skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Too many people are killed by supersized cars. This new rule could help
Audiofoolery snake oil sellers are the worst
> Seems like you don't buy into the swiss cheese model of accidents. Because other safety mechanisms and good practices exist, it doesn't mean that there's not reasons to add additional safety.

I think it's reasonable to say "we have done enough" at some point though. We can debate where the point is, but safety is not an unalloyed good. It has a cost, and reasonable people can disagree over whether a particular safety invention has enough ROI to justify its existence.

For example, we wouldn't countenance banning all motor vehicles even though we could eliminate all car related deaths with that one simple trick. We would get a fair bit of payoff, but the cost would just be too high to justify it. Similarly, if we could inflict a very minor cost on everyone in the world to prevent one death per year, that would be too low of a payoff even though the cost is very low.

So yes, we can always add more layers of defense against accidents (or security incidents). But eventually, the juice isn't worth the squeeze and you stop. So I don't think the Swiss cheese model really can justify any particular intervention by itself; you have to evaluate the specifics of whether the particular intervention is worth it.
Oh sorry, just realised I replied to my own comment instead of yours :D see my response above!
Dhall is another configuration language that's deliberately Turing-incomplete. Though its Haskell-inspired syntax turns people off who aren't already Haskell programmers. It's based on calculus of constructions.
I'm using dynadot for my .at domains
Counting in Irish
>"You put in text, you get out an image, no more need for discernment or skill or labor."

This sentiment is reminiscent to the attitudes around photography when it first became practical. People wondered how photography could be considered a form of art when all one had to do was point and press a button. The amount of effort is minuscule compared to what it takes to depict the same subject using traditional media. That being said, there is a lot of skill necessary to capture a photograph properly; lighting, composition, shutter speed, exposure, and so on. I agree that generative AI images will disrupt the market segment for stock photos and "clip art" used for articles, presentations, et cetera.

There will be a need to study and acquire skills related to the use of generative AI image creation. While technology will make simple prompts "good enough" for most outputs, just as our smartphone cameras make taking a picture "good enough", people will still need to study and practice in order to make high quality output.
I wouldn’t say it is wrong per se. It certainly defies the conventional translation into FOL, but there is no a priori reason to pick the conventional formalism of FOL for this problem.
That, and the Indian Ocean territory will cease to exist in the (very) near future, so the .io domains might be going the way of the dodo.
I won't be registering any new ones at least, and recommending everyone to stay away from them.
Supabase CTF
LOL. What does it do? DMA Gladiator, FPGA DMA with Custom Unique PCILeech Firmware

For cheating in games?
A game to test your LLM prompting skills
That's the conclusion I came to as well. That said, for whatever reason, the part that was most confusing to me was realizing that the logic puzzle was about the idea that the statement itself had to be false. For whatever reason, I glossed over the phrase "a liar who always lies" the first time and just read "liar" everywhere else, so it wasn't obvious to me what the intent was behind using the word "liar" was.

Personally, I'd change the original wording (from the quoted italic section) to "someone who only tells lies" if I were the author. It's probably specific to me, but I'm always thrown by phrases like that because it seems like it's trying to differentiate in some way from someone else; surely there isn't anyone who "always lies" who _isn't_ a liar, so why say that? It's distracting to me in the same way as if someone said "the speech-capable human being who speaks only in lies". Normally it wouldn't bother me, but because puzzles like this often seem to be used to try to illustrate some smug point about how bad people are at logic, phrasing things in an unnecessarily confusing way just makes it seem even more smug (see https://xkcd.com/169/).
Announcement blog post: https://supabase.com/blog/hack-the-base
The book is from basically the “experimental music” school of electronic music. The idea was/is that music will be completely transmuted by electronics and computers, leaving traditional music behind. Here “traditional music” means almost everything people actually listen to, from orchestras to GarageBand electronica to pop.

The claim may be a bit aspirational right now, but in theory “electronic music” subsumes all music. Or enlarges music so much that traditional musical ideas are special cases, not necessarily relevant.

I’m trying to pitch this properly as a very cool concept. But I no longer believe it will happen in my lifetime.
Nice work! Looks beautiful and sounds great.
I suspect a misreading of D) as "The liar has at least one non-green hat" which, in fairness, feels weird that wasn't included in the list.
Shuttle was "reusable" after inspecting every part and replacing half. Starship is obv going to be better. But that doesn't mean they won't still fall far short. And without transparency from SpaceX about Falcon 9 refurbishment, nobody knows how reuse affects operating profit.

It's a nice story, like FSD, or that robot. Wen real? IDK.
My description of the power set is by definition allowing all to imply some
Are Free LLMs (like llama) really Open Source?
Something I've been thinking about recently, and I'm curious to hear how much you agree: Calling most free LLMs 'open source' feels misleading. Sharing weights and architecture without the training data, hyperparameters, or training scripts is like distributing a compiled binary while claiming the software is open source. The training process is the real source code (or at least, a big part of it) — without it, these models are just a black box with an open interface, not truly open. Just a thought...
As others have noted in the comments, if the liar has no hats, then "All my hats are green" is, in some formal understanding, true. The liar cannot make true statement so must in fact have at least one hat.

That makes A) a good candidate.

But E) can also be true — and in fact both A) and E) can both be correct.
Is it open weights, not open source? Otherwise GitHub link expected.
Who's doing something about the CEO and what are they doing?

What would taking meaningful action to solve the issue mean to you in each case?
Also, I'm not sure that those two affirmations are equivalent:

~∀x (~IsAHatOfMine(x) ∨ Green(x))

∃x ~(~IsAHatOfMine(x) ∨ Green(x))
Don't forget the toilets. I am sure the members of parliament are very interested on what happenes in a school toilet. I mean, with some of those things, they work on a daily basis. /s
As I said in another comment [0], it depends on what definition of types we're using. But if we're going to pedantically jump down someone's throat correcting their usage (in this case OP's usage of "untyped"), we should at least use the most pedantically correct definition, which is the one used by academics who study type systems and which pointedly excludes dynamic checks.

I have no problem with people using the other terminology in casual usage—I do so myself more often than not. I do have a problem with people pedantically correcting usage that is actually more correct than their preferred usage. I dislike pedantry in general, but I especially dislike incorrect pedantry.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42367659
I think the opinionated approach is what made json “win” the format battle more than anything else. If you’ve been around enterprise in the early 00’s you’ll know the horror that XML became when people weren’t using it in any sane manner. Which a lot of people simply weren’t, for whatever reason. Now this is anecdotal but over the decades I’ve never had issues parsing json, and I largely attribute its strictness to that. Yes I suppose you could abuse it, but I wouldn’t have to parse your nonsense, which couldn’t be said for XML.

I don’t have anything against XML by the way, it was purely horrible to work with because people were using it in so many weird ways. Personally I prefer toml, but I guess we all have our preferences.
Added to my read-list
OpenWrt is also very difficult to safely upgrade on some devices which I would also consider as a huge downside. I finally gave up and bought an old Dell off eBay and installed OpnSense and am much happier.
> If someone invested their money in TIPS over the last 30 or 40 years thinking they will be able to buy real estate because TIPS protected them from inflation

TIPS have been available less than 30 years.
404 Media Objects to a Texas Subpoena for Our Reporting
Yes, agreed.

I guess the typing would be for the size of the integer that you work with. For example, x86_64 assembly has different prefixes to indicate what part of a larger register you are using: 8 (lower), 8 (upper), 16 bit, 32 bit, and 64 bit itself.

There are other "typed" operations, such as branching for unsigned vs. signed integers (think JA vs JG), or SAR vs SHR (signed arithmetic shift vs. unsigned arithmetic shift—one preserved the division logic of shifting for signed integers by repeating the MSB instead of adding zeroes when shifting).

While I'm not too familiar with them (but have been meaning to learn more for years!!), SIMD instructions probably also have similar ideas of having different types for sizes of arrays.
GitHub doesn't really seem to prioritise security. I just reported a nasty way to smuggle code[0] into Actions pipelines to them and got a classic "expected behaviour WONTFIX” response. It's exactly the kind of sneaky behaviour that the Jia Tans out there would use in an attack.

[0] (see end of) https://cedwards.xyz/github-actions-are-an-impending-securit...
Because gen pop will oo and aah and politicians who don’t know better will think it will beat China or Russia so it gets tax breaks and funding
It's also cosmology, but for what it's worth, the solar system is moving at about 230km/s around the milky way so you could say every one of us is moving at such a number.
Semantic Retrieval at Walmart
> Am I insane or is the world insane?

I don't know. What I can see is that few people are paying attention. About four variants of this news has appeared in the last hour and yours is the only comment on any of them.
Wasn't aware of that. Yes, I've no clue what I'm talking about. But if buyback gains are also taxed as income when cashing out, what is the advantage of buybacks then?
No, the perjury aspect of a DMCA takedown (which isn't even applicable here as that's not what they did) is if you don't actually represent the person that you claim to be filing a takedown on behalf of.
Nevertheless there is a huge difference between composing or improvising a musical piece, and programming a filter or oscillator.

Btw. "audio engineering" is what audio engineers are doing (see e.g. https://aes2.org/), and yet another completely different profession.
In my opinion it's a bad practice, and rewriting code to be typeable is a good idea for refactoring.

But I write Python for some time now, and I know what you mean. I have nightmares about codebases with dynamically generated class fields for example (though I heard ruby is even worse)
> Funny, because I often see people say have similar objections for buybacks. It seems like nobody is happy with corporate profits returning to shareholders

Nobody is happy with corporate profits returning to shareholders at the expense of workers and customers, at least not as transparently as it is done now.

Wages have remained flat in the US for several decades now. It’s starting to have a real impact on the economic and social conditions of the country. “But what about the shareholders?” isn’t going to be a valid excuse to someone who pays for coverage against medical costs.

There is no economic system, or business model within said system, in which there is unlimited value to be transferred. Humans will assert their rights at some point or another.
Welcome to big corpos.

If you’re not pushing the envelope to be noticed more and build your promotion packet, you’re coasting.
Knight TV Resurrection (2018)
Global ad market to surpass $1T for first time
How could this happen? We're storing deploy credentials in GitHub, and configure fully automated deploy pipelines using YAML and Shell. Escaping 101. xD

https://xkcd.com/1638/
What does it even mean to be right mathematically here? If I invent a mathematical structure where I define elements 1 and 2, an operation + and a relation = that posits that 1+2=2, I can say that mathematically one apple plus two apples equals two apples. Would I be mathematically right or would I be applying a wrong/not-even-wrong/linguistically deceiving /incoherent model to the real world?
I'll say things were better in the past. It's obviously subjective, but I hate the direction things are going.

The user is now viewed as a security threat to their own device, the hyper-churn culture of the javascript ecosystem is now embedding in other areas even systems (like Android, as you point out), "updates" for apps and to a lesser but growing extent OSes, are routinely pushed and forced on users regardless whether they contain new bugs/regressions or horrible UI/UX changes, more and more software is becoming proprietary SaaS and "subscription" based, and backwards compatibility is for the birds. In the name of "security", tech companies and even individual devs are turning our own home networks into opaque spy apparatuses that make network connections that we (the owners of the network) can't even inspect. Even maintaining self-hosted apps is becoming a several-hours-per-week job.

It feels like during the late 00s and early 10s we had some real golden years of open source, but now the poisonous engineering culture that pushes the above things is poised to squash it as a "daily driver" for people. For example, once Microsoft completes their requirements for TPMS and can do hardware attestation like Apple and Google, the ratchet of websites not working (or not working completely) unless the device passes hardware attestation will start, and it will make life on a Linux laptop/desktop similar to how Tor is now where you get endless CAPTCHA hell and nobody cares because you're in a tiny minority of users and many of the tools that provide technological liberation for an individual are also tools used by gray and black hat actors.

And I haven't even gotten to the Apple-ization of everything where it's becoming all about building walled gardens. I remember when compatibility was a selling point of hardware/software.

It's not all bad of course, but it does feel like a lot more bad than good is developing. Happy Monday everyone!
I didn't say that - I mentioned that, previously, 8080 and 8085 shared the same ISA with different implementations.
This is generally the case for the vast majority of puzzles, 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.

I've rarely encountered a case where it is isnt an extreme lack of self-awareness in the questioner -- eg., being extremely overfit to language/notation/etc. localised to their own area of expertise.
I think you vastly underestimate how common and strong the anger is, and how low belief in following the letter of the law is. It's unlikely, but not winning the lottery unlikely.
Agreed. I bin this with other “rules lawyering,” which usually feels unfair, uninteresting, and unsatisfying.

It’s why puzzlemaking a truly challenging and impressive skill. It must be fair, a challenge, and obvious in retrospect.

I think it’s why the twist in Bioshock worked so well for me: it was right there in plain sight numerous times, while other twists in mystery games/films elicit a groan.
Optical mice fail with too much dust on the lens. It's risky to depend on a vision system in a machine that is generating dust.
Ah... lateral thinking. You reminded me of this joke https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/the-barometer-problem/
If you have the content of the OCR as text, yes!

You can send to the API metadata as long as it's JSON. The results will give you back the original text, the highlight closest to your query and the metadata. You can then pipe some or all of this information to your LLM.

Quick disclaimer though, our code as-is today would not support 3M documents, we optimised for speed on our first launch, and everything is in RAM (wait until our next update).
Great Concept.
I don’t know what the best book would be, but I found this extract from Andy Farnell’s book “Designing Sound” to be a very helpful introduction to Pure Data:

http://aspress.co.uk/ds/pdf/pd_intro.pdf

Another useful book is “Loadbang - ProgrammingElectronic Music in Pd” by Johannes Kreidler. The 2nd edition is evidently out of print, but a free download is available here:

https://www.wolke-verlag.de/musikbuecher/johannes-kreidler-l...
The Rewards of Writing
If you need additional CI minutes for an open source project, you can apply for the GitLab for Open Source program. Program members get access to GitLab Ultimate and 50,000 compute minutes per month.

You can find the application here: https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/open-source/join/
This is the first time I've seen this. It looks quite promising for taking care of a logical planning phase. But you still need an execution engine like Calcite or Datafusion (or an LLVM IR based executor)
You can find slackers in every position. But if they were people consistently doing zero work they wouldn't survive en the tech world. In my opinion the biggest slackers are probably in research and in govt jobs, as these are jobs where performance is hard to measure, especially in academia where you can slog off and have no results for years
Actually we certainly should not do everything in our power to prevent crime. The net costs would be way too high. We tolerate a certain amount of crime on purpose because preventing all preventable crimes would be prohibitively expensive and restrictive on society.
Knight TV and keyboard · PDP-10/its Wiki
Nice article OP. I and a great many others suffer from the same struggles of bringing personal projects to “completion”, and I’ve gotta respect the resilience in the length of time you hung in there.
However, not to be overly pedantic, but I always felt “data science” was an exploratory exercise to discover insights into a given data set. I always personally filed the efforts to create the pipeline and associated automation (i.e. identify, capture, and store a given data set - more commonly referred to as “ETL”) as a “data engineering” task, which these days is considered a different specialty.
Perhaps if you scope your problem a little smaller, you may yet be able to capture something demonstrably valuable to others (and something you might consider “finished”). You’d be surprised how simple something that addresses a real issue can be to be able to provide real value for others.

Nice work and great effort.
Given so many kids watch the state-funded CBeebies, which doesn't need ads, or YouTube or Netflix, which presumably this won't cover, this is probably just another chance for TV companies to stop broadcasting kids' content at all.
Yes! All of the articles by this author are insightful and well written.
I used to host my TV torrent tracker with one of these that would ignore literally everything. Was expensive, but was factored into the costs.
Dado stack. It's a smaller diameter than the blade. You'd have to be pretty lazy to not just reinstall the riving knife when you put a normal blade back on, but I could see that happening.
The rationale I've always heard for having the $ at the beginning of the number was so that a handwritten value on, say, a check couldn't be modified by sticking a number at the beginning. 1.00$ could be forged into 91.00$, but not so with $1.00.
Hey, Mael here

I'll answer any questions you may have with Rohith.

We're on the Indian and UK time zones, so if you ask a question after 11 am PST, you will have to wait until tomorrow for a reply!
Hello! I have done this sort of research internally at companies and have coordinated with the world’s leading researchers in developer productivity for a long time.

Myself and every other leading researcher in the field that I have spoken to have serious concerns about this supposed “research.” For example, you can see a post here from Margaret Anne-Storey, who is arguably the world’s leading researcher in developer productivity:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/margaret-anne-storey-8419462_...

I share her concerns. I have asked Yegor multiple times when he plans to publish his research methodology for review by others and he has not even answered my question. That is, he hasn’t even said “it’s under review and we will publish it by _____.” He’s certainly argued with me about the validity of his results, but suspiciously has not actually published any research methodology as far as I have been able to find.

This is very concerning, because I have worked with this type of data set extensively. I am possibly one of the world’s leading experts in using and analyzing this type of data, and I can tell you that it is fraught with data anomalies of the sort that would easily cause an incorrect result here. For example, you might believe all developers are working in GitHub, but then it turns out the company has 10% of developers contributing to some other source control system. Or one of your GitHub orgs isn’t instrumented correctly. Or some of those people aren’t actually software engineers even though they have a title that _looks_ like that. The list goes on and on, and these are _real_ problems that happen in the data at _every_ company.

Im frankly shocked that the Washington Post or any other credible media organization is publishing this without any verification or background on the validity of the research.

I am fully willing to believe that some engineers don’t do work, or do very little. I’ve seen it. But if you’re going to claim that you did research for a University, with the University’s name on it, I expect things like a published paper, understanding the margin of error on your published numbers, etc. especially in a field that is so prone to errors in the data.
They fired the Python team in a round of rolling layoffs on nearly every team, immediately replaced them with a lower cost-of-living-adjusted team, and left the infrastructure basically identical.

The fact that they were all fired is definitely evidence in favor of the claim that there were problems Google noticed, but combined with the rest of the picture I'm not sure that decision supports that hypothesis.
People are still anywhere near honest with these things?
Qualified dividends are not capital gains, even if they are taxed at the same rate
This is what I came here to say. Tech has been pretty central to the tools of professional graphic artists (which include video games) for a long time.

I notice a lot of non-professional artists running to the rescue of artists. I suspect this is in part because there are a lot of young people who have pursued a degree in art and have been frustrated by the mismatch of their expectations in the commercial world. There is a lot of romanticism.

I myself went to art school (MFA). Actually I was really grossed out by the big Art gallery scene. It professes to be open minded, anti establishment and non commercial but it is extremely narrow in politics, hugely elitist and deeply oriented around big money. That’s ok, but I wouldn’t claim that Art has any moral superiority.