skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The reason Christians are encouraged to bring the gospel to non believers is commonly referred to as the great commission. However this should be given and not forced .

I'm familiar, but it's tangential to what I'm saying. I'm referring to the belief that you should only engage with non-believers because it represents a recruitment opportunity. It's not a belief that I see preached (often), but it's definitely one that I see people practice. The view that relationships with non-believers is inherently adversarial is one that I don't appreciate.
Exemplar code in python, shows the benefit in rust. o---kaaaaay.

So the outcome is "for this compiled rust, around 1m records it gets better"

But you didn't actually prove a general case, you proved "for a good optimising rust compiler" didn't you?

Maybe I'm over-thinking it. Maybe this does just become simple, working-set-locality stuff.

I could take the lesson: for less than 10m things, on modern hardware with more than 4 cores and more than 4GB stop worrying and just code in the idiom which works for you.
We have just gone through the most massive event in this category in the lifetime of most people alive today, and the next such event is quite openly being planned for execution.

Each and every one of us knows very well by now how we reacted to mass psychological movements and how we will react to the next one, which is of course the next great war.
> if linear algebra is really a part of the day-to-day job [...] then you’re hiring specialists

It kind of bothers me that the parent and other readers here are passing off knowing linear algebra as some kind of esoteric skill. Linear algebra is a year 2 course in a undergraduate eduation. There are polished libraries to make it fast.

Unless you mean enough knowledge to be writing linear algebra libraries, there is no need to consider this skill a high hurdle.
Yes, exactly, I would (naïvely) assume it's common among e.g. ML specialists, who are in high demand and thus hard to recruit. I'm sure there are a lot, but if I had to extrapolate from experience ("OK, who's good at math, hands up?") I would say it's less than 20% of coder genpop.
Google recently had a press release where they decided to make the silly and largely pointless claim,

> [Willow] lends credence to the notion that quantum computation occurs in many parallel universes

There is nothing illegal about this, but this silly attempt at making the press release seem even more important than it was (which was unnecessary anyways) wound up detracting a bunch of attention for little benefit. (Ultimately, it didn't really matter much: most of the focus was still on the accomplishment, but it's still a pointless own-goal.)

This is basically the same thing. Of course, it isn't illegal to use a term wrong, but it's going to inevitably detract from the things that matter. There's plenty of other words in the English language that can be used in place of the words "open source". Doesn't matter what you choose: source-available, fair source, etc. It's all fine. Just don't use "open source", that's confusing because it isn't consistent with how the term open source is used.

For better or worse, Open source is firmly-established industry jargon by this point. There's little point in arguing about it because right or wrong, we can go 100 comments deep and the status quo will be absolutely identical by the end. It's not worth it.
It's quite obvious that it's not universal, and that's a shame. If it were, we'd probably be more open to making changes to longstanding institutions which are no longer serving us.
> "Why are we open-sourcing the Wasm backend?"

I remember this debate when the SSPL was debuted, and I think for the most part people have switched to using the term "source available" for licenses like this, but I don't think it occurred to me before now: what's the "verb" form of "source available"? The best I can come up with is "making the source available".

I mostly find this all pretty silly because "available" seems to basically be a synonym of a certain meaning of the word "open". It reminds me a lot of the whole "free as in freedom" versus "free as in beer", except for the difference between the two types of "open" being way more ambiguous. As far as I can tell, the question mostly boils down to disagreements about how "open" something needs to be in order to qualify; in other words, it's about the degree of openness and where to draw the line. With things like this, I always tend to prefer drawing the line somewhere as easily identified as possible, so drawing the line at "is the source literally possible to obtain or not?" feels like a much more obvious question to answer than "is the list of things I'm allowed to do with the source sufficient for me to do the things that I think I should be allowed to do?".

I recognize that this is already a lost battle, but it really feels like the consensus opinion had a lot more to do with posturing than what people actually would expect words to mean, which is disappointing to me as a descriptivist.
Your messages and emails involve at least two parties.

If the choice is between making it effectively impossible for you to give Meta all the messages and emails between us, and making it a trivial decision in a nagging popup, I'd prefer we keep it impossible.

If there was infrastucture to support mutual consent, I'd be more inclined to buy into your premise. But that's not coming any time soon.
I am assuming that the tool provides a list and asks for confirmation before deleting? Does it just go and automatically delete stuff in the background at any time?

edit: yes I see a "dry run" option, which is how I would use it. I also see a "scheduled" option which is probably what you're criticizing. Hard to tell, you're quicker with the insulting than the arguing.
If I was watching a gritty crime film and one of the criminals said “alright lads, looks like it time to do some pig butchering”, my assumption would be they would be ambushing some cops. If the next scene was them setting up a Facebook profile it would seem comically mismatched.
> Is this because immediate mode GUI rendering is inefficient?

No.

https://www.forrestthewoods.com/blog/proving-immediate-mode-...
Two-inch long 'murder hornets' eradicated from US
I'm not sure I follow. So you failed to measure software productivity in lines of code, therefore it follows that "There's No Such Thing as Software Productivity"? Don't you think that giving up after n=1 attempts at measuring software productivity might be a tad too fast to draw a generalized claim of impossibility? I might argue the real lesson learned is "Lines of Code are Not a Measure of Productivity in an Isolated, Toy Example".

I suspect this sort of thing gets promulgated because it kind of massages our ego, like yes, they can measure other sorts of productivity, but not ours, oh no, we're too complex and intelligent, there's no way to measure the deep sorts of work that we do! Which, yes, OK, we're not exactly bricklayers, but surely, if you had to, you could do better.
You can very well at least count the problems that were solved (or deleted) you can also probably measure the value those solutions have in revenue or another metric.

It's still true that measuring lines of code, time spent coding, commits or anything else is at best a proxy of productivity. It's also true that without any code changes problems more often than not don't get solved or we at least can't call the activity software development.
woo, that's a throwback!

Goodbye to an old friend: 1-800-GOOG-411 (2010)

https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/goodbye-to-old-frien...
Forgejo is an ideological fork (not a bad thing) that has chosen to rule out staying abreast of the significantly higher rate of development happening upstream. Consider it to be like Pale Moon instead of Firefox.

Gitea has a great active community and remains MIT license with no CLA.
Yes but those numbers are pre-tax income.
In the real world, your application is running in a container among hundreds or thousands of other containers. The system's resources are also probably being managed by a hypervisor. The CPU is shared among N tenants _and_ is overcommitted. It's not that much to ask to optimize where you can, when it isn't unreasonably difficult.

More importantly, this attitude is precisely why software sucks today. "[CPU, Memory, Disk] is cheap, engineering time isn't." Fuck that. Bad engineering time is _incredibly_ expensive. This is an excuse to not spend time learning the ins and outs of your language, and your hardware.

It also frustrates me to no end that people are so deeply incurious. This seems to only happen in tech, which is baffling considering how incredibly broad and deep the industry is. Instead, everyone clamors to learn the new Javascript abstraction that lets them get even further away from the reality of what the magic boxes are doing.
We just need to make another ticket asking them to comment on this one, then ask HN to upvote it!
That's ineffective action to enable the industry to continue rather than ending it and doing something less dangerous that won't kill millions. Not all motion is progress :rocking horse photo here: - One of Meta's "motivational" posters
Google develops Gemini Creative Partner tools for image editing and animation
So we have:

Call Santa's Hotline (11 points, 1 year ago, 2 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38574125

Hi Santa (8 points, 1 year ago, 4 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38618118

Talk To Santa (2 points, 13 days ago, 8 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42338750

Better Call Santa (10 points, 7 days ago, 5 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42391898

ChatGPT-Santa Mode (43 points, 6 days ago, 7 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42401603

Call From Santa (2 points, 5 days ago) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42409236

.. and now Magic Message Santa (welcome to the club)
Hey I like your project, earned a star from me! When time allows, will take it on a test drive to see how exactly it works with Roslyn/C# data. My C# solution has grown to about 80 projects so it would be good test.
Asking a software engineer to be more productive is akin to asking a mechanical engineer to be more productive. What does that end up looking like? More useless blueprints? It turns out when you ask software engineers to just crank out code, you just get lots of code.
Also perhaps a risk to the patients. Or, if you need to operate that rig on the public roads, everybody.
I would argue that, if the sole differentiating requirement is “must be proficient at linear algebra” (at an undergraduate level), the pay requirements shouldn’t be that different from most other similar jobs. Almost every engineering job will have some domain specific requirements; would you say a job asking for applicants to be “proficient in undergraduate-level fluid dynamics” would require higher pay than any other chemical engineering job? Or, back to SWE, if there’s a requirement to have experience working with microcontrollers, should that job pay more than any other C developer position?

If an SWE job posting has a narrow set of requirements, none of which require particularly high-level education, that means the ideal candidate is a “regular” SWE with experience or knowledge in the field being hired for. It’s not like this aerospace company wants someone who is an expert at linear algebra while also being a full stack dev with intimate understanding of a few major cloud platforms’ offerings and knows how to write windows drivers and does silicon design in their spare time. They’re just looking for a particular type of developer for which there simply may not be any candidates. Yeah, technically you could triple the salary and steal employees from other companies who weren’t looking for jobs, but the economics of that aren’t feasible. If there are n positions and n-a total eligible developers (for some positive a), it doesn’t matter how much you increase pay, there still aren’t going to be enough people to fill the roles. And you’re eventually going to run out of money, because you usually can’t just triple the price of your products.
Maybe I was hopelessly optimistic but I thought Bluesky was going to keep human moderation in the loop and not just "be" a kinder, gentler place, but enforce it.

This article suggests it was happyness and rainbow thinking: It's not actually funding the oversight needed to keep stupid shit out of the feed.

(not on either X or bluesky: I decided socials aren't good for my mental health and I do HN and limited amounts of other interaction online in basically focussed and curated spaces only)
Russians are brown now?
It would be a huge blowout. We didn’t know how to train or eat and athletes smoked and drank substantially more. Meanwhile, the gear evolutions make significant difference.

But take distance running - prior to 1954, nobody had done a sub 4 minute mile. After that was known to be possible multiple people sub 4 minute miled in the following decade. If you sent a top runner back a hundred years they would be able to run a sub 4 minute mile, even with 1920s equipment - and the world record in 1923 was 4:10
Apparently (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42457376) but watch out, they're in Europe (3 points, 13 days ago, 1 comment) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42337072
I'm having a hard time determining if my private repo code is used for training their models. The GitHub Copilot VS Code Extension states:

> Your code is yours. We follow responsible practices in accordance with our Privacy Statement to ensure that your code snippets will not be used as suggested code for other users of GitHub Copilot.

IIRC, I think this statement gave me the initial reassurance I needed to use Copilot many months ago, however I feel like this could be deceptively reassuring. Does it mean they can use my code for training and suggestions to other users after changing the variable names?

I tried to dig deeper. The section on "Private repositories" in their Privacy Policy [1] says: "GitHub personnel does not access private repository information without your consent", with exceptions for security, customer support, and legal obligations. Again, this feels deceptively reassuring, since GitHub personnel and GitHub's AI services are separate entities.

In their Privacy Policy, "Code" falls under the definition of "Personal Data" (User Content and Files) [2], and they go on to list lots of broad ways the data can be used and shared.

Unless I've missed anything, and as other commenters have said much more succinctly, I have to assume that there's a real possibility that my private repo code is used to train their models.

[1] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/gith...

[2] https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/gith...
> The code is allowed to continue after it has logically bugged out.

I'm a big fan of asserting preconditions and making it clear that we are getting into a bad place. I would rather dig through Sentry for an AssertionError than propagate a bad state and having to fix mangled data after the fact. If the AssertionError means that we mishandled valid user input, no problem, we'll go fix it.

A few times in my career I've had to ask, "okay, how long has this bug been quietly mangling user data?" and it's not a fun place to be.

Side note: I've never understood the convention of removing asserts in production builds. It seems like removing the seatbelts from the car before the race just to save a few pounds.
This is an old response, but thanks for the comment. I feel like you articulated zone 2 a lot better than almost anywhere else I've seen.
Show HN: Postgres as a VectorDB GUI
To me it's neither here nor there. Personally, I wouldn't touch SSPL software, not because there's anything particularly wrong with non-open source licenses, but because I think the SSPL is just a terrible copyright license anyways.

The OSI and people who supported the OSI, for better or worse, put a lot of effort into branding for open source that I think we can all agree was extremely successful. There's no reason that this sort of thing can't be done for "fair source" or "source available" or whatever you want to call it. That said, it's an issue for proponents of this license model to sort out in my opinion.
That is a sweeping statement. They (or should I say "We") are no worse than anybody else. If your point is that "worse" people should not come in to the country on H1B because H1b is meant for "better" people, I will probably agree.
Advanced civilizations should be indistinguishable from nature.
California squirrels show carnivorous behavior for the first time
It's really hard to parse what you are trying to say in the middle of this colorful imagery and quotations, but if you are spinning up a new Kubernetes cluster (and AWS/GCP account) per deployment, it's obvious you don't need this tool.
Ok, but then what is a way to do it?

The text gives an example to the core problem, and to argue differently requires thinking around it.

In practice. I’ve seen many attempts at measuring productivity, but once you dig into them, you see they are just abstraction mechanisms above something that is similar to lines of code.

I have yet to see an idea that sidesteps the core issue described in this post. Also, it applies to many types of work, and software is not unique in any way.
Yeah, that is sad. The biggest mistake I think is made in modern Christianity is forgetting that all fall short and that somehow Christians are somehow better humans than others.
And now, AI LLMs have a way to prioritise what's important and organise their memory (context window) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42411409
Thank you so much for your analysis and advice.

I'll be sure to give them the attention they deserve!

Have a great day!
Semi-agree. I've had 2 mx525s fail within ~6 months of purchase but I've also had a mx anywhere 2s that I bought used and got 3 years of usage out of it before I had to replace the switches.

I wouldn't buy a cheap mouse from them again.
https://github.com/yonahd/kor
yup. we have definitely all gotten an ENOENT or EIO before with no context.
Yes I know that, this is on every page. The functional differences are not, that's why I am asking about those.
I mean sure you could argue that, as communists and others perhaps do, for instance, but we are chiefly talking about the US, where individual profit is decided, IMHO correctly, as the primary metric. Sure, you may want to choose to minimally do certain things for national security or other legitimate reasons as the people vote for (as I mentioned in three posts above), but that is supposed to be a deliberate choice of the people and their representatives, driven by their desires, not as an automatic subsidy to any pre-established business, in the form of lax immigration policy which can have second-order effects.
Safety and profits are related.

Except the relationship is not strong enough to compel companies to always do the right thing (or even to do so adequately often). Especially when they perceive that the market will let them get away with it. For example when negative impacts are scheduled to occur far into the future (or in the present but affecting non-customers, or the environment).

Or when they occur in the present, but (as with seatbelts before they were mandatory) the customers just don't perceive the risks.

If you prefer to think every person who works at any company is a moustache-twirling villain

The comment you initially chimed in on was definitely quite hyperbolic. But this take is also.

Of course not "every" person working at a company needs to be ethically challenged for bad things to happen. All that's need are a few bad apples (whom we know are in no short supply) at approrpriate levels of responsibility. The rest will simply go along, to keep their jobs.

You know that.
Yep. We pay a lot. We are a company you've heard of and we're doing well. For our systems engineering roles, we've had a hell of a time finding good people. Plenty of interviews with folks who turn out not to know basic C programming or systems level algorithms.

It seems like systems level programmers are either firmly employed somewhere else or have switch roles to an easier domain. I know I've considered going back to Python programming where I can make the same money with a lot less work.
> I wonder if any of the big companies will pull out of the EU over DMA or future legislation.

I've said this here before - no chance. Shareholders would be taking them to the cleaners. Europe is responsible for >20% of Apple's revenue. Look at how many companies are willing to kill people for a few % extra, let alone as much as 20%. I don't think there's any where the EU counts for <10%, maybe X if you still count that as a big one.
Trump and Harris Supporters Favor High-Skilled Immigration
Virtually nobody was buying Intel GPUs:

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/discrete-gpu...

Looks like their latest GPU is selling out. Hope they actually move the market a little bit and iterate on this.
The context above that verse is important. It's not that Christians shouldn't associate with non believers, but avoid believers "brothers and sisters" that are basically fake.

1 Corinthians 5:9-10 NIV
[9] I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— [10] not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world.
> It's a ratio of inputs to outputs.. even in the example the inputs and outputs are measurable.

But reality is never that clear cut. How’s the ratio look when:

- Peter goes to the park and the breakthrough doesn’t come?

- Or it comes 3 weeks later?

- Or he deletes 100 lines of code and introduces a new bug?
Absolutely nothing. I threw that out of rage but shouldn’t have.
It's very tempting to be a layperson out of ones depth and apply MPI to a shit-tonne of things we're seeing. But I suspect the superficial "looks like it" of mass hysteria about things (pizzagate, drones, bank failures, Gamestop & cryptos in general) isn't actually the same as this.

I am also interested in how strongly real MPI aligns to "mostly women" because I don't want to believe there are these kinds of gendered differences in response to things, but the evidence looks to be there. It's unfortunate to get back to a somewhat paternalistic "victorian" sense of Hysteria as a fundamentally young female disease.

A very long time ago I was caught up in what was probably a mass psychogenic break out in primary school. It only takes a small trigger and suddenly the teachers are dealing with a shitload of vomit. There is a compounding quality that in sufficient volume, vomit is a bit of a chemical warfare agent but still: hell to pay and a lot of cleaning. The problem is that most of the good cleaning agents smell, and the smell is enough to trigger "GAS GAS GAS WE'RE BEING GASSED" panic attacks and there you are, back at the front door (I exaggerate, this was a small school and a handful of collapsed kids, but it does happen. Out of nowhere.)

I've also experienced (as a kid, and young adult) panic attacks and I know how very real central chest pain is, when you're caught up in your own imminent demise. On the plus side thats not a gendered problem: any and all young things including martians can get panic attacks.

This was a very interesting read.
Well no, the first observation was in 1943 https://academic.oup.com/jmammal/article-abstract/24/2/231/9...

Which is noted in the paper (2 points) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42449402
Also scala-cli https://scala-cli.virtuslab.org/docs/getting_started

I still like to use Ammonite as a REPL, but scala-cli has replaced it for me in those cases where i get fed up writing bash.