skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
idk, most of these tools don't actually work well. so maybe $100 for a lifetime unlimited plan.
> To think of SQL as just an RPC protocol completely misses the point of SQL, or the incredible engineering involved in modern query planners. There a many reasons to replace SQL if something better, but the idea that it’s an inefficient RPC protocol, and that clients should have more fine-grained control of the planning and execution of queries, really isn’t one of them.

But SQL is used as an RPC protocol & wire format for getting data in and out of the database. Basically all web apps built on top of a sql database craft SQL strings for SELECT and UPDATE commands. The queries are very repetitive - since they're crafted once and run with each web request. I'm sure there's a lot of unnecessary work related to doing that over and over again constantly - and if that work isn't parsing strings, its generating the query plan. The format is also really awkward to use. SQL doesn't play very nice with most modern languages - since you generally either write the SQL string by hand, and then the types are opaque to the language. Or you get an ORM to do it - and then you can't easily customize the SQL string itself.

Its complicated, but one approach to solving this would be to bundle up all that query planning code into a wasm blob and send it to database clients when they connect. The blob would contain any complex statistical code that the database uses. This would allow applications to create and save a query plan from a query string, and reuse it with subsequent queries. The wasm bundle would also contain all the binary serialization & deserialization code. Databases could then continue to evolve their query planners as they do today - but performance would be much better. And it would open the door to richer, lower level APIs for applications to customize & understand the query plans. And, I'm sure, figure out what types will be expected and returned from any given query.
Which is not particularly important without the context of price, heat, availability, multicore perf, etc. As a whole, there appear to be better values on most fronts, though necessarily when all is combined in some opinionated way. There are certainly good values to be found in the intel world, but I can't think of a time where they have been so comprehensively challenged.
The charts you linked don't look like the same kind of chart to me. There's information about what happened after what, but the information about how much each task took seems missing.
It's a good point, and yes, afaik any redress can be requested as a condition for blessing a merger.
Just for argument, if we set the limit at 25 years. The Fellowship of the Ring, published 29 July 1954, would have been out of copyright by 1981. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellowship_of_the_Ring)

I would say that the bulk of the (for lack of a better term) fandom, occurred after the 1980. Frodo Lives!(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frodo_Lives!) notwithstanding.

I would also argue that corporations would have no qualms of waiting 25 years to capitalize and format shift a work of art, where as the 50 year term limit makes it more difficult for them to play off of nostalgia alone.
Well, for at least a time they would have the entire x86 market. That is not nothing. Also AMD may want to get back into the fab business. Without competition in x86 why not use Intel's fabs?
Hey I mean two negatives make a positive right? Can't possibly go any worse than it already is.
Both use GNOME by default
It can be more than one thing at a time.

But I would also say that that kind of toxic management is absolutely a part of "software engineering culture". How many horror stories do people on here have of managers who care nothing about the quality of the product, only meeting the deadline so they can get their bonus?

"Software engineering culture" is way, way more than just "how write good code." It includes how we work, how we manage/are managed, how we advocate for ourselves, or fail to do so, and much more.

It certainly includes the very common resistance to unions among programmers, and assuming this was caused by management pushing a known-bad product out the door, a strong union would have (at least potentially) been able to stand up to such demands.
Seems like everything is going to become more expensive. Will that further depreciate the US dollar?
Intel has had some big failures (or missed opportunities) over the years. Just going from memory - Pentium 4 architecture, not recognizing market opportunities with ARM, Itanium, AMD beating them to 64 bits on x86, AMD beating them to chiplets and high number of PCIe lanes with EPYC, poor battery life (generally) on laptops. The innovations from Apple with Apple Silicon (ARM) and AMD with EPYC make Intel look like they're completely lost. That's before we even touch on what RISC-V might do to them. It seems like the company has a long history of complacency and hubris.
I think such an appliance had already been invented. They are called "trees".

All they need to do their work is corporations leaving them alone.
No Spitting. The Mgt.
People who are presumably very well-off financially can retire a tad on the early side for all sorts of reasons or a combination thereof. Certainly he has made some significant course corrections at Intel but the most charitable thing one can say is that they will take a long time to play out. As you say, a merger with AMD seems like a non-starter for a variety of reasons.
Those solutions are still very useful for all sorts of reasons, they wouldn't be going anywhere. (in fact, going by my own experience/situation with a high quality ISP, I actually end up using more of these services!)

But new business models do open up: A lot of functionality now needs to have some sort of cloud backing to be able to guarantee some level of 'Just Works'.

Imagine regular muggles being able to install stuff at home, which Just Works, doesn't need a central cloud service, doesn't invade your privacy, and continues to work even when the original manufacturer shuts down.

Right now really only specialists who know what to ask for can do that, and not all ISPs even have the option.
For an interesting comparison, here's BQN, an array language, at 25.5μs (on an i3-4160) for both parts, including input parsing:

https://github.com/dzaima/aoc/blob/master/2024/BQN/1_fast.bq...
Perhaps "bush lawyer" was the inspiration for "hedge wizard."

https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/zetwkt/what_exactly_is...
Not entirely true. It just requires that Intel retain a 51% stake in any split foundry company.
I don't think a human could effectively "reason" after being trained on nonsense (I don't think the training would even take). I think believing generative AI is operating on the same kind of meaning we are is a good way to be surprised when they go from writing like a learned professor for paragraphs to suddenly writing in the same tone and confidence but entirely wrong and with a bunch of made-up crap—it's all made-up crap from their perspective (if you will), we've just guided them into often making up crap that correlates to things we, separately from them, regard (they don't "regard", not in this sense) as non-crap.

[EDIT] To put it another way: if these things were trained to, I dunno, generate strings of onomatopoeia animal and environmental noises, I don't think anybody would be confusing what they're doing with anything terribly similar to human cognition, even if the output were structured and followed on from prompts reasonably sensibly and we were able to often find something like meaning or mood or movement or locality in the output—but they'd be doing exactly the same thing they're doing now. I think the form of the output and the training sets we've chosen are what're making people believe they're doing stuff significantly like thinking, but it's all the same to an LLM.
This comment pairs very well with the recent thread on Heaviside’s operator calculus. He got ahead of theory, did groundbreaking work, and was ultimately superseded by more principled approaches. I think this illustrates a kind of intellectual leapfrog. Sometimes we do things that are right, but it’s not clear why they work, and other times we have theoretical structures that open up new realms of practice.
A new invention could help reduce fatbergs and unclog sewers across Australia
Most academics would agree with them that dynamically typed languages are a misnomer and in fact have no type system. And whether you want to use the colloquial term that counts dynamically typed languages or the academic one that doesn't is a subjective decision, and one where their choice was clear from context.

More generally, advocates of dynamically typed languages seem to want their languages to be considered typed because there's a developing consensus that typed is better. Unfortunately for said advocates, that consensus was not developed in contrast to languages like Forth, it was developed in contrast to languages like Ruby, so changing the definition of a type system to accommodate Ruby doesn't actually get you credibility in the new "cool kids club". You're better off arguing why dynamic is better than static than you are trying to enforce a particular definition of types. No one is going to be persuaded that Ruby meets their needs just because you made them use your definition.
What kind of sysadmins are they then? I don't want to sound dismissive, but is a "windows sysadmins" a thing? Do companies run windows on servers?
What about an AliExpress clone of the Flipper Zero electronics, reusing the design+firmware+docs+ecosystem+community, while undercutting on price?
"the real and only reality" would be better stated as ~"the small finite set of realities" (basically, each "tribe's" trained "take" on a given situation)...but even then, it is always possible to point out a trivial, causally unimportant object level difference such that one can miss the point.

Whether it is possible to circumvent this remains to be seen. Science has demonstrated it can to some degree, but it only covers a portion of reality.
It's really a perspective and "keeping up with the Jones's" situation.

You are a tech engineer and "live comfortably" means that you "live like a tech engineer" in the area. Which means "not making financial sacrifices to work at company X".

Live comfortably for some people means single family home with yard, 4 bedrooms, 2-3 annual vacations, eating out once a week, shopping at expensive grocery stores, etc. etc.

Now put all these $200k or dual income $400k people in the same area and it becomes a race to the bottom of "who is willing to live closest to paycheck to paycheck".
Why would China and the EU have input on a US merger?
Before gen AI, scraping mostly wasn't about copyrightable data but about finding facts. Scraping doesn't magically make copyright infringement legal.
They weren’t interested in creating an open solution. Both intel and AMD have been somewhat short sighted and looked to recreate their own cuda, and the mistrust of each other has prevented them from a solution for both of them.
'German soldier of WW2' does not automatically equate to 'Nazi'.

Such binary thinking misses much nuance and is very unhelpful.
Is Attention Really All Thats Needed?
It’s no secret that social media companies strive to maximize time spent in their apps—in other words, how much attention we give them. Whether it’s the infinite scroll or endless notifications, these platforms are built to keep us engaged, often at the expense of our focus, productivity, and well-being.

I’ve always been curious about how people defend themselves against these attention-grabbing algorithms. Do you have systems in place to protect your time and mental energy? Do you rely on self-discipline, or do you use screen-time control apps like Atten, AppBlock, Jomo, Opal, or something else?

But here’s a bigger question I’d love your input on: If we all agree you shouldn’t go grocery shopping on an empty stomach, should using screen time control apps become a hard-and-fast rule for our devices? In a world where attention is commoditized, could having these apps enabled by default be as essential as locking your doors at night?

I’d love to hear your thoughts:

- Do you find these apps genuinely helpful?

- What strategies do you use to avoid falling prey to social media algorithms?

- Should screen time control tools be a standard part of our digital lives, or do they just address the symptoms of a bigger problem?
Qt Creator 15 released with Windows on ARM64 support
Reverse Thinking Makes LLMs Stronger Reasoners
You're definitely helping me prove my point, what are those other environmental impacts?

Let's imagine we can stop a single car from needing to be produced: that will dwarf all the mining impacts from probably thousands of phones! Cars are soooo much worse along any angle you can possibly imagine, yet people are misdirected from their use of cars to worrying about miniscuke rounding errors from their phones.
Networking - Connect with experienced professionals from other companies to share experiences and learn from each other. There are many ways to do this: reconnect with former college classmates, search for people in companies you admire on LinkedIn and send them a friendly invite, or join online groups or attend local events.

Mentoring - As you build your network, you'll naturally find opportunities for informal mentorship. This could be someone with a solid career who has already navigated the tough paths and can help you tackle challenges while also offering guidance for your journey.

There have been many times in my career when I felt stuck. By having regular conversations, listening to others, and sharing work experiences, I gained a broader perspective and have always been able to found ways to move forward.
Newsletters are outside the scope of Show HN. "Off topic: blog posts, sign-up pages, newsletters, lists, and other reading material." https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html
I must write code very differently than most writing the actual code is not what takes my time. Sure you feel that time, but it ends up being a pretty small percentage of mine.
I have been in one. Its just a room with an air flow rating and slight positive pressure vs ambient. There's no entry control, no special clothing, no hair nets. There was visible dust on top of the equipment and no one seemed to care, not even the people who you think should. I honestly think its there for a check mark on the paperwork.
Pre-Owned Pricing Is Broken – Here’s How We’re Fixing It!
Hi everyone!

I’m part of a small team working on something I think fashion lovers might find really helpful. We’re building a pricing assistant for pre-owned products, starting with fashion. The idea is to make it easier to figure out fair prices when buying or selling second-hand, using data from across the web.

We’d love to invite this community to be among the first to try it out! If you’re interested, you can check it out here: https://www.resellprice.com/.

Your input would mean so much to us as we fine-tune the tool—we want to make sure it really works before launching more widely!

Let me know if you have any questions or ideas. Excited to hear what you think!
Whatever "quarter of 12" means in English, whether it's 11:45 (quarter to 12) or 12:15 (quarter past 12), it definitely isn't 11:15. We do fraction of an hour forward or backward relative to the hour mentioned, not fraction of an hour elapsed in approach to hour mentioned.

I recently encountered a German asking for the English phrase equivalent to bis unter, looking for a phrase like "up to below". There isn't one in common use. We just don't count things in equivalent ways.
Consider looking at the solutions threads on Reddit instead - that way, the code you're looking at isn't broken in ways you don't know enough to spot.
If you are in a team of sysadmins, you are still the local system administrator.

The only ones this message applies are the HPC ones and the "app folks", and the number of ssh-apps that require you to log in another computer is very small nowadays.
https://taeric.github.io/CodeAsData.html was my take at exploring parts of this idea. Being able to manipulate code with the same constructs as you generally write the code is pretty cool.
I wouldn't say physicists were 'happily' using renormalization back in the day. Rather, some of them were happy and many others were very concerned. Then, the ideas behind renormalization were formalized in terms of (poorly named) renormalization group flows, and by the early 90s it was on quite solid mathematical footing (though there remains to this day quite a bit of confusing folklore and fear around the topic, complete with plenty of bad pedagogy that has given many an undergrad as well as many the interested mathematician a lot of anxiety)

However, simultaneously with us coming to understand renormalization better, we've also come to realize it's really not such a big deal and it was supremely overused back in the day. Nowadays, most modern field theorists think in terms of 'effective field theories' and are not nearly so interested in trying to sum infinite perturbative series so we have a lot less use for renormalization (though it does still have its place)
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectively_extended_real_lin...
That’s the crux of it. I think I can write safe C. So do many other people who, surely like me, cannot. I know I’ve written safe Rust because I had to fix my code until it was able to compile.
> Not a great argument considering Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen (read: Houthis)

So how long did the Afghani and Iraqi governments stand up to the US military? Weeks? Maybe a month? They got steamrolled by modern military technology.

> and further back Vietnam and North Korea all wrecked the US military one way or nine anothers.

Those countries had access to then state-of-the-art military technology. A 1960s tech vs 1960s tech war is not a good stand to reason about a 1960s tech vs 2020s tech war.

> If we are concerned about national security, I would look into why we can't win wars against bass ackwards goat herders and jungle men...

The US has qualms about many tactics that could defeat an insurgency (e.g. massacres, attacking hostile civilian organizations), your hypothetical advanced US adversary may not have those qualms, so I wouldn't rely on them. Also its political system doesn't have the attention span to really stay long enough to subdue a population through other means.

> ...instead of silicon that won't even see military applications for at least a few more decades.

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time to plant a tree is today.
the former: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42291527 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42292668
The Mate 70 is shipping with it… as indicated in the article?

Obviously wiki pages are not 100% always up to date or even correct, which you should know considering you’ve been on the internet for at least seven years…
Employee lawsuit accuses Apple of spying on its workers
The Wikipedia page has a lot of good details:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS_NEXT?useskin=vector

The most interesting part is that it is based on realtime LiteOS that was build long time ago for IoT applications. It's not a time-sharing OS like AOSP is.
I'm saying nobody can guarantee the claim of the GP I've replied to, that if Intel would have produced mediocre GPUs with 64+ GB of RAM that would have magically help them rise to the top of ML HW sales and save them.

That's just speculations from people online. I don't see any wisdom in that like you do, all I see is just a guessing game from people who think they know an industry when they don't (armchair experts to put it politely).

What made Nvidia dominant was not weak GPUs with a lot of RAM. The puzzle of their success had way more pieces that made the whole package appealing over many years, and a great timing of the market also helped. Intel making underperforming GPUs with a lot of RAM would not guarantee the same outcome at a later time in the market with an already entrenched Nvidia and a completely different landscape.
They already have human segmenters segmenting existing scrolls, which presumably is used to train the program in much the same way.
There are also options like Texas Instruments or Microchip. Of course far more unlikely than either nvidia or amd, but definitely options.
Old trees don’t capture much CO2. It’s only young, growing trees that have a meaningful impact. Need a lot more than fewer corps
Rather than removing 0 from a numeric type, we can avoid including it at all. For example, we can have a bunch of numeric types like:

Positive = One | Succ Positive
Nat = Zero | Positive
NonZeroInt = Positive | Neg Positive
Int = Zero | NonZeroInt
Rational = Ratio Int Positive

etc.

Depending on the language, these could be implemented with little or no runtime overhead.
Maybe. My point was more that it's complicated. For example: I couldn't care less about how much power my desktop uses.
That’s not an issue for the filmmaker who sticks to online distribution, there are branches of well known payment processors in Addis Ababa.

They won’t be making blockbuster movies anytime soon, but I imagine their business would be greater than zero?
I must admit, this is the kind of description that's enough to make me want to maybe get into ham radio someday.
Cat coat color is an X linked gene, so there's no representation of it on the Y chromosome.

Let's denote this as Xo and Xb for the genes. An orange female cat is XoXo, a tortoise shell / calico cat is XoXb and a black female cat is XbXb.

Male cats are either XbY or XoY - there are no tortoise shell male cats (there are cats with Klinefelter's syndrome that can be XbXoY but only mentioning this for a full coverage of the topic - and for a real example of this https://disneylandcats.com/cat-profile-francisco/ and it confuses things since XbXbY and XoXoY cats would be difficult to identify without a genetic test).

The thing with all of this is that the genetics for XoXo or XbXb and XoY or XbY are exactly the same percentages.

Doing the Punnett squares for cat coats and all the possible pairings and you get simplified

Genotype Count Percent of XX or XY
XoXo 3 25%
XoXb 6 50%
XbXb 3 25%
XoY 6 50%
XbY 6 50%

It ends up with 2/3 of the orange cats being male and 2/3 of the black cats being male. This doesn't quite match real world situations since you could have a colony that is dominated by orange cats (or black cats ... or neither).
Julia hasn't "taken off" but I venture that it might be "getting there" with recent improvements in being able to generate (relatively) compact binaries.

More generally, I wonder whether the future of software development will be less enamored with new/upstart languages, and more amenable to languages with truly novel offerings which have also had decades to mature. Beyond Julia, OCaml, Erlang/Elixir, and potentially Scheme / Common Lisp are a few of the others I can think of.
That news came out after I wrote my comment, but that vindicates my apprehension towards Intel's ability to execute. Only believe them after they deliver.
My favourite Gleam feature confuses people [video]
I think it is a political low blow to go after the family of political opposition. I guess that rule went out of the window too, although I think it was the liberal media that started to make fun of Trumps family. But it shouldn't matter who started it.

Sure, everyone should be equal in front of the law, but public persons are a difficult case. To be honest, I think for the alleged crimes he suffered enough punishment just because some people aired his dirty laundry publicly.

Overall it is a sign that the political culture has become vastly more primitive. Were it healthy people would also call out their own political side to stop schoolyard shit like this.

The interesting thing probably was that all that happened in Ukraine. For countries like Russia this can look like governmental involvement that is generally a bad look and it could be misinterpreted.