skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Same reason they'll make 10 different microservices for a single product that isn't even 5K LoC. People chase trends because they don't know any better. K8s is a really big trend.
Planting New Platform Roots in Cloud Native with Fir
Sub-millisecond latency sounds impressive, but isn't network latency going to overshadow these gains in most real-world scenarios?
Maybe. Sometimes it would be, but sometimes such things are not announced for various reasons.
I am forgiven to have been exhausted by the grind and for trying to be loyal and go all-in where I am hired.

Wait, it turned out I am not forgiven and just taken advantage of.

So yeah, I am trying. Not easy by any means. But lesson learned, though way too late in my life and career. I'll definitely be doing that going forward.
Yes, but maybe they should train more on uncertainty and mistakes, that are later followed by clarifications and corrections, like those found in notes.
Ask HN: Do you bother trying to get job application timelines to align?
Hi all,

I'm about to start a new job search, but I know from past experience that application times for different roles can be vastly different. Ideally I'd like to be able to weigh up any offers I get, directly against each other.

Obviously there's no guarantee of getting any job, but I was just wondering as a general rule, if you make it through the initial stage of an application, do you:

a) Try and "delay" or engineer (i.e. scheduling later interviews where possible) your applications so you receive the final decision at roughly the same time?

b) Just go through the application process as normal (not taking the risk of stretching out the process as you may disadvantage yourself in actually getting the job).

I feel like option b) is the more sensible choice (i.e. better to get the bird in hand) but curious as to what others do. I'd like to avoid the scenario of getting a job offer and either trying to delay the acceptance for as long as possible or taking the offer and then rescinding later - ultimately I'd do this if I had to, but wondering if option a) is a way of mitigating the chance of this happening.

Thanks for any advice or insight! :)
Is it just me or the latest chips from Intel look relatively better? I meant the Ultra Core 1 and 2.
I'll put it this way:

Every time I try to use Nomad, or any of the other "simpler" solutions, I hit a wall - there turns out to be a critical feature that is not available, and which if I want to retrofit into them, will be a hacky one-off that is badly integrated into API.

Additionally, I don't get US-style budgets or wages - this means that cloud prices which target such budgets are horrifyingly expensive to me, to the point that kubernetes pays itself off at the scale of single server

Yes, single server. The more I make it fit the proper kubernetes mold, the cheaper it gets, even. If I need to extend something, the CustomResourceDefinition system makes it easy to use a sensible common API.

Was there a cost to learning it? Yes, but honestly not so bad. And with things like k3s deploying small clusters on bare metal became trivial.

And I can easily wrap kubernetes API into something simpler for developers to use - create paved paths that reduce the amount of what they have to know, provide, and that will enforce certain deployment standards. At lowest cost I have encountered in my life, funnily enough.
This is classic "middlebrow dismissal."
> Activist or terrorist? Those groups have blurred the line

Irrespective of official designation or intent, if you’re inflicting political violence on unarmed civilians, you’re a terrorist. If not, you’re something else.
Thanks, it has been a fun passion project! As for batching images, I agree its too bad it can take a lot of tries for some of the images, though it isnt always that way. I'm still mindblown I can magically create images from words though so it doesn't phase me.
> I suspect the rights holders would abandon them if they had to pay any fee

Wouldn’t that just put the works in the public domain, allowing others to legally publish the works? What would be the downside?
Any time you are communicating between multiple programming language communities, it is important to understand that they will have differing definitions for things, to extend grace to people trying to communicate across those barriers, and to not apply dogmatic definitions of terms that apply to the contexts you happen to be familiar with but are used differently elsewhere.

"Crash" is not a universally defined term and you will find there are plenty of communities that do not agree that "crash == OS process terminating".
Presumably in the hopes of a more "shareholder friendly" CEO being appointed.

"shareholder friendly" and "good for the company" are not at all the same things.
Sad to see Gelsinger go, but despite the churn, I don't think Intel is doomed. At worst, per their most recent Q3 results, I see $150Bn in assets and $4Bn in outstanding stock, and I see the US Gov (both incoming and outgoing) gearing up for a long war against China where Intel would be an asset of national importance.

My back of envelope calculation says Intel should be about $35 a share (150/4). If they stumble when they report Q4, I think the US Gov will twist some arms to make sure that fresh ideas make it onto the board of directors, and perhaps even make Qualcomm buy them.

I do think that Intel need to ditch some of their experiments like Mobileye. Its great (essential) to try and "rebalance their portfolio" away from server/pc chips by trying new businesses, but Mobileye hasnt grown very much.
Yes, gaming GPUs are a decent money maker - but Intel GPUs can currently only compete in the midrange segment, where there is a lot less money to be made. And to change that, they need to invest a lot more money (with uncertain outcome). And for AI it's basically the same story - with the added difficulty of Nvidias CUDA moat, which even AMD is having trouble with.
Chips are the new oil. They run everything and without them you would be outdroned in the case of a war.
This describes my black cat exactly; she runs and hides at the door bell, but when it all calms down, she inevitably comes out to see who it is and within half hour is trying to climb in their lap and is begging for attention from the new person. I had an orange cat once and he pretty much thought he was the family dog. I’ve never seen a friendlier cat, didn’t matter if it was another cat, a dog, a person, or a squirrel; anyone who would play he was ready to go.
I can see some differences, but none of them seem "big".

In code you don't have all the extra communication avenues that we have when speaking, like body language, intonation, sarcasm and so on.

On the other hand, when writing code we are not speaking in real time. We can think about a problem for a while, consider the best possible way to solve a problem and how to explain it.

What do you see as a big difference?
Don't forget their "brilliant" strategy of suing their own customers.
Politicians and the military disagree though. They can place plenty of pressure on the market to change the market's mind if they care to.
Mmmm. This article is like one of those duck-rabbit pictures, isn't it? With a slight mental effort, you can read it one way, or another way.

So, here are some excerpts:

These advantages ("It’s a lot easier to support matching, indentation, coloring, and so on", and "tools hit the trifecta of: correct, useful, and relatively easy") are offset by one drawback: some people just don’t like them. It feels constraining to some to always write programs in terms of trees, rather than more free-form syntax.

Still, what people are willing to embrace for writing data seems to irk them when writing programs, leading to the long-standing hatred for Lispy syntaxes.

But, you argue, “Now I have a bicameral syntax! Nobody will want to program in it!” And that may be true. But I want you to consider the following perspective.

[...] a bicameral syntax that is a very nice target for programs that need to generate programs in your language. This is no longer a new idea, so you don’t have to feel radical: formats like SMT-LIB and WebAssembly text format are s-expressions for a reason.

The last three paragraphs play upon each other: people hate Lispy syntax; people dislike bicameral syntaxes; S-expressions are bicameral syntax.

And notice that nothing in those excerpts and nothing in the text surrounding them (sections 4 to 7) really refers to the ability to access the program's syntax from inside the program itself. In fact, the sections 1 to 2 argue that such an ability is not really all that important and is not what makes LISPs LISPs. Then what does? The article goes on about "bicamerality" (explicit distinction between the reader and the parser) but doesn't ever mention again the ability of the program to modify its own syntax or eval.

I can't help but to make the tacit deduction that those never-again-mentioned things are not part of "bicamerality". You, perhaps, instead take those things as an implicit, never-going-out-of-sight context that is always implied to be important, so those things are never mentioned again because already enough has been said about them but they still are crucial part of "bicamerality".

It's a duck-reabbit article. We both perceive it very differently; perhaps in reality it's just an amalgam of ideas that, when mixed together in writing, lack the coherent meaning?
Much like with Boeing, they are out of options. the US has no other chipmaker but Intel. China has about half a dozen.

the 8bn is more of a pointy stick at this stage to try and get your 56 year old failing chipmaker to do something besides profiteering (buybacks layoffs and mergers.) Its a wasted effort. short of nationalizing Intel, the US is going to lose a crown jewel of its technological advantage solely due to mismanagement.
You don't need a heavy frontend build for interactivity. All you really need nowadays is asset fingerprinting.
Climate change and war are excellent examples demonstrating how far Humans are willing/obligated to take this convention.
And that's why you can have the giant tailwind css file instead of "building" when you're developing.
I have a sizeable bet that government spending will be higher after the term is up. I am not at all worried about losing the bet.
> I am not sure about your level of computer literacy, so sorry in advance if I give a a overly detailed response

In technical discussions, this is what I call "The Move". It comes from a desire to position the person making The Move as more knowledgeable and experienced and therefore correct and the other person as relatively new, inexperienced, lacking in wisdom, and naive. It's extremely sophomoric and perversely favored by those who lack the attributes they're trying to project. Don't do it.

I know how browsers and web apps work. I'm a former Mozillian, and among other things, I wrote, edited, and maintained the JS docs on developer.mozilla.org.

Even aside from The Move, nothing else that you wrote out here is especially relevant. The central observation I made is that users have more reason to be circumspect of non-browser based programs that they download and run than they do of browser-based programs because any nefarious thing a browser-based app can do, a native executable can do, too—or worse.

Anyone who has a gut feeling to the contrary is doing exactly that: operating on vibes and intuition and trying to reason with their gut instead of using actual reason to do what is ultimately a straightforward calculation.

(And the thing is, you and everyone else in your camp already knows the truths I've written out here. If you disagree, then we'll set aside one day a year that we'll call Native App Day. For Native App Day, browsers will refuse to execute browser-based apps. Instead everyone who publishes a web app will agree to publish programs packaged in the native executable format for Mac, Windows, and Linux, and everyone who typically uses the web app will run these executables with the same alacrity they apply when they undertake to use the web app. This will be strictly enforced, and there will be no cheating by folks who just refuse to use the computer on Native App Day.)
I’d argue that focus is what Intel fundamentally lacks. Or any kind of real vision.

If they had focused more on mobile CPUs, GPUs, or especially GPGPUs a decade ago, they could have more product diversity now to hold them over.

Instead, they dipped their toes into a new market every few years and then ran away screaming when they realized how difficult and it would be to gain market share.

If they had any actual vision, they could have a line of ARM CPUs now to compete with the onslaught in all major CPU markets.

They should have listened to their customers and market forces instead of trying to force x86 down everyone’s throats.
For me, even having an infinitely patient intern who is quite often wrong is useful.

Even when they're only acting as competently as a university student, they're doing that at dozens of subjects which I stopped doing at 16, plus some more I stopped at 18*, and they know at least some stuff about subjects I never studied like the Swedish or Oromo languages, or agriculture, or the history of Djibouti — though I have yet to find a professional use for all this breadth of knowledge, the fact they're so general means I don't have to worry, just ask and see what they come up with.

Even in my own domain, software development, I can take their mediocre code as a starting point to build upon because the better LLMs know all the different libraries that are meant to help with different tasks in the main languages, all the things that changed in python or CSS since I last used them professionally, even a few things I've never learned about iOS despite having been in that sub-field since 2010 — and sure, the code ChatGPT produces is merely OK, not great, but I can fix that up just like I can actually work with humans whose code or architecture I don't approve of**.

And when I think the AI is wrong about code, 1 time in 10 it's actually me that made the mistake — so a learning opportunity.

Back in 2004-2005, I was an intern; if I remember right I was paid £1000/month, and if I was indeed useful at that point, I would expect the best LLMs today to be similarly valuable (inflation adjusted) despite the much lower cost.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCSE and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-level

** well… mostly.

There's been a few humans so bad I gave up in disgust, for example because they were duplicating files instead of sub-classing and then not understanding the criticism they got for doing so — but even that took over a year for me to give up on them, despite the warning signs being visible in the first week.
Collaboration comes with it's own challenges and inefficiencies
It would be great to repel the patriot act. But it wont happen. That's the one that allows the government to spy on its citizens. They aren't going to give that up.
>NOT because there was any natural right to the product of one's thoughts to not be copied or expanded upon

grandma not sharing her best recipes, and children calling each other "copycat!" is an argument for a natural right. It is innately how humans feel, and there is a supporting argument that we don't want grandma's secret innovations dying with her, to incent sharing.
Both of the Co-CEOs have a finance background. I think that is rather telling. They are trying to appeal to Wallstreet and potentially have people that are equipped to manage an M&A deal.
So you think the way the US would win those wars is by suffering more casualties? No, in all cases, it was the lack of political will to continue not an inability to defeat enemies tactically.
It's more like you had five apples and divided them among zero people, which means not even you get to keep them. They were thrown in the trash instead. The answer is zero.
The CIA, NSA, and Pokémon Go
Why would the US govt allow a merge with AMD?

Sure they won't allow Intel to be bought by a foreign company, but surely everyone would much rather see Intel being bought by literally any other company than AMD and Nvidia.
Unless you find out that calling AA for everything and going to big name mechanics garage every time costs you significant portion of your budget.

A lot of it is finding balance between what to do yourself, what to outsource, and it's not as easy or clean as some people here like to claim.
Oh, yes. They spent too many years as the obvious #1, with a license to print money...when, longer-term, staying there required that Intel remain top-of-league in two profoundly difficult and fast-moving technologies (10e9+-transistor CPU design, and manufacturing such chips). Meanwhile, the natural rot of any large org - people getting promoted for their ladder-climbing skills, and making decisions for their own short-term benefit - were slow eating away at Intel's ability to stay at the top of those leagues.
What does "Go is too slow" mean in this context? Were you expecting similar performance to Rust or C++?
Yes, and it's a kind of standard thing 'sandwich construction'.
The Great Flattening is here to stay
Measuring Failed Recovery Time
https://web.archive.org/web/20241202103437/https://www.busin...
Gelsinger seemed well connected to Washington / the democratic administration in particular and the CHIPS act seemed to be designed to save/bail out Intel.

Perhaps this is a fall out from the election.
Gelsinger retires before Intel Foundry spin is ready. This means trouble.

Intel invested tens of billions into A20 and A18 nodes, but it has not paid off yet. News about yield seemed promising. Massive investments have been made. If somebody buys Intel foundries now, they pay one dollar and take debt + subsidies. Intel can write off the debt but don't get potential rewards.

Foundry is the most interesting part of Intel. It's where everything is happening despite all the risk.
Getting Stuck
I know ISO 8601, but that doesn't answer my question. Let me rephrase this, why was a format intuitive to a machine chosen instead of a format which feels more intuitive to a human?

I think YYYY/MM/DD - YYYY/MM/DD will mean the correct thing to many more people than YYYY-MM-DD / YYYY-MM-DD, which I suspect many will interpret as an OR and not a RANGE.
Could that also be that dentists are meaner to red haired people too? Subconsciously of course.
The Honeywell Kitchen Computer
The "couple bucks" in my experience were difference between viable business and bankrupt one - including time spent on maintaining k8s!
>The solution is to generate energy without emitting CO2.

These take time and emit CO2 themselves at least in the bulding phase.

And LLMs like GPT won't help us fighting climate change so we raise our energy consumption without later benefit on that matter.

Maybe we first should buld the energy sources and then use them for convenience tools.

Or do you want to explain our children we fucked up because we "needed" AI to write emails that are read by AI to generate a response? Much of AIs use is still just for unnecessary things just more convenient. It's still unclear if they have a productivity benefit or just changed the way we spend the same amount of time.

Intel's study found no such benefit and suggests teaching the people how to use LLMs means how to tell the machine what it should do.

Sounds like programming with extra steps and more ambiguity.
The thing is GenAI will be just like CGI. When it is bad it will look bad and has 'that look'. But when it is good enough you will not even know.

The creativity has already gone sideways for most of this. I can with a few simple sentences create an acceptable picture (in some cases a short film). With a AI pipeline I can make some pretty cool scenes. Instead of having to know how to properly draw an s curve with a nice gradient bit of layered colors over it and 14 meticulously created layers. I tell the program to do it for me. It does an acceptable job in a fraction of the time. People can complain all they want but the rest of us are already using these tools and will continue to do so until something better comes along.
This was extremely well said. I'm impressed by your eloquence here. Are you primarily a communicator at work? I'm curious... Bravo
What a frankly weird oversimplification? GPUs don't exist because CPUs aren't fast enough. GPUs exist because CPUs aren't parallel enough. And to achieve that parallelism, they sacrifice massive amounts of performance to get it.

A GPU-only computer would be absolutely horrendous to use. It'd be incredibly slow and unresponsive as GPUs just absolutely suck at running single-threaded code or branchy code.
If they can replicate them within a decade why bother with an extremely costly war.
Given the push of ARM designs into the desktop and server space, that monopoly doesn't seem to me as much of a danger as it might have a decade ago. I imagine any anti-competitive behavior in x86 would only accelerate that trend. Not that monopolies shouldn't be a concern at all, but my thought is that it's not quite that large of a danger.
The reason to be skeptical of SMRs is the reason to be skeptical of any nuclear, and that is the eclipse of accountability in American culture. Nuclear engineering requires quality standards that are not even faintly realizable within a culture that does not know how to say "not good enough" and where every aspect of life has been reduced to mime.
So far, it's really bad at actually replacing human labor in pro-social ways while being a supercharger for various antisocial jobs, like scam artist or astroturfer. The main "beneficial" use for it today is replacing wasteful labor that probably didn't need to be done in the first place—which is why an AI version is fine, because it didn't matter to begin with.

My wife and I both work in the field, I on the tech side, her on the creative side, and she's been in it since the earliest days of industry trying to adapt these tools. There's a lot (like, holy shit, so much) of effort and money going into it, but so far it's only marginally helpful for non-evil jobs.
most black cats are male

Huh, I had not heard that. In my experience it's pretty evenly split -- at least, in my circle of friends and family there's eight black cats, four of each. (Most short-haired, one long-haired black cat that's female.)
Maybe they'll sell Intel to Northrop Grumman /hj
You are jesting, but there is some wisdom to that post. No reasonable person is suggesting global company changes direction on the basis of one post on the internet, but the advice provided is not without merit. Surely, a company of that size can do some research to see if it is a viable path. In fact, if it does anything right, it should have people like that ready to do appropriate analysis.

I have my thoughts on the matter and cautiously welcomed their move to GPUs ( though admittedly on the basis that we -- consumers -- need more than amd/nvidia duopoly in that space; so I am not exactly unbiased ).
RAID10 on local SSDs is pretty performant option, but yeah, it's per node.
SSD Cost versus Spinning Rust
You sure you don't have sleep apnea? Try heavy doses of vitamin D? Like 4x daily recommended? Ice baths/wim Hoff breathing techniques? I feel for you, I'm just brain dumping all my tangential knowledge.
>The article cites “mechanical systems” as being infallible, and reading that language, it reads to me as some archaic legislation that never got updated for computer software.

It's worse than that.

The law was fixed in 1984[0] and then the fix was intentionally reversed in 1999.[1]

[0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/69/1991...

[1] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/23/section/60
Show HN: TypeSafe, Expressive SQL-Like QueryBuilders/ORM for TypeScript/JS
If you can, hire people more experienced than yourself, and then listen to them and take what they say seriously.

If you can't, find some courses, and participate in open-source development (where they need help, and will often provide feedback). If you need rigour, try test driven development. Attend meetups and conferences and try to meet people there.