skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Disagree that it's easy to pin on "how they were brought up".

Indeed. That might play a role, but another less politically charged aspect to look at is just: how much effort is the human currently putting in?

Humans are often on autopilot, perhaps even most of the time. Autopilot means taking lazy intellectual shortcuts. And to echo your argument: in familiar environments those shortcuts are often a good idea!

If you just do whatever worked last time you were in a similar situation, or whatever your peers are doing, chances are you'll have an easier time than reasoning everything out from scratch. Especially in any situations involving other humans cooperating with you, predictability itself is an asset.
A Trio of Modules to Speed Up Your Perl Web Applications
Turbostat Utility Lands New Features with Linux 6.13
I'm curious to know how did you know the winner used AI?
Great to see this again. Amazing how this tool expanded so much over the years!
Cool project, looks like they support a number of assemblers and compilers, too. It’s not clear if it also supports the ca65 macro assembler as a standalone assembler as part of their cc65 support, or if it only supports the c compiler.
Can you remind HN what was special about VUE? My dim memory of it was that it was very CDE-like, in contrast to other environments of the time, such as Sun OpenWindows. Did VUE have some particular special sauce?
You can have just about any amount of inefficiency in game making before it's a scam. Some are both highly funded and effective, others only the former. Just look how little Zwift has achieved with a similar amount of funding. I mean sure, it's playable and and does what it's supposed to do, and played by thousands of paying users at any given moment, but the same was true when they had burnt through a tenth of that money.
paying per mo is certainly more convenient I guess. but once you are in, there isn't a cost to stay in. Some trackers might boot you if you don't log in once every 3-6 mo.
Twitter also knew the value of letting a non-user view content, the day X started that I never went back. Reddit also understands this, and while they might bother you every chance to log in, it's not required.
Can anyone speak to usecases for submodules that arent better served by your language’s package manager? Multi-language codebases, languages without appropriate package management perhaps?
Previously on HN:

[flagged] C++ Standards Contributor Expelled for 'The Undefined Behavior Question' (slashdot.org) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42226250 (84 points, 88 comments)

Edit:

Also, this PDF discussed on Reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/1h0ximn/firsthand_acco...

Wow, digging through the various threads, people are making a lot of claims (and counterclaims) made without any citation whatsoever, even when one should be easy to provide. At least Andrew Tomazos has the excuse of referring primarily to in-person incidents.

There should be theoretically-verifiable proof of the email chain Andrew cited, but actually verifying it would be difficult for most people. I do think Andrew should post it in full (including Message-ID headers) nonetheless, since making the claim "this message-id is fake" is a much riskier counterclaim.
I skimmed the documentation and didn't see any reference as to whether Markwhen supports dependencies? I.e. MSProject-style make one event dependent on another task ending or starting.

Did you need/use that functionality?
Right, but my point about long time maintainability still stands, the person in the lead of the Rust project in the kernel already threw in the towel: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240828211117.9422-1-wedsonaf@...
You can see videos of what it takes; Jonathan Paulson makes the leaderboard often with Python and puts videos of him doing it on YouTube; he made positions 25 and 40 on day 1 this year and here is his video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym1ae-vBy6g
I think it was a bad argument, perhaps due to weakness in Crick's knowledge of information science.

The argument goes like this;

Suppose you built a library of chemical reactions, to generate a DNA codon from
an amino acid, and did this for all of the different amino acids.
Since two different DNA sequences comple to the same protein, you could take sequence A, perform transcription and generate a protein P, and then construct a different DNA sequence B.

Thus we have "genetic information" extracted from a protein and stored in DNA, violating the Dogma... in an extremely cheesy way, since it's obviously the same "information" you had at the start, just encoded differently, and also it's not different in any meaningful sense from doing the same reverse engineering on non-logically-redundant DNA.
Because people want to it live? It says they were redistributing IPTV which is essentially cable over the Internet.
Grant wrote his autobiography pretty much entirely out of desperation to provide for his family after his death. He had lost everything he had in a Ponzi scheme and was heavily in debt as he was dying from cancer, and the autobiography was his last chance to make money for his family.
I often give myself stern talking tos when I made ignorant sysadmin decisions
And that's why we should

1) switch from using "sudo some-command --some-argument" to "some-command --some-argument" in which some-command authenticates and elevates via polkit, and

2) configure polkit to allow the initial human user of the machine to elevate without typing a password.

#2 is just a default, and special configurations can of course override it and return a configuration much like what we have today.

But Jesus Christ Almighty Batman, if I'm installing Ubuntu on my laptop and I, as my regular user, want to install audacity, I shouldn't have to re-enter my password!
Both Clemens and Grant wrote when copyright was 28 years + optional 14 year extension.

I'd much prefer that to the current life + 70 years or 95 years after publication.
Interesting, from the perspective of a father wanting to protect his son, it is understandable. It is just difficult from the perspective of a president even if the reason may sound superficially correct.
I am curious. If you are willing to pay for the convenience, why not just pay the original service providers?

Is it much less expensive?
> Moreover, the police confiscated cryptocurrencies valued at over €1.65 million ($1.74M) and another €40,000 in cash ($42,000).

That eur250mio / mo number is almost certainly bullshit just going off the above alone.

Not to mention that you can't exactly hide 3 yards annual revenue ... and anyone within a mile of a corporate treasury role will tell you that you can't cash-manage that revenue on 40k eur.
How do people typically make money from these new things
It is a rootkit.
The real "financial damage" here is depriving ordinary people of an affordable alternative to the increasingly exorbitant cost of streaming services. We just want our bread and circuses while the world burns, is that too much to ask?

If you want to watch your favourite sportsball team, there are jurisdictions where you need 4+ different subscriptions (and still won't have access to all games).

I am currently trialling IPTV because my legit subscriptions (i) do not allow me to login on more than x devices, which is an unnecessary restriction and incredibly inconvenient, (ii) have broken functionality in their app that I rely on, (iii) no longer support my device, despite it being perfectly capable, so the app has been automatically deleted from it, (iv) ads.

I remember when Netflix first appeared and there was a shift away from piracy and all of its risk, quality issues, illegality, etc to the convenient, affordable, legal alternative. Unfortunately we have reached a point now where these media companies have recaptured their power and control, and are wasting no time screwing over paying customers in the most cynical, usurious ways they can invent. The equilibrium is shifting back to piracy, where the consumer has the power, and the big players offer custom apps, great quality, no ads, reasonable restrictions, etc.
The old ads were incredibly verbose as well. In fact, if you compare ads in say, 1955 National Geographics to ads in 1985 Byte, theyre not so different: headline, image, then 200 words of content. Something happened in advertising around 1988 to 1990 that totally upended this approach. (I wonder if it was the arrival of mature DTP that meant that much more visual layouts could be achieved for the same effort?)
What "lawfare"? How was Hunter unfairly targeted here?
Could runaway Kessler syndrome in LEO would launch enough debris that some would reach MEO? Though out there the density of debris might not be high enough to pose much risk.

The article glossing over this made me a bit dubious of the whole thing.
The $10.5B number is bullshit. It assumes every piracy stream user would've been a paying customer (which is false), and they would have paid the full, non-sale value (also false).

For subscriptions, they usually add up the cost over at least 12 months. Sometimes longer.
Amazon Workers on Strike from Black Friday to Cyber Monday
That can be fixed by limiting copyright to a certain duration per medium. You write a book - you have copyright on paper based books for 15 years. You publish it as Ebooks for desktop and mobile devices - get 15 years on that medium. Convert to visuals on Television &/or Films - 15 years on that medium. Virtual reality - another 15 years and so on ...
That's bad. I have to say though that I'm more bothered that the guy taking over has said he wants generals like Hitler had.
Maybe value of movies times streams that would be 1000x more than actual
Tether accounts can be frozen by the FBI. Not sure how it can be used by the cartels? What am I missing?
The latter had been an issue for me in the past with some projects that just weren't packaged for, e. G., python and had to be imported directly. It can also be helpful for non-packaged assets that are held in a separate git repository.
Does anyone care to share an example of the OrderService that is not anemic?
Non-determinism is a well-understood tool, and does not diminish responsibility.

Grep works just fine, despite implementing non-deterministic finite state machines. Monte Carlo simulations are behind nuclear weapons (where they were invented), weather forecasts, financial trading, etc. Las Vegas algorithms like randomised quicksort also diminish no one's responsibility.

In principle, you can run training and inference on neural networks completely deterministically. But I don't think that makes any difference to responsibility. (To make them deterministic, you obviously have to use pseudo-random number generators with fixed seeds, but less obviously you also have to make sure that when you merge the results of parallel runs, the results 'merge' deterministically. Deterministic parallelism is an extremely interesting field of study! Or, since we are only talking about principles, not what's practical, you could just run everything in series.)

The problem with LLMs is that they are complicated and their actions are hard for humans to predict or reason through. Complexity is the bane of responsibility: if you have a complicated enough system (and a complicated enough management structure involved in producing that system), that's where responsibility goes to die, unless you specifically work to establish it.

In this case, employing LLMs is no worse than employing humans. If upper management gives bad instructions and incentives for lower level employees, we tend to pin the responsibility on upper management.
... and of those who have used multi-user Unix systems, very few would have had the privilege to use sudo in that context. (Unless you count managing a family computer, and even that is likely rare these days given that everyone seems to have their own machine.)
Is this what is powering all those Android TV boxes you can buy?
> Should they continue to suffer today‘s very real problems only to prevent the predicted but not certain worse suffering later?

No probably not, but it's reasonable to look a bit sideways at actions that are causing growth in some places, while other places are being told that we desperately need to embrace degrowth
You ain't seen nothing yet.
One of the links he provides is to this review article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00109...

It concludes with something not far off from what Huberman stated. Not saying it proves he’s right but makes it easy to give him the benefit of the doubt and try to track down the actual new research he is referencing.

> One intriguing possibility is that the structure and function of aMCC could be
altered with sufficient behavioral training. Indeed, as a flexible hub, the MCC may be
better equipped than other brain regions to reshape its connectivity in response to
learning. It has been proposed that protein receptors important for plasticity (such as
CaMKII, NR2B, NMDA) are highly expressed in limbic circuits including aMCC (Wei et
al., 1999; Palomero-Gallagher et al., 2008; Garcia-Cabezas et al., 2017; Burt et al., 2018;
Palomero-Gallagher and Zilles, 2019). Interestingly, Garcia-Cabezas et al. (2017)
recently showed that in adult monkeys, markers of synaptic plasticity are high in MCC
(and other limbic regions) while markers of stability (as expressed by cellular factors that
inhibit synaptic plasticity) are low. These findings suggest that training related
improvement in behaviors requiring tenacity may be mediated through the aMCC. We
have seen evidence that aMCC can be ‘trained up” in the domain of exercise (Colcombe
et al., 2006).
AIX on RT PC had a rather interesting architecture: the AIX kernel ran on top of a microkernel called VRM. VRM also supported two other operating systems, AOS (IBM’s port of 4.3BSD) and PICK. VRM could run multiple operating systems simultaneously, with a hotkey to switch which had access to the keyboard, mouse and screen. Similar idea to Windows NT’s environment subsystems, and IBM’s later Mach-based Workplace OS (cancelled before it ever went GA, but shipped in beta form to customers as OS/2 PowerPC Edition).

VRM was written, not in C, but in a PL/I dialect (not sure which, but probably PL.8). So AIX for RT PC is a rare example of a Unix whose kernel is (partially) written in a language other than C. The only other example of that I know of is IBM z/OS (which most people don’t think of as a Unix, but officially it is one, since it passes the certification test suite and IBM pays The Open Group the Unix trademark license fees.)

I say partially because the actual AIX kernel is in C, but it then calls to the VRM microkernel which isn’t in C. But a lot of basic functions which normally belong in a Unix kernel are in the VRM instead and the AIX kernel is just a thin wrapper over them.

When AIX moved to the RS/6000, the VRM microkernel was dropped, and AIX from then onwards was a classic monolithic kernel all in C.

Well, historically “AIX” has been a brand for (many but not all) IBM Unixes, with several unrelated code bases being labelled “AIX”. One of those, AIX/ESA (for IBM mainframes), was actually based on OSF/1, and hence used the Mach microkernel. But it was discontinued in the first half of the 1990s, when MVS gained Unix compatibility support. And all the other “weird” AIX variants are also now long dead, so in practice AIX for RS/6000’s descendant is the only AIX left.

AIX is a bit like DB2, in that both were brand names for multiple distinct code bases. The difference is all but one AIX code base died, whereas multiple DB2-branded code bases are actively supported today.
This is basically true of any useful means of exchanging currencies or value. Far, far, more mexican drug trafficker laundering has been, and is being done, at places like Wells Fargo.
That certainly doesn't look good.
Were you using the Flatpak? Apparently the sandboxing introduces performance issues.
what Crick means, I believe, is that since multiple codons can code for a single amino acid the information or entropy in that set of codons is larger than the information transferred to the protein creating a many-to-one interaction. This means that you could, in principle, create an RNA sequence 'A' that codes for the same protein as another sequence 'B', but they are discretely different implying that this difference could be exploited to send different information back from proteins to this different RNA sequence. Kinda a reach in my opinion and not really important as proving you could do that doesn't bring us any closer to understanding what nature actually does. I guess the most interesting result with this research is analyzing the thermodynamics of this reverse interaction as an argument as to why nature has not evolved a way to do this.
tl;dr; - They're just a shell around a bitcoin leveraged-investment scheme. Like any such scheme, that fabulous when the price of the underlying security (bitcoin) is rising. But disastrous when it's falling.
I guess, but it's not really a fundamentally different programming paradigm, which is what I was getting at.
Maybe. Though when you add clean water upstream that usually means water clean enough to be fit for drinking (because that what comes out of your tap.)

When they dilute at the treatment plant, they can use somewhat dirtier clean water.
Having known of the man I would say copyright would have been, if at all, at somewhere in the bottom of bottom list of battles he was (and had to be) fighting.
Tablet, yes.

As for reading, definitely better to read in the train than a phone screen. As for writing, didn't try
It seems like a majority. The people that collect NFTs should be in their own category though.
When I worked as a welder in a shipyard, very often I would get a pre-chosen lunch set from one of the multitude of taco trucks that showed up. It ranged from regular, professional trucks where you could order from a menu, on down to the wives of the workers selling tamales or the like out of the trunk of their cars to make a little extra on the side.

Nine times out of ten I'd usually just get the meal of the day from one of the ladies. It was always good, and it was actually kind of fun to wonder what you were going to get! I definitely see the appeal of not having to think about it.
Convenience, I guess. I'm not that deep into the piracy world that I even know of all my alternatives, to be honest.

I pay a reasonable subscription fee, download the app on all my devices, and watch whatever I want.

The app is compatible with all of my devices, isn't broken, there are no unreasonable limits or restrictions, and no ads. That's a lot more than I can say for the 5 or 6 subscriptions it replaces.
> Memorizing on a higher level than facts

Which is not memorization, since memorization is defined by its limits: storing information based on its literal form, as apposed to some higher meaning.

It is called generalization. Learning specific examples with a shared memory too small to memorize all the examples, creates a gradient toward a more compact storage form: patterns. Which, unlike memorized examples, are able to generate reasonable guesses for similar but previously unencountered problems.

Generalization does not require reasoning, nor is it required for reasoning. But they often complement each other.

Where reasoning usually means some kind of flexible application of multiple steps. I.e. a sequence of steps, trying alternative steps, stepping forward to a solution, stepping back from the goal, accumulation of ever larger solved subsets or substeps of the problem, etc.
> There's plenty of actually useful projects I could do in this time to learn new things instead after all.

I suppose. I do actually useful projects at work. AoC reminds me of why I personally loved programming in the first place - solving small technical puzzles. I don't like trying to make every single moment of my life "productive".
"That paper's title makes people think about things they'd rather not think about"

Only if you are insane.
Then I'd say the ideal length is probably zero. I don't buy that derivative works negatively impact revenue that much.
https://docs.markwhen.com/syntax/dates-and-ranges.html#relat...

It doesn't look at task completion but you can base events on other events
When you argue like that, that’s what’s generally referred to as “pushing an agenda” and people sour to it quickly. You’re better off sticking to your actual argument than embellishing things.
Access maybe never took off, but wasn't Visual Basic super popular at one point? I think you could arguably call it low-code given its use of a WISYWIG UI builder and eliminating a lot of the boilerplate of creating a windows application. I definitely think you could call Excel a low-code tool too. Probably SAP and Salesforce as well.

I'd argue that it was Cloud and improved monetization opportunities rather than ChatGPT which made the current iteration of low/no-code more popular, although ChatGPT certainly helps (I'd argue that past a certain level of complexity/code sized, LLMs also stop working properly). Most low/no-code tools include hosting, which is a must for anything meant to be served on the Internet, and before public cloud took off, this was a lot more complicated to offer for free or a low-cost. There's also a much bigger market for SaaS and it's easy to take payments over the Internet now, which incentivizes semi-technical to build software to be served over the Internet rather than their desktop (and also makes it easier to build the low/no-code tools themselves).

> until you REALLY need a programmer

This is the thing I was getting at, there are a lot of people who know how to program but are not super-skilled at it, and I think a lot of software engineers don't get this. Think back to when you were just learning to program and how frustrating it probably was to do "basic" things like set up your dev environment or ship a website for the first time. For the people using low-code, it's not that they can't do these things, it's that they'd have to spend a lot of time looking things up and learning how do it, which is a major time investment (and frankly require a lot of persistence/patience which I think professional SWEs self-select for, because the learning SWE learning curve is brutal for most people) that they'd rather not make. You can argue that past a certain degree of complexity that the investment is worth it, but in many cases it probably isn't, and in others it's possible they'd not have made it to the point of outgrowing low-code at all if they had to do everything from scratch.

It's not much different from how we as programmers use things like Cloudflare or AWS Lambda. Could we run and manage our own DNS or scaling? If we really need to learn it, we probably could if we set our minds to it. Is it possible we could outgrow those tools if we start on them? Definitely. But even when we know how to implement our own scaling or DNS we might still reach for these tools just because they're so convenient to get something working quickly, and most of the time we don't outgrow them anyway. Low-code is pretty much the same thing except it has a lower technical barrier to entry (eg you don't need to know how building/deploying software works) and often is easier to outgrow.
"which HOOBOY man we’re just knocking it out of the fucking park with possible anti-semitic dog whistles today aren’t we"

No. Absolutely not. No reasonable person would consider the title to be that.
Working with PaloAlto to identify CVE-2024-2550
The problem is that any command that elevates privileges introduces a potential hacking vector so while having to enter your password or provide some other authentication at points where privileges get escalated is not an unreasonable ask.
Drug parents are only 10 - 20 years, and it works great. The creator gets to make enough money to finance their next drug, and the public gets cheaper generics after a decade or two.

There's no reason any other IP should be longer.