying about one's bias, and letting your bias erode journalistic integrity.

(edited to add last part about journalistic integrity)