skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> ... an illustration on how everybody doing A doesn’t mean shit.

I don't think you understand either the parent or me. The point is that the majority of people do something wrong that the author is trying to help prevent, so just by virtue of that being true it stops being "stupid and obvious".

> We can all agree that something huge is missing if you don’t learn algebra or addition.

We can indeed all agree on a separate topic, but that does nothing for the topic we are actually discussing. The core of your entire argument is that somehow FP is fundamental to solving complexity, you seem to think that everybody already agrees with this. We don't.

> Even the atheist is a zealot

No, he is not. Being an atheist or not is a completely internal world view, being a zealot implies being vocal and aiming to convert or convince others.

> The only way to not be a zealot is to be a zealot about being unsure of everything

No this is also not true, see above. Things are not as black and white as you think.

> People insinutated a lot of things because I used religion as an analogy.

The point of an analogy is to improve the discussion through clarity, you made a bad analogy and in doing so made the discussion worse and less clear.

> The ONLY point I was trying to make is that a majority or large group of people believing in or doing plan A doesn't mean shit for plan A.

Which, again, is missing the point. The majority is already judged by the parent, namely: they are doing something wrong. Hence it does not matter that the majority is not always right, the point of the parent is already that the majority is wrong. You are trying to argue for something that nobody brought up, you are arguing against the statement: "the book is good because everybody is doing what it describes". Nobody is saying that, and so you're arguing into the void.
Effectively using AI tools is a skill. Much like effectively using Google is a skill. You already saw glimpses of what it can do. I suggest you to keep trying to find out boundaries where it works reliably and where it does not.

I'm using Copilot daily. I don't use it to write code instead of me. But I'm using it to generate lots of obvious code just the same way that I would do. I know when to expect it to do its work perfectly and I know when I need to supervise it. I know when I'd spend more time editing generated code so I'd write that code myself and I know when I'd spend less time editing generated code.

I don't think that AI brings 10x or even 2x to my productivity, so you can avoid using AI. But I certainly can say, that using Copilot makes programming less tenuous in the same way using autocomplete, autoimports and similar IDE stuff makes programming less tenuous.

I also think that whether copilot helps or not depends on type of code that you're writing. If you're very careful about DRY and your language does not have much boilerplate, may be you'd find it less useful. For example when I'm writing Go, every second line is of kind `if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("Cannot bla: %w", err); }`. The only "intellectual" part here is error message and Copilot generates it 99% perfectly along with surrounding stuff.
That's really not true. You just have to be good
When did we decide that AI == LLM? Oh don't answer. I know, The VC world noticed CNNs and LLMs about 10 years ago and it's the only thing anyone's talked about ever since.

Seems to me the answer to 'Can AI do maths yet?' depends on what you call AI and what you call maths. Our old departmental VAX running at a handfull of megahertz could do some very clever symbol manipulation on binomials and if you gave it a few seconds, it could even do something like theorum proving via proto-prolog. Neither are anywhere close to the glorious GAI future we hope to sell to industry and government, but it seems worth considering how they're different, why they worked, and whether there's room for some hybrid approach. Do LLMs need to know how to do math if they know how to write Prolog or Coc statements that can do interesting things?

I've heard people say they want to build software that emulates (simulates?) how humans do arithmetic, but ask a human to add anything bigger than two digit numbers and the first thing they do is reach for a calculator.
Now that you put it that way, it is laughably easy.
Internet conversations have no payoff. Your reputation among rude strangers does not matter. You don’t need to be right. If the conversation itself is not pleasant, you can just walk away.

So when I stop enjoying the engagement, I leave. I don’t try to get the last word; I just stop reading halfway through the message and close the tab.
10 Different Flavours of Load Testing
- Value of Bitcoin increases at least as much as in 2023

- Disney will make huge reductions in plans for Star Wars and Marvel projects that are not started

- GPT 5 will be a significant improvement, but not as much as expected.

- Trump increases toll barriers, but lowers them after he discovers that US also depends on good trading relations (he will spin this as a win)

- Trump spreads FUD about his commitment to NATO, that causes EU to invest more in their already significant weapons industry. US manufacturers are afraid to lose customers, and pressures Trump to change his approach (he will of course spin this as a win)

- Israel bombs the new leaders of Syria in January and escalates the conflict significantly.
Worth noting that I trained formally in Buddhism under a teacher for a few years. I’m not unaware of all this

And the Vedic version of suffering is all full of love for reality, not wanting to delete it by smashing a button
You can turn to actual experts, e.g. YouTube or books. But yes, I have recently had the misfortune of working with a personal trainer who was using ChatGPT to come up with training programs, and it felt confusing and like I was wasting time and money.
The fact that this is possible feels like it says something about the universe— that there is not as much information in our environment as we think there is.

This in turn could explain the unreasonable effectiveness of brains — especially small ones like animal brains — at modeling and operating in the world.
Neither Fastmail's JMAP for third-party apps nor Stalw.art supports Contacts/Calendars yet.
Fastmail said that it will be enabled once it passes IETF standardization.
Stalw.art also mentioned they will add support after the standard is finalized.
The Twtxt/Yarn community is larger than you think. As the founder of Yarn.social[1] (which itself uses the Twtxt spec and extensions[2]) and operator of the "flagship" instance twtxt.net[3] I often interact with around ~70 folks (_not including news feeds_).

[1]: https://yarn.social
[2]: https://twtxt.net
[3]: https://twtxt.net
Bond, Perpetual Bond
"but what you've described is nonsense"

If what I described is 'nonsense', criticizing Musk for not criticizing China is also 'nonsense' and this entire conversation is moot. But I suspect you don't feel this way.

"Walz is highly critical of the Chinese government,"

Not according to his students. If you were there pre-Tiananmen Square and post-Tiananmen Square and you really didn't like China, you wouldn't continue to business with them and give them money for 25 years after this. Exactly like Musk, he continues to do business with China, even after all of the human rights violation. But, you defend him.

It's interesting that it's okay to talk about how bad the Chinese government is now on HN. For years if you even mentioned it, you were deemed racist and downvoted. Once again, the tides change when it can be used against a political enemy.
For what it's worth, if you create a new profile for Chrome extensions, they won't have access to your regular browser profile.

I do this for web developer extensions that typically need a lot of powerful permissions. So I have a Chrome profile that's full of web developer extensions, so they're isolated from private and security sensitive stuff like email and banking.

Similarly, you can do this by installing Chrome Beta or Chrome Canary for use with different extensions you don't want to take a risk with.
Palantir&Anduril reportedly building tech consortium to bid on defense contracts
So it's a logical fallacy then. I could say Musk doesn't criticize elephants too. Does this mean he supports them?
Meetings are the worst place to share knowledge. I can’t count the times when I’ve built something only to find out I missed a requirement that was verbally stated in a meeting I missed that wasn’t recorded.

Ai bots are a dumb solution to this real problem. 75 years ago they would have had a human transcribing the meeting minutes. I’m not sure what the better solution is.
Absolutely, but I think advertising also is a major driver in the perceived importance of social status .
A Call to expertise is actually a fallacy. This is because experts can be wrong.

The scientific method relies on evidence and reproducible results, not authority alone.

Edited to add a reference: see under Appeal to authority. https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/fallacies/
I made an AI Anti-Counterfeit app for clothing brands
Probably mostly not. The errors tend to be logical/conceptual. E.g. mixing up scalars and matrices is unlikely to be from tokenization. Especially if using spaces between the variables and operators, as AFAIK GPTs don't form tokens over spaces (although tokens may start or end with them).
OP's talking about a specific use-case related to tech companies like Google. Not creative writing or research, areas in which AI is in no shape for supporting humans with it's current safety alignment.
Anders Puck Nielsen
has some very good (and directly to the point) videos about this, including Russia's plan for victory (which isn't land area).

He is a military analyst working for the Royal Danish Defence College.

https://www.youtube.com/@anderspuck/videos
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, 2020, 2018) reported that 39.1% of the civilian workforce in the United States performs physically demanding jobs.
Worse still, bashing on "incels" is totally fine.
Is TideCloak open source? When I search on Google I find this - https://github.com/tide-foundation/tidecloak
1. ChatBot technology will be instrumental to the rise of oligarchical societies and fascism. Mass propaganda, media corporations colluding with governments, governments operating within companies, etc.

2. Wealth inequality will increase at an exponentially faster rate.

3. Global warming will trend towards warmer than ever before

4. Political violence will escalate especially toward vulnerable populations.

5. Increase in minor and major ecological disasters.

6. Geopolitical issues will create more tensions leading to an amplification of what will be known as WWIII.

7. A key biomedical advancement will come from China.

8. We will look back on this year as the year that started inhumane physical/psychological experiments similar to Tuskegee using technology and vulnerable populations. The devastation of which will eventually be looked at as the creators of the atomic bomb.

9. Grass roots companies with physical and social/community based products and services will start to thrive.

10. A bubble in the AI investment world will pop for the bag-holders, but the heavy weights will remain strong and increase in momentum. A slight return to 2022 expectations for digital goods will reprise (see 2026 predictions for this)

11. The first court case involving AI generated video will begin.
The politics of Ukraine war is extremely complicated.

They aren't actually. And none of that history relates to the current war.

Which is all about Russia's internal politics and ideology. And not about the after-effects of post-WW2 territorial transfers at all.

Those transfers in turn were in turn the work of the Allied powers, not Ukraine.
Neat, guess we'll finally see if cross-language concurrency stops being such a pain.
Well I guess we finally got the mythical 'Q*'. Or at least some variant of it using energy functions (I think that's what they mean by 'soft' Q-learning?). The extra boost from using the value function at test time is interesting as well.
> We've made our choice about what we think is a fruitful way to describe the results

Some people describe the lies liars construct as "alternative facts", while others call them "their opinions". I prefer to call it bullsh_t, unless they really believe it, then I call it horsesh_t.

The difference between bs and hs is, of course, that the people who bs have a selfish intention for their lies.

The next sentence begins with:

"I'll be honest,"

which is not something an honest person needs to say, in my experience.

Regardless, I doubt Heisenberg would be certain about their findings. ;-)
I think the issue that many people have with Haskell is the order of expression evaluation is not structured left-to-right and top-to-bottom. At least it's what makes it difficult to read Haskell for me. Compare it with F# (and OCaml family in general):

open System.IO

(File.ReadAllText "text.txt").Split()
|> Seq.map int
|> Seq.iter (printfn "%d")

It doesn't really matter on simple expressions but as you keep chaining the operations the reverse order gets more difficult to follow.
Every release removes / breaks stuff in the standard library and has been for a while. That's because prior to ~3.2 or so, deprecations were basically never followed up on, but now deprecation means it's going to be removed.

E.g. Python 3.12 has deprecated datetime.utcnow(). So it will probably be removed in Python 3.14 or 3.15.

For all intents and purposes, "Python 3" is now the brand and "Python 3.x" releases are major, breaking releases.
Wonder why it happened? anyone know the back story?
Yes - I mean only to say "AI" as the term is commonly used today.
I don't believe that's true. I think they must make the material available after a proper counter-notification, or they lose their liability shield as per the exception here. IANAL, just reading the text of the law at face value.

(g) REPLACEMENT OF REMOVED OR DISABLED MATERIAL AND
LIMITATION ON OTHER LIABILITY.—

(1) NO LIABILITY FOR TAKING DOWN GENERALLY.—Subject
to paragraph (2), a service provider shall not be liable to any
person for any claim based on the service provider’s good faith
disabling of access to, or removal of, material or activity claimed
to be infringing or based on facts or circumstances from which
infringing activity is apparent, regardless of whether the material or activity is ultimately determined to be infringing.

(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply with
respect to material residing at the direction of a subscriber
of the service provider on a system or network controlled or
operated by or for the service provider that is removed, or
to which access is disabled by the service provider, pursuant
to a notice provided under subsection (c)(1)(C), unless the service provider—

(A) takes reasonable steps promptly to notify the
subscriber that it has removed or disabled access to the
material;
Applicability.
PUBLIC LAW 105–304—OCT. 28, 1998 112 STAT. 2883

(B) upon receipt of a counter notification described
in paragraph (3), promptly provides the person who provided the notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) with a
copy of the counter notification, and informs that person
that it will replace the removed material or cease disabling
access to it in 10 business days; and

(C) replaces the removed material and ceases disabling access to it not less than 10, nor more than 14,
business days following receipt of the counter notice, unless
its designated agent first receives notice from the person
who submitted the notification under subsection (c)(1)(C)
that such person has filed an action seeking a court order
to restrain the subscriber from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on the service provider’s system
or network.
The loneliest I’ve ever been was as a new parent with an abusive and distant spouse. I went years without any positive interactions or connection with another adult.
ABC: Learning the Alphabet with Java Annotations
China refused investigation into ship linked to severed Baltic cables
Looks like Apple has been funding them for at least the past 3 years so this may even be fair.

If you're really targeted, "they" will also go for your non Apple devices like your "smart" TV. So you could probably use support to harden all your tech stuff.
How do you know what’s happening elsewhere? Other than having relations, it falls under reporters to propagate news. How do you meet new people? You go to special events and gatherings. The web is already linked, but we have special nodes like search engines, directories, and forums that are information hubs.

Creating a website was always easy. The minimum html you need is very small, and all you have to do is copy the files with an ftp client. Then tools like wordpress came and it became even easier.

What social medias have done was to put everyone in the same space. First there were walls and you just have to build your own information hub. Now, the platform is providing you its own like a private television service (including ads) whether you like it or not.

No need to invent a new version of the web, we can always go back to what was working and is still working.
> But if all models were truly open, then we could simply verify what they had been trained on

How do you verify what a particular open model was trained on if you haven’t trained it yourself? Typically, for open models, you only get the architecture and the trained weights. How can you reliably verify what the model was trained on from this?

Even if they provide the training set (which is not typically the case), you still have to take their word for it—that’s not really "verification."
Wolfram Alpha's "smartness" is often Clippy level enraging. E.g. it makes assumptions of symbols based on their names (e.g. a is assumed to be a constant, derivatives are taken w.r.t. x). Even with Mathematica syntax it tends to make such assumptions and refuses to lift them even when explicitly directed. Quite often one has to change the variable symbols used to try to make Alpha to do what's meant.
An important learning for me was to not be so concerned with different styles and ways of doing things in the same codebase. Fighting against this is ultimately a big waste of time and results in team fragmentation and "grammar Nazism" IMO.

Better to learn to read and understand regardless of the style, and micromanage each other less. Save the sweat for the big stuff.

This is something I constantly need to remind myself.
So you're saying... gun drone?!
Others can build infiniband hardware according to the standard. There used to be at least two companies building infiniband hardware until Intel killed QLogic’s infiniband division in a misguided attempt to make its own monopoly. :/
We just launched MemCP, a blazing-fast, open-source, columnar in-memory database designed to handle both OLAP and OLTP workloads. Built in Go, MemCP combines cutting-edge parallelization, spaltenbasierte Speicherung (columnar storage), and intelligent compression (1:5 average) to deliver performance 10x faster than traditional databases like MySQL — with 80% less storage usage.

Features:

In-memory design for sub-millisecond query speeds.
Columnar storage for efficient analytics and transactional workloads.
Modern hardware optimizations: NUMA, NVMe, multicore CPUs.
Lightweight and portable—embed directly into your app!
Built-in REST API support for rapid app development.

Why it matters: MemCP offers the power of enterprise-grade analytics at open-source accessibility. Whether you’re running a startup or scaling a cloud-native app, MemCP is here to level up your data game.

Learn more & contribute on GitHub
Early adopters welcome—feedback drives us forward!

Discussion prompt: Can MemCP disrupt MySQL/MariaDB in the same way Redis shook up caching? What killer apps could this enable?
> So even if you drop the US, only the EU should be sufficient.

So the US has a more robust arms industry, so they are certainly more helpful in that regard, but monetarily the EU as a whole seems to have given more:

* https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-huma...

* https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/news/ukraine-support-tr...
The Federal Triangle
You don’t beat someone by doing everything worse either.
In fact, what I am most curious about is how AI understands symbolic logic relationships (neural networks and Turing machines are not completely equivalent). During training, this is a bunch of tokens.
Probably a combination of those things but also about the staying power or perception and stereotype from the broader programming community. (I’m not saying that Haskell is super pragmatic and industry-ready, only that the perception of it often lags behind its real usefulness — admittedly in part because other languages work well enough so why bother to engage with one that requires thinking differently?)
I don't know what an IPP is but I bought a networked Xerox all in one, plugged it into my network and it just showed up on all my devices (mind, they're mostly Apple). So whatever they're doing, it ain't so bad.

I did have to cover the power led with black nail polish though. It was lighting up the whole room.
I had to Google what "send me a Xerox" means.
No, it is factually right, at least if Scott Aaronson is to be believed:

> Having said that, the biggest caveat to the “10^25 years” result is one to which I fear Google drew insufficient attention. Namely, for the exact same reason why (as far as anyone knows) this quantum computation would take ~10^25 years for a classical computer to simulate, it would also take ~10^25 years for a classical computer to directly verify the quantum computer’s results!! (For example, by computing the “Linear Cross-Entropy” score of the outputs.) For this reason, all validation of Google’s new supremacy experiment is indirect, based on extrapolations from smaller circuits, ones for which a classical computer can feasibly check the results. To be clear, I personally see no reason to doubt those extrapolations. But for anyone who wonders why I’ve been obsessing for years about the need to design efficiently verifiable near-term quantum supremacy experiments: well, this is why! We’re now deeply into the unverifiable regime that I warned about.

https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8525
People are forgetting about the content farms like Associate Content [1]. Since the early aughts, these content farms would happily produce expert-sounding content on anything that people were searching for. They would buy top search terms from search engines like Yahoo, hire English majors for dirt cheap, and have them produce "expert" content targeting those search terms. At least the LLMs have been trained on some relevant data!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahoo_Voices
> there is no reason to believe a connection between the mechanical model and what happens in organisms has been established

The universal approximation theorem. And that's basically it. The rest is empirical.

No matter which physical processes happen inside the human brain, a sufficiently large neural network can approximate them. Barring unknowns like super-Turing computational processes in the brain.
Ads get viewed (fraudulently) by bots.
Shout-out to FluxUI.dev
> Then falls. Falls around 70%. Again, this is based on historical trends.

A semi-joke-y observation about a monkey wrench that may be thrown into the mix:

> The main argument for a Strategic BItcoin Reserve seems to be that Bitcoin holders worry about an impending shortage of greater fools and need the US government to act as the greatest fool of last resort.

* https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1870564077535470079
Then later on NuGet was supposed to fix that, but even with a package manager you encounter "dll hell" like scenarios.
At the time apple looked at beos, the print subsystem was... far from complete. There were probably many deal killers with Be, but this was the one I remember people kept repeating.