skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It seems you only want to call MVC frameworks frameworks? But there's millions of other types of frameworks for thousands of purposes. Framework is a generic term (for which the definition is usually the calls into you/you call into it thing). What it does and whether it's a framework is two completely orthogonal things.
Aren't HikVision the ones banned by many governments because they have
dodgy "call home to China" firmware?

Persoanlly I go with the Eyeball Entities Omnicam with an Omniscient
Systems Xcam-REAM control centre [0].

[0] https://cybershow.uk/media/ads/cctv-ads.mp3
> But if you are creating something like a library of basic math functions I would rather read your code than your docs.

Talking about software specifically: this is the exact wrong way to do it. A programming interface should be easy to use and "self-documented" to some extent (by, e.g. using the type system as much as possible to make bad states unrepresentable), but only very simple interfaces are usable that way. For most real-world interfaces, there's just no way you can encode all the "rules" in the type system and the names. You absolutely need to document how your interface works in general, what each part is used for and expected to do, special cases and so on that are just impossible to know otherwise. Now, if you just read the implementation instead (and notice that you would need to read all implementations, most interfaces are likely implemented in many different ways) you're not coding against an interface at all. You're assuming the implementation is the interface. You're ignoring what the implementer intended to be private and subject to change. Don't do that.
Don't think that's true. There were many Japanese firms who were displeased when the US government forced them to stop serving the Chinese market.
Typically these logs are available, but hard to read or just dumped in some JSON file.

However, they have been efforts like https://explorer.invariantlabs.ai/benchmarks/ that try to make agents more transparent in that way (show interaction logs).
Yes...but it goes even deeper.

For example, in physics, the paradox of Maxwells Demon is resolved when you consider the cost of deleting data:

"In 1982, Charles Bennett showed that, however well prepared, eventually the demon will run out of information storage space and must begin to erase the information it has previously gathered.[8][12] Erasing information is a thermodynamically irreversible process that increases the entropy of a system."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon#Recent_progres...

It is also difficult for humans to delete information. In my humble and only a little facetious opinion this is one of the main drivers for ever new "To Do" apps: the existing app gets full because deleting is too hard, so we start fresh with a new app. The app isn't the point, the starting fresh is.

The underlying reason there being that the cost of maintaining small (to do) notes can be greater than the value of the note, which is one of the reasons we still use little scraps of paper and other mechanisms that will effectively auto-delete.

Understanding the micronote lifecycle: improving mobile support for informal note taking

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/985692.985779
In general I wouldn't expect random street criminals to be able to specifically locate and identify and properly disable a nondescript server in a closet in the middle of a break-in. They're frantically looking for cash and jewelry and portable commodity electronics and firearms. Stuff they can pocket and scram and easily use or fence later.
Speaking of which... anyone know why there don't seem to be any managed 2.5 Gbit switches / chipsets? Can we expect them in the foreseeable future?
Don’t those often cost more than the raspberry pi?
Speaking of, I found interesting (and thinking about it some more, I am not even sure why I find that interesting...) that you seem to be exclusively talking about technical books in this posts, yet "tech book" is only directly mentioned once, towards the end.
Unfortunately my house is not wired for Ethernet and it's a rental so I can't install it. Wireless is a must and security is obviously important for wireless. But I think you are correct that I will be disappointed by what's out there.
Not really. Education sucks because it doesn't scale. Every single child needs to be educated and educating them takes thousands (or tens of thousands) of hours of teacher work. Meanwhile an average person probably requires only tens of hours of doctor work in teir lifetime. Imagine doctors having to treat people by a roomful (even if they were pre-sorted by vaguely similar diagnosis). That would suck indeed.
9 seconds to get both stars is absolutely insane - there had to be some AI assistance here.

Come to think of it, a pipeline that feeds the problem text into an LLM to generate a solution and automatically runs it on the input and attempts to submit the solution, doing this N times in parallel, could certainly solve the first few days' problem in 9 seconds.
(40 years building software)

I think the most significant aspect of building software that is rarely discussed is the business’s appetite for change.

I can solve any architecture problem, but I can’t lead a horse to water.

By far the biggest hurdle to building good software is gaining buy-in and trust from everyone.

The actual architecture is like skiing a double black diamond. If you’re at that level of skiing, you can ski anywhere.
Thanks for sharing that!

imo the manga is often better the the anime adaption even if they replicate everything 1:1

A bit off topic but I found the text version of clockwork orange very hard to read and not nearly as entertaining as the movie - still an impressive piece of art.
That’s also the kind of stuff I always hear from people that love to shoot from the hip and trust their gut feel. The results those people have is invariably inconsistent, there’s no way to scale any of their knowledge and honestly at the end of the day it’s just a person reacting to a situation.
> From my perspective, the Internet is strung together by a bunch of micro services - DNS here, email there, etc. etc. And that seems to work.

But that was true long before the term microservice was invented though.

And, arguably, a pet server running a full-on DNS server, logging locally on something else than stdin/stdout, and using it's own DB, ain't a microservice while another DNS server containerized, using standard logging, and a DB outside the container is a microservice.

So yeah it's all disputable but to me the Internet was working just fine on pet servers years if not decades before microservices communicating through APIs were invented.
The cycle usually goes something like box ticking, complacency, security scare, remediation, rinse and repeat.
There are different kinds of soft delete.

I've had cases where the rows in question absolutely could not be hard deleted, because of legacy foreign key relations. But the PII in those rows had to go. So we did a kind of "firm delete" by setting all columns (except the PK and a few necessary flags) to their default values and/or null.
What about AG Grid? We have apps at work with 1M+ cells. I am pretty sure that AG Grid has React support.
Interactivity Studio launches on Framer as a plugin
In that case, it should be documented at least that the process is driven by LLM and hence, it's not known exactly how it makes a decision...but I guess that would not look good to most users so they just leave it out.
So now you have two, entirely separate worlds that don't compose in any way, and you have to create "DTO"s to convert from one to the other and back.

Don't get me wrong, I would much prefer coding in a single language for both backend and frontend, and I would not choose JS/TS for that. But your choice is that, only a decent choice. Just like react is. There are so many ways to do web development, and neither of these are fundamentally bad.

Specific applications of these architecture/designs on the other hand can be catastrophic in both cases, and I'm sure most of us has been burnt by these (e.g. for SSR, I have seen code that sent back HTML segments that reused IDs. With dynamic JS it was a pain to hunt down these errors. But there is an entire field dedicated to all the vulnerabilities that have historically been opened up by careless backend devs).
Maybe not me but I feel like someone knows how to build software on this site?
I enjoyed both seasons immensely. I think it’s actually on Amazon Prime in the US, as they acquired the rights to the first season and removed it from AMC+ and HIDIVE, and then produced the second season, iirc.

Make sure you get the watch order down for Psycho-Pass. If you’re able, watch the extended edition of season 1, as Crunchyroll makes it appear to simply be another season in their listings, if you use their platform.

I just found another similar series via Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id_%E2%80%93_Invaded

Have you heard anything about Id: Invaded?
Total deal breaker for me. I don't understand this design decision, this router is clearly targeted to advanced users so I would expect most of those would have multiple devices they'd want wired?
It’s not about writing for loops, the practice is to get good at problem solving and algorithmic thinking. For loops are a means to an end, like writing letters on a page.
I feel like we are debating slightly different perspectives, and with that lens I agree with what you say. Here is the difference in perspectives (and this is decoupled from this particular paper): your take is that today the reviews work in a certain way and here are some things we could do to maximize our chances of acceptance. My take is that reviews shouldn't work this way.

To take some examples:

1. > You cannot choose who will read.

Specifically no, but generally, yes. I'd expect the reviewer to understand ML. And if this is not the brand of ML they're familiar with, I'd expect them to put in the work to familiarize themselves during the review process, in the interest of fairness. After all are we not seeking out qualified reviewers for the review process? This is not just anyone who stumbles across a paper on the internet.

2.
> message is too diffuse

Any message would appear diffuse/opaque/abstract to someone unfamiliar with the area. This is exactly why an objective review process must equalize such communicative biases. This is partly facilitated by the conference picking the right reviewers and with their review-assignments, and partly it is also the duty a reviewer to fill in whatever gaps of comprehension that remain.

3.
> Read best paper awards of good conferences, notice how much material is there in the same number of pages, and reverse engineer what they did to make the paper clear, concise and easy to follow.

Good general advice but you are preaching to the choir. I do read best papers from various conferences and I run reading groups where we discuss papers from ongoing conferences. I run an applied ML research group in the industry - this pretty much comes with the job. Further, I don't think that best papers are head-and-shoulders above non-best papers; they are often voted to the top because they solve a broadly known problem, or they further the understanding of such a problem. Writing plays some role here, but is not the discriminative factor.

4. Requiring justifications. Yes, there is a rebuttal phase for that.

Just to be doubly clear, I am not saying papers (and this paper) can't be improved. But that is not the argument I am making.
It's mathematics. You can't put this genie back into the bottle. Also do realize that you are a tiny minority inside a tiny bubble. E.g. the number of cars has been increasing over time, and you don't even know. Upwards of 40% of office workers in the West use AI in their work one way or another. Having it summarize a Slack thread or generate a picture for a slide deck is not going to kill anyone or turn your computer into poison or whatever. It might even (much to the horror of the morally pure), make the work more fun at times, by automating the more bullshit parts of it. If we play this one right, our grandchildren might not need to work at all.
It feels like AI will shape a lot of the submissions for these types of coding “traditions”. But, I guess that’s just the world we live in.
Libation: Liberate Your Amazon Audible Library
Create dynamic QR codes, track scans in real-time
@dang Can we update the link to the original source?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1934361
Unrelated, but who runs this account?
E-commerce sites are a pretty good fit for SPAs. Sounds like a bad rewrite, nothing more, nothing less.
Woohoo, one of the highlights of this time of year. I had to do mine from an eastbound flight over the pacific. This has become a fun tradition not just for me personally but for many friends, colleagues, and fellow HNers. Big props once again to wastl and his helper elves for making this!

I encourage anyone who gets value from this to donate to support it if they can. It is a passion project but nonetheless comes with real costs.
Review of "Statistics" by Freedman, Pisani, and Purves (2017)
I mean... It's as easy as getting SSL certs and importing them into a trust store/adding them to a directory.

The hard part is getting the people you want to establish a trust relationship with to give you a copy of their key. Web of Trust was the answer to logistical key distribution problem. The idea being there would be an organization that would vet people and vouchsafe their cryptographic material for everyone else.

The problem of course, is that the more invisible this is to users, and the more unintuitive the actual mechanics, the more valuable cracking the CA's becomes for hostile actors because of the ensuing blast radius compared to the boast radius that would result from theoretically getting the practice of key exchange in the public, and getting them to internalize the act of creating their own trust networks.

Of course, if you have dreams or fantasies of being able to control people, none of the work that goes into educating the populace is ever going to be endorsed, because once everyone realizes that they can at least assure their own safety by not delegating their cryptography, the entire idea of eacesdropping as a third-party by tapping the line is unmade. Which is not a popular state of affairs universally.
One of the most important changes in the recent decades is that the bar to become a journalist (as in, someone that wields the 4th power of broadcasting) has been lowered tremendously (from print / radio / tv to bloggers / wiki editors / podcasts / home video makers / streamers...).

P.S.: Congrats, you are a decently powerful journalist too now.
Cool.

When I was younger, I could never get these. But one night in bed with my tablet, I saw a magic eye image, and I guess because I was really tired, I was able to see the hidden image.

Since then, it's been pretty easy for me to see them. Even the animated black/white static snowman one, which I think was pretty advanced since it offered no clues for your eyes to latch onto.
>It guarantees that only the hub and the mobile app have access to unecrypted videos.

Interesting project! As a Rust implementation for Open MLS, secure end-to-end archival, and a TLS vector, having the DIY home camera setup connect to the internet via a Privastead hub eliminates the need for secure tunneling.

I could see this incorporating facial recognition technology and real-time monitoring.

If you've ever seen eigenfaces, they look like early hominids. One method is principal component analysis (PCA) which isolates the major characteristics of a human face in correlating underlying noise to the most essential features of a face.
The character in the scene can’t plug in bc they don’t want to get the implant - it’s not explained in the anime tho
I think the comment you're replying to is partially sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek.
> Build out the necessary charging infra on a war footing

Why? If electric cars are the future, certainly building infrastructure will make sense for private companies. If it is not profitable for companies to build such infrastructure, then maybe electric cars are not the future but a fashion trend.

> I could accept EV tariffs if they were meant to give domestic manufacturers breathing room to catch up. I don't see that anyone has gotten the memo though.

China is overplaying their hand. They are having massive overcapacity in the car manufacturing, but most of the world can't afford such cars either due to price and/or due to non-existent infrastructure. You can forget on selling 30k EUR cars in Africa, India or Central Asia. You can also forget on selling such cars in most of China. So tariffs will decimate Chinese car industry.
FROM, then WHERE, then SELECT
Mikrotik, Ubiquiti, TrendNet, Mokerlink and all the other Chinese brands usually have something in this space (4-48 port managed L2 or L3 switches). A lot of the chipsets are mentioned in reviews on sites like ServeTheHome.

The sub-enterprise, prosumer, SOHO-type market is pretty strong, but OpenWRT isn't a part of it -- not sure if that was a requirement.
This book looks more like a parody of “How things work” then an ode to it.

However, it might, just might, spark a young minds’ interest enough to be a net positive.
You also said

> We use a "loading" spinner

> users can wait an extra second [every time they scroll to load new content]

which is exactly the bad experience the commenters above are talking about.

They understood your comment, and they disagree. This is not the good advice you think it is, unless your main goal is to score 100 on lighthouse for SEO purposes, not UX.
They aren’t going to buy it. They don’t need it. Sorry
I don't think OP finds it not cool; otherwise he would had forgotten the scene long ago.
Well, for one, it's not obviously unethical.
If you think this is unpleasant, you should see the environmentalists who try to take a poke at Jeff Dean on Twitter.
I agree not everything needs to be rewritten.
And neither does code using an abstraction such as Highway, so we can stop beating that dead horse.
Oh yeah --facepalm-- it's purple after all!
I think that might be a bit of an unfair caveat. People do real work on mobile OSes. They shop and communicate on mobile OSes, and occasionally organise revolutions.

(Although I'm not sure why "Netraft confirms, Windows is dying" is a useful comment here anyway. Windows is a behemoth.)
The pigeon experiment is a great one to learn from not just about programming or software, but about life in general. Where are you getting your next dopamine hit? Is it random? Maybe that’s where our idiosyncrasies come from.
> I never saw anyone on this thread deny that JS CAN be used without frameworks [...]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42282054

"brochure-ware"

B-R-O-C-H-U-R-E-W-A-R-E
AI coding assistants ruined the global leaderboard experience. AoC might as well nerf it by discarding the quickest x percent of submissions, or something...
> For example, deleting 1 million rows in a single transaction is a textbook case of what not to do. Instead, splitting the operation into smaller batches, such as deleting 10,000 rows across 100 iterations, is far more effective.

Why do I as a user have to do that? Why can't the database implement batching internally and automatically transform my 1-million-rows query into an appropriate list of batched queries?

(Edit: Thanks a lot for the answers, that makes more sense - in particular the point that this would also lock one million rows at once)
This is super big news if it’s real.

Basically, given an agent with an initial set of predefined actions and goal, they’re saying “decompose this into steps and pick and action to achieve each step”. Pretty standard stuff.

Then they say, hey, if you can’t solve the problem with those actions (ie. failed repeatedly when attempting to solve), write some arbitrary generic python code and use that as your action for the next step.

Then save that as a new generic action, and slowly build up a library of actions to augment the initial set.

The thing is, there’s no meaningful difference between the task “write code to solve this task” and “write code to solve this action”; if you can meaningfully generate code that can, without error, perform arbitrary tasks, you’ve basically solved programming.

So… that would be quite a big deal.

That would be a real “Devon” that would actually be able to write arbitrary code to solve arbitrary problems.

…which makes me a bit sceptical.

Still, this seems to have at least worked reasonably well (as shown by being a leader on the GAIA leaderboard) so they seem to have done something that works, but I’m left wondering…

If you’ve figured out how to get an agent to write error free deterministic code to perform arbitrary actions in a chain of thought process, why are you pissing around with worrying about accumulating a library of agent actions?

That’s all entirely irrelevant and unnecessary.

Just generate code for each step.

So… something seems a bit strange around this.

I’d love to see a log of the actual problem / action / code sequences.
OpenAI did something similar with their o1 model. Ran a coding problem through o1 thousands or maybe millions of times and then checked if the solution was correct.

I can imagine a great pipeline for performance optimization:
1. have an AI generate millions of tests for your existing code
2. have another AI generate faster code that still makes the tests pass

So I guess all I want for Christmas is a massive compute cluster and infinite OpenAI credits :P
Yes, but normally this is done by making your own CA and installing it into your client devices, not by getting it into every device globally by working with Microsoft.
This answers your questions: https://astro.build/blog/2023-web-framework-performance-repo...
OK :) A thin abstraction, though.
If comparing with alternative categories such as domain-specific language or autovectorization, I'd still classify Highway as intrinsics, just portable and easier to use.
I agree completely. The simplest solution is often the best solution. And also, the best understood and best supported solution. Teams love new shiny objects and toys to play with, but if business leaders truly understood the tradeoffs, they’d shy away from the latest and “greatest” most of the time.
Admittedly the main lesson I take away from that one is "if you can only make progress by going vertically down with no space to move your arms...maybe give that cave a miss".
It was, of course, an AI-generated solution; they posted it here: https://web.archive.org/web/20241201052156/https://github.co...

Later, after being called out on it, they posted an apology to their GitHub profile (https://web.archive.org/web/20241201064816/https://github.co...): "If you are here from the AoC leaderboard, I apologize for not reading the FAQ. Won't happen again."

Both the repo and that message are now gone.
Writers basically said in this paper let us just save certain amounts of working code snippets generated by llm and hope that they are also needed in the future, at the same time concluding that the saved code is sparsed , so this research paper at this stage is just useless.
> And your app is tiny. It's got like two source files.

If the same app had been written by a typical team of React devs, it would be >1000 source files and 50K LoC. That's not an argument against my approach, it's an argument in favor of it.
For comparison, here's how long it took in past years:

2015 - 10:55
2016 - 7:01
2017 - 1:16
2018 - 1:48
2019 - 1:39
2020 - 7:11
2021 - 1:07
2022 - 0:53
2023 - 2:24

And this year's second place was 0:54.