skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Full control? nope.

A system to consider honest input without regard for job titles or hierarchy? yes!

For instance, I am not a UX designer but I do keep abreast of consumer perception and preference in whatever field I'm working in - almost like a stalker.

If a designer designs an interface and the feedback is clearly and unanimously negative, I should be able to present this and affect actual change in the product - not have my concerns heard, not considered, but to force actual remedial action taken to fundamentally address the issue.

If a competitor rolls out a new feature that is leading to a mass exodus of our customers, I should be able to demonstrate this without the managers whiffing about some vision that nobody gives a shit about or sprint planning responding to it in 6-months or having days of endlessly yapping. If the ship's got a leak my brother, it should be quickly and swiftly addressed.

It'd be like driving to lunch and your car catches on fire, you ignore it, and think about what you're going to be getting for dessert.

People realize these urgencies in IT/devops but teams that don't want to rock the boat as you gently glide over a waterfall are a complete waste of time.

So control? No. But if someone waves their hands and shout danger, they shouldn't be patronizingly patted on the head and told everything's under control.

In conventional large companies, that's exactly what happens. You're on a team, get assigned tickets, attend meetings, everyone calmly plays their roles and if you notice something in someone else's lane, you're supposed to politely stay quiet and watch everybody crash.
Is CNCF new Apache foundation? Looks like everyone dumps their stuff there. Does not look promising. Am I missing something? Probably RedHat paid salary to podman developers, but who will pay salary to them now?
Do I Have a Bad Adam? – Leaded Solder
But now we’re in reducto ad absurdum territory because elected officials can pass laws to force private companies to fire specific employees, too. And before you say “constitution,” that can also be amended.
You make a good point,

Although the country where I am in doesn't restrict me from vaccinating my pet by myself, I'd rather just outsource it to a vet. vet clinics here also have added facilities like pet cleaning etc which is a plus . In this case I find I'd rather enjoy my pet than figure out its innards or it's anatomy.
>Debug information tends to be large and linking it slows down linking quite considerably. If you’re like many developers and you generally use println for debugging and rarely or never use an actual debugger, then this is wasted time.

Interesting. Is this true? In my work (java/kotlin, primarily in app code on a server, occasional postgres or frontend js/react stuff), I'm almost always reaching for a debugger as an enormously more powerful tool than println debugging. My tests are essentially the println, and if they fail for any interesting reason I'll want the debugger.
There are multiple national and international initiatives that have been building seed banks for a long time, what do you mean with the again?
> Also I don't see any excemption for pro users. They must be joking if they think I want to pay for a service that delivers ads too.

You might not want to, but you will. If the offered service is better than others.
Every negative headline I see about AI hitting a wall or being over-hyped makes me think of the early 2000's with that new thing the 'internet' (yes, I know the internet is a lot older than that). There is little doubt in my mind that ten years from now nearly every aspect of life will be deeply connected to AI just like the internet took over everything in the late 90's and early 2000's and is now deeply connected to everything now. I'd even hazard to say that AI could be more impactful.
which is why we need to adopt nuclear power so we run thousands of these so the odds of them picking up a bot instead of a person is overwhelmingly likely
> inspired by the poetry clock (https://www.theverge.com/23669343/ai-clock-chatgpt-poems-rhy...).

That's fun. Although, from the article:

> There’s one other problem, though. It’s well known that AI language models like ChatGPT have a tendency to make up data (sometimes known as “hallucinations”), and it turns out that’s true even if you’re just telling the time. Roughly once every 15 minutes, says Webb, the clock will simply lie about the time just to make a certain rhyme work. “The fibbing is hilarious. Sometimes you can’t tell — it might say ‘one past two’ when it’s actually ‘two past one,’” he says. He says this will be fixable but, for now, is a fun quirk of the system. “Clockwork means you get precision drift; AI-work means you get hallucination drift.”

;)
This was a tough listen, for two subtly similar reasons.

The voice was uncanny. Simply hard to listen to, despite being realistic. I mean precisely that: it is cognitively difficult to string together meaning from that voice. (I am adjacent to the field of audio production and frequently deal with human- and machine-produced audio. The problem this podcast has with this voice is not unique.) The tonality and meaning do not support each other (this will change as children grow up with these random-tonality voices).

The conversation is excessively verbose. Oftentimes a dearth of reason gets masked by a wide vocabulary. For some audience members I expect the effort to understand the words distracts from the relationship between the words (ie, the meaning), and so it just comes across as a mashup of smart-sounding words, and the host, guest, and show gets lauded for being so intelligent. Cut through the vocabulary and occasional subtle tsks and pshaws and “I-know-more-than-I-am-saying” and you uncover a lot of banter that just does not make good sense: it is not quite correct, or not complete in its reasoning. This unreasoned conversation is fine in its own right (after all, this is how most conversation unfolds, a series of partially reasoned stabs that might lead to something meaningful), but the masking with exotic vocabulary and style is misleading and unkind. Some of these “smart-sounding” snippets are actually just dressed up dumb snippets.
There were a bunch of suggestions on the bluesky thread that they should donate samples of them to researchers so that they could figure out what was actually in the fucking things.
The difference with the bot is that there is a fast feedback loop between action and content. No tagging required, real physics is the playground.
I think iota is fine because it's missing the dot that an i has, but nu is terrible, yeah. In fact, in some fonts nu is exactly v: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_(letter)

But then a lot of capital greek letters at least are identical to latin letters in those fonts, so I guess you have to choose carefully anyway... and pick the proper font/handwriting if you absolutely have to use nu. (Hopefully you don't.)
It's more like looking at grided paper and thinking that defining some rules of when a square turns black or white would result in complex structures that move and reproduce on their own.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life
If you were offered a job with an awful manager and a no-fun team for $250,000, and a job with the best people on the planet for $249,999, which one would you choose?
We do agree, I am just pointing out what once may have been a technical term (idiot, moron) may have become more of a disparagement these days.
“ We have a user base with probably-unusually-high intelligence, community norms which require basically everyone to be familiar with statistics and economics, we have fuzzier community norms explicitly intended to avoid various forms of predictable stupidity, and we definitely have our own internal meme population. It’s exactly the sort of community which can potentially outperform whole large fields, because of the median researcher problem.”

Citation definitely needed.

Also, the problem of bad research isn’t an IQ problem. The corporate university model creates terrible incentives. Science has the problem too, but metrics gaming does less damage because it’s harder to get away with publishing actual wrong answers.

The reasons there’s more shitty research in “soft” fields are not a problem with the IQs of researchers but:

* more bikeshedding at all levels, from creates, peers, and the public. High-IQ people can be horrific bikeshedders, and tend to be just as oppressive in their mediocrity when they go into territory they know nothing about.

* lack of external options for hangers-on. Mediocre CS researchers can easily get jobs at FAANG and earn 5x more than actual good ones who stay in, so the non-serious people get pulled away. That doesn’t happen as much in the social sciences.
It's such a common pattern in technology - especially in VC-funded companies - that it's nice to have a single word to be able to discuss it concisely. In a way it's not too different than old-school "dumping" of products at below cost to drive competition out of business only to raise prices once you have control of the market. Though with internet companies the "price" is often the volume of ads you end up getting exposed to.
I recommend you to read all the previous CVEs with a "disputed" state :)

Lots of companies did it the same way. SAP, Salesforce, Fortinet, Sophos, heck, even Solarwinds RCE was disputed - AFTER the whitehouse made a public statement about it.

I'd argue that NIS2 doesn't enforce much, because the "reasonably modern" lingo is used everywhere, which is a legal grey area that lazy lobbyists inserted for a good reason.

Legally speaking, base64 is a reasonably modern encryption, which says something about this, and the lack of technical correctness in the whole sector.

TISAX requires 24 hours response times, and the response is "We have received it" because it doesn't say that companies have to disclose or report any incident. Neither any mandatory time frames for bugfixes.

Same for all ISO norms, you can fulfill ISO 27001 et al with a single part time student job, which has 20+ role descriptions. Will the student get the job done? Probably not, but it's still passing the audit because auditors don't control the outcome, only the management policies.

We need to rethink how audits are done, because systematically paying auditors for implied successful audits is what got us here.
Perhaps this will be obvious to anyone who is actually a potential customer, but I wasn't sure what "SOP" stood for until I saw the definition in your comment above. A definition in some corner of the landing page might be nice.
Aw, you went and spoiled his comedy bit. Come on!
Thanks for reading and for the kind words!

First, a meta comment is that I've found that you should weigh advice based on how similar the advisor is and how closely their success matches what you want. So, given that I came in with a background in software already, my advice might not be a good match for you.

I feel like I went down a lot of misguided paths as a founder following advice of people who were successful but were very different from me (e.g., their goal was to reach $1B in valuation, they love pitching to customers).

That said, the thing I recommend to a lot of people curious about starting out with an indie business is to create a course or a book. People call these "info products" and that term has kind of a stench to it, but I think they're a great way to learn. I prefer the term "educational product" because there's less of a stigma. I created a video course in year three of going off on my own, but I wish I'd done it sooner.

I think people feel reluctant to create an educational product because they feel like they're not an expert at anything, but you don't have to be the world expert on something to make a course. You just have to know enough that you can get your students from level N to level N + 1. You can take something that you recently learned and make a course that you wish that you'd had that would have let you learn the same information in 5 hours rather than 50 hours. And you don't have to be the world's greatest teacher as long as you can find some people who enjoy the way you explain things.

Creating an educational product is like a microcosm of the full experience of launching a business. It forces you to think about what customers want, build something that fills the need, and then market it to find customers who want it. And all that stuff is hard, but it's much easier to do with a course. If you spent 50 hours making a course and find out you can't sell it, you lost 50 hours. You can learn from the failure and try a new course or product the next month. If you spent 2 years learning to code and building a tech product and find that nobody wants it, you'll feel very tied to that idea and have a hard time pivoting to another idea.

I have my issues with Pieter Levels, but I think he's a great case study in trying businesses rapidly and then doubling down on the ones that work. When he started, he didn't know how to code well, so his early products would just be like a Google Sheets spreadsheet that he sold access to.
"The terminology of calling computer parts "organs" is gone now, but the "Control" here describes what we now commonly refer to as CPU."

Actually, what was described is currently called the "Control Unit". We divide CPUs into a Datapath (which includes registers, busses, ALU...) and a Control Unit which is either hardwired or microcoded. Decoding instructions is the job of the Control Unit though it might get a little help from the Datapath in some designs.

The block diagram for a modern processor at the end of the article is just the Datapath - the Control Unit is not shown at all which is the most popular current style. It must actually exist in the chip and HDL sources, of course, if the processor is to actually do anything.
I heard that deadnaming is uncool.
They are indeed great and I use them thoroughly (Cursor, Warp etc...). Thanks for the wishes and inspiration.
Isn't it a bit unreasonable to compare something free that you can run today on totally standard consumer hardware with *the* state of the art LLM that is probably >= 1T parameters?
During the Winter, I tend to stay more active. I play several sports, do weight training and do indoor rock climbing to sort of wear myself out. So in Winter, I adaptively change the signals my body is using that tells it when its time to go to sleep.

My diet also changes in the Winter. I cut off caffeine at noon and restrict phone and screen time in favor of physical activities in the later afternoon. It takes about two weeks for my body to adjust fully to the changes, but then its fine throughout Winter. Even when I'm getting less sunlight because the sun is going down sooner.

I never knew how much your diet will affect your sleep and biorhythms until I started making changes. Even small changes can have big effects on your sleep cycles.

Hope that helps.
Nvidia was not the best example. They get to moon in the case that any AI exponential hits. Most others have less of a wide probability distribution.
I thought we discussed it here a few years ago but neither algolia nor DDG are giving me hits. I’m probably using the wrong search terms.

I have a relative with anterograde amnesia from a stroke, so that story got passed on to my father when it happened. 8 years ago perhaps?
> If you’re like many developers and you generally use println for debugging and rarely or never use an actual debugger

You lost me here.

Using a debugger to step through the code is a huge timesaver.

Inserting println statements, compiling, running, inserting more println, and repeating is very inefficient.

If you learn to use a debugger, set breakpoints, and step through code examining values while you go then the 8 seconds spent compiling isn’t an issue.
Shift Left Is the Tip of the Iceberg
Enable them when you need to debug. This is for speeding up "edit-build-run" workflows.
Doesn't rust have overflow checks in debug and skips them in release?
While texture mapping is done via box projection based on the plane itself, the actual texture mapping parameters are separate values than the plane (specifically they are scaling, shifting and rotation).

Some .map extensions do store vectors instead of scale/shift/rotate that allow much more flexible texture mapping (though still need to be on a plane, but can represent things like skewing), but these are still stored separately from the plane.
Were you actually under-qualified? The stereotype is that many people are not qualified for the jobs they are doing... ;-P
The moment the insta-glasses expand beyond a few dorks is the moment I start wearing a balaclava everywhere I go.
> I am convinced that you can make yourself x2 by using an AI.

This means you're getting paid 2x more, right?

...Right?
HN always says this, and it's always wrong. A technical implementation that's easy, or readily available, does not mean that a successful company can't be built on it. Last year, people were saying "OpenAI doesn't have a moat." 15 years before that, they were saying "Dropbox is just a couple of chron jobs, it'll fail in a few months."
Nowhere near, but the market seems to have priced in that scaling would continue to have a near linear effect on capability. That’s not happening and that’s the issue the article is concerned with.
> Altman has been telegraphing that he's eyeing the exit

Can you think of any specific examples? Not trying to express disbelief, just curious given that this is obviously not what he's intending to communicate so it would be interesting to examine what seemed to communicate it.
println debugging is where everyone starts. Some people never graduate to knowing how to use a debugger.

Debugging through log data still has a place, of course. However, trying to do all of your debugging through println is so much harder, even though it feels easier than learning to use a debugger.
What do you think heritability means?
> OpenAI has announced a plan to achieve artificial general intelligence (AGI) within five years, an ambitious goal as the company works to design systems that outperform humans.
or probably both? Seriously doubt 3.5 Sonnet is in the same order of magnitude as 32B
The literal only way the Onion could mock this man was with… reality.
The dankest timeline
> Identity, authn and authn are hard

They are technically straightforward problems. The challenge is usually political; who owns the identity, who manages the identity, privacy concerns of users, etc.

Authz can get crazy, there's a lot of over-engineered solutions there because there's basically no hard boundary between authz and general business logic.

But identity and authn are relatively straightforward, technically, and we ought to have a better FOSS solution than just Keycloak.
However well intentioned, I can't figure out what this blog post is attempting to do.

On one hand, the author seems not up to date with how standards have changed at flagship journals post replication crisis. There are new editorial teams, new standards, and a new culture of avoiding past mistakes. Does this mean things are perfect? No, but that's any human endeavor.

The author also doesn't define "memeticity" but implies that it is bad. However, given that science is a slow-moving conversation where outdated ideas are jettisoned and current ideas are explored and investigated... So some of amount of "memeticity" is to be expected. It seems like the author's issue is that some papers aren't ambitious enough?

At the same time, the author is also saying that the median person in any endeavor is not as skilled as the most skilled people. This is true by definition. Indeed, a small dedicated team of high-performing people, with the right leadership and clarity of vision, can indeed have an outsized impact. That's what most of us know or at least suspect in startup land.
It was my pleasure.
I'm not sure if this is a good idea, especially in code; apart from adding unnecessary confusion for the reader, this will also confuse some monospaced fonts.
> The uploader has not made this video available in your country

We really need a civilization changing event to rethink some stuff.
Yep, I'm building a dev tool that is based on this principle. Let me focus on the hard stuff, and offload the details to an AI in a principled manner. The current crop of AI dev tools seem to fall outside of this sweet spot: either they try to do everything, or act as a smarter code completion. Ideally I will spend more time domain modeling and less time "coding".
> eye control is poor UX... a jittery cursor in the center of your vision

For a lot of folks with tremors or other mobility issues, their eyes may be much more stable than their fingers. It might be helpful to weigh the tradeoffs you're presenting with alternatives including a jittery inaccurate finger in the center of their vision, or even just not being able to use the UI at all.

> only useful as an accessibility feature

For the above reasons, that's exactly how they're marketing it
Rust has compiled time overflow checks enabled by default in any profile.
Runtime overflow checks are disabled by default in release profile.
I am not sure why my comment above is downvoted -- if you know where the perpetual optionality of digital attestations is officially stated, please, provide a link.
> If you fact check Elon's tweets and retweets, pretty much none of them are true

As someone who purports to care so much about facts, how can you open with this statement? This sort of behavior is why Trump won in a landslide -- people are voting against this sort of cognitive dissonance disguised as arrogance, not for Trump.

> But I do know X is overrun with disinformation, racism, and outright reality denial.
> I left twitter a while ago

Okay. I'm picking up on a common theme amongst all the armchair experts on X -- they aren't on it and only know what has been cherry picked by their own hyper-partisan media outlets.

Let's assume Elon is quite right wing and the vast majority of his personal posts are opinions masquerading as facts. Did you know you can unfollow him? How is this worse than where you get your news? I'll tell you -- in many cases, you don't know who owns your news source of choice and you don't know their agenda, but they surely have one. So basically, X is a more decentralized information system with more transparency.
There are around ~3,000 cases per year in the United States[1]. Since cancer is the result of cell division gone wrong, it can develop pretty much anywhere in your body. However, areas where cell division occurs more frequently are more common.

[1] https://www.mdanderson.org/cancer-types/appendix-cancer.html