skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> why would it make sense to ban BPA if the BPA-free products are also bad

You don't need to solve every problem in the world to solve one problem. It makes sense to ban BPA because BPA is shown to be harmful. Whether or not BPS is also harmful is completely irrelevant to evaluation of BPA. I have no doubt one day BPS will also get the axe.

Hopefully companies come around to enumerating what they're actually selling as a differentiating factor in the market. "This is just stainless steel" is a pretty good marketing technique.
Spreadsheet also implies Excel, which can have a negative connotation depending on your perspective. Excel is a double edged sword.
The only really good reason I can see to use a CRT is because you want to fix/rebuild one of the old 1980s vector arcade games (like Tempest or Star Wars) and want it to be a truly authentic reproduction.
While I agree that these are titans of 20th c. philosophy, particularly of the philosophy of mathematics and logic, the overarching school they belonged to (logical positivism) has been thoroughly and rightly criticized, and it is informative to read these criticisms to understand why a view of life that is overly mathematical is in many ways inadequate. Your comment still argues from a very limited perspective. There is no reason that correct application of Gödel s theorem should be any indication of the richness of someone's philosophical views unless you are already a staunchly committed reductionist who values mathematical arguments above all else (why? can maths help you explain and understand the phenomena of love in a way that will actually help you experience love? this is just one example domain where it does not make much sense), or unless they are specifically attempting a philosophy of mathematics. The question of whether or not we can effectively model cognition and human mental function using mathematical models is not a question of mathematical philosophy, but rather one of epistemology. If you really want to head a spurious argument, read McCulloch and Pitts. They essentially present an argument of two premises, the brain is finite, and we can create a machine of formal "neurons" (which are not even complete models of real neurons) that computes a boolean function, they then conclude that they must have a model of cognition, that cognition must be nothing more than computation, and that the brain must basically be a Turing machine.

The relevance of mathematics to the cognitive problem must be decided outside of mathematics. As another poster said, even if you buy the theorems, it is still an empirical question as to whether or not they really model what they claim to model, and whether or not that model is of a fidelity that we find acceptable for a definition of general intelligence. Often, people reach claims of adequacy today not by producing really fantastic models but instead by lowering the bar enormously. They claim that these models approximate humans by severely reducing the idea of what it means to be an intelligent human to the specific talents their tech happens to excel at (e.g. apparently being a language parrot is all that intelligence is, ignoring all the very nuanced views and definitions of intelligence we have come up with over the course of history. A machine that is not embodied ina skeletal structure and cannot even experience, let alone solve, the vast number of physical, anatomical problems we contend with on a daily basis is, in my view, still very far from anything I would call general intelligence).
This is a great device but I can't imagine giving so much power and control to a closed-source, self-updating device.
I'm of two minds when I see comments complaining about header files. Practically speaking, I think "have the preprocessor copy & paste source files together" is a bit of a hackjob, but, conceptually speaking, having your interface and implementation separate is ultimately a good thing.

The problem of course lies not with header files, but C++ the language, as all public fields and private fields must be specified in the class declaration so that the compiler knows the memory layout. It's kind of useless in that sense. You can move private methods out to a separate source file, but, you don't gain much in doing so, at least in terms of strict encapsulation. And of course, if you use templates at all, you can no longer even do that. Which is its own can of worms.

Unfortunately, none of these problems are problems that modules solve. Implementations very much disagree on interfaces vs implementations, precompiled vs simply included, etc etc. In my own usage of modules I've just found it to be header files with different syntax. Any API implemented via modules is still very leaky - it's hard to just import a module and know what's truly fair for application usage or not. You still ultimately have to rely on documentation for usage details.

At the end of the day I don't really care how the implementation puts together a particular feature, I care about how it affects the semantics and usability of the language. And modules do not really differ in proper usage from headers, even though the whole backend had to be changed, the frontend ends up being the same. So it's net nothing.

All said and done, when it comes to defining library APIs, I prefer C. No public/private, you just have some data laid out a particular way, and some functions to operate on it. The header file is essentially just a symbol table for the binary code - and said code can be a .c file or a .o file or even a .a or .lib or .dll or whatever - C doesn't care. Raw functionality, raw usability. No hoops.
They've actually been making positive moves with GPUs lately along with a success story for the B580.
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate!

> Some other process or silicon can read or write the object you just moved but doesn’t know you moved it.

That should primarily affect buffers that are inline with the moved object, right? i.e., not static buffers or stuff that's heap-allocated? How common is that scenario? I admittedly generally thought DMA used static buffers, though to be fair I'm not exactly highly experienced in the space.

> You need to keep the memory previously occupied by the moved object valid long enough for those references to realize you moved it to prevent corruption.

How is this (reliably) handled in C++? I feel there's gotta be more than just hoping the empty object hangs out long enough for the rest of the system to catch on (e.g., moving things around near the end of a scope when the empty object will be destroyed "soon").
> I can't imagine getting hundreds of countries to all unanimously agree on anything.

There are many, many international agreements that >100 countries agree to. The EU requires consensus for many things (what does that mean exactly? zero 'no votes?) as does NATO, which requires unanimity for some things. US Congress passes bills 'without objection' as a normal thing.

Maybe you are reading too many inflammatory stories? Humans are social creatures who are hard-wired to cooperate.
> The answer is not Yet Another Tool In The Chain

Normally, that would be true, but Nix has wiped out my need for homebrew, asdf, and a bunch of other tooling, so it still satisfies your requirement by leaving fewer dependencies overall instead of additional ones!
SHOW HN
I'd be really curious to see what happens if you use PaCMAP (https://jmlr.org/papers/volume22/20-1061/20-1061.pdf) and more recent large-scale variants (https://github.com/YingfanWang/PaCMAP).
Are there feasible open alternatives to this closed-source blob? The fundamental capabilities seem nice, on paper.

Also, is there Windows / Mac compatibility?
The whole time I was reading this article, I just wanted to know the history of the soba restaurant that was being demolished. I bet there’s an interesting story there too.
> Similar to any time a construction project is being done.

Certainly false; there is a lot of construction in those places and currently most other places.
> Linus's harmful and evil promotion of Vitamin C

Which is "harmful and evil" thanks to your afterknowledge. He had based his books on the research that failed to replicate. But given low toxicity of vitamin C it's not that "evil" to recommend treatment even if probabilistic estimation of positive effects is not that high.

Sloppy, but not exceptionally bad. At least it was instrumental in teaching me to not expect marvels coming from dietary research.
The problem is that performance achievements on AMD consumer-grade GPUs (RX7900XTX) are not representative/transferrable to the Datacenter grade GPUs (MI300X). Consumer GPUs are based on RDNA architecture, while datacenter GPUs are based on the CDNA architecture, and only sometime in ~2026 AMD is expected to release unifying UDNA architecture [1]. At CentML we are currently working on integrating AMD CDNA and HIP support into our Hidet deep learning compiler [2], which will also power inference workloads for all Nvidia GPUs, AMD GPUs, Google TPU and AWS Inf2 chips on our platform [3]

[1] https://www.jonpeddie.com/news/amd-to-integrate-cdna-and-rdn....
[2] https://centml.ai/hidet/
[3] https://centml.ai/platform/
i wish this didn’t use mpu6050 imu, which is obsolete and unavailable it seems.

but i guess they used it due to existing code/drivers widely available for it and esp32.
The cuda situation is definitely better. The nvidia struggles are now with the higher-level software they’re pushing (triton, tensor-llm, riva, etc), tools that are the most performant option when they work, but a garbage developer experience when you step outside the golden path
Haha you are right! I might have been thinking of that, thanks for your charitable generous interpretation - or I might have been confused. I think I was just confused here, but good point.

I guess it's the n/2 one whose divisibility by 2 becomes uncertain. I think I looked at the formula and thought 3n+ 1 if 3n + 1 ~ 1 (mod 2), not 'if n ~ 1' haha that was funny! :)

Thanks again :)

edit: Also what a lovely way to correct someone -- 'said what you mean' -- I am gonna use that! :)
This is so cool! Although I'm not sure about my Total Commit stats, surely I've done a bit more than that.
links:

https://www.sporcle.com/games/g/populouscities

https://www.sporcle.com/games/Wrightboy05/50-biggest-cities-...

https://www.sporcle.com/games/Wrightboy05/100-biggest-cities...

https://www.sporcle.com/games/eliasostnas/top-100-most-popul...

https://www.sporcle.com/games/MapleLeaf/world200

https://www.sporcle.com/games/vanderbizzle2014/300-largest-c...
> Targetted use to control malaria is probably justified, given the negatives of malaria.

Do we have evidence about whic his worse? Anyway, that sort of argument assumes there are no other solutions.
Union: Cloudfare Workers in Kubernetes
A human could read the llms.txt if they want to. And a developer could put ads in llms.txt if they wanted to!
Or the manufacture of new vehicles to replace perfectly serviceable old ones.
I want to second the idea that "spreadsheet" implies reactive data, even (or maybe especially) in a programming language context.
The Washington Post did/does have a similar series.
Tetragrammaton with Rick Rubin: Peter Thiel
> 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.

But this seems to be what you said was an anti-pattern:

> That's an anti-pattern. In a properly lexically scoped language, an undefined identifier is erroneous, diagnosable before you even run the code.

You were speaking there, presumably, of bare variables, not of hash entries, but Perl's defined-or works just as well on lookups, like `$a{ key } //= "Hi there!"`, in which case it is just a less-verbose version of the two-step lookup you propose.
> and "we couldn't make filtering work, so whatever".

They actively _do not_ want you to be able to find what you need, that would mean you don't look at their ads.
No science, only vibes.
> return x if defined? x

It's a natural pattern, and translates with obvious changes to Perl, but still `x = defined? x ? x : y` is longer than `x //= y`, so all I was meaning to say in my original comment was that I was surprised that Ruby didn't borrow the latter from Perl.
AI will not do math for us, but maybe eventually it will lead to another mainstream tool for mathematicians. Along with R, Matlab, Sage, GAP, Magma, ...

It would be interesting if in the future mathematicians are just as fluent in some (possibly AI-powered) proof verifying tool, as they are with LaTeX today.
These topic-adjacent expert responses just reek of point harvesting by an LLM, I didn't do any such downvoting, but in the last year I've changed to this viewpoint.
I am not sure if we are speaking about the same thing. LSP can give you type hints. What I am doing is that I am opening a "window" in my editor that has the full docs. You can browse through it freely. The issue with "non-Rust" languages is that the docs will be on a website. On most Rust projects (90%+), the libraries will use the Docs system which makes the docs fully available on LSP.
I used 2captcha, for a fee ... it doesn't work
I'm maintaining an absolutely massive Perl codebase at work. I've made it extremely resilient so that I can stop fire-fighting it and 2025 is the Year of the Rewrite. Wish me luck...
> why has it gotten such interest/points?

For context: The top comment on most HN stories, especially research, tries to completely discredit the OP, often by finding flaws, and especially in statistical methods.

Everything has flaws. I think people are interested in what is valuable and possible. Shakespeare's work has many flaws, but that's not what people focus on.

Also, while you aren't responsible for all those other top comments, why should I believe yours? Usually I just ignore these comments (but I appreciate your curiosity).
From Lamini, we have a private AMD GPU cluster, ready to serve any one who want to try MI300x or MI250 with inference and tuning.

We just onboarded a customer to move from openai API to on-prem solution, currently evaluating MI300x for inference.

Email me at my profile email.
I had to google it, but I guess you're insinuating that I've done crack?

Fact is, it's smoked cocaine, and the level of scaremongering about it was pretty absurd compared to powder cocaine, amphetamine, or opiates, all arguably just as bad.
I follow John on Mastodon. He never fails to disappoint.
CSS-only implementation of an “osu!”-like circle-clicking rhythm game
> Do you guys find this funny? Adding fuel to the fire?

If you can't beat them, join them it seems?
Neat project, although prices are inaccurate for premium domains. I looked for sh.me, the options show like $7 price, but in reality it was $20k something on the domain registrar.
Meta outsources because it's cheaper.
Dunno, but if it works, Florida will probably make it illegal.
For context, “osu!” is already a clone of a series which originated on Nintendo DS, Osu! Tatakae! Ouendan / Elite Beat Agents:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%8Cendan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osu!_Tatakae!_Ouendan_(series)

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osu!>
I think it will become apparent how bad they are at it. They’re algorithms and not sentient beings. They do not think of themselves, their place in the world, and do not fathom the contents of the minds of others. They do no care what others think of them.

Whatever they write only happens to contain some truth by virtue of the model and the training data. An algorithm doesn’t know what truth is or why we value it. It’s a bullshitter of the highest calibre.

Then comes the question: will they write proofs that we will consider beautiful and elegant, that we will remember and pass down?

Or will they generate what they’ve been asked to and nothing less? That would be utterly boring to read.
Roomba do zero path planning and make no attempt at floor plan memory. That’s their whole thing. They figure it out on the fly each time.
My Favorite Paulg Essays
That's the thing, it really isn't that different. It's just that the practice involves learning to split off your internal monologue until it's done unconsciously. In a way you are literally giving yourself schizophrenia. 4chan didn't get me to put magnets on hard drives but they did get me to do it to my brain.
You might be interested in checking out the WHO SMART Guidelines. Nothing on cancer yet AFAIK, but it's evolving.
You have to see real crack addiction in action. It’s not over-hyped at all. It’s just that not everyone gets addicted to it.

People get hung up on physical addiction, but the mental obsession is the real destroyer. Most folks aren’t wired for that kind of obsession. They can get physically addicted to opiates, quit, and never go back. I’ve seen exactly that. I’ve also seen folks become so obsessed with pot, that it makes your worst Central Casting street junkie look tame, by comparison.

True addicts don’t need physical addiction. It’s a mental disorder that doesn’t make sense to most people, but it’s definitely there.
China simply outspends russia a hundred times over. When you account for china's full security budget it's almost the same as US defense spending when accounting for PPP.

China is also the world's factory and many components of modern weapons are dual use goods of which China is the supply chain. The problem that no one dares speak is that there is no wholly domestic supply chain for most electronics and other components anymore. If war were to break out with China US defense production would halt immediately.
not really true anymore as the latest oled tech surpasses crt in almost every spec. And the spec it does not the difference is detectable by devices not human senses so practically makes no difference.
Yeah but MLID says they are losing money on every one and have been winding down the internal development resources. That doesn't bode well for the future.

I want to believe he's wrong, but on the parts of his show where I am in a position to verify, he generally checks out. Whatever the opposite of Gell-Mann Amnesia is, he's got it going for him.
It shall SIM no more.
Show HN: Gemini-Powered Contextual Text Editor with Inline Diffing View
Hey Hacker News,

I'm excited to share an early prototype of an AI-powered editor that leverages context for improved text generation and refinement. By providing notes, links, and other relevant information, you guide the AI, leading to more useful outputs. This editor is designed around my workflow, where I frequently use LLMs to refine my writing. I found myself spending a lot of time copying context into chatbot UIs and then copying the results back into my documents. This editor prototype aims to make using LLMs for writing more intuitive and streamlined, addressing the inefficiencies of copying context between different interfaces and comparing text.

This project is still in its early stages, and I'm looking for feedback. How could this be improved? What features are missing? Let me know in the comments.

Link to project: ai-writing-tool.vercel.app

Thanks!
Tl;dr programming as a hobby building what and how I want is much more fun than doing it for money and being told what to do.
That assumes Julius is a second declension noun. If it were a third declension noun it would indeed be Juliuses.
You mean

enum { nb = 1024 };
struct { int k, v; } hash[nb];

// 0 is an invalid key
void incr(int k)
{
int i = k % nb, j = i;
do {
int k2 = hash[i].k;
if (k2 && k2 != k) {
i = (i+1) % nb;
continue;
}
hash[i].k = k;
hash[i].v++;
return;
} while (i != j);
abort();
}

Apologies for the telegraphic variable names and weird control flow. I wrote this on my cellphone. Lacking these 15 lines are what keep you from writing C?

There's a nice tutorial on hash tables in K&R, and I can also recommend learning about Chris Wellons's "MSI" hash table design, described in C at https://nullprogram.com/blog/2022/08/08/. He shows a more full featured hash table in about 30 lines of code, depending on what functionality you need. It's eminently practical, and usually a lot faster than generic algorithms.

That's not an exceptionally simple hash table either. One night I hurriedly wrote a rather long-winded implementation also on my cellphone (strings, with separate chaining and a djb-style hash function) and it also came to about 30 lines of code: http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/justhash.c
Oh I dunno. With cmake it really is pretty straight forward. You can pull from VCS, a tarball, even use a git submodule.

If it's another Cmake project, that's the happy path. Easy peasy. If it's not you still have the ability to run ./configure && make or evoke whatever incantation is in the dependency's requirements. I'm not the hugest fan of cmake, but I've worked with it quite a bit and it's a much more pleasant story than other languages I've used a lot like python, JavaScript, OCaml (which I love), etc.

I do find rust and go dependency management a little simpler due to the prescribed nature of them, but once you get off the happy path, the flexibility of C land is tough to beat. It sort of matches the language stories themselves; you have more control and have to do a bit more yourself. It's all about trade offs.
> the Japan-based cryptocurrency company DMM

I thought DMM was a much larger conglomerate of online services like gaming/shopping, that crypto is now apparently a part of since last I checked.
I just saw the two comments in question and find it to be absolutely hilarious.

A serious answer to your question - no, these are in the "whoop" weight-class. Warhead carrying drones for anti-personnel and anti-armor are usually 10 inch and up, meaning they are using "10 inch" frames and likely 3115 motors, with 6S battery packs. Of course, there's endless variation, but that seems to be a optimum combination
One of the reasons I am not yet worried about LLMs is that this is not actually possible, at sufficient levels of domain complexity, and contextual complexity. The domain complexity that LLMs start failing is pretty low at the moment.

As well, as domain complexity increases so does the required amount of precision, and again I find LLMs start getting less precise when put in the deep end. You don't tend to find this kind of software in your "programmers programming". You tend to find this kind of software in industry, where large businesses consist of wild business rules built up over decades, and that has been half-codified into software. I just don't see LLMs swooping in to take that over.
CSS Wants to Be a System
Maybe he was just looking for people that agree with him?
> Nobody suggested that replacing your utensils would reduce your intake to zero. That does not invalidate wishing for zero and doing what you can to move in that direction.

What I'm saying is, you should make sure you're actually moving a meaningful amount.

And you can't assume wooden is better when it's still coming from a big factory.

> The exposure is effectively zero...when?

It depends on what chemical you're looking for and where you're looking. It's a pretty generic statement, it's not just about utensils.

> Wasn't your whole original argument the exact opposite? That exposure is never precisely zero? Dividing the numbers in the study by ten does not make any of them zero.

There is a point where the effect is zero, but you're never going to reach actual zero.

Your goal should be the former, not the latter.

And sometimes you don't need to do anything to reach the former. In that situation, replacing products just hurts you by wasting time and money (and less time and money will increase stress which is bad for your health).

So no, my argument has not changed.

> Acting on limited data is often much more advantageous than not acting on available data.

Sure, I agree. But have a realistic idea of the impacts and risks before acting.
Have you tried override the allocators and destructors of your classes so you can do all allocations at startup?
Indeed. It also doesn't have anything like PKCE.