skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Maybe? No idea. I'm based in the US, and I know Telus Communications, the parent company is based in Canada. I have no idea if this is even something that would violate a regulation, let alone who to report it to, or how that would change with a foreign employer.
The linguistics imo are pretty ill defined.

"All" bring a common colloquial term doesn't have a strict set theory definition here. It is reasonable many people think zero hats is means the lie is in this very first word.

A lot of people will consider "all" to implicitly mean 1 or more, while I think strict logicians will map colloquial all to 0 or more.

All mat imply colloquially 2 or more as well, as why bother say "all" if you had one hat in the truthful sense

"My hats" contrasts with the "has a hat" because having a hat in your possession that you could have borrowed does not confer ownership that the word "my" can imply.

So great, a three letter word and a two letter word and we are knee deep in ambiguity.

They could be wearing the hat to try to publicly locate the true owner who might say "hey I lost that hat at x".

"Are green"... Green as in vegetable? Green as in the specific wavelength defined as green and not lime or some other named shade? Completely green dyed being undermined by a black spot or a pattern on the hat?

Imo zero hats of ownership is a viable lie to the statement, as is having one red-green hat.
"Severely flawed" is a matter of interpretation, and I don't want to argue for or against.

But to put into context, these numbers are likely accurate, but represent the time it would take for a very naive classical algorithm (possibly brute-force, I am unsure).

For example, the previous result claimed it would take Summit 10,000 years to do the same calculation as the Sycamore quantum chip. However, other researchers were able to reproduce results classically using tensor-network-based methods in 14.5 days using a "relatively small cluster". [1]

[1] G. Kalachev, P. Panteleev, P. Zhou, and M.-H. Yung, “Classical sampling of random quantum circuits with bounded fidelity,” arXiv.org, https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.15083 (accessed Dec. 9, 2024).
Makes sense. My brain is able to do that work on milliwatts.
I bet Vimeo videos will still chug on it
One of the biggest problems with such an assertion is that it's not falsifiable.

It could be that we are borrowing qbit processing power from Russel's quantum teapot.
Mutt-Wizard: CLI to automatically configure mutt and isync
I mean, it's important to remember that the axioms of first-order logic are arbitrary. We could easily argue that the truth value of an empty group is undecidable, and that would better correlate to natural language logic.

The fact that we compact these edge cases into arbitrary truth values is just for ease of computing.

This is also relevant to the arbitrary choice of the 'inclusive or' as a default over an 'exclusive or', which most people use in natural language.
Intel bought Alpha and killed it to eliminate the competition.
OpenAI Releases Sora
>and it equally drives me mad in those areas where academics set "puzzles" and conclude that people's inabilty to "solve" them is some cognitive deficiency.

Does that actually happen in academia? It seems to mostly be a social media thing.
> but the ease of use

You mean the ease of restoring Windows. Why do i have to click 2 times in Win 11 to select another window on the taskbar ?
There are a lot of security guarantees that go away with a rooted phone, and I wonder if "in the wild" more often rooted devices are malware than user rooted.

From the perspective of a company, these things boil down to numbers. They have the data, and they can review it. If they find a correlation like that they lost large numbers to rooted phone, they will ban it.

I have had email forwarders and @protonmail.com accounts get blocked only because they are more likely to be fraudulent and companies can just block because the hassle isn't worth it.
I’ve never seen good CRT physical emulation. But I also suspect it’s been long enough, that I just wouldn’t be able to tell the difference unless I had my old childhood bedroom Sanyo CRT to compare it to.

I’m not sure these come close because there’s some sort of physical element that would be hard to replicate unless you mapped the DPI of a screen to the “DPI” of a CRT.

Otherwise you’re just creating a weird facsimile in the same way that a lot of indie artists don’t produce pixel art that is actually pixel aligned. It’s ugly.
It is a truth table, but normally there isn't a way to dump them.
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelinger_Archives

Internet Archive collection: https://archive.org/details/prelinger
> Either all their hats are some other color or only one hat is green. This means you have to assume the liar has a hat. How do we know that?

Which is another listener’s bias: is lying by omission a lie?

All my horses are unicorns. I don’t have any horses, nor unicorns. So it’s true but also not.
SuperCollider: A synthesis and algorithmic composition platform
Not available in the EU:
https://help.openai.com/en/articles/10250692-sora-supported-...
I guess the kind of extreme effort that doesn't usually have a promising conclusion is more common in scientific research, or experimentation in general, but sometimes you just have to get accustomed to it.

Eventually it doesn't really make any difference if there's no breathtaking milestone because it turned out to be impossible by nature, ran out of runway, or lost interest after a more or less valiant attempt.

What can be gained is the strength to overcome the near-impossible next time and all it has to do is be a certain degree less-impossible and you know whether that would take you over the goal line like few others because you've been there.

Without even worrying as much about whether you will lose interest or not, that's a lot less stress and pressure when you think about it.

This can enable you more realistically to succeed in other areas where peers may find it impossible or not be able to do as well without as big an inconclusive project behind them.
I have a little monograph written many decades ago on Dimensional Analysis. Since reading it, not quite so many decades ago, I simply dismiss puzzles of this sort because the two sides of the equations are dimensionally incongruent. This means that I have to try to guess the state of mind of the questioner rather than solve a logic problem.

It's a handy stance because I'm no good at either solving logic problems or getting inside other people's heads!

Another on that really irritates me is the kind that presents a series of integers and asks which integer comes next. Any integer will do, you just have to fit the appropriate polynomial.
Though they are necessary for the given functionality.

So let's say that by default you have a light theme. If the user selects a dark theme, you need the cookie. Then my reading is that no banner would be necessary.
It does but there's no actual way to get legal recourse for false DMCA notices or anything similar. The legal system is stacked for the abusers to have their way and the victims to have no recourse, regardless of how egregious the abuse is.
Wish they’d followed their previous MO of releasing stuff with no warning or buildup.

Results won’t match the hype.
And it is also what makes the most sense if you are using all_of, usually.

For example, you may want to use all_of to check if all the preconditions are met before running a command, is there are no preconditions, then you can run the command.

Or, in a test report, a test case is successful if it and all of its sub-cases are successful, if there are no sub-cases, then that part is considered successful.

Or, you are making a task runner, you exit if all the tasks are completed, if there are no tasks, then you can exit immediately.

Saying that all of nothing is true is the most appropriate behavior, both in theory and in practice.
I’d say it’s more akin to Dark Energy than anything Black Hole related.

DE is some sort of entropy that is being added to our cosmos in an exponential way over historic time. It began at a point a few billion in to our history.
It works better for everybody when these puzzles are told as inside jokes instead.
I agree with you completely. I was talking about the parsing being easy with this, not referring to the outputs being correct in reality.

You can get awful results with poorly defined constraints.
No, this quantum computer cannot factorize the large composite numbers that we use for modern RSA. Even for the numbers that it can factor, I don't think it will be faster than a decent classical computer.
No, that's not what that means.

Not sure what you mean by the "that" when you say "if that's true", but there is nothing in this thread or by google that is anywhere close to breaking encryption.
Totally agree, and wouldn't really comment on it except to say that the cheapest Sawstop is $1-3k even on blackfriday. That's not really in the same league as other jobsite saws that are $100-300.

Each one really is a ~10x step in cost above the other. Of course quality and safety/reliability are higher too, and I know which I'd buy. But, comparable only sort-of.
From Benjamin Pierce's Types and Programming Languages, which is basically the definitive work on types:

> A type system is a tractable syntactic method for proving the absence of certain program behaviors by classifying phrases according to the kinds of values they compute.

And later on:

> A type system can be regarded as calculating a kind of static approximation to the runtime behaviors of the terms in a program. ... Terms like "dynamically typed" are arguably misnomers and should probably be replaced by "dynamically checked," but the usage is standard.

The definitions you're using are the ones that he identifies as "arguably misnomers" but "standard". That is, they're fine as colloquial definitions but they are not the ones used in academic works. Academically speaking, a type system is a method of statically approximating the behavior of a computer program in order to rule out certain classes of behavior. Dynamic checks do not count.

As I've said elsewhere, I don't have a problem with people using the colloquial definitions. I do have a problem with people actively correcting someone who's using the more correct academic definitions. We should have both sets in our lexicons and be understanding when someone uses one versus the other.
Ask here or on reddit?
Not impressive compare to the opensource video models out there, I anticipated some physics/VR capabilities, but it's basically just a marketing promotion to "stay in the game"...
This is how I feel about drones.
Table saws are dramatically more dangerous than band saws. When a band saw blade makes contact with whatever it's cutting, the force is in a single direction. Down at the table which provides material support. Table saws use a rotating blade and often a fence system. Lots of things can go wrong there, but it typically involves binding between the fence and the blade which can lead to kickback which can send chunks of wood through a wall or potentially more dangerous is it can cause the wood to twist violently into the blade risking bringing your hand towards the blade.

Here's a saw stop in action, so it's not gory. But look at how FAST things go wrong here and how violent the interaction was.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Whatcouldgowrong/comments/11s53ew/w...

Compare that to a band saw in use, and you can see fingers quite close to the to the cutting edge and still have good control over the work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlHe9gOphBw
Shader based CRT emulation works well on 2K+ screens. Much more convincing than the crude scanline emulation with mask images.
Biological evolution occurs on the backs of millions of deaths.
Right? Does TLS1.3 have the underpinnings to use quantum-proof encryption algos?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/post-quantu...

https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2024/10/09...
Howie Did It – 3D Printing a Printed Circuit Board [video]
> Why not? Generally the zero-value for a union type is just the first option, which can be useful or not. You can wrap it in an option type to ensure it's been initialized too.

Races with the GC, if you try to be smart and have unboxed options.

Interfaces are similarly boxed to avoid such races, and make the rest of the language faster.

> If Go's semantics mean it's always a nullable pointer, then that still doesn't make union types useless. There's still value in knowing that "if there's a value, it's one of these Y options".

At that point, what's the benefit over a (boxed) interface and existing type assertions/switch?

Besides, if the options are your own types, you can also add an unexported method to the interface to seal it. And then, if you go this route, you can also have exhaustiveness checks with existing tooling.
Unfortunate that they deleted it and didn't / couldn't lock the account and flag all its submissions as suspect while leaving them in place for review.
I feel like no other embedded scripting language will ever surpass lua. Neovim, roblox and all my projects that needed scripting support use lua, its my first choice.
The implementation on Chrome for Android is really ugly
> Why not hopefully more? Less? Is mathematics this inaccessible to the other 99.9%?

I think it meant "hopefully at least 0.1%." (I can imagine someone who feels that it's hopefully at most 0.1%, but probably that person wouldn't be kindly disposed towards efforts to fool people into being interested in complex mathematical topics, as your parent seems to be.)
Serious question: is this better than current text-to-video models like Hailuo?
Nothing to do with the nature of the language. Rather it is to do with the nature of humans. Rust code when it is old enough to be referred to as "fossilised" will also likely evoke the same (lack of) interest in large scale refactors. The next generation will then repeat your comment for the trendy language of their times.
As a native English speaker, I'd have said "all my hats are green" is untrue when you don't own any hats, meaning (A) isn't actually implied to be true.
The fact the guy is a liar means he's allowed to imply he owns hats when he doesn't, right??
I dont see any userguides about the actual app. Just installation guides.
Any ETA on that?

for example is there a way to isolate an ICP/user-type to do outreach to?

thanks
> a "hermetic" subset of Python

That's funny: I've been using bazel (and previously blaze) for well over a decade, but it has never once occurred to me to think of starlark as having anything at all to do with Python! I can't see anything about it which is distinctively pythonic.
Pricing:

Plus Tier (20$/month)

- Up to 50 priority videos (1,000 credits)

- Up to 720p resolution and 5s duration

Pro Tier (200$/month)

- Up to 500 priority videos (10,000 credits)

- Unlimited relaxed videos

- Up to 1080p resolution, 20s duration and 5 concurrent generations

- Download without watermark

more info: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/10245774-sora-billing-cr...
> In the world of logic puzzles, it is understood that a "liar" never makes a true statement, and that "vacuously true" statements are false.

I agree with the first stipulation, but, outside of Lewis Carroll's puzzles, I think that the second isn't true. For example, I believe you'll find just the opposite in Raymond Smullyan's books.
Sell your cereal to free school breakfast programs so those kids are literally spoon fed your stuff by the government. When they complain to their parents they want it at home, make sure you can trade food stamps for your cereal.
article titled "Why No Amount of Public Money Will Buy a Euro-Amazon." The piece examines the challenges Europe faces in replicating the success of e-commerce giants like Amazon, despite potential public funding efforts. It discusses issues related to scale, market dynamics, consumer preferences, and the necessity for substantial investment in innovation.
I've found using these and similar tools that the amount of prompts and iteration required to create my vision (image or video in my mind) is very large and often is not able to create what I had originally wanted. A way to test this is to take a piece of footage or an image which is the ground truth, and test how much prompting and editing it takes to get the same or similar ground truth starting from scratch. It is basically not possible with the current tech and finite amounts of time and iterations.
The article describes all of this
MKBHD's review of the new Sora release:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY2x0TyKzIQ
... and it uses SIMD encoding because the tooling made it available and convenient (and someone was willing to work on that, which is also a benefit of Rust). Tools matter.
Datalist is a great hidden gem, and most websites with HTML forms would improve by replacing some inputs with datalists. Datalists are also great for making a simple and manually curated search field for small websites, although a little bit of JS is required. But nothing else.

The only common place where datalists do not work is when the user has an iPhone with Google Keyboard.
There's no way I'm trusting the safety of my fingers to today's ML abilities reading a live camera feed.
This is the first "rewrite it in rust" reason I've heard that actually makes total sense, congratulations. Ability to safely hack on ancient code really does sound attractive
There's an early xkcd for this sort of riddle: https://xkcd.com/169/

The article mentions a maths exam, and of course the answer to the hats puzzle is very straightforward if you convert to statements about sets and logic in the way the teacher expects.

But converting ambiguous language into logical statements by taking everything extremely literally is the opposite of a useful life lesson, so I think it's a terrible exam question.
https://old.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/
I bet you $5 any heavily utilized k8s cluster has at least one go service running and crashing because someone forgot to check for error.
> Strong/weak is a meaningless dichotomy

Strong/weak is not a dichotomy. It's a spectrum. That's why folks argue over where a language lands in the spectrum. OTOH, static (compile-time) vs dynamic (run-time) is a dichotomy. There's not really any in between. It's clear when and where typing occurs. So there's nothing to argue over.

> Typed versus untyped is, on the other hand, a rigorously defined academic distinction

A typed language is one that has a type system. Python has a type system. It's typed.
You seem to be hell-bent on a disagreement. Let's invest our time better, for example, making music. Do you have any musical works that can be listened to?
If you have none how can you say they are specifically brown? You could say they are any color then which makes them being just 1 specific color not true. Your non-existent cats aren't brown, they are every color or even no color.

Maybe even more accurately they aren't brown, they are an undefined color.

I'm not really satisfied saying that the characteristics of something that doesn't exist can be anything. I am satisfied saying the characteristics are undefined though.
Related is the raven paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_paradox), where for the statement "All of my hats are green", seeing _anything_ non-green that is not one of my hats is evidence in favour of the overall statement.
Have you seen some of the display options offered by the RetroTink scaler? I think some of them look pretty good, but I'm not a hardcore CRT enthusiast, so maybe my standards are just lower than yours :P
The page says "coming soon." I guess I'm wondering if there are any benchmarks or other way to compare this to current models.
True! That said, vectorization is also available and convenient in C++. I'm just pointing out that the headline is kind of saying "aluminum Tesla Model S outperforms steel-bodied sports car" --- it emphasizes the wrong thing

You can also write shitty slow code in Rust, and as the language becomes more popular, we'll see lower quality code. That's why it's so important to attribute performance wins to the real factors: we don't want to create the impression that translating a bad algorithm to Rust will somehow produce a good algorithm.
Though I like the novelty of AI generated content, it kind of sucks dead internet theory is becoming more and more prevalent. YouTube (and all of the web) is already being spammed with AI generated slop and "better" video/text/audio models only make this worse. At some point we will cross the threshold of "real" and "generated" content being posted on the web and there's no stopping that.
I think steeper decline is at about 37ish years for women.

There's also some deterioration as men age, but it's less obvious.

Some say the combined age should not be over 80. Shrug.

(Should be obvious fertility varies greatly between individuals.)
No API/per video generation? Huh.
That’s around more than 20+ VC-backed AI video generation startups destroyed in a microsecond and scrambling to compete against Sora in the race to zero.

Many of them will die, but may the AI slop continue anyway.
Not available in the EU: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/10250692-sora-supported-...
Because when kids go on the internet they always end up in regulated age appropriate areas.
I wish there was an app database that says what works and what does not.

For instance, I tried installing android auto from the google play store and it failed miserably. However, in the grapheneOS store, you can install it there.

That is entirely not trivial for me and having to go read the docs on every app I want is rather annoying.

Other apps that do not work for me at all are anything wallet related, specifically ticket master. For concerts I have to use someone elses phone which is inconvenient.
What's the best open source video model right now?
The registrant is itch.io. Sounds like victim blaming.
Love the callout of them definitely training on his own videos
Did you appreciate my comment's real meaning, that one can have empathy for everyone else too, who need to work with this data?

Another solution is, of course, to give everyone usernames they don't want. E.g. your user name is your employee number. Or your department plus three letters from your name that happen to make your username unique. I've seen both.

I also extend my empathy to those who, after choosing a username nobody can type, don't get invited to meetings, don't get messages, are never referred to as the domain expert, because how can I add "习近平" to a meeting, if I can't even search for their username?

Say even "mårten" is not showing up when I search my email, because those are not the same letters as "marten". Meh, emacron knows almost as much on this topic, so I'll just invite him instead.

If you're already powerful enough, then people will be forced to copy-paste "mårten". If you're not already powerful enough, then you don't get invited at all, because that doesn't scale.
I haven’t used a bandsaw a lot, but I have seen some photos of gnarly lost fingers.

I use a table saw quite a bit and think there are more ways things can go wrong, most of which stem from kickback which happens in a split second. The wood will either fly back and hit you, or your hand will be pulled into the blade and you will likely lose a finger.

Both machines can be safe with the proper precautions. That said, I still enjoy my SawStop as insurance for my fingers since I still write software for my day job.