skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why you wrapping it in all of these conditionals? Why does it matter whether the many people with firearms went inside the capital itself or if they just helped other break through the police barricades outside the capital, which they did? Why are you making a distinction between whether someone with "a rifle" was caught inside or any other type of firearm?

There were many people verified to have brought firearms onto capital grounds, and several of those people tried to get inside the capital building itself, and there may well have been others that succeeded. Or not. Either way, there is little difference.
The payback period is something like 20 years to break even for the 10 kW worth of panels I am installing on my home this spring in Alberta.
Inside The Crane Claw – How the Crane Plays You
The simplest example is with factorial. The "base case" is when we hit 0 or 1, we want to return 1. By identifying and defining this case first you ensure that your program's execution will be bounded (which is normally what we want):

def factorial(n):
if n == 0 or n == 1:
return 1
# recursive case(s)

This is an incomplete program, the next part is to identify each of the recursive calls. In this case there's just one, and it's achieved by reducing `n` by 1 and multiplying the result of the call by the current `n`:

def factorial(n):
if n == 0 or n == 1:
return 1
return n * factorial(n - 1)

And if you're using a non-braindead interpreter/compiler you'd make this more efficient by using tail-calls (these get optimized away by reasonable language implementations, the main Python implementation is not reasonable):

def factorial(n, accum=1):
if n == 0 or n == 1:
return accum
return factorial(n - 1, accum * n)

For more complex cases, consider a binary tree or node in an abstract syntax tree (AST). Assuming an ordered binary tree (left node is less than current node, right is greater than the current node) and a search over the tree (this is also easy to do without recursion at all but for the illustration):

Assume the node is something like this:

@dataclass
class Node:
item: int = 0
left: Node = None
right: Node = None

def search(node, value):
# 1st base case: the value was not found
if node is None:
return False
# 2nd base case: the value was found
if node.item == value:
return True

Again, at this point the program is not complete but we've identified the two base cases. The next step is to figure out the recursive step(s). In this case there are two recursive steps but only one will be taken (if we aren't at the base cases yet): go left or go right.

def search(node, value):
if node is None:
return False
if node.item == value:
return True
if node.item < value:
return search(node.left, value)
if node.item > value:
# technically this test will always be true if we reach this point
# so the right search can be made unconditional. I put this here
# to be more explicit, remove the test to be more efficient.
return search(node.right, value)

If your data structure or problem has a recursive structure, you can use this approach.
Signal president make puzzling claim about mass surveillance
I thought you had a point but then I remembered how funny it is. If you are dealing with sensitive customer data you shouldn't get to skip security.

It is actually cheap and easy if we change the question: Should you be allowed to run a closed source proprietary platform with insufficient security? After all, if you open it up and let people do what they want it becomes their responsibility.

Bricking the device at a predetermined date isn't very elegant but it would work. Maybe the user should have the option to return it (working or not) and get some money back.
Because the journalist is claiming to have validated the elements of the story. If the journalist is also lying about that or intentionally helping their source in lying that’s a huge breach of public trust and should be immediately blacklisted from working as such in the future. There are other ways the source could be protected without actually lying about things they’re claiming are true.
I think the distinction between "tuna" and "tuna fish" (tuna salad) was likely just something we made up in our own family. Maybe even just a way for us kids to prank our mom, or vice versa. "Do you want tuna, or tuna fish?"

OTOH, "tuna fish" was indeed a common phrase back in those days (mid 20th century) as a synonym for canned tuna. It appeared on tuna can labels and advertisements. Here are some examples:

https://www.google.com/imgres?q=%22tuna%20fish%22%20advertis...

https://www.palosverdespulse.com/blog/2021/6/25/it-tastes-li...

Over the years, "tuna fish" fell out of common use, which may explain why you haven't heard of it.

Here is a conversation I had with ChatGPT 4o about this:

https://chatgpt.com/share/677988fd-28b0-8012-af63-5bd59985a2...

To answer your question, no, we never said salmon fish or anchovy fish. Just tuna fish.

Language and its evolution is an interesting thing!
Whenever I'm openly performing nefarious illegal acts in public, I always wear my Sixfinger, so if anyone takes a photo of me, I can plausibly deny it by pointing out (while not wearing it) that the photo shows six fingers, and obviously must have been AI generated.

In support of said nefarious illegal acts, the Sixfinger includes a cap-loaded grenade launcher, gun, fragmentation bomb, ballpoint pen, code signaler, and message missile launcher. It's like a Swiss Army Finger! You can 3d print a cool roach clip attachment too.

"How did I ever get along with five???"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElVzs0lEULs

https://www.museumofplay.org/blog/sixfinger-sixfinger-man-al...

https://www.museumofplay.org/app/uploads/2010/11/Sixfinger-p...
Bro what. That is maybe four bites. It is by no means "plenty of food".
Next month no one is going to remember this anyway, so they don't lose much by trying.
Not sure. As a user, I expected it to pull the entire year (I believe that is what other*-wrapped summaries do, but I'm not sure). That would give a better picture on broad trends over the year, rather than just the things I said in December. Though perhaps I'm above average in comment frequency.
We don't know how the initial attempts at contact were presented. I can see it being extremely difficult to get someones attention. If how seemingly technical people ask for assistance on net forums is any indication, unless has someone has the skill of a reporter in presenting information, a string of signal messages with, "contact me, I have important information on XYZ" isn't going to cut it.
As you say, there are a lot of these connections, another is increased religiosity with neurological disorders like epilepsy and schizophrenia.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4073495/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384855860_Religiosi...
The point is that a fictional story is just one of a host of possibilities, so you can't base decisions off what happens in it rather than the other n-1 possibilities.
META is a cash machine.
An auction system for ads results in the most profitable solution winning, not the most valuable. Marginally bidding toward the largest difference between consumer price and input cost is a bad thing; that's the least efficient solution, and means you are maximally overpaying for value received. An ideal search would find products with the smallest difference between price and input cost, i.e. items near the Pareto frontier.

For a more distilled scenario, if you manually accepted open stock trade offers, and your broker took kickbacks to always show you the worst bids/asks that they think you might fall for and make it difficult to find the best quotes, that would obviously be bad. In fact not providing best execution is illegal. The ad economy runs on exactly this conflict of interest. Money flowing through ads represents inflated transaction costs.
so it's their fault that every other tool maker refuses to provide the facilities at the same level of simplicity? they gave an example to show it was possible, it doesn't mean that their example was the only way - other developers decided that the public was too dumb to use those kinds of tools.
> For modern WoW, even in dungeons (M+), if you can’t follow a perfectly executed “script”, nobody is interested in grouping with you.

For low key chill groups it's not true.
I live in Cincinnati and I'm continually surprised to meet African Americans who all seem to have an immediate family member who has been shot. And that's without the subject even coming up with a lot of them. At this point, I would be afraid to ask. (Most are not involving police)

Among whites the only person I know to have been shot dropped his shotgun and accidentally blew half his forearm off while hunting.
Curious why you only want the AI features 30% of the time? Do you use the Cursor agent mode or just the autocompletion?
There are employers who don't care about criminal records, at least up to a point. Most trade unions don't, and many other blue-collar employers don't. A criminal record isn't going to prevent you from working, but it might limit your choices.
"and eventually teams are left with only true believers."

Or with nihilists who learned to say yes to everything, to at least get paid.
Yes, come on. I could point out that the parent comment is all fact-free speculation about states of mind, but we both know what is really happening: You are just repeating a certain political movement's dogma (that we've both heard many, many times).

Following such a movement is a sure way to do a lot of bad things. And you can see the movement insists that not only you follow it and I must follow it, but if journalists don't immediately repeat its dogma, they must be shut down. Independent thought is not allowed.

Mass dogma like that is nothing more than a means to power for the leaders, who without any check on them - whatever they say is ardently believed and argued for, a requirement of acceptance, and really the whole point of the movement - can steer people wherever they want.

The only protection in life, the only way, is to think independently for oneself. Facts are our anchor to reality; straying far from them is certain to lead to mistakes. And we need reject anyone who says otherwise. Such movements, which insist on adherence, are particularly dangerous.
In my experience box cooking times are never quite right, and irrelevant if you're going to be finishing your pasta in the sauce anyway.

Unless you're extremely familiar with the exact brand of pasta, temperature of your stovetop, etc., you should be tasting your pasta toward the end of cooking to decide when to stop cooking it.

> - It's still not going to be enough starch

I'm inclined to disagree, but only have anecdata on this, so I can't really get into an extended debate over it. So I guess now I get to look forward to experimenting with starch additions the next few times I cook pasta.
If BLM had attempted what J6 actually did, it would have made Kent State look like a Simpson's episode.
UK Lowest graduate salaries 'on a par with minimum wage'
At first blush, this might be Job Shop Scheduling {1}. But I don't know {2}. If so, it is NP-Hard which means verifying an optimal solution is also in NP.

An LLM might be able to solve a toy scale problem with only four operations and lots of "machines." But I am skeptical it can solve problems of "interesting size" more effectively than numerical techniques because verification is also in NP. {3} Good luck.

{1} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_shop_scheduling

{2} "All shifts covered" seems like a requirement for optimality.

{3} Assuming the problem is Job Shop Scheduling.
Are you sure it's objectively true, and not just a personal observation based on subjective experience? Given that we have had opposite experiences, it seems like the latter. Maybe the crowds you run with disproportionately use them?
TikTok knew its livestreams exploit children, Utah lawsuit claims
For a second I read WFH as Waffle House and not Work From Home.
Software isn't a one time use commodity. Other people can make UIs - guess why people still buy them! And if you're mad about commercialization, then they should have chosen a different license. You are paying for the UI, and only the UI.
Okay, and?

You keep changing the point you’re trying to make.
Speeding tickets are not criminal.
Here's an article from Margaret Sullivan that goes into the details of one recent example of "both sides" from the NYT:

https://margaretsullivan.substack.com/p/an-ugly-case-of-fals...

But it's hardly isolated. Once you start to see it, you start to realize how pervasive it is in a lot of reporting.

As above, it's the kind of thing that makes sense when you have two sides who, looking at the same facts, have different opinions on them. But when one side is rapidly divorcing itself from the facts, well... it's become a problem.
you'd think if the cia don't want it to happen, then somebody somewhere else would make it though. it's not like the CIA and fsb would collude - they serve different oligarchs.
I think your comment is a direct reflection of the lack of popular coverage and discussion of January 6th. It was planned for prior to the election as a contingency. There's clear and direct evidence of that fact and there's very little awareness of that fact.
I have a similar flow for Android Studio. Generate code with AI, compile and fix editors in a real IDE.
For what it's worth, good system prompting in Cursor makes an enormous difference, currently I use:

You're the best fullstack engineer and LLM engineer, prefer using Vite + React, TypeScript, Shadcn + Tailwind (unless otherwise specified).

CODE ORGANIZATION:
All code should be grouped by their product feature.

/src/components should only house reusable component library components.

/src/features/ should then have subfolders, one per feature, such as "auth", "inventory", "core", etc. depending on what is relevant to the app.

Each feature folder should contain code/components/hooks/types/constants/contexts relevant to that feature.

COMPONENTS:

Break down React apps into small composable components and hooks.
If there is a components folder (eg. src/components/ui/*), try to use those components whenever possible instead of writing from scratch.

CODE SYTLE:

Clear is better than clever. Make code as simple as possible.

Write small functions, and split big components into small ones (modular code is good).

Do not nest state deeply, prefer state data structures that is easy to modify.
Maybe more consistent with HN culture to write something up and link it?
Ask HN: You get a chance to visit the past, where do you go?
if we get a chance to visit the past of history, what events should one ought to witness?
I dont think that necessarily applies when you could easily make a training set from some actual black American people’s writings on the internet or book, or even an individual that self identified that way and train on all their writings around the internet, and result in those same stereotypes when you ask an AI to create such a profile

You dont need a black American engineer or product manager to say “I approve this message” or “halt! my representation is more important here and this product would never fly” as they are just not person the data set was trained on, even if you asked an AI to just create the byline on the profile for such a character

its weirder, and more racially insensitive, for people to be vicariously offended on behalf of the group and still not understand the group. In this case, the engineer or product manager or other decision maker wouldnt have the same background as the person that would call themselves “momma”, let alone it not mattering at all, if you can regurgitate that from a training set
I actually live in this area, so imagine my surprise to see a guardian article about my little neighborhood, and it being posted on HN!
There are private prisons in the US that benefit from more prisoners.

But there are many more people and organizations there that benefit from fewer prisoners.

For most purposes, a country is not a singular thing.
The problem with using fiction as a discourse about possibilities is that fiction is governed by the rules of the author's mind, not the rules of reality. So the fidelity of the model being used to drive the discourse is directly dependent on the congruence between the author's internal model of the world and reality, which can often be deceptively far apart. This is especially bad when the subject is entertaining, because most of us read fiction for entertainment, not logical discourse. So we create scenarios that are entertaining rather than realistic. And the better the author is the more subtle the differences are, but that doesn't mean they go away. It feels like a somewhat common experience in my life that I'm discussing some topic with somebody, and I have subject matter expertise based on actual lived experience, and as the conversation goes on I discover that all of my conversation partner's thinking about the subject was done in the context of a fictional world which misses key elements of the real world that lead to very different conclusions and outcomes.

This is not to totally discard fiction as a way of reasoning. With regard to hypotheticals beyond our current reach it is often the only way to reason. So it's valuable, but we have to keep in mind that a story is just a story. Hard experience trumps fictional logic any day. And I can't assume that the same events in real life will lead to the same outcomes from a story.
The Capitalist Wet Dream
I'm not a new programmer. I started as a teen in the 90s. I was a pro for some years, although I have not been for a few years now--I own a small B&M business.

I don't have a desire to become a great programmer, like you might. I want to program to meet real-world goals, not some kind of enlightenment. I don't want my long-term memory filled with the nuts and bolts required for grunt work; I've done plenty of programming grunt work in my life.

I am building custom solutions for my business. LLMs allow me to choose languages I don't know, and I'm certain I can get up and running near-immediately. I've learned over a dozen languages before LLMs came on the scene, and I'm tired of learning new languages, too. Or trying to memorize this syntax or that syntax.

I think your outlook is more emotional than logical.
> 5-10% difference seems crazy.

Well. That’s what it is. It’s crazy only because of how deeply you believe in agency.

If you instead think deeply about the numbers, and then the fact that you are comparing two completely different driving environments, one thing becomes clear: the way the driving environment is designed and driving culture is administered in France might be much better and safer! Then, agency plays a relatively larger role, by definition, even if it is absolutely small everywhere. Whereas in America, such as in San Francisco and many other communities, a lot of injuries are probably attributable to the environment and culture. This is at least the expert consensus is, not just the consensus of insurance companies.
Ask HN: Can you avoid being personally identified (and tracked) by recaptcha?
There is recaptcha v2 and v3. V3 uses V2 if V3 isn't sufficient to identify you.

What I mean with identify is fingerprinting. recaptcha collects info on how we solve the recaptcha. People have very unique way of solving captchas. You would have hard time seeing this with your own eyes but if there are 100 people who did 100 recaptchas each, then the algorithm will be able to know which recpatchas were solved by which person. This is also in combination with standard browser and device fingerprinting.

So is it possible to avoid being identified? If I've done recaptcha thousand times before, can I do it next time in a way that Google won't be able to link me to the same identity as all the previous thousand times?

I think the solution has to be done automatically in some way. Because if you try to solve the recaptcha manually with your own hand, then chances are high you will be identified. But solving it automatically is precisely what recaptcha is meant to defeat (bots).

I've had many many many times experience with recaptcha where I have had to sit there and try solve it manually the way Google intends us to solve it, for more than 1 hour I'll sit their frustrated and keep tring to solve it but it says I am failing even though I'm really not. This usually happens when I manually click in a non-human way. I might for example move the cursor by pushing the mouse with a pen. This causes mouse movements and timing and click locations to be different. But this only works for a number of times, i guess after thousands of times Google will know that is me messing around.

V3 is scary because it's first-party fingerprinting and you won't know it's there until it throws a v2 recaptcha at you. It tracks your interaction and habits on the website to see if it's human-like and probably also to uniquely identify you. If it can't identify you then it will make you solve a v2 recpatcha instead.

Google is also very anti-competitive against browsers that are configured for privacy. That's probably another reason I often have to spend hours trying to solve them.

I am afraid that the only way to not get identified by v3 recaptcha is to turn off JS. But if you do that then you can't use the website which is protected by v3 recaptcha. Unfortunately most of the internet is using either mitm cloudflare or recaptcha, so turning off JS means good bye internet.

Protection against 3rd party tracking does not help against these privacy threats because they are first party threats.
>everything from the unpaid, unseen work of women in and out of the workplace

Call me a misogynist if you like, but the idea that women should be paid for housework and child-rearing needs to be killed with fire.
It’s more of a “jostle” than a stir when cooking spaghetti in a frying pan.
You don’t avoid 1984 (mass surveillance) by being 1984 (erasing history).

Edit: to expand my thought, what you just said would be erased if we got in the habit of erasing stuff because it might be unpleasant. So while maybe this kind of opposition to Internet Archive would get rid of it, good luck preserving your well intentioned reason for it far into the future. A world in which books are burned/rewritten is a world in which it’s impossible to give a shit about anything on a societal level, including privacy.
ELKS: Linux for 16-bit Intel Processors
an ad machine*
SSH App Bots
Ask HN: Search Engines that ignore SEO and/or randomize results?
I said it's "a matter of fact that was clearly visible for years" which is the opposite of claiming to have special knowledge, so why the straw man? No special knowledge is needed to know that this claim is objectively true, you can just watch videos of him and see it for yourself. Why are you expecting me to cite evidence for something so widely accepted his own party didn't let him run for President again? If you really cannot see what everyone else can see - even his own party - then I'm not going to spend time on trying to convince you.

As for seeing stuff in Fox News, I don't think that particular organization is what the people who started this thread were thinking of.
Imagine there was a virus or parasite that just made you feel pleasure, all the time, with no tolerance effects?

I wonder what progress has been made in addiction medicine for meds that simply prevent the development of tolerance? If possible, it would fall under the category of harm reduction. Failing the patient to get sober, they could at least continue getting high on the same amount which might prevent their failure to function.
Heavily disagree; with guidance, these AI tools can solve problems that otherwise require in-depth expertise. Someone ported the HD version of my game[0] to MacOS using GPT with no prior graphics knowledge.

[0]https://2009scape.org