skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It takes around 20+ years to go from H1b to permanent visa/green card. In the meantime your kids born in US have grown up, graduated, you have a house and everything could be yanked at the border when you are travelling.

Meanwhile vast majority of them pay into taxes and social security and leave the US and never see a dime of that money.

Immigrants are the easiest group to exploit by everyone because they have no voice and are vilified by vast majority of the people include the so called intellectuals in here.
Intel Inside, Gelsinger Outside
Posts with much more comments than upvotes seem to get buried.

> 222. US airspace closures, lack of answers deepen East Coast drone mystery (theregister.com) | 26 points by LinuxBender 1 hour ago | flag | hide | past | favorite | 49 comments
Good point. In 5 years we will have a different name for a new hype related to AI :-)
Go messages are harder for both devs and users to read. Grepping for an error message in a codebase is a special hell.

Besides, it's quite trivial to simply return the exception's getMessage in a popup for an okay-ish error message (but writing a stacktrace prettifier that writes out the caused by exception's message as well is trivial, and you can install exception handlers at an appropriate level, unlike the inexpensibility of error values)
How is that relevant? Who is suggesting replacing c++ with javascript?
Ubiquity has already attempted to make their customers dependent on the "cloud" once. I believe there was some pushback and they just made it annoying to not use their online services, but I'd still like to know what they need my personal data for...
But is this still true considering LLMs? Is it possible that LLMs could save AI?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42431690
I doubt execs care at that point. They, much like most of us, only care about getting people off their back. "Hey, I got the employees back into the office like you wanted, it's your problem now."
Some highlights from the Federal Register:

> 2. Bar on Multiple Registrations Submitted by Related Entities

DHS will not finalize the proposed change at 8 CFR 214.2(h)(2)(i)(G) to expressly state in the regulations that related entities are prohibited from submitting multiple H-1B registrations for the same individual. On February 2, 2024, DHS published a final rule, “Improving the H-1B Registration Selection Process and Program Integrity,” 89 FR 7456 (Feb. 2, 2024), creating a beneficiary-centric selection process for registrations by employers and adding additional integrity measures related to the registration process to reduce the potential for fraud in the H-1B registration process. In that final rule, DHS states that it “intends to address and may finalize this proposed provision [expressly stating in the regulations that related entities are prohibited from submitting multiple registrations for the same individual] in a subsequent final rule,” but that “[m]ore time and data will help inform the utility of this proposed provision.” 89 FR 7456, 7469 (Feb. 2, 2024). Initial data from the FY 2025 H-1B registration process show a significant decrease in the total number of registrations submitted compared to FY 2024, including a decrease in the number of registrations submitted on behalf of beneficiaries with multiple registrations.[1]

This initial data indicate that there were far fewer attempts to gain an unfair advantage than in prior years owing, in large measure, to the implementation of the beneficiary-centric selection process.[2]

Under the beneficiary-centric selection process, individual beneficiaries do not benefit from an increased chance of selection if related entities each submit a registration on their behalf. As such, DHS has decided not to finalize the proposed change pertaining to multiple registrations submitted by related entities.

> C. Summary of Costs and Benefits

DHS analyzed two baselines for this final rule, the no action baselines and the without-policy baseline. The primary baseline for this final rule is the no action baseline. For the 10-year period of analysis of the final rule, DHS estimates the annualized net cost savings of this rulemaking will be $333,835 annualized at a 2 percent discount rate. DHS also estimates that there will be annualized monetized transfers of $1.4 million from newly cap-exempt petitioners to USCIS and $38.8 million from employers to F-1 workers, both annualized at a 2 percent discount rate.
The business plans have some amount of data that has priority - I see on the website that it's 2TB/month for $500/month, and after that there's unlimited non-priority data. So on the busy day the business with priority data would have good speeds, while others would have slow speeds. It's just like controlling how much time is allocated by the satellite for transmissions to business users. I think all the satellites provide service for all users, but they differ in bandwidth (older sats have less), and additional capabilities - some sats have laser satellite-to-satellite links that allow Starlink to have connection even in places where there's no ground station nearby (like in the middle of the ocean), and some sats have "direct to cell" antennas that will provide low-speed LTE connection to regular smartphones (that's not available yet, but will be next year).
This rapid feedback seems like it will be especially useful when iterating on CSS designs
I chucked my only piece of TP-Link equipment a few months ago out of caution.
> by allowing idiots do “science”.

Anyone can "do science". No permission is required. The question is who publishes what garbage.
Hah. It is pretty crazy that the Acorn Archimedes chip won.
it has always been an "attention"-economy rather than a "science"-economy. and scientists are human too, with their biases.

there are two kinds of people. the majority of us have made up our minds and find evidence for it. the rare few listen to whats out there with an open mind. once someone has put their name on something, they fight hard to protect that.

entire populations have always been and still are driven by pseudo-science (astrology etc).
Impressive we can do that - but, again, a hyped up solution in search for a problem after pouring tons of resources into it
Site is dead for me, here is a link

https://archive.ph/FxbQH
My python+numpy+matplotlib version from when I was playing around with it:

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
n = 2048
X, Y = np.mgrid[:n,:n]
plt.imshow(X^Y, cmap=plt.cm.Spectral)
plt.show()
You can manually transform vertices (call ImGui::ShadeVertsTransformPos) this is what angled headers are using https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/issues/6917
I agree it's not first-class citizen yet, next year new text API should make this easier.
You could, but a better strategy for that particular project would have been to rewrite it to not need that.
Yes, laws would be very easy to write if we had consensus. Unfortunately, laws are useful primarily when we don't have consensus.
Yup, as expected. Not dealing with the effects of clustering. Great job GOV. https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/1fyx9hp/cognizant...
The State of Python 2024 – The PyCharm Blog
What is Log Aggregation and how to select a good log management system?
NSA has been “SIGINT-enabling” router chips for a long time according to Snowden documents. Discussed last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37570407

There’s also that famous photo of NSA “upgrading” Cisco routers, of course. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa...
> I recall a discussion here about the decline in software quality, from many years ago. Someone argued that if we designed hardware the way we design software, we'd be too afraid to go outside. At the time, I thought it was just hyperbole...

That meme goes back at least to the 90s: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/car-balk/
For anyone curious about the vulnerabilities, this Ars article from November 2024 is a good read: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/11/micro...
I love cheap and reliable TP-Link routers as much as the next guy, but it's definitely also a security issue. The CCP almost certainly has a backdoor. Maybe a respectable one in the form of an undisclosed bug or the ability to lean on an update provider, but the point stands: it's absolutely a security issue and denying this is cope.

Routers are going to be a bit more expensive and a bit less reliable for a while. We'll live.
Is the brain better than a GPU at image recognition nowadays? Actually I’m not sure how that’s measured. Certainly a GPU could be tied to a database with a lot more things in it, like you can get some pretty impressive facial recognition demos where it’ll recognize a ton of random people.

But humans can see objects they’ve never seen before and sometimes guess what they might be used for, which is sort of like object recognition but better. (Or sometimes I see an object I’m technically familiar with, like an old tool of my grandpa’s, and remembering what he used it for feels more like imagining… maybe it is).
As I get older, I have grown to really distrust any technological choice of having a "single source of truth" and "Cross-Disciplinary" concerns.

Having a tool reconcile data across sources makes sense. Having a single source, sadly, does not. Especially not when you are forcing stakeholders/users to either use a new tool for this, or worse, to change their vocabulary and tooling to support it.

So, I get the desire. It would be nice to have a way to say "this color red is always used for whatever reason." But then you will have people try and layer that on with "for other reasons, things of another type will always be darker by about 4 shades." Someone will see one of these interactions go poorly, and add whatever emphasis they can to the rule they care about. Then the obfuscations begin.
I think rather than a single test, now we need to measure Turing-Intelligence-Levels.. level I human, level II superhuman, ... etc.
Ah the classic make a bold prediction to grab headlines because it doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, memory's are short.
Very fun read! I’m curious though, when it comes to non-Ruby-specific optimizations, like the lookup table for escape characters, why not instead leverage an existing library like simdjson that’s already doing this sort of thing?
Same reason phone headlines always mention branding when they're iPhones: more people click on headlines like that. In this case one could argue that it's relevant because no ICE models had this flaw, but I'm not convinced this wasn't done to make money off the EV/anti-EV flame wars that are happening online every day.
Clients shouldn't connect to the Internet by default, and when they do it should be domain/IP whitelisted only.

For example, an IoT lightswitch in your home should only talk to what looks like an MQTT broker in the AP. It doesn't need to have any concept what that topic it publishes to does. Similarly, the receiving light doesn't need to know what caused it. This way those devices literally never need any external network access at all.

I started working on this idea by playing with OpenWrt hosted video relays, and learned that it works, and am now extending it: https://github.com/atomirex/umbrella

Right now I am on HN procrastinating when I should be producing a video of ingesting from a TP Link security camera (really) into a webrtc SFU on the AP, sending it to another SFU, and watching the result.
That's because Yahweh was a sky god and lived high up in the clouds. So raising your hands, standing on mountain tops, etc, reduces your distance to him. Raising your hands while praying doesn't make as much sense anymore since Heaven is a metaphysical concept and not a place in the skies.
I really do think this time is different, we are on the precipice of something huge
> They don't work well with any of the fancy features, like Streams.

Because that would require effect types, which is quite advanced/at a research level currently.
There will always be a desire to inflate some damned bubble or other
The NY Post is just reposting original reporting by the Wall Street Journal:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/us-ban-china-...
This appears to be using a simple file watcher based on glob patterns to detect changes [0] so I'd be curious if we can configure that list to include ViewComponent instances as well! That may be harder since it's not just a static asset, and the keys in the config do appear to be hard coded [1] so I think each asset type has some quirks around how it can be hot reloaded.

[0] https://github.com/basecamp/hotwire-spark/blob/main/lib/hotw...

[1] https://github.com/basecamp/hotwire-spark/blob/af57eeb22c642...
If you really feel this way, why leave it to chance? They might not nuke that target. Far more reliable to commit suicide the old fashioned way as soon as you hear the news reports.

I am irritated by assertions of this type. They belong in a similar category to "just shoot me if I ever get [old/ugly/stupid]" - meaningless hot air when push comes to shove. In reality, when faced with death, people struggle to survive until they have no struggle left.

Know how many people in Hawaii committed suicide in 2018, when so many genuinely thought the nukes were coming? Zero.
It's not like classic cars are flawless immortals. It takes a lot to keep a classic car going and this will be no different.
TLDR version:

This is not to say that we will not talk about AI at all in five years, in the same way that we still talk about big data today, only that we will not talk about AI in five years because of its success.
It's amazing how out of date this conception is with the actual research.

I guess it's to be expected that pop-sci is 10-15 years behind…
Both work with checked exceptions.
Somewhat similar: My PyCPython project (https://github.com/albertz/PyCPython), where I wrote a C interpreter in Python, and then tried to interpret CPython. I never really completed this project though.
YouTube will start cracking down on videos with clickbait titles in India
Way too extreme. Seeing the world in such manicheanist terms is not healthy.

All companies care about safety, to varying degrees and for a mix of reasons ranging from PR to regulatory burden to the fact the CEO uses the product.

Many don’t care enough by my subjective standards, but it’s silly and childish to say no company cares even the tiniest bit about safety in any context.
Does the fact that he blew the whistle infer that he cared about the problems?

What would you have done if you realised that something you're working on was a death-trap, and managed ignored your concerns?
Model Context Protocol SDK for Kotlin
Now, you can easily build MCP servers and clients using the official Kotlin SDK, created and co-maintained by the JetBrains team.
Lead pipes, yes.

But asbestos in the walls is great for the safety of those living there — the place doesn't burn down so easily. It's the safety of anyone who inhales the dust when the place gets broken down that's endangered by asbestos.
Heck inflation could explain that growth.
> I just want to get dinner, flop onto my bed, text some friends and get sleep.

Sorry, I was using the assumption you were looking to improve your craft and make great contributions.
Read the article.

It's talking about how what we can "AI" today will be treated as bog standard - the same way this happened with Recommender systems 3-4 years ago, Neural networks 4-7 years ago, statistical learning (eg. SVM) 7-10 years ago, etc.

The title is a reference to a fairly prominent article about "Big Data" that was based on the same premise.
I don't have kids yet but I would certainly want them to be free-range. I guess now we have tech like Find My, it should give parents more peace of mind?
TLDR: In five years, AI will fade as a buzzword because its success will make it an invisible, standard part of technology.
The most crucial thing that I've seen over the years is that most developers are simply afraid of bringing the application down on bugs.

They conflate error handling with writing code for bugs and this leads to proliferation of issues and second/third/etc degree issues where the code fails because it already encountered a BUG but the execution was left to continue.

What do I mean in practice? Practical example:

I program mostly in C and C++ and I often see code like this

if (some_pointer) { ... }

and the context of the code is such that some_pointer being a NULL pointer is in fact not allowed and is thus a BUG. The right thing to do would be to ABORT the process execution immediately but instead the programmer turned this it into a logical condition. (probably because they were taught to check their pointers).

This has the side effect that:

- The pre-condition that some_pointer may not be null is now lost. Reading the code it looks like this condition IS allowed.
- The code is allowed to continue after it has logically bugged out. Your 1+1 = 2 premise no longer holds. This will lead to second order bugs later on when the BUG let program to continue execution in buggy condition. False reporting will likely happen.

The better way to write this code is:

ASSERT(some_pointer);

Where ASSERT is a unconditional check that will always (regardless of your build config) abort your process gracefully and produce a) stack trace b) core dump file.

My advice is:

If your environment is such that you can immediately abort your process when you hit a BUG you do so. In the long run this will help with post-mortem diagnosis and fixing of bugs and will result in more robust and better quality code base.
AI as it's called today is an improvement over an existing thing, e.g. image generators, conversational interfaces, customer support automation, that kinda thing; that aspect of it won't go away, especially not if "good enough" becomes/stays affordable.

But whatever we have in five years will probably take over the "AI" moniker, like how ML had it ~10 years ago.
The biggest YouTube tail latency is “skip after x seconds”. And I don’t think this paper helps.
Prepare to qualify...
I doubt it. A recommender system is not "obviously" AI - it could easily be just static lists, or based on viewing counts (wouldn't be surprised given how bad Netflix's algorithm is).

LLMs and gen AI are totally different. They are very clearly AI. You're literally having a conversation with a computer! I don't think people will stop calling it AI.
AI right now reminds me exactly of the blockchain/crypto hype. People trying to apply blockchain to everything, calling something a "blockchain" based solution. However, blockchain based solutions never panned out, as it was an attempt to apply technologies to use cases rather than solving actual problems. Now when you say "blockchain based X", people will scoff at you. AI will follow the same path I believe, as LLMs are less applicable to solve meaningful problems than expected.
Yet another step for nationalists to start pushing for internal technologies across the globe.

Slowly I am feeling back into world geopolitics of my childhood.
that's what I currently use! was tempted by 1P CLI as it would support a cleaner sharing of envvars amongst a team
That's your read. I read him as someone who did want to fix problems and was actively prevented from doing so for a long time, and has left that part of his career extremely frustrated as a result.

Yeah, maybe he could've been more professional. I guess. In my mind though the far more important takeaway is how a major automaker is (yet again) cutting corners and turning out ever shittier products at ever higher prices and pocketing the margins. And as someone who is actually looking into a vehicle in similar categories, if I could get an engineer like him from every manufacturer to give me the non-corporate-speak truth of what goes on in their design process, that would be 1000x more valuable than all the samey-bullshit-marketing-fluff that all of them turn out.

And you know, if the company itself was more interested in making a quality product than just telling people their product is quality they probably wouldn't give half a shit if an engineer was out discussing the process. I get that NDAs are most often (and for!) protecting a company's IP, and that makes good and is sense. However the same agreements also allow said company to do all kinds of horseshit with at least a decent expectation that their engineers won't spill the beans to the wider public, and that sucks ass.
Scala's zio library basically gives you checked exceptions that work with things like type inference, streams, async operations, and everything else.
Flash games in Excel files was the way
As someone who was unfamiliar with the Donor Game which was the metric they used, here's how the authors described it for others who are unaware:

"A standard setup for studying indirect reci-
procity is the following Donor Game. Each round,
individuals are paired at random. One is assigned
to be a donor, the other a recipient. The donor
can either cooperate by providing some benefit
at cost , or defect by doing nothing. If the
benefit is larger than the cost, then the Donor
Game represents a collective action problem: if
everyone chooses to donate, then every individual
in the community will increase their assets over
the long run; however, any given individual can
do better in the short run by free riding on the
contributions of others and retaining donations
for themselves. The donor receives some infor-
mation about the recipient on which to base their
decision. The (implicit or explicit) representation
of recipient information by the donor is known
as reputation. A strategy in this game requires a
way of modelling reputation and a way of taking
action on the basis of reputation. One influential
model of reputation from the literature is known
as the image score. Cooperation increases the
donor’s image score, while defection decreases
it. The strategy of cooperating if the recipient’s
image score is above some threshold is stable
against first-order free riders if > , where is
the probability of knowing the recipient’s image
score (Nowak and Sigmund, 1998; Wedekind and
Milinski, 2000)."
We think about many things at a time. But for those with malfunctioning brains that have the internal monologue going constantly, they mistaken that monologue for their thoughts and so it must be "one thing at a time". The language they experience their monologue in is by its very nature, sequential, you can't speak or even hear/understand two parallel streams of speech.

>Our brain does plenty of thinking in the background that leads to "a-ha!" moments even

That's not "in the background". That's the real you, your real mind. That's the foreground. But, if your brain malfunctions as many do, then the monologue shows up and crowds out everything. Sometimes it is apparently loud enough that it even prevents those "a-ha!" moments.

>but our language coerces our thought patterns into being linear and non-concurrent?

The language should just be discarded. What you want is an internal silence.
Based on my experience as an analyst of Looney Tunes, it would appear that being a Director of ACME Widgets is right up his alley.
What does "I work in VC" mean? I know, venture capital, but what does it mean in practise and how is that tool useful for you?
This misses the context that Raoult alone has published more than 3000 papers and is one of the most highly cited researchers in his field. Take the combined sum of all the IHU authors and it's likely in the tens of thousands.

This is also why people increasingly believe whatever they want. Nobody is honest, everything is framed in the most exaggerated ways - which then makes it easy to undermine, and there's mass corruption everywhere on top of all of this especially in covid related stuff where you have geopolitics, politics, and hundreds of billions of dollars in profiteering stewing in one giant, and quite toxic, pot.
I still am completely lost. Can you give me the answer so I can see what input is supposed to look like?

In my head I want to solve it with 37=37, x=x and q=q. And then run rfl