skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Trump made the post a partisan hot potato that was open to the highest bidder, it took the incoming administration a bit of deliberation to determine how to replace that shit show with someone both sides of a pretty evenly split Senate could approve of… I’m also not blaming Trump for anything that started under Obama’s watch and that he just inherited and didn’t act on immediately.
The interesting follow-up here... there is no reason these effects should be restricted to children. Like, if children can't learn with devices in a classroom, it suggests executives can't learn in an office (and might give a hint as to why we haven't seen expected productivity benefits driven by it).

But again, if the effect was this strong, I'd really expect to see broader evidence (even just at a national level based of digital uptake).
you don't absorb quartz through your skin and is inert if it gets into your stomach. small particles won't hurt your guts and will get pooped out; ingesting dirt is something that is not uncommon with animals, including people.
> We would like to combine Jepsen’s workload generation and history checking with Antithesis’ deterministic and replayable environment to make our tests more reproducible.

For those unaware, Antithesis was founded by some of the folks who worked on FoundationDB - see https://youtu.be/4fFDFbi3toc?si=wY_mrD63fH2osiU- for some of their handiwork.

A Jepsen + Antithesis team up is something the world needs right now, specifically on the back of the Horizon Post Office scandal.

Thanks for all your work highlighting the importance of db safety Aphyr
Scientists uncover a magnetic misunderstanding about Uranus
Precisely, the next pilot will not bail out so quickly, saving a $100M plane. Encouraging pilots to exhaust all options before they eject is the entire point.
Science.org is made without counsciouness in the way they force the reader to use javascript.
But if you have really something to say, I would like to read it in Text WebBrowser only, I do not want to use crap web browser that are made to make you think you read something interesting. Pseudo journalism kill science.

403 Forbidden

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Refresh (390 sec)
Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
Hard disagree. I think a huge part of our job as engineers is to build systems that can outlive us and comfortably change hands (without the next team cursing the former).

Maybe this is born from spending so many years in Amazon (with it's high turn over and near-quarterly re-org shuffling), but what's getting called "replaceable" here I'd call "writing maintainable software."

The goal is to get knowledge out of your head and into the codebase so everyone can reap the benefits. Knowledge hoarding is lame.
I like Min too. I've been using it for 3 years. The workspace separation is nice, along with the minimal UI. I think it has the best defaults of any browser. Unfortunately, there's a couple uncomfortable quirks and bugs to deal with. I'll probably be switching to Firefox soon and spending lots of time customizing.
Time, and it may be desirable to avoid things you find uncomfortable.
>but if they don't provide value to everyone who they take as customers, they're a shitty business.

What does this even mean? Not everyone has to buy from every business. If consumers aren't deriving value from a business, they can just refuse to buy said product/service. It'd be great if a business's TAM is everyone, but the fact that some people won't get value is hardly an indictment. I don't like fishing. You'd have to pay me go on a fishing expedition. In other words, a fishing gear business won't provide value to me. If I go against my interests and buy a bunch of fishing gear that won't provide value to me, that's hardly an indictment of the fishing shop.
Sure, but still on each tile, you do O(k^3) compute with O(k^2) memory, and you generally arrange things so that at least one tile is in L1 and at least one other is in L2/LLC (using CPU idioms), so again, you have plenty of bandwidth (typical choices of k are in the ballpark of ~32, and a 32:1 compute to memory ratio is just fine on most hardware, especially if some of those accesses are coming from fast memory)
Thanks anhphong, it works now.
What is missing in edtech is a concept of progress and partial correctness and guess work. The primary input in edtech is multiple choice. This is selected so a person does not need to evaluate the answer making it cheaper. But leads to kids guessing. Starting a blank line to write a response is what really kicks the brain in. There is no easy way out.

We could replicate the same blank page and grayscale human response to questions. But then we have not made a cheap factory that reduces costs. Its the typical fast, good, cheap conundrum. Everyone keeps picking cheap and getting mad when it does not work.
Router-manufacturer should be mandated to implement a functionality that allows applying a whitelist filter for certain times of a day. It would have helped me a lot as a parent to make sure that my children can only access Desmos, online Office sites etc. while they are supposed to do their homework.
We will be able to sit on our makeshift rafts and make funny pictures of dogs with hats.
I think people, and society in general, need to be a lot more careful about buying into hype, and prematurely adopting hyped tech.

Would you buy (or fly in) a "revolutionary" new jet, that (by the way) hasn't been tested, but it's makers are really hopeful it will be safe and perform better than other jets?

IMHO, changes in education need to be studied for at least ten years, then rolled out slowly with much more skeptical study. First you've got "balanced reading" that de-emphasized phonics and reduced literacy (but I'm sure resulted in massive textbook sales and prestige for a few education academics), and now you've got EdTech screens that have hurt students' learning (but probably made some VCs rich). Implementation's got to slow down until we actually are sure the shit actually works better.
There’s this remarkably stupid stereotype that muscles equates to stupidity. If you look at some of the champions, they all have degrees in fields like Accounting (Ronnie Coleman, Phil Heath) or Chemistry (Frank Zane). Schwarzenegger famously did business school at night while a bodybuilder.
I have seen the opposite happen a lot though, even if a project is successful you will get numerous people coming to you asking “who approved this? Why was I not involved in the decision?” And the ballooning aftereffects are why it takes months to push a simple button.

Big companies are like government bureaucracies now.
We'll do/try/pay for anything except for teachers and good teaching
Everybody is different. The reason I need to go to bed early is that I wake up before 7am every day, regardless of when I go to bed. So the only way for me to get 8-9 hours of sleep is to go to bed early.

Your body is different from mine so you need a different routine. My point was that it's important for me to maintain a certain schedule which was incompatible with my partner - which is fair enough.
It makes sense to think of bones as endocrine organs.
As an investor in healthcare AI companies, I actually completely agree that there's a lot of bad implementations of AI in healthcare settings, and what practitioners call "alarm fatigue" as well as the feeling of loss of agency is a huge thing. I see a lot of healthcare orgs right now roll out some "AI" "solution" in isolation that raises one metric of interest, but fails to measure a bunch of other systemic measures.

Two thoughts:
1: I think the industry could take cues from aerospace and the human factors research that's drastically improved safety there -- autopilot and autoland systems in commercial airliners are treated as one part of a holistic system with the pilot and first officer and flight attendants in keeping the plane running smoothly. Too few healthcare AI systems are evaluated holistically.

2: Similarly, if you're going to roll out a system, either there's staff buy-in, or the equilibrium level of some kind of quality/outcomes/compliance measure should increase that justifies staff angst and loss of agency. Not all AI systems are bad. One "AI" company we invested in, Navina, is actually loved by physicians using them, but the team also spent a LOT of time doing UX research and feedback with actual users and the support team is always super responsive.
and paid water
Unrelated, but surely thanos would need to murder half the universe every few years to keep the charade running
"The idea is high-pitched sound brings attention and awareness effectively. "

I was in a restaurant in a small town outside of Shanghai years ago when an old lady came to regale us with her singing accompanied by a one-string stick sort of violin.

It was unbearable. Her high pitched voice was weak Waverly and shrill and that one string violin was piercing and offsetting.

I mentioned that I would be willing to pay to send the person away and one of my young Chinese dinner companions said "me too"
That doesn't fix the issue because then people will stigmatize things that have negative health consequences which is what already happens in pieces like Europe.
This has also been my experience. Curriculum standards really put a stop to any radical changes in the way we structure the learning process.

I guess that IS the point of standards, but we really should be experimenting more on the fringes.
This is the same technology story told thousands of times a day with nearly every technology. Medical seems to be especially bad at this.

Take a very promising technology that could be very useful. Jump on it early without even trying to get buy in and without fully understanding the people that will use it. Then push a poor version of it.

Now the nurses hate the tech, not the poor implementation of it. The techies then bypass the nurses because they are difficult, even though they could be their best resource for improvement.
This is what I was most interested in with this project (especially in light of the https://opensourcepledge.com/). We didn't run it against any new libraries, so it would be interesting to see the state of the most starred libraries.
This article feels “ripped from today’s headlines” for me, as my mother-in-law was recently in the ICU after a fall that caused head trauma. The level of AI-driven automated decision-making is unsettling, especially as it seems to allow large organizations to deflect accountability—“See? The AI made us do it!” I’m not entirely sure what guided her care—or lack thereof—but, as someone who frequently works in healthcare IT, I see these issues raised all the time.

On the other hand, having access to my own “AI” was incredibly helpful during her incident. While in the ICU, speaking with her doctors, I used ChatGPT and Claude to become a better advocate for her by asking more informed questions. I could even take pictures of the monitors tracking her vitals, and ChatGPT helped me interpret the readings, which was surprisingly useful.

In this “AI-first” world we’re heading into, individuals need their own tools to navigate the asymmetric power dynamic with large organizations. I wonder how long it will be until these public AI models get “tweaked” to limit their effectiveness in helping us question “the man.”
> AI = machines that think like people" is the sci-fi definition

It's also the layman's definition

Which does matter because laymen are the ones who are treating this current batch of AI as the silver bullet for all problems
One can sort of get a non reference capture, by passing the same name as a argument; but yes it would be nice if one could somehow say capture by value.

foo := 1
closure := func(foo int) func() int { return func() int { return foo += 1 } }(foo)

x := closure() // 2, w/o altering outer foo

If not something like the above, I'm not sure what you're trying to express. Possibly what 'foldr' suggested, or that with mine such that one passes in the initial closure function as a argument?
Training is only unprofitable if your time horizon for measuring profitability is less than it takes for the training to make a return. Sometimes that return is intangible, sometimes it is tangible.
Web 2024 (2014)
Customized skill based education should be the future.
Going from mode 4 to mode 1 on the F-35B (I don't know about the AV-8 family) has a significant portion of the flight below stall speed. I don't think that we know at what portion of the flight this happened.

And that's an insignificant detail in the rest of the post anyway, a nuance that does not invalidate the rest of the points made in the post you are replying to.
>And they trust their state and follow the rules a lot less

It was my understanding that the opposite was true in Ukraine early in the conflict. Russia suffered high casualties because they still relied on a central command structure and field leaders were reluctant to make decisions without the express validation of their superiors. This led to them being sitting ducks as they waited for confirmation, and resulted in many high level soldiers being killed because they had to travel to the front lines to communicate orders for any effect.
All these years (decades?) we've been warning about the dangers of wholesale surveillance, collecting and never erasing tracking, metadata, anything the government of private sector can get the hands on.

The end result? The population have spoken. They don't care. It might be too late already, or maybe we have another few years left, I don't know. Everyone aware of the XX century history, I think, sees the rise of the fa^H^H danger as inevitability. It happened after the WWI, it happened after the breakup of the Soviet Union, and the result is the same.

We have interesting times ahead of us. This time it will be backed by a fully functional surveillance apparatus capable of finding everything about a _suspicious_ citizens in seconds.

We've been warned and we failed to act.
Forest keepers: Arhuaco balance modern and ancient ways – photo essay
Muscles are lazy, CNS is necessarily much much lazier.
That's still trusting humans, either the ones who created the AI and gave it it's goals/parameters or the humans that actually implement it's edicts. Can't get away from people, it's a lesson all the DAO hype squad learned quickly, fundamentally you still need people to implement the decisions.
It's a music visualizer, just call things what they are.

You'll get better responses without throwing in terms like "shoegaze" or "architecture" for something less than 300 loc.
A Survey of Explainable AI in Financial Forecasting
That would be a net win for society!
> Machines are much more amenable and don't have loads of arbitrary unwritten rules

I'm sure system prompts of the most famous LLM are just that
It is a little surprising, and I agree, the docs here are not doing a particularly good job of explaining it. It might help to ask: if you don't explicitly commit, how does Kafka know when you've processed the messages it gave you? It doesn't! It assumes any message it hands you is instantaneously processed.

Auto-commit is a bit like handing someone an ice cream cone, then immediately walking away and assuming they ate it. Sometimes people drop their ice cream immediately after you hand it to them, and never get a bite.
Virtual Trackballs: An Interactive Taxonomy
> - playing games such as _Dragon Box_ (which teaches the principles of math and esp. algebra)

One of my kids got pretty damn good at Dragon Box in like... first grade, I think it was?

As far as I can tell this has had (years later) no effect on actually being able to understand algebra any better. The connection's not there. I can see why, too—doing it myself, it was sometimes hard for me to figure out how the various patterns of actions in the game connected to the mechanics of solving algebra problems, and that's with my already understanding that part pretty well. Even when it gets a little more explicit about which symbols are connected to what, later on, what actual mathematical operation or set of scribbles on paper does "drag this little box onto that other little box so it disappears" translate to?

My conclusion is it was good at making me feel like my kid was learning something, but not a great use of time for actually learning that. I think she got a ton more out of the couple times I sat down with her for five minutes to show her how something worked on paper, than hours and hours of Dragon Math.

This goes for other games that are supposed to teach place value and such, but make it really abstract and "fun". Maybe it's just my kids, but even when you point out that what they were doing perfectly well in the game is the same thing they're supposed to do on this worksheet for school, the presentation and mechanics are so different from "drag these colored blobs around" that the value the game provided was practically none. It didn't confer understanding, it taught a very specific kind of pattern recognition just for the game that the kids have trouble generalizing, same as Dragon Math.
That, we haven't figured out any viable way to produce the sort of energy necessary to feed humanity without harvesting the sun, which is very greedy in terms of area.
Quantum Kinetics breaks nuclear fusion record at 200M°C
Each state in the US runs their own elections. Some states (like California) err more on the side of increased voter accessibility by offering many options to vote. This makes things convenient for voters but increases the complexity of administering election. There's no "right" or "wrong" way to do it---just different value judgments on what trade-offs are worth it.
>Considering that a few minutes ago you made an argument which only holds if your interlocutor ignores that time exists,

???

It's unclear how that has to do with this comment.

>I think you'd be wise either to reconsider your precepts or declare your interest.

I'd think you'd be wise to write a more cogent argument rather than vaguely gesturing at my prior comment, or implying I have a conflict of interest.
The teaching method I find best is a teacher explaining and writing with chalk on the blackboard, and the students taking handwritten notes on paper, asking whenever something is not clear. In other words, the most boring classical setup possible. Of course all the nuances and little details make all the difference: board picture, structure, teacher personality, pacing, choice of topic, interaction, motivation, excitement, etc.. It is not guaranteed to work, but as a format it is workable, and I found nothing so far that is better either as a student (long time ago) or as a prof at a top university (for some time now).

A distant second is the format we used during COVID: writing with a tablet using xournal, and streaming it via zoom (loosely like Khan academy). This is of course only my personal experience/opinion, but also informed by vast amounts of student feedback.

EDIT: I agree with the different perspectives from the responses, and should have qualified that I meant it for subjects one typically learns at a university, like calculus or linear algebra. One-on-one tutoring, self-learning can work even better or complement the above and skills, e.g. playing a musical instrument should be approached totally differently.
Eugenics is about improving the gene pool. Genetic discrimination is about making more money.
An Examination of the Predictive Validity of Bar Exam Outcomes on Effectiveness
> The purpose of the system is what it does.

This is a tautological and useless definition of telos. Sometimes things just don't have a purpose.
Thanos had a horrible policy. In many cases it wouldn't help (either it would cause societal collapse or things would go back to being a problem), and even when it does it would usually not be worth it.

If he has to get rid of 50% of the people, shouldn't he at least put them into some sort of computer system, so the remaining people could at least talk to them after?

Then put a guardian system in orbit around every planet to protect the uploads and prevent any recurrences of problems.
https://archive.ph/FxNyr
Clarification since a number of the comments are reading this as "strength training makes your brain stronger". This study looked at _motor_ neurons, not neurons in your brain. Motor neurons are the neurons between your spinal cord and muscle cells, responsible for transferring the signal from your brain to contract/relax your muscles.

I think it was already known that working out muscles increases the innervation (the resolution of how many neurons are attached to a muscle) of the muscles, which is the mechanism for increased motor control that eg pianists have. I think this study is shedding more light on process, and providing stronger empirical evidence for that exact mechanism. Very exciting that this might be used to help people recover from nerve damage/spinal cord injury!
Elon Musk was the Saturday Night Live host who made cast members cry
Previously, I mentioned that explainable AI might improve if modern methods were combined with fuzzy logic or decision trees. This paper has examples of hybrid models that improve explainability in that way.

The architectural principles are probably applicable to areas other than financial, time-series forecasting. I hope people experiment with them.
I'm not actually at a company where I know folks by name at this point. I was for a time.

I currently work at a much larger company where I ship platform-related stuff that integrates a bunch of systems (card payment processing... so fintech) for other developers so that they can ship features and products to customers. I've done a lot of the work mentioned in the article.

The hot-take is just a suspicion that we make things more difficult for ourselves by involving more people than is necessary to get work done, not trusting developers, etc.

Update: and is more a reflection about how the industry operates in general than how things operate where i work in particular
The Byng article is interesting.

I have this theory that military officers are mainly evaluated on how many of their soldiers that die or go missing. It is the easiest hard number to make a metric off. Easy to verify. The more soldiers an officer can kill, the better he seems.

Obviously admirals had a harder task since sunk enemy ships is easier to count. And Byng had witnesses from land. He should have sunk 3 or 4 ships, in hind sight.
Per-Song or Per-Album? Record Labels Challenge Court's Piracy Damages Ruling
There's all kinds of potential negative effects.

1. It generally comes at non-zero financial expense.

2. I might not know what I'm doing.

3. I might get hurt.

4. I might cause someone else to get hurt.

Or, perhaps most-tortuously:

5. They're all going to laugh at me.
Wiki is wild
That’s mostly a marketing myth on the AWS side. As recently as three or four years ago there were _new_ initiatives being built in the legacy “corp” fabric; and even today Amazon has internal tooling that makes use of Native AWS quite different than it is for external customers; particularly around authn/authz.

And that doesn’t even mention the comic “Moving to AWS” platform that technically consumed AWS resources, but was a wholly different developer experience to native.
I enjoy strength training and drinking alcohol.

I think if I had issues with either mental clarity or sleep I'd cut back more, I do practice dry January and have been surprised and how I don't really feel all that different. Maybe 30 days isn't long enough