skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The key is to figure out what your learning process looks like.

For example, I discovered early on that I learn in three phases:
1. I get exposed to something (a concept, a process, etc); basically discover that something exists.
2. I then see how that thing is used whether through mentorship or tutorials or, increasingly, through trial and error.
3. I apply that thing to some novel problem.

Through this cycle of Discovery-Tutelage-Application, I can assess my level of comfort with new material and understand when my struggles are due to trying to short circuit the process.

It's likely that you have some form of learning process that is equally cyclical, yet undefined -- once you identify and codify those steps, you can evaluate your progress when it comes to acquiring new skills.
>
If you want to grow you will need to change jobs. Small companies are not a good fit for a fresh grad with little to no experience. In a small company you are by necessity a jack of all trades because there are only so few of you. [...]

> The best way to grow as a fresh grad is to join a medium sized, established business. There you are going to be a part of a team where you will get to learn the ropes of your field (that's something you won't find in ChatGPT or university) and at the same time the pressure won't be so hard.

My experience differs: already at medium sized, established companies there is a lot of corporate bullshit. Also, at small companies, you know the colleagues better, so that the culture is often more "humane". Also, exactly because at a small company you are a "jack of all trades", you by necessity learn a lot more; but be aware that on the other hand you won't specialize so deeply into the topic. So, if you want to deeply specialize in a topic, you better look at a medium or large company (but be aware that there might exist few or no jobs there that allow you to specialize in the topic that you are into).
Correct, that would be even better, but I didn't have control over the camera firmware. Someone mentioned OpenMiko, which I plan to investigate and see if it can allow me to effectively run the hub inside the camera itself and achieve what you are referring to.
Honestly this hurts my head but Hillel is inevitably correct. You can define an explicitly undefined operation to do whatever you like. But what’s the point? There’s no new mathematics you can do with it, no existing behaviours you can extend like this. Normally, when you divide by a small number, you get a large number. Now for some reason it goes through zero. Why not five? Why not seven?

Just because it’s formally consistent doesn’t mean it isn’t dumb.
I'm definitely giving this one a chance. It's version 1. I'm convinced that many good things will evolve from this.
A recent translation by Bartlett and Collins has extensive notes and reflects up-to-date scholarship. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/A/bo113934...
It’s unexpected and that makes it dangerous.
First Around-the-Clock US Stock Exchange Wins SEC Approval
This was just a very simple example which came to my mind:
you could also use active mapping etc. (though i prefer the XML files), its just one example out of many: i see LLM not as a "problem solver" but as a helper/sparringpartner
Not exactly new: some domestic pets are also mobile 3D printers capable of printing directly on your floor.
This is a big part of the reason. But it behooves us to ask why a key innovation in a field (and I trust Jeff Dean that this is one, I’ve never seen any reason to doubt either his integrity or ability) should produce such a reaction. What could make people act not just chagrined that their approach wasn’t the end state, but as though it was existential to discredit such an innovation?

Surely all of the people who did the work that the innovation rests on should be confident they will be relevant, involved, comfortable, and safe in the post-innovation world?

And yet it’s not clear they should feel this way. Luddism seems an unfounded ideology over the scope of history since the origin of the term. But over the period since “AI” entered the public discussion at the current level? Almost two years exactly? Making the Luddite agenda credible has seemed a ubiquitous talking point.

Over that time frame technical people have been laid off in staggering numbers, a steadily-shrinking number of employers have been slashing headcount and posting EPS beats, and “AI” has been mentioned in every breath. It’s so extreme that even sophisticated knowledge of the kinds of subject matter that goes into AlphaChip is (allegedly) useless without access to the Hopper FLOPs.

If the AI Cartel was a little less rapacious, people might be a little more open to embracing the AI revolution.
Everything you did to make your conference better made it worse
Not trolling, but what's wrong with visual remote debugging using either Pycharm or Visual Studio? I find it much more rich information wise than using pdb.
Maybe you missed the part where I said we're using SSR for content? That solves the CTRL-F problem easily.

You (and a lot of others here) are making a ton of wrong assumptions, imagining things I never said, and making up your own problems that don't exist in my code just to try to bash me, without even really understanding anything that I wrote in my comment. This entire thread sucks and is full of low-quality trolls. I've been doing front-end for ~30 years, I know what I'm doing. Don't bother replying, I won't be responding to further wrong assumptions and bashing.
Btrfs is in production all over the damn place, at big corporations and all kinds of different deployments. Synology has their own btrfs setup that they ship to customers with their NAS software for example.

I found it incredibly annoying the first time I ran out of disk space on btrfs, but many of these points are hyperbolic and honestly just silly. For example, btrfs doesn't really do offline fsck. fsck.btrfs has a zero percent chance of destroying your volume because it does nothing. As for the user space utilities changing... I'm not sure how that demonstrates the filesystem is not production ready.

Personally I usually use either XFS or btrfs as my root filesystem. While I've caught some snags with btrfs, I've never lost any data. I don't actually know anyone who has, I've merely just heard about it.

And it's not like other well-regarded filesystems have never ran into data loss situations: even OpenZFS recently (about a year ago) uncovered a data-eating bug that called its reliability into question.

I'm sure some people will angrily tell me that actually btrfs is shit and the worst thing to ever be created and honestly whatever. I am not passionate about filesystems. Wake me up when there's a better one and it's mainlined. Maybe it will eventually be bcachefs. (Edit: and just to be clear, I do realize bcachefs is mainline and Kent Overstreet considers it to be stable and safe. However, it's still young and it's upstream future has been called into question. For non-technical reasons, but still; it does make me less confident.)
I decided to do it in Erlang in 2019, that Intcode VM was much "fun"... I really enjoyed it, I wish there were more years than that.
by far not! :-D

on stack overflow, i do not get "context-adjacent" ideas & inspirations - thats the difference.
Q on this post:
Is the field rule "Every element Except Zero has ... " (the 9th rule) defined with respect to the additive identity "zero" or the magical other undefined "Zero" that is the number we're all familiar with?

If so, how weirdly arbitrary that the additive zero is omitted for all multiplicative inverse definitions. (At least it seems to me). I always figured this was a consequence of our number systems, not of all fields.
Seems like a solution in need of a problem. In the rare instances I notice dust on my screen, a coffee shop napkin or $1 microfiber cloth does the job quite well and fixes it for several months...
"Software Development" includes programming, engineering, and "the BS involved in working for the tech industry as part of a team". Your title can be [software] programmer, software "engineer", software developer, or a plethora of other things.
Show HN: Bring Pokémon nostalgia to your code editor
I created this VS Code extension to scratch a nostalgic itch of mine and thought I’d share it.

vscode-pokemon brings Pokémon into your code editor, adding a touch of joy and nostalgia to your coding experience
It's fine. Infinity isn't a real number, so 1/x isn't continuous at 0, so it doesn't matter what the value of 1/0 is. All your open sets still behave the way you expect. Whether you choose "this function is undefined here" vs "it's impossible to ever reach the value of this function at this value, under any assumptions I'll ever care about" is purely a matter of convenience.
It is at the moment as it’s doing energy arbitrage and needs to know the current energy prices.I believe you also get more warranty if you have it connected to the internet as they can fix bugs etc remotely. But the PW isn’t mission critical.

I also have an off grid cabin with a Victron inverter that is not on the Internet and never will be.
This is a reasonable setup. We discussed it in other comments as well
I have not heard a single person mention this outside X. Must be an echo chamber thing.
I've done last two AoCs in F# (well, only the first few days too). For a person without prior functional programming experience, it was fun! Unfortunately I won't have time to participate this year, but if I did, I'd probably chose F# again.
You should check pm2 for concurrent requests
In subversion writes replaced a node, then replaces the parent node all the way up to the root. So anyone doing a read in the middle of a merge only sees the old data because it saw the old root node. I assume MVCC systems do something similar, but for others I would think a lock per node allows for a lot less contention. And your project then relies very much on good indexes to avoid reading rows and thus parent nodes you don’t need.
it's exactly how we learn. many examples and then general principles. if you start with general principles, everybody drops out.
But, just like this article using «physically deleted», when in practice it's not the case (the bits are just freed to be overwritten some unknown amounts of time later), does legal compliance just completely ignores this fact of actual physical deletion ??*

(AFAIK it takes several passes of overwriting bits with random bits on magneto-mechanical storage to not be able to retrieve any significant fragments of the original data, and things are even worse on transistor storage, which casually makes copies of the data for wear leveling reasons.)

*With the exception of state secrets of course, where we know that storage is mechanically destroyed «with extreme prejudice».
I've added real-time GitHub trends tracking to DailyPings, our developer community platform focused on building in public.

The new feature:
- Tracks top 30 repositories by stars and forks
- Updates hourly

DailyPings is like HN but specifically designed for developers sharing their building journey. We combine project updates, technical discussions, and now, trending GitHub projects.

Try it: dailypings.com

Feedback welcome!
There's a great Radiolab episode[0] that talks about divide by zero in perhaps more conceptual terms.

KARIM ANI: If you take 10 and divide it by 10, you get one. 10 divided by five is two. 10 divided by half is 20. The smaller the number on the bottom, the number that you're dividing by, the larger the result. And so by that reasoning ...

LULU: If you divide by zero, the smallest nothingness number we can conceive of, then your answer ...

KARIM ANI: Would be infinity.

LULU: Why isn't it infinity? Infinity feels like a great answer.

KARIM ANI: Because infinity in mathematics isn't actually a number, it's a direction. It's a direction that we can move towards, but it isn't a destination that we can get to. And the reason is because if you allow for infinity then you get really weird results. For instance, infinity plus zero is ...

LATIF: Infinity.

KARIM ANI: Infinity plus two is infinity. Infinity plus three is infinity. And what that would suggest is zero is equal to one, is equal to two, is equal to three, is equal to four ...

STEVE STROGATZ: And that would break math as we know it. Because then, as your friend says, all numbers would become the same number.

[0] https://radiolab.org/podcast/zeroworld
Hello, creator/maintainer of Nodezator here. Nodezator is not a framework, but an application where you can load, connect and execute your Python functions as a graph. You can also export your graphs back as Python code. Even so, it seems it is not what you are looking for.

Unfortunately I don't have much experience with other similar projects. I did research many of them before deciding to make my own in case one existed that already met my needs. Didn't find what I wanted, which is why I made Nodezator.

However, this doesn't mean what I found was bad. Quite the contrary. There are a few interesting node editor projects in the Python ecosystem, each awesome in their own particular way. Unfortunately, as I said, I can't say much about them, and some of them don't seem to be maintained often. Even so, I'll mention them here in case you want to take a look.

Ryven - always come up in node editor discussions
PyFlow - another one that is mentioned often
DearPyGui - python GUI framework built on top of imgui, includes facilities for node editing interfaces (I find their nodes very charming)
NetworkX - not a node editor framework, but a lib with lots of utilities for representing and operating on graphs
Creating a backing track for an open mic
I’ve read most of the SF on this list so I’ll throw out my other recommendations:

I like Chambers’ Wayfarers series but IMO Closed and Common Orbit is the best one.

Another recent book that stuck with me is Tchaikovsky’s Elder Race, which is told from two perspectives as both a sci fi and a fantasy story. It’s great and a quick read.

I enjoyed All Systems Red but for whatever reason have no desire to read the sequels. Same with Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie. Both good stories but something about the settings just didn’t pull me in.

And I can never help but plug the Vorkosigan saga, which started in the 80s but still has a few recent books. Anyone who hasn’t read them should start with the early books though.

A Memory Called Empire is another great one that I’m actually surprised isn’t on this list.
I was also looking for this. And would like to add: lim(-1/x)_x -> 0 = -inf
That is (in my opinion) the whole point why it is actually undefined. On one side of the y-axis it goes to infinity, on the other to minus infinity. I don't see a solution to this and therefore always have accepted that it is undefined.
I set this to zero and print a warning/error about divide by zero on the log with data that caused it. That log would be sent to the business person worry about.

If they ignore it, I do not care, it is the business problem anyway.

Worked for me for decades :)
Do you have any advice for helping a child who is left handed and sucks at penmanship?

My youngest is left handed, and his writing is just trash. I have no idea how to help him outside of specific left handed writing tools (that I'm pretty sure don't help at all).
Hiroshi Nagai: Japan's Sun-Drenched Americana
Rackspace Spot – Rackspace – Pricing Page
a text LLM isn't going to learn by trial and error, it's not been given that sort of freedom. RLHF would be the llm version of trial and error - but it's like the chef is only allowed to do that for a few days after years of chef school and from then on, he has to stick to what he has already learnt.
> they aren't really that cheaper than the competitors

This is demonstrably false.
This article invents a new binary operation, calls it "division" and uses the "/" operator to denote it. But the article repeats multiple times that this new operation isn't a multiplicative inverse, so it's not actually division. For example, (a/b)*b=a isn't true for this new operation.
> Fwiw, I don't agree with Chomsky. Clearly LLMs are extracting structure in language and I think it is obtuse to claim that a system designed for pattern matching won't identify these patterns. One doesn't need reasoning or abstraction to converge to this, one simply needs sufficient sampling and for structure to exist. Clearly structure exists in the language, so we should expect a sufficient pattern matcher to be able to extract these patterns.

Chomsky has never said that LLMs can't extract patterns from language. His point is that humans have trouble processing certain language patterns while LLMs don't, which means that LLMs work differently and therefore can't shed any light on humans.
Nifty engineering! Where can I buy this?
> It’s saying that Pony is mathematically wrong. This is objectively false.

Pff. The author wants to show off their knowledge of fields by defining a "division" operator where 1/0 = 0. Absolutely fine. I could define "addition" where 1 + 2 = 7. Totally fine.

What I can't do is write a programming language where I use the universally recognised "+" symbols for this operation, call it "addition" and claim that it's totally reasonable.

Under the standard definition of division implied by '/' it is mathematically wrong.

What they obviously should have done is use a different symbol, say `/!`. Obviously now they've done the classic thing and made the obvious choice unsafe and the safe choice unobvious (`/?`).
Learn to type? I never got over my penman ship problem, I just learnt to type and printed all my exams in college. And then it didn’t matter much after school since I would mostly type anyways.

If I had to do it over again, I would probably force myself to write right handed. It should be possible to get used to it, but that would really be a choice they have to make for themselves.
In the age of AGI why is handwriting recognition still so bad and not a mainstream technology?

Why do I still have to painstakingly write math formulas in LaTeX instead of just writing them by hand?

Why don't we write computer code by hand instead of typing it in and struggling with encodings?

We have face/object recognition and audio recognition which is often better than humans. But handwriting recognition is still quite lacking. Are there technical reasons for that or is our monopolistic IT industry just focusing on the things nobody needs like Metaverses, Augmented Reality and Chatbots?
Because exceptions are expensive, and functions with holes are dumb.

"Dumb" is purely a matter of aesthetic preference. Calling things "dumb" is dumb.

> Normally, when you divide by a small number, you get a large number. Now for some reason it goes through zero.

Zero is not a "small" number. Zero is the zero number. There is no number that is better result than 0 when dividing by 0; "Infinity" is not a real (or complex) number. This itself is GREAT reason to set 1/0 = 0.
It only ever bothers people who conflate open sets with closed sets, or conflate Infinity with real numbers, so it's good have this pop up to force people to think about the difference.
Also, many games today outright install rootkits to monitor your memory (see [1]) - some heartbleed is so far down the line of credible threats on a gaming machine that its outright ludicrous to trade off performance for it.

[1]:https://www.club386.com/assassins-creed-shadows-drm-wants-to...
Is it a similar artistic style? I had the same feeling when looking at the person-on-a-horse statue, it is very mayan-esque to my naive eyes.
You're Probably Wrong About Rainbows [video]
Then take 10 and divide it by -10 = -1. 10 / -5 = -2. 10 / -0.5 = -20.
So from the other side of the y-axis it behaves the exact opposite. It goes to minus infinity. So at x=0 we would have infinity and minus infinity at the same time. Imho that is why it is undefined.
Your IT system may need to handle entries linked to people who don't have names, for example, recording that some treatment was given to a baby who died soon after birth before being given a name.
The funny thing is that we're getting closer to being able to give that paragraph to an LLM and have it spit out the simpler explanation.

This is what chatgpt gave me for the prompt "can you explain this in two sentences". It's pretty close to what you wrote.

> The system follows the ReAct framework to decide on a thought and action at each step based on the task, available actions, and interaction history, updating its context with the results of the action. If the action introduces new functions, the system expands its action set to include these new capabilities.
But, since there is a finite number of 400 page books, there are only so many permutations before you run out of books.

The most trivial example, you cant make an 800 page concatenation of two identical books because the 400 page library doesn't contain duplicates.
The name is very close to SurveyMonkey so tread carefully young padawan.
Maybe start using Roman numerals then?
Consider ignoring the reasoning for how/why LLM's can do this sort of thing which doesn't matter as much when you simply try it out. I wouldn't be surprised if many of these problems are in fact solved by LLM's. Just from my experience using them to solve relatively novel issues in my day-to-day. There will of course be mistakes and hallucinations, but in a proper dialogue with a motivated programmer, I bet it works >50% of the time.
You can do it “in place” as the target can be the same as the source. And you can definitely resize it, both truncate it and extend it. The only restriction, really, is that all parts except for the last one need to be at least 5MiB.

GCS compose can also have target be one of the source objects, so you can append (and/or prepend) “in place.”

For GCS compose the suffix/prefix need to be separate visible objects (though you can put a lifecycle on them). For multipart, the parts are not really objects ever.

The performance isn't great because because updating the “index” is slow and rate limited, not because the APIs aren't there.
Why isn't LLM pre-training based on next token prediction considered "trial and error"? It seems to fit that description pretty well to me.
I get lonely, but why bored? Plenty of stuff to do on a big property (you don't usually have a postage stamp lot in rural that deep), and you can watch nature, or probably all the mass market entertainment too.

Not many discos out so rural, and not a lot of dining out either, but 45 minutes from a Walmart implies close to something.
I have experience running Kubernetes clusters on Hetzner dedicated servers, as well as working with a range of fully or highly managed services like Aurora, S3, and ECS Fargate.

From my experience, the cloud bill on Hetzner can sometimes be as low as 20% of an equivalent AWS bill. However, this cost advantage comes with significant trade-offs.

On Kubernetes with Hetzner, we managed a Ceph cluster using NVMe storage, MariaDB operators, Cilium for networking, and ArgoCD for deploying Helm charts. We had to handle Kubernetes cluster updates ourselves, which included facing a complete cluster failure at one point. We also encountered various bugs in both Kubernetes and Ceph, many of which were documented in GitHub issues and Ceph trackers. The list of tasks to manage and monitor was endless. Depending on the number of workloads and the overall complexity of the environment, maintaining such a setup can quickly become a full-time job for a DevOps team.

In contrast, using AWS or other major cloud providers allows for a more hands-off setup. With managed services, maintenance often requires significantly less effort, reducing the operational burden on your team.

In essence, with AWS, your DevOps workload is reduced by a significant factor, while on Hetzner, your cloud bill is significantly lower.

Determining which option is more cost-effective requires a thorough TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) analysis. While Hetzner may seem cheaper upfront, the additional hours required for DevOps work can offset those savings.