skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Reality check for anyone considering this: I just got a used 3090 for $900 last month. It works great.

I would not recommend buying one for $600, it probably either won’t arrive or will be broken. Someone will reply saying they got one for $600 and it works, that doesn’t mean it will happen if you do it.

I’d say the market is realistically $900-1100, maybe $800 if you know the person or can watch the card running first.

All that said, this advice will expire in a month or two when the 5090 comes out.
Very good point particularly w.r.t. "remediate vs. mitigate". Do you have any articles/resources/books that you can point to on how it is done for "industrial software"?
> The goal of the CTA was to crack down on shell companies used to commit crimes. The reality is lawbreakers are not going to file with FinCEN.

What do they do instead? That isn't easily detectable or prosecutable?

> LLCs with more than 20 employees and greater than $5 million in revenue do not have to file with FinCEN—another win for the special interest groups over We the People.

Would any other laws or regulations would make ownership of those 25%-or-more stakes identifiable anyway?
Honey's browser extension is accused of ripping off customers and YouTubers
just upload it to jlcpcb and get it delivered with components soldered.
What are the hardware and software requirements for a self-hosted LLM that is akin to Claude?
Ya people in these comments don't know what they're talking about (no one ever does in these threads). AMDGPU has had MMA and WMMA for a while now

https://rocm.docs.amd.com/projects/rocWMMA/en/latest/what-is...
You can pay the penalty and get safe container access, too. AFAIK, C++ standard containers provide both bounds checked (.at()) and unchecked ([]) element retrieval.
You don't have to use any of that and you still get lots of nice things like range based for loops, STL containers, algorithms, namespaces, and constexpr.
This one.

You could hear a former typist from the other side of the building even on a rubber dome keyboard.
> well-intentioned interest in our universe

I mean, probably. Though HN does have a taste for fringe theories, which might color your interpretation of "well-intentioned". And most of us aren't really qualified to assess the statistical rigor of astrophysics papers, myself certainly included.
> Now, all of that will be done by AI.

No "AI" of any description is doing novel proofs at the moment. Not o3, or anything else.

LLMs are good for chatting about basic intuition with, up to and including complex subjects, if and only if there are publically available data on the topic which have been fed to the LLM during its training. They're good at doing summaries and overviews of specific things (if you push them around and insist they don't waffle and ignore garbage carefully and keep your critical thinking hat on, etc etc).

It's like having a magnifying glass that focuses in on the small little maths question you might have, without you having to sift through ten blogs or videos or whatever.

That's hardly going to replace graduate students doing proofs with professors, though, at least not with the methods being employed thus far!
I am a bona fide C++ hater, but that's just because I resent working on it for professional code that needs to work reliably with coworkers I don't entirely trust. For personal projects it's one of the most satisfying coding contexts I've ever worked and it is indeed a blast to have such fine-grained control over execution.

I abandoned the language about a decade ago and I don't see myself looking back. My projects these days need long-term reliability more than anything and rust + cd/ci hits a sweet spot. That said, I do miss the thrill of designing and executing a program that runs in a certain way exactly as I intended and knowing that it was my expertise and insight that allowed this execution. Would I want to work with someone that was driven by that? Hell no! But it is personally a joy I won't forget.

Other inexcusable pain points: the build systems and package management is an absolute nightmare; the pre-processor feels like a sadistic joke; the syntax is horrible; there's so much cruft in the runtime you need years of experience to not machine-gun your foot off by using the most obvious tool at your disposal. But in a sense this just increases the joy of shipping a working executable with all your cleverness and blood and tears wrapped with a bow.
Ah yes, the programming language (Mojo) that requires an account before I can use it...
Cynical take: Try to get acquired by Intel for Arc.
More specifically, when you program a lot on your own without these tools, you just remember things.

Using a concise language and style helps, too.
Because many teachers dont underatand that stuff and hace no incentive to learn it because they hace defined benefit pensions and job secyrity through seniority, atleast in my experience. Having teachers on a completely unrelated financial oath to thwir students is pretty actively detrimental.
Take a look at the latest Llama and Phi models. They get comparable MMLU performance for ~10% of the parameters. Not to mention the cost/flop and cost/gb for GPUs has dropped.

You aren’t trying to run an old 2023 model as is, you’re trying to match its capabilities. The old models just show what capabilities are possible.
I've recently picked up using lsp now that a lot of my work is in go. I have co-pilot but often forget that it's there and don't use it much.

Generally, I have a hill to climb with a new code base. I get the ideas into my head and then rely on that rather than tooling. It's how I've always worked. I'm very comfortable with my editor so it just does what i think and i don't have to expend effort to translate my thoughts into keystrokes.

That's basically it. This Blog Post by a friend of mine on important editor skills to master is a good read on effectively using an editor
https://info.pagnis.in/blog/2014/05/06/10-actions-you-must-i...
I don't know, the evidence for dark energy has always seemed a lot sketchier than the evidence for dark matter. Dark matter has lots of interlocking lines of evidence. Isn't dark energy pretty much entirely based on various cosmic distance measures that all have huge stacks of assumptions embedded?
Etsy shops are a “community site”?
The frequent flyer community is so into this.. F / J / Y for classes, 3 letter airport codes, 2 letter airline codes etc. It's annoying really.
I use Rust, so explicit imports are required. However, I fail to understand this point

> You’ll learn where all the reference docs live for your language, libraries, and frameworks, and along the way you’ll learn more by actually reading the docs.

With neovim/LSP, I have a key binding (Kg) that opens a small window within the editor with the rustdocs. Not only this is faster than going to the browser, typing the type name, opening the docs, looking up the method but also it ensures that I am looking at the docs of the correct version that my code base is using.

I don't really understand the aversion to using these tools. They are "auto-complete" and not generative complete. This means you need to know what you are going to type for them to help you.
I love the complaint that there's unfair tests that ease the requirement for bona fide businesses, separating them from citizens who use LLCs to invest in real estate or to protect their assets.

Limited liability is regulation, so it's absurd to complain about extra rules for limited liability corporations being overreach. The new rules might be misguided, but it's incoherent to say that an adjustment to what is allowed under an existing set of regulations is an overreach.
Everytime I need to write C, I wish I could use C++ instead. The things I miss most are RAII, templates, lambdas, const-correctness, and most importantly, a standard library with container types and algorithms.
> Others in this thread have bought up the future of ICEs and classic car preservation. Back in the early 2000s the US government offered people cash incentives to dispose of their fuel inefficient cars, and by disposal they meant running the engine with an abrasive liquid instead of oil until it is totally ruined beyond repair.

Could you elaborate?
The problem is identical to how do we have an hash table (or other associative array or dictionary) in which we distinguish the presence of a false value from the absence of a value.

There are solutions for that. For instance, a lookup operation that returns the underlying dictionary entry, or nil if there is no entry. If there is an entry, we can dereference it: entry.value has the value. That's a solution not requiring any special type system constructs like Optional or sum types.

We can have a double lookup: if the lookup yields the ambiguous false value, then we can do another lookup like contains(hash, key) that has a boolean result.

Some languages like Common Lisp have multiple return values. The gethash function in Common Lisp returns a second value which indicates whether the key is present. If the first value is nil, but the second value is t, then it indicates that the nil was actually pulled from the hash table.
I'd try Windows 11, but it doesn't support my hardware. ;-p
Google CEO reveals major job cuts as part of "efficiency" move
Well, if one of OpenAI's LLMs started quoting Mein Kampf in its answers to people, would you laugh, or would you not laugh? That's the question.
Not remotely, how did you get to that idea?
Hi, I'm the author of the article. I actually think the opposite of what you mentioned. IVF is more suitable for prefiltering compared to HNSW. For prefiltering in HNSW, there is a certain requirement for the filtering rate—it can't be too low, or the entire graph may become disconnected. For instance, with the commonly used parameter m=16, each node can have at most 16 neighbors. If the filtering rate is below 5%, it can directly result in no neighbors meeting the condition, causing the algorithm to fail entirely. This is why the academic community has proposed alternatives like ACRON[1]. On the other hand, IVF doesn't have this problem at all—you can check whether a candidate meets the condition before calculating distances.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.04871
Oh, yeah. Put a picture of it on the effing internet. Smooth move.
Accepting that kind of gift from any entity doing business with my employer is explicitly forbidden in our business ethics policy, under penalty of termination. These billionaires frequently have business before the court.
Personally, the biggest benefit I get from LSPs is just proactively letting me know compiler errors before running the compiler (and I miss this working in extremely dynamic situations, like macro-heavy lisps). I definitely would side-eye someone who willingly eschewed that. But the rest of your points are well stated from my perspective
The economic reality is both parents are usually working these days. Parenting responsibilities are a lot more shared than they used to be while men identify strongly with how they perform at work. It’s a squeeze.
I like to think of it as a amazing document autocomplete being applied to a movie script, which we take turns appending to.

There is only a generator doing generator things, everything else--including the characters that appear in the story--are mostly in the eye of the beholder. If you insult the computer, it doesn't decide it hates you, it simply decides that a character saying mean things back to you would be most fitting for the next line of the document.
If only their software was open source ... but probably some CEO insisted that they be closed source because of "competitors"
Now we are getting down to a philosophical issue (but I think an important one).

In Rust, they made the safe way of writing things easy (just write v[x]), and the unsafe one hard (wrap your code in 'unsafe'). C++ is the opposite, it's always more code, and less standard (I don't think I've seen a single C++ tutorial, or book, use .at() as standard rather than []), to do bounds checked.

So, you can write safe code in both, and unsafe code in both, but they clearly have a default they push you towards. While I think C++'s was fine 20 years ago, I feel nowadays languages should push developers to write safer code wherever possible, and while sometimes you need an escape hatch (I've used unsafe in a very hot inner loop in Rust a couple of times), safer defaults are better.
Too late, pretty much invisible unless we use some kind of genetic agent.
So for female figs its crunchy seeds but male ones it can be crunchy wasps eggs/larvae right?
A literal is not purely a syntactical term. A literal is an object that is embedded in the program itself. As such, it is necessarily part of the syntax: the piece of syntax denoting the literal is understood to be that object itself.

However, note that syntax disappears when the program is compiled. The literal itself does not!!! (Unless identified as dead code and eliminated, of course).

Even using the C language as an example we can readily distinguish between literal syntax and semantics. The string literal syntas "abc\n" includes the double quotes and backslash. Yet the string literal object at run time has no double quotes or backslash, and the n after the backslash was turned into a newline (linefeed in ASCII). (C compilers on Unix-like platforms do in fact map string literals to read-only memory. It's not ROM, but wite-protected VM. Firmwares written in C being burned into ROM are thing also. The literals are then in ROM.)

In Lisp, we think of the objects as being source code, so it's a little different. The C idea of the double quotes and backslash being source is called "read syntax" in Lisp, particularly Common Lisp. Scheme might use "read syntax", I'm not sure. In any case, "surface syntax" or "character-level syntax" are also useful synonyms. Note

Lisp compilers and interpreters take the scanned-surface-syntax-turned-object as their input. We could call that deep syntax. So a quoted literal is literally a chunk of the deep syntax, turned into a datum for the program: (quote X) embeds the syntax X into the program, making it available as a datum, and the compiler will process that quote construct by propagating X as is into the compiled image, arranging it to be part of some table or literals or whatever.

Some object are self-quoting, like numbers of strings, or #(...) vectors in Common Lisp and Scheme.

The TXR Lisp #H(...) hash syntax is like this. If it appears as an evaluated expression in code, then it is a literal. The compiler must propagate that to the compiled image, just like a vector, string, or number.
AMD is kind of doing that funding by pricing its GPUs low and/or giving them away at cost to these startups
Then expect to remain ignorant and continuously duped.
I do 100% of my software development in vim. I have syntax highlighting and some auto indentation but otherwise no autocomplete, no LLMs, no vim plugins for hopping between files.

I just… write code? If I need to remember what’s in another file, I open up that file in an adjacent iTerm pane, or pull up the docs for the library, etc etc. if I want to have the program run every time I save, I run a watchexec in an adjacent pane.
Of all the challenges with this, graph layout is beyond trivial. It does not rank as a problem, intellectual challenge, or even that interesting.

The challenges are all about what goes in the nodes, how to define it, how to standardize it across different institutions, how to compare it to what was tested in two different clinical trials, etc. And if the computerized process goes into clinical practice, how is that node and its contents robustly defined so that a clinician sitting with a patient can instantly understand what is meant by it's yes/no/multiple choice question in terms that have been used in recent years at the clinician's conferences.

Addressing the challenges of constructing the graph requires deep understanding of the terms, deep knowledge of how 10 different people from different cultural backgrounds and training locations interpret highly technical terms with evolving meanings, and deep knowledge of how people could misunderstand language or logic.

These guidelines codify evolving scientific knowledge where new conceptions of the disease get invented at every conference. It's all at the edge of science where every month and year we have new technology to understand more than we ever understood before, and we have new clinical trials that are testing new hypotheses at the edge of it.

Getting a nice visual layout is necessary, but in no way sufficient for what needs to be done to put this into practice.
See Chris Titus, author of many Windows utilities and of a clean and debloat powershell suite that's open and has a knowledable community of windows engineers.

* Update Any PC to Windows 11 (2021)

Guide going over updating any PC to Windows 11 that “doesn’t meet requirements” or doesn’t use Secure Boot or has a TPM 2.0 chip.

https://christitus.com/update-any-pc-to-windows11/

If it'll run 10 it'll run 11 .. as long as you're not after all the fancy AI, adware, and Total Recall big brother stuff ( .. who is? )

IIRC I think (I'd have to check) you can use this Windows 10 | 11 kitchen sink GUI to create your own stripped down Windows 11 boot | VM disk that has all the crud including the hardware checks removed.

Gamers and Qubes users like lightweight VM images, there are forums dedicated to roll your own Win11-lite images.
Yes! This can be a real problem when your data structures are allocated from a memory pool. Since the whole memory region is owned by the program, out-of-bounds writes will either do nothing or silently corrupt your program state.
I just want to pick out one thing:

It would (or should) crash your program in any other language anyway.

To me there is a massive difference between "there is a way a malicious user can trigger an assert, which will crash your server / webbrowser", and "there is a way a malicious user can use memory corruption to take over your server / webbrowser".

And bounds-checking penalties are small. I can tell they are small, because Rust doesn't have any kind of clever 'global way' of getting rid of them, and I've only noticed the cost showing up in profiles twice. In those cases I did very carefully verify my code, then turn off the bounds checking -- but that's fine, I'm not saying we should never bounds check, just we should do it by default. Do you have any evidence the costs are expensive?
IANAL. Current details of what is going on...

Court of Appeals overturns the order blocking enforcement of Beneficial Ownership Information reporting requirements (2024-12-23)

https://www.nfib.com/news-article/fifth-circuit-appeals-cour...
You just type or copy/paste, but the main language I use, most statements are terse. But I have personal templates for a few languages. As you go on, most of the programs are pretty much close to what you have already done.

Like the old saying, there is only 1 COBOL Program, all others were copied/pasted from the original.
> The ducks in St. James' Park are so used to being fed bread by secret agents meeting clandestinely that they have developed their own Pavlovian reaction. Put a St. James' Park duck in a laboratory cage and show it a picture of two men—one usually wearing a coat with a fur collar, the other something somber with a scarf—and it'll look up expectantly. The Russian cultural Attachés black bread is particularly sought after by the more discerning duck, while the head of M19's soggy Hovis with Marmite is relished by the connoisseurs.

Good Omens, by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman
China slowly but surely is becoming #1 in everything.
Original source: [Google cut manager and VP roles by 10% in its efficiency push, CEO Sundar Pichai said in an internal meeting](https://www.businessinsider.com/google-ceo-company-cut-manag...)
You couldn't be more wrong. Windows 11 is the reason I left Windows for Linux, after MANY years, and I was running the Pro version.
> Could be trying to make themselves a target for a big acquihire.

Is this something anyone sets out to do?
Show HN: Contextual Jokes in Group Chats
Built Master Chick, a bot that intelligently and occasionally makes jokes in group chats, based on what everyone says.

It finds the best time to crack a "contextual" joke.

You can also toggle energy level of Master Chick to make it less annoying, or more hyperactive if you want it to. Also NSFW/SFW mode.

Master Chick has made my group chats much more fun! Wanted to share this gift for Christmas!

Try it out: https://t.me/masterchickbot
"Hey!"

These were the memes that we brought to and from school uphill both ways, kids.
Dupe (167 points, 2 days ago, 60 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42483500
Right, it would make more sense to use HL7 FHIR (possibly along with CQL) as a starting point instead of reinventing the wheel. Talk to the CodeX accelerator about writing an Implementation Guide in this area. The PlanDefinition resource type should be a good fit for modeling cancer guidelines.

https://codex.hl7.org/

https://www.hl7.org/fhir/plandefinition.html
Great points! Regarding assertions what techniques/practices did you guys follow? What did you do when an assertion failed? I myself am a fan of DbC and hence am interested in knowing more about how others use/modify/extend the technique.

> If you need to send data you send bytecode.

I presume you mean some encoding of binary-to-text; eg. base64 etc. ?
Yep. The department store model still makes sense in Nordstrom's target price bracket. The whole point of a physical store in the 21st century is that it can provide a hands-on, in-person experience that an online store can't. Nordstrom sells premium products where that kind of experience is worthwhile.

I don't need a physical store to compare two different 6-foot USB cables. I do need a physical store for a suit, or a nice pair of shoes, or cologne.
My dog knows all the neighbor dogs names, and their owner's names. He's a smart breed but I feel like you're really underestimating animal cognition.
> Given the other context of your comments I doubt this is a confession of contribution of hubristic affluence contributing to our modern disposable society but I feel like this underscores the point I'm trying to make in my reply.

Let me assure you that none of what I said was meant to diminish your point of view which I agree with mostly.

What I was trying to convey was that people’s mindsets were rather different during the last decade of CRT. CRT had been around since the end of WWII, it may have gotten bigger over the years but the form it took on largely remained the same so there was a sense of continuity as people handed down old TVs when they got something nicer.

When cheap LCD TVs came to the market it represented something more akin to a paradigm shift as people with limited space at home could now easily own screens 30 inches and up. My parents are actually rather frugal with my dad borders on being a tech hoarder who insist on keeping every single cell phone and laptop he ever owned somewhere in his garage. However even he was unable to justify the sheer bulk and running cost of CRT TVs back in that period. Even if he were to give it away there would have been very few takers of any.

Therefore it’s not inconceivable that this model could have been sold in the US or even few more places outside Japan. Most of them simply disappeared without a trace because at some point they were probably worth less than the space it occupies, and people were overly eager to embrace the flat panels without realising that they are not getting some of the utilities back.
> That will get you only one million per second.

But per core, right?