skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's explained in the article:

> Fortunately for Spivack and the Arch Mission Foundation, spewing DNA and water bears across the moon is totally legal. NASA’s Office of Planetary Protection classifies missions based on the likelihood that their targets are of interest to our understanding of life. As such, missions destined for places like Mars are subject to more stringent sterilization processes than missions to the Moon, which has few of the necessary conditions for life and isn’t at risk of contamination. In fact, Spivack isn’t even the first to leave DNA on the moon. This honor belongs to the Apollo astronauts, who left nearly 100 bags of human feces on the lunar surface before they returned to Earth.
If you want to build something like youtube, you could store the data from a start of a video, and data defining a slower resolution stream, and more popular videos on the lower latency parts of tapes in your storage arrays, and while the video plays you could go get the rest from the higher latency places.

You could also predict What is the next video the user will want.

Also, the 2 minute seek time is from one end of the tape to the other.
But you could also move accross tracks, vertically so that gives another route for short seek times for some of your data.

So it might be possible to build something with a reasonable performance.
I dropped EE entirely and switched from Computer Engineering to Computer Science because of my entry level EE course professor. I know I'm not the only person pushed away from EE due to Neil Cotter. Boggles my mind why he's still allowed to be the gateway to that discipline for so many people.
Can someone explain why this doesn't distort the signal? Eg. with all these capacitors one might think it would filter out higher frequencies?
Wel also have agreements on nuclear weapons proliferation but that doesn't stop israel
To be fair, that ship has sailed years ago in many areas of programming, even without LLMs...
I always say church organs are the original heavy metal. Who needs amplification? Just open up the big pipes! The debut of the Rite of Spring is also an excellent choice.
Spacetype Generator
It also reduces the knowledge needed. I don't particularly care about learning how to setup and configure a web extension from scratch. With LLM, I can get 90% of that working in minutes, then focus on the parts that I am interested in. As somebody with ADHD, it was primarily all that supplementary, tangential knowledge which felt like an insurmountable mountain to me and made it impossible to actually try all the ideas I'd had over the years. I'm so much more productive now that I don't have to always get into the weeds for every little thing, which could easily delay progress for hours or even days. I can pick and choose the parts I feel are important to me.
The final spaghetti point really takes the wind out of this article's sails. A lot of it is good information, but too many parts make me think "That's a stretch."
SICP shows a real world code base. It's real world programs that builds up to implementing real world programming languages.

Why would you validate if you can parse? If you have a decent chunk of experience in implementing business logic then you know that your quality of life will be destroyed by switches and other inscrutable wormhole techniques up until the point where you learn to use and build around rule engines. SICP shows you how you can tailor your own rule engine, so you won't have to get the gorilla and the jungle when you reach for one in an enterprisey library.
"You can use this, except not commercially unless you do such and such" isn't a free license though. Whether it's free matters more than whether it's nonprofit. GNU showed us how software could be for-profit, yet also free.
> I don't think this is really unique to Rust. Any language that requires you to write stuff down about interfaces might require you to change them in a lot of places if you get it wrong. E.g. if you get the type of a parameter that is passed everywhere wrong.

My experience doesn't match this. I think the difference is that Rust has... "specific types", to pick an arbitrary term. The types store more information, which means that there are many more ways that you might need to update an interface.

An interface with a function that takes a C++ pointer doesn't imply anything other than that the pointer is valid at the beginning of the calthe return value of l to that function. It doesn't even tell you whether it can be nullptr or not. It might be a pointer extracted from a `std::unique_ptr`, in which case the actual expectation is that the pointer be valid when the function returns. Or it might be passed the return value of `new`, in which case the expectation is that the pointer be either valid but now owned by something else, or invalid when the function returns. And you might change from one expectation to the other merely by removing a `delete` call 7 levels deep, without needing to adjust any of the intervening layers.

Rust, on the other hand, encodes a specific subset of the possible lifetimes that the C++ version accepts, and every intervening layer has to agree on that lifetime or at least the structure of it.

And it's not just lifetimes. In Rust, you'd typically make everything a specific type -- maybe an enum or Option or whatever. In C++, I often find myself intentionally degenerating even (C++) enums to ints when I need to store or output or manipulate them -- I want to test `val < FirstCustomValue` or something. A parameter that started out as an enum with 3 variants can add on a couple of orthogonal bits without perturbing much of anything.

The more specific the types used in practice, the more they'll need to be adjusted to accommodate changes. C++ doesn't even have the facilities for specializing the types as precisely, but more importantly types are typically left pretty loose in practice -- at great cost to stability and correctness, but with resulting benefit to adaptability.

A lump of mud is much more adaptable than a carved sculpture.
Understanding the Trunk-Based Development Workflow
> Some people can just let others be wrong and just stay silent, but some people can't help themselves.

As one of thoes who cant help themselves; the way you phrase it feels a bit too cynical, I've always interpreted it as people want to help, but don't want to offer something that's wrong. Which is basically how falsifiable science works. It's so much easier to refute the assertion that birds generate lift with tiny backpacks with turboprops attached. Than it is to explain the finer details of avian flight mechanics. I couldn't describe above a superficial level how flapping works, but I can confidently refute the idea of a turboprop backpack. (Everyone knows birds gave up the turboprop design during the great kerosene shortage of 1128)
what's the best locally hosted LLM without guardrails?
This person correctly thought it was going to go viral, but seeing the whole conversation some else linked below, it could go viral like you said, for shameless homework nagging.

Edit: copied conversation link https://gemini.google.com/share/6d141b742a13
I used to run a cron job that would scrape my university's daily bulletin and post every day right after it was updated. It may have been the first “presence” the university had on twitter. I remember following things like weather stations that had automated accounts, as well.
It does. It also obeys the Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem when you take into account the clock frequency (you can't delay signals above half the clock frequency). It also exhibits nonlinearities that will create harmonic distortion.

At least in the pro audio space, those qualities are actually desirable.
How could a study find what an algorithm for personalization does without actually trying it with various people? Number of post views is not a relevant metric. Musk's number of followers has risen significantly in that time frame.

Of course Musk's post views rise as people who are not fans leave, his fans come, and there's not enough other content to show those who stay.

Where's any proof of the claim that Twitter adjusted the algorithm? Do the authors seriously think this weak temporal corelation is enough? Do they actually think this is good science, or just bank on the current Musk hate?

(I'm not a Musk fan either, my own Twitter algorithm didn't show me a single Musk post since forever. And it's smart enough to keep showing me SpaceX stuff.)
I wonder if that's large enough to contain an old linux running an old version of firefox and feed that the page content.
Fellow is doing an aggressive function. I wouldn't dare put contrary functions against his output.
Setting trolling aside, this could also be an act of a person who is very scared and angry at the diagnosis, and who is dealing with the news by looking for external factors they can blame and redirect their feelings toward. It's a very human reaction for someone in a terrible situation, and I would be inclined to give them some grace for it.

Understanding is not agreeing though. Of course none of this is on you. Everybody deals with stress in their life, and if code review bickering was the worst thing they faced, I'd consider that pretty lucky indeed. As others mentioned, you can't control how others deal with adversity and emotions, and this includes this LinkedIn outburst. No need to feel guilt here whatsoever (though perhaps worth thinking about professional disagreements in general, and ways of handling those conversations in a productive rather than adversarial manner).
Do you know how those weight loss drugs work? They reduce your appetite. They're literally designed to "fix" the problem of "being a glutton." They don't magically burn more calories or whatever you think they do, they just make you eat less.
The 2 first paragraphs are in contradiction with my results with working with LLMs. There is definitely some form of reasoning that has emerged. Some people will still find it not convincing enough to be called reasoning, but that just a quantitative limitation at the moment.

With respect to AGI in its broadest sense: indeed it is not in reach. I think that is for the better!
We do, however, absolutely need a public option.
Change the title to I checked out a few email marketing tools and here's the one that pays me the biggest and the longest affiliate commissions.

Sneaky, I almost trusted this til I reached the comments that this just another pretty looking affiliate spam
So that you won't be coerced or forced to give up your kidney under duress.
Palworld Developer Reveals the Pokémon Patents Nintendo Claims It's Violating
Cobalt 60 from radiotherapy machine can kill you in exactly same way as spent Uranium rod from a power plant. For human body there is no difference between those two.

And we are not even getting to burning coal and subsequent nuclear fallout from it, which is completely uncontrolled.
>We should be trying to find common ground and working with them

Why should we, after what they did to the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong?
100%, and a lot of them are truly terrible use cases for LLMs.

For example, using a LLM to transform structured data into JSON, and doing it with two LLMs in parallel to try to catch the inevitable failures, instead of just writing code that outputs JSON.
My workplace archived old builds of our product. It’s very rare that we need them, but we do need them occasionally. We’d happily take 1 hour latency to be able to cheaply store more of them.
I've never tried SystemC. But after having tried to learn Chisel and friends, and successfully learning Bluespec (and using it in professional projects), I have some insights.

It's fundamentally important when doing hardware design to work in a language that _expresses_ itself like you're designing hardware. Verilog (for all its faults) shines there because it feels like you're writing a slightly higher level netlist. That's not the case with SC and friends, which doesn't allow you to think in hardware. Languages like BSV and SV are functionally similar but they force you to think in similar ways to Verilog, meaning you can write much tighter high-level code.

I'd be interested in your experience, but I feel that using normal programming languages to build hardware is an abstraction failure. Which is why it performs so poorly.
I never bloody saw it , until it was pointed out in the comments here.
They might be trying to avoid discovery which voids side agreements concerning confidentiality and possibly collusion / cooperation. Such conditions coming to light might undermine defense of the same / related patents in other jurisdictions.

Hypothetically, and IANAL.

Edit: I'd say the article supports this interpretation.
Incorrect: you need to know the "how" to create more complex and optimal queries. Your example is like saying, in Python, you just need to write print("Hello World!") to print something.
It was Kirkland butter, I hope they are allowed to stain the artistic expression of their own design.
I preferred the old HTML/CSS/JS logos: https://banner2.cleanpng.com/20180920/kl/kisspng-javascript-...
Obviously fake time traveler.

Only references proir current history. Future concerts were better.
The problem _there_ is that there's very little diversity in the training data - it's all NVidia designs which are probably from the same phylogenetic tree. It'll probably end up regurgitating existing NV designs...
I recently saw a YouTube video[1] of a company trying to get analog circuits to market because they claimed that a great deal of modern electronics are using basically "polling" logic to test analog inputs for activation thresholds. They claimed that by pushing the logic further upstream along the analog path they could significantly reduce the power draw of those systems by removing the busy-wait loops

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AgkTdQXFTY (Analog computing will take over 30 billion devices by 2040. Wtf does that mean? | Hard Reset)
This did get rid of that bottleneck and the stutters are slightly better, but it still has some more work to go.

https://ibb.co/LgtJHMs

You'll want to get rid of glTexImage2D completely except for application startup (allocate a pool of N images up front, then re-use them and update with glTexSubImage2D). And short of being able to optimize the text render, which seems to be awfully stupid, you'll want to render offscreen to those textures ahead of time before you need to render them on-screen.
State pride I suppose.
If you are making an LLM for children, I have no problem with that! I’m not sure kids being completely removed from the adult world until suddenly being dumped into it is a great way to build an integrated society, but sure, you do you. Build your LLM with safeguards for educational use, best of luck to you!

I do not think it should be the default. I do not think that “adults” wanting “adult things” like some ideas on how to secure a computer system against social engineering should have to seek out some detuned “jailbroken” lower-quality model.

And I don’t think that assuming everyone is a child aligns with “human desires”, or should be couched in that language.
I've only been to 3 or 4 rock/pop concerts in my lifetime, but my older brother brought me to the 1973 (?) Steely Dan concert at the Santa Monica Civic.

I loved (and still love) Steely Dan, but what I mostly remember was the thick cloud of smoke in the room, and the fact that the music was way too loud.
Show HN: I Built an AI-Generated Mood-Based Music and Genre Recommender
I'm really missing a go-full-screen button.
We're saying that after every single recommendation you should make it bloody clear that you are profiting from this and how much? So people can make the independent decision about whether your 'reasearxh' is to be trusted or thrown in the garbage like it is.

We recommend software products too but don't hide behind euphemisms and hide our commissions.
Garak is a former spook that served an explicitly genocidal fascist regime and repeatedly tries to get back in and moonlights as a terrorist and starts a war.

It's a borderline insane branding of this corporate tool. Words and stories apparently mean nothing to these people, so if allowed they'll probably destroy the lot of it for all of us.
It was designed for apps, extensions and pages that behave like apps (stuff that might not have a server anywhere, just a manifest and some static HTML/JS). The cache is only one of the use cases.

I think some pages still use them for running background stuff. My browser is setup to clear all of them upon closing the tab.

This whole direction is being silently discontinued anyway. Running browser apps has become harder, not easier.
It is a brilliant book, first book I bought with my own money college. It makes math interesting and approachable.
For reference https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/...
I would say that after 20+ years career OO plus functional elements have been a good default. Maybe I missed opportunities where symbolic computations were important and limited myself with languages like C++ that prefer OO/functional approaches... I can't go back and try something else to know =)

I might agree with your hot take in sense that leaving choice is important though.
Which is like saying that if you read enough textbooks you'll become an engineer/physicist/ballerina/whatever.
Four year CS degrees usually require something around 20 (maybe even more) CS courses. Are you saying that all of those courses at your school were taught in Scheme? You never had a chance (in the classes, ignoring hobby or internships) to use other languages? That'd be a pretty unique school.

But even if that were true and you did take 20+ classes in Scheme, you're still a college educated computer scientist. You can't pick up JavaScript or Python in time for a job interview for an entry level job? They're easy languages to learn. If you survived four years of exclusively being taught with Scheme, they'd be a breeze to pick up.
Key Advertisers Pause Spending over Twitch Anti-Semitism Allegations
That seems to the only purpose twitter ever served even before it was "ruined" was social witch hunts and mass mob forming.
Again, how do Windows and macOS (to an extent) solve this? It’s possible, just not incentivized. Show me the incentives and I’ll show you the outcomes.
+500 social credits

Indeed, why not find common ground with a totalitarian regime that conducts genocides and violently suppresses democracy and dissent

take it from an old man that was born in eastern europe in another totalitarian regime, I've seen it in practice, I've seen the horrors behind closed doors: appeasement never works and only prolongs the suffering of the people.
The low-tech solution is to remove the electronics from key and glue the near the ignition switch, but needs to be done before you loose the last working original key.
what if the water bears made their way to the bags of feces and started to grow inside there. If the bags serves as a terrarium that produces oxygen from anaerobic microbes via photosynthesis.
The atproto relays are crawling aggregations of independent servers. There’s no reason AP couldn’t accomplish the same if they worked on it
How about this? https://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-css-v.svg ;)
FWIW, that’s why I’m working on a platform[1] to help devs deploy polite crawlers and scrapers out of the box that respect robots.txt (and 429s, Retry-After response headers, etc). It also happens to be entirely built on Cloudflare.

[1] https://crawlspace.dev
This is anecdotal but

- A company I worked for wanted to be 100% focused on doing one thing. It was spending 10x more than it was making revenue. It went bankrupt.

- Another company I worked for always insisted on not having all eggs in one basket. There was one big revenue maker that dwarfed the others though. The company is still around and doing well.

I have quite a scattered brain too so I get the appeal of "choosing to focus". But looking others do it I see the risks : refusing to experiment and learn new stuff, or find new opportunities.

EDIT: I'd like to add that focusing or not focusing is not a useful dichotomy, it's more about finding the right "exploration vs exploitation" balance.
It’s a performant publishing tool (depending, of course, on your expectations) but it’s not a high performance publishing tool.
Great question! Our approach isn't to replace the user’s personality but to enhance their natural communication.

Think of it as a guide helping you express yourself more effectively, especially if you're shy or unsure how to start. The messages are tailored to reflect your unique voice and style as much as possible.

It’s about building confidence and fostering authentic conversations, not masking who you are. We are not yet but with time we think we will get there
I can remember when object-oriented programming was all the rage and if you didn't see the light you were just too stuck in your ways apparently. I imagine back then Dave may have had some similars arguments with the senior programmers he worked with at the time as you did with him. You didn't cause his terminal illness.
> But looking at the list, some countries are quite interesting in the "High proficiency" group.

The labels are somewhat arbitrary cutoffs (every 50 points), but which country in the “high” category would you say is worse than HK or Honduras (the two top countries in the “moderate” category)?

I could definitely see an argument for a few ranks up or down, especially if you change the ranking criteria.

That said, this list seems directionally correct.
Same memories, and even the same timeline :) I still recall being blown away by the concept of "code is data", the magic of which I haven't encountered in professional development, alas.
Unfortunately for you I was responding to "how do you know [God] didn't help with finding your shoes?", so your statement reads like a non sequitur.
Ipnon's claim was explicitly stated to follow from just one datum, thus:

>The main calculator used in the US to calculate 10-year risk of cardiovascular incident literally cannot compute scores for people under 40. There are two consequences to this....

And the first claim:

> If you are under 40 you will never encounter a physician who believes you are at risk of heart attack or stroke.

If that's not hyperbolic, where's your evidence that it even just close to being the case?
> In other words, take away the Turing completeness of templates. Which goes back to my original comment.

Template halting is only a correctness issue because it's done at compile time. Turing completeness is not a problem in general, and limiting the amount of computation at compile time is fine.

> The only solution is to take away pointers (Java, C#, etc) OR do what C does

Something along those lines.

> The only way to avoid UB is to limit expressiveness (pretend addresses don’t exist), and all Turing complete languages have UB.

The only way to avoid UB is to limit expressiveness, and NOT all Turing complete languages have UB.

Pointers are a big thing to restrict for a safe language. But you really don't have to do that much else. Whether a program halts or doesn't halt at runtime isn't a safety issue, there's no UB involved. It just runs indefinitely.
If you're interested in a python project, take a look at https://github.com/doshareme/server . Join us on Discord https://dub.sh/doshare-discord
Teachers at a minimum only need n+1 more knowledge than their students.
this is wild because i use parametric polymorphism by writing `forall` in basically every Haskell PR i do for work ever

i think Go having a pretty bad implementation of parametric polymorphism (a programming concept from the 70s) is probably the root cause here
Avast, Kaspersky and so on sell trojans that compete against other, free, as in gratis, trojans in userspace. They have next to no interest in security as such beyond that scope.
The title needs (2019)

I thought the news felt like a deja-vu
Not so good for the people selling matches.
Nx0, 0xN, and 0x0 matrices are great edge cases.

0-length vectors, too.

Then, do the same with Nx1, 1xN, and 1x1 matrices.