skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Are they asking for the means to achieve victory?

Yes, and victory for them isn't taking over Moscow but guarantees their sovereignty, independence, and security.

That entails:

- reducing the capacity for Russia to strike Ukraine with long-range missiles;

- the capacity to disrupt supply lines and push them back into Russian territory;

- the capacity to strike air defense systems so Ukraine can secure its air space;

- the capacity to defend unoccupied territory;

- be part of a defensive alliance that guarantees Ukraine's defense in case of a future invasion;

- be part of an economic alliance that will allow Ukraine to rebuild and thrive;

> When and under what circumstances would it be considered a victory for Ukraine?

Victory will be achieved when their citizens can go back to their homes knowing they won't ever have to deal with a genocidal hoard that thinks Ukrainians don't exist.

> How much aid would Ukraine require for this to succeed?

As much as necessary, and I think Western allies and partners can sustain this - if Russia can, the largest economies surely can too.

> Would it be sufficient to deter Russia?

Russia is already paying a high cost in human lives, the economy and culture, they're on a self-destructive path - so just let them do their thing, continue to accelerate this path, and keep supporting Ukraine.

> Is Russia's production capacity worse?

There is a shortage of labor in Russia, with the unemployment rate extremely low, they reached a cap. Now they're trying to outsource production to North Korea.

In conclusion, so you have a historical framing: you'd be in the group of Nazi Germany appeasers, and we saw where that led the world to - WW2. I'm not saying you're a Nazi sympathizer, or anything like that, far from it. I'm saying that you're misinformed to the point that you prefer to sacrifice a country of 40 million people that represents democratic values (even if they're in their infancy), that wants to protect it and be aligned with us... and that won't impact the privilege US has in the global stage.

In exchange for the illusion that... companies that increase consumer prices will drop prices? That housing will suddenly pop out of the sky... housing that migrants mainly build? That the multibillionaires will start to pay more income now that they're part of the government?

That's all to blame on Ukraine aid receiving old military equipment meant to be discontinued and decommissioned, right?
This probably didn't belong here?
One way to save costs would be by using journalctl to view logs then setup your app to send you an email whenever an unhandled exception is raised or some other kind of error occurs.
> Easy to deploy: Upload files, done

I know people love to say this, but does anyone realistically make websites or web apps that way? No, not really. Even with PHP there are frameworks, there is a package manager, there is version control, and there are deployment systems.

Pretending that PHP developers are uploading a .php file to a shared hosting server (like in 2002) to suit the narrative feels disingenuous to me as it doesn’t align with what I see PHP developers doing at all.
When you go to sleep, your brain stem disconnects from your body and your brain enters a feedback loop. The sensors are very much connected, just to whatever. Hence why you can grow dragon wings in your dreams and feel them. Memories can be made as well. I used to be really into lucid dreaming and time compression. My longest dream was nine years compressed into a 12-hour sleep period.
>others would use theblower orbits

Orbital slots are managed by ITU United Nations International Telecommunication Union who manages availability / congestion. SpaceX reserved substantial % of sub 500 km slots. Hence PRC announching their megacontestallations to reserve 500km+ slots, specifically because there isn't enough room in sub 500km for another mega constellation so they're grabbing next best ones.

PRC megaconstellation is targetting 500km+, they're not going to put up 10,000s of mega constellation without economic reusable, hence many options under development. They're choosing orbits based on assumed reusables not current launch costs / vehicles, which btw LM5 is $3000/kg, or ballpark enough to F9/kg for disposable megaconstellation launches despite cost. But bottleneck is resusable vehicles can sustain the required tempo for megaconstellation that disposable can't.
I wouldn't consider all the new features small, but even many small improvements can result in a major improvement.
That would be some really old library. Already in 2012 when Composer was released there was PSR-0 and today almost all libraries are Composer managed and using a namespace following PSR-4 which itself is ten years old. A library that old would almost surely not run on PHP 8 unchanged anyways.

Surrendering the global namespace to the language is not so bad an idea.
Or email clients that only support Gmail...
Also people who emigrated from India to other British colonies benefited - that includes my ancestors.

British rule also got better over time. It also depended on your point of view. For low castes it probably did not make much difference who ruled - and the British may have been better for many of them. Another feature of British rule in India (and elsewhere) is that it was only possible because of Indian support. The same was true in Sri Lanka - Leonard Woolf's account of his time there is fascinating and British rule was not maintained by force of arms - he comments there were hardly any soldiers outside the capital, and the police he relied on were "native".

Its not whether it was right or wrong - I do not think conquering other people is can be justified. It is that it just is and its consequences are inescapable. Its like the Roman conquest of Britain and most of the rest of Europe. Bad things, can have good consequences.
I feel like a game is much more than an interactive presentation of a story, there’s certainly more nuance.

Most importantly, I want to play a game because I want to feel that human connection —- another human being made this; deliberately designed this a certain way.

Nonetheless, this is certainly a very impressive technical achievement that we’re able to do this.
Not sure if you mean the Dutch style cycle lanes: in that case, it's just tourists that risk impact with bikes, simply because they're conditioned to ignore them (i.e. the brain is trained to consider dangerous only what's beyond the curb).

After a few weeks people just learn to be mindful of bicycles and bicycle lanes as they are normally mindful of roads. In particular, one learns to never change direction suddenly (crossing a bike lane, but also on a shared road) but to stop first and check behind their back for potential cyclists.
Code Search – Grep by Vercel
Yes, proxies are something we can enable for select customers. If your use case requires them, feel free to reach out at contact@autotab.com
I cannot agree. It's just "feel-good thinking." "Everybody can do everything." Well, that's simply not true. I'm fairly sure you (yes, you in particular) can't run the 100m in less than 10s, no matter how hard you trained. And the biological underpinning of our capabilities doesn't magically stop at the brain-blood barrier. We all do have different brains.

I've taught math to psychology students, and they just don't get it. I remember the frustration of the section's head when a student asked "what's a square root?" We all know how many of our fellow pupils struggled with maths. I'm not saying they all lacked the capability to learn it, but it can't be the case they all were capable but "it was the teacher's fault". Even then, how do you explain the difference between those who struggled and those who breezed through the material?

Or let's try other topics, e.g. music. Conservatory students study quite hard, but some are better than others, and a select few really shine. "Everyone is capable of playing Rachmaninov"? I don't think so.

So no, unless you've placed the bar for "mathetical skill" pretty low, or can show me proper evidence, I'm not going to believe it. "Everyone is capable of..." reeks of bullshit.
Not an expert, but I think procedurally generated terrain is generally fractal in nature, and is reproducible in that sense from a seed that is used in the generation. It is therefore recursive, as fractals are recursive.

A traditional neural network is a universal function approximator, however it is not recursive in nature, unless it is some sort of RNN. The transformer architecture, which this seems fairly similar to this one, is also not recursive in nature; although I believe, limited recursion can come about through CoT.

Therefore, I don't believe this could match the reproducibility, in an infinite sense, of a traditional procedural generator.
It could be much easier for user defined functions to collide with standard functions, especially when it happens unintentionally.

Someone else creates a function named array_something in the namespace. Maybe it already exists in earlier versions, maybe it happens to collide with one of the four introduced in 8.4. This function is accessible to you in the current scope. Now, you try to call the function like the way it is defined in the standard library. You get a very confusing error and spend 10 minutes trying to figure if it is you or PHP that is hallucinating. Turns out you have been inadvertently calling that other user defined function. The other user may be completely unaware of the fact that they created a function with naming collision.

To combat this, you need strong IDE help including static type checking, which is not always there for everybody. And it still doesn't help with cases where the user defined function collides with a new standard function.

Most "modern" languages have very few built-in functions in the global namespace. Another example is Go. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe there is 0 function in global namespace in Rust. println! exists but that's a macro. In other words, the example I mentioned just never happens with these languages.

Not to mention the long list of junk you see in IDE when you type "array_".

I guess you haven't written much MATLAB.
Last year I read How to Solve It and the first half of one of Polya's other books - Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning. I certainly didn't commit them to memory, and I never systematically tried to apply them during self-study, but they do sometimes help give me a pointer in the right direction (i.e. trying to think of auxiliary problems to solve, trying to find a way to make the known & unknown closer together... etc.).

Auxiliary problems are something that always screwed me in college, when we were doing Baby Rudin, if a proof required a lemma or something first I usually couldn't figure out the lemma. Or in general, if I didn't quickly find the 'insight' needed to prove something, I often got frustrated and gave up.

This material seems like it would be good to actually teach in school, just like a general 'how to think and approach mathematical problems'. Feels kinda weird that I had to seek out the material as an adult...

One other thing I got out of the Polya books, was I realized how little I remember about geometry. So many of their examples are geometrical and that made them harder for me to grok. That's something I wish I could revisit.
I also recommend this article, on why in the US, innovation in this area isn't pushed:

America Has No Transportation Engineers

https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/america-has-no-transporta...
Hilversum is pretty bad
I think if you tried them out you'll find these bike paths are not unsafe (and I bet the accident numbers back that up), because it's a whole system. Design like this will have features to force drivers to take slow turns when crossing the bike paths, and they are raised so that it's clear to drivers they don't have right of way.

NL always goes for the transit stops that poke out like you mention as well when possible.
tangentially, tee(1) can also be useful for deciding which update in the middle of a long pipeline broke things
In my experience:

PHP is always blazing fast, with no additional setup to make "Reload page, see results" work.

Python needs additional setup. Either by monitoring the filesystem and pessimistically recompiling the application every time a file changes. Causing resource consumption every time you hit save in your editor. Or by having the web workers that serve the requests die after 1s of inactivity or so. Which makes the next pageview slow again, even if no code changed.

I think PHP's advantage is because of 3 things:

1: Recompiling changed files is built in.

2: With PHP you can set your project up in a way that only the code necessary to answer a single request is updated. With Python and Django, all the code for all requests is updated and even code paths that are actually never used.

3: PHP keeps each file compiled to bytecode in memory and only recompiles files that have been changed. Although you might accomplish something similar in Python if you let it pollute your filesystem with cached bytecode files.
I'm pretty sure many PHP dev don't know about OPCache. Many of my colleagues don't know for sure. My point is "be aware of the state of your app code and what you execute", and so be aware of the shortcomings of this deployment "strategy". It's sure perfectly fine and easy for small apps / low traffic / not critical apps. I just want to point that it's not inherently good enough and definitely not the universal way to deploy a PHP app.

Git pull to deploy is something I avoid.
I'm always so baffled by warnings about losing muscle when losing weight.

Of course you do! If your body is tens of pounds lighter, then you don't need the extra muscle to lug it around. This paper is about reduction in heart muscle, and of course your heart doesn't need to be as strong because there's less blood to pump and less tissue to fuel.

When you gain weight, you also increase the muscles needed to carry that weight around. If you see someone obese at the gym doing the leg press, you may be astonished at how strong their legs are. When you lose weight, you don't need that muscle anymore.

Our bodies are really good at providing exactly the amount of muscle we need for our daily activities (provided we eat properly, i.e. sufficient protein), so it's entirely natural that our muscles decrease as we lose weight, the same way they increased when we gain weight. Muscles are expensive to keep around when we don't need them.

Obviously, if you exercise, then you'll keep the muscles you need for exercising.

But this notion that weight loss can somehow be a negative because you'll lose muscle too, I don't know where it came from. Yes you can lose muscle, but you never would have had that muscle in the first place if you hadn't been overweight -- so it's not something to worry about.
We are hiring. Feel free to reach out at contact@autotab.com
The current version is 0.0.13 (on the homepage), it's normal that the author is focusing on their platform at the moment. It probably was too son to post it on here.
Their official support is for only 21 devices?
Bluesky's Engineering Culture: open-source-first
Thanks! We currently have to manually add Chrome extensions on our side, but plan on supporting users installing arbitrary extensions in the future. So far we’ve found that most apps offer web UIs with the same functionality as the extension and Autotab can just use those.

What extension would you like to automate?
Show HN: Newsletter2Podcast – Free tool to turn your newsletter into audio
You won’t kidnap them, you’ll drive over them and then blame the kid for being in your way
I've seen two approaches so far:

Grounding everything in symbolic representations. [1] Which can greatly empower stuff that we could simulate but was too complicated to write a game around; now you can have agents respond to complex simulations with appropriate dialogue. But it's limited by what we can build a simulation to do.

Or,

Leaning in to making the LLM the core of the experience but relying on the player to play along to a greater or lesser extent. This sidesteps the jailbreaking problem but requires rethinking what playing a video game is about - is it about breaking free of the limits of the system, or about co-creativity?

There's some attempts to find other paths, but they very much are pioneering new ways to play games and look very different to past gameplay. [2]

[1] e.g., https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3649921.3656988 though there are many examples .

[2] e.g., https://www.1001nights.ai/
Cantor gave his life to the Continuum Hypothesis, Hilbert gave much of his life to similar goals.

You’re making an argument somewhat along those lines, but given that I didn’t stipulate a convergence condition your conclusions can be dismissed by me.

If it were a valid argument then we’d need Gödel.
I'd also think you'd want to adjust by geography based on COL. A two earner family earning $200K in SF or NYC is different than one earning that in suburban Arkansas.
I broadly agree that I'd like standalone separated bike lanes, but I think this is dubious:

> Bikes hitting pedestrians (ex: children wandering out on to the bikelane) is a much larger safety concern than bikes being hit by cars

As far as I'm aware, more or less everywhere, both the frequency & severity of bicycle vs pedestrian crashes is much lower than bicycle vs car crashes. Do you have any statistics that say otherwise?
Like a massage? You can't be serious. I would consider it a basic service like healthcare, power, or water, so it should be easily accessible, have certain quality standards and very affordable, basically a decision to go there shouldn't have any financial impact.. but surely that's ideal.
What's the H in HN stand for?
In principle. In practice, most Go code, and even significant parts of the Go standard library, return arbitrary error strings. And error returning functions never return anything more specific than `error` (you could count the exceptions in the top 20 Go codebases on your fingers, most likely).

Returning non-specific exceptions is virtually encouraged by the standard library (if you return an error struct, you run into major issues with the ubiquitous `if err != nil` "error handling" logic). You have both errors.New() and fmt.Errorf() for returning stringly-typed errors. errors.Is and errors.As only work easily if you return error constants, not error types (they can support error types, but then you have to do more work to manually implement Is() and As() in your custom error type) - so you can't easily both have a specific error, but also include extra information with that error.

For the example in the OP, you have to do a lot of extra work to return an error that can be checked without string comparisons, but also tells you what was the actual limit. So much work that this was only introduced in Go 1.19, despite MaxBytesReader existing since go 1.0 . Before that, it simply returned errors.New("http: request body too large") [0].

And this is true throughout the standard library. Despite all of their talk about the importance of handling errors, Go's standard library was full of stringly-typed errors for most of its lifetime, and while it's getting better, it's still a common occurrence. And even when they were at least using sentinel errors, they rarely included any kind of machine-readable context you could use for taking a decision based on the error value.

[0] https://cs.opensource.google/go/go/+/refs/tags/go1:src/pkg/n...
Same, but I went with a well specced Chromebook and it's Linux dev VM.
If you want any evidence that terrible language design is alive and well in PHP, look no further than the new array_find function.

Not only is it yet another global function in a namespace already chock full of random array helpers, it is extremely similar in both name and usage to array_search - a global function since PHP 4. Except, of course, that in typical PHP fashion, array_find’s argument order is ($array, $filter_callback) while the older array_search is ($search_value, $array).

There are literally hundreds of hits for existing, global, functions named array_find. If these are loaded from a library, they will break uses of the new built-in function in exciting ways. Yet, even with this mentioned in the RFC (https://wiki.php.net/rfc/array_find) it seems to have been no obstacle whatsoever to its inclusion - despite the fact that the implementation is literally three lines of code.

I have to question if the benefits of this global function really outweigh the benefits. PHP devs claim that other languages have these functions so PHP should too - but neglect to note that most languages don’t make them global functions (rather, they’re usually array methods or in some utility module).
In Ireland, Dublin City Council has mostly gone with lanes which are either on the side of the road (with or without bollards), or entirely separate, whereas South Dublin County Council prefers shared use pavements. The two local authorities are contiguous, so it's all a bit jarring when you go between them.

Separately, a national project, Busconnects, is putting in its own bike lanes. Some of these are... interesting: https://irishcycle.com/2023/03/23/busconnects-approach-to-cy...
I made some similar observations (https://kristiandupont.medium.com/empathy-articulated-750a66...): I studied neuroscience at university but everything I learned seemed incredibly abstract. Playing with LLM's and trying to create human-like behavior made many psychological conditions much more tangible, even if the LLM is only an approximation of some process that happens in our heads.
> Bikes hitting pedestrians is a much larger safety concern than bikes being hit by cars.

Do you have any empirical evidence for this? Because every single study I have seen suggest that speed and weight of the participants matters most. And a bike and a person are simply, much less likely to cause serious harm.

A car can kill a biker easy, for a bike to kill anybody, you need to really be incredibly unlucky.

The Dutch are doing a lot of empirical work, and they have not adopted anything like you describe.
> Turns out CPUs are pretty good with zeros and ones.

I've been saying this a lot recently, that CPU's are powerful 1-bit vector machines!
Aaron Swartz was right
I do mean GCC. Whoops.

Deficiency or not, it breaks debugging. I’m willing to pay a cost of one byte per breakpoint as a workaround.

And GDB has far more outrageous, if less-frequently hit, bugs in its architectural state handling. I’m not holding my breath for a fix.