skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Why are you confident to use such a tiny model on something so critical?

Don't use any LLM for something critical. They can't be trusted innately due to their design, why on earth would you use them for something where you need reliability?
I thought Waze was owned by Google though? I assumed they would use Waze’s traffic data.
> Because some project manager had "AI" on his performance goals this year.

Same reason Logitech did it, it's a totally arbitrary waste of resources
Thanks for the kind words swimwiththebeat. I really appreciate it. I didn't get to the ARM acquisition failure and crypto boom given time constraints. There is so much to cover in Nvidia's three decade history, so I had to pick and choose.
I agree that integrated tests tend to be brittle, but if we need database tests either way, the database harness can't be flaky. So any flakiness there is something that has to be fixed regardless. Slowness, I agree, but unless you're spinning up new containers for every test, the overhead of each query being real is going to be small.

If the database interactions are trivial, I agree—just use stubs. But if you've got non-trivial joins, then you'll need a separate database test suite anyway. And if there's stateful logic involving the database and you want to use fakes in unit tests, you need a whole extra set of tests to validate that the fakes behave the same way that the real database does.

I do actually prefer to avoid relying on the database for unit tests—it's cleaner, it's faster—but often testing with the database is simpler & reliable, and I can't justify the extra lines of code required for fully isolated unit tests. That's extra surface area for tech debt that could lead to stuff like fakes behaving differently from their production equivalent.
> Outside of the Linux kernel, there is very little shared technology between Android and the Linux desktops.

lol... so, all of it? Linux is a kernel.

Regardless, my point had absolutely nothing to do with technology. Android's popularity has absolutely nothing to do with Linux and/or what it shipped with or didn't ship with. Its popularity has everything to do with the fact that it shipped preinstalled on devices that people bought.
Linux isn't going to become popular on desktops until it is shipped on desktops.
that is a fake. A mock is a device for verifying you called the expected funchtions. A fake emulates the api. Importantly if you change funcioms the fake will still pass if they mean the same - think of write which might take a buffer+length [C style], a list or a string (often there would be more than 10 variations)
It's such a waste of resources. They should just focus in making a better browser.
Because then you wouldn't be doing unit testing; you'd be doing integration testing. You'd also probably not be testing the database in a realistic configuration and thereby missing the whole point.
They don't want to what? Don't want to give up poorly designed regulations? Or do not want nuclear power?

The latter is largely due to the anti nuclear movement, as sponsored by the petroleum industry. This will go down in history as one of the biggest self-owns in trying to protect the environment.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2016/07/13/are-f...
Elves and dwarves still keep their night vision, elves don’t sleep, dwarves have a better save vs poison (IIRC).

I do like how they’ve opened up the species in general. I have a character in a campaign that is essentially based on my cat, a tabaxi rogue with impulse control issues.
now my comment looks out of date :)

thanks but also i am very intimidated by how much work you put into this game lol

is this why i am a bad engineer
This throws away most of what your database can do for you. I personally like to do authorization at the database layer. There are a tons of other things a DB can do, like trigger a webhook. Are you going to frequently pull from your DB for live updates?

I think OP issue is that he didn't understand what mock tests actually tested against. They are called mock for a reason. There should be a better way to provision a database when running tests and have a full simulated environment.
Points 4 (file sharing) and 6 (hw compat), and part of point 1 (package distribution), are valid critiques. The rest, not so much.

The main reason Linux hasn't proliferated on the desktop is that businesses don't use it on the desktop and that's because they prefer to pay for a license so they get support if something goes wrong, and because Windows has always dominated business software (much of which isn't even available on other platforms).

The second reason is because Mac blows most everything else away when it comes to laptops; it's almost rare these days to come across someone that doesn't have a Mac as their laptop (unless it's a work-issued laptop in which case it's a Dell or something like that, or they want a budget laptop).

Linux is not likely to be mainstream for the desktop because there's not really a business model that drives it like there is for Windows and Mac. And that's fine. I use Linux as my daily driver for work (by choice), though for my personal laptop I have a Mac.
Why call these obelisks their own class instead of categorizing them as another type of virus?
Seconded.
Back in 2015 I got a Toshiba Satellite Radius convertible laptop.
X11 ran there even with touchscreen support.
Plus, USB3 ran smoothly.

Now I'm using a Dell, and again, full hardware support with zero issues using Wayland and Pipewire.
And I use Slackware, not exactly a sophisticated distro, but one that just offers upstream software with no modification.
get Claude to make an app and publish it as a PBA
publish it as a website and download it as a PWA
What are you talking about? Signal is open source, and its cryptographic security is trivially verifiable. If you don't trust the nonprofit behind it for whatever reason, you can simply compile it yourself.
Oh hey, it's me. Shortly after then I did a write-up on how I crafted them, which was discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38718314
I've beconeea fan of good fakes. Good fakes closely resemble the real service but let me query useful things in tests. Mocks just tell me I called a function without concern for the 10 different ways to doethe thing.
I went to a low-ranked university in the midwest for CS (class of 2011) after going through an intense honors/AP circuit in high school. After experiencing difficult courses in English/History in high school, I was flabbergasted at the low quality of some of the courses at this university.

I had two courses that, as part of their curriculum, had a couple lectures to teach me how to write a resume. One of them was a 200-level English Technical Writing course; the other was a 300-level CS course. I had never had an actual job, yet somehow I wrote a better resume than my peers; many of them completely half-assed theirs. In the speech/comms 101 course, apparently I was the only one who had ever synthesized an argument or done any sort of critical thinking prior to that class.

I frequently got told that it was unusual for me, the CS student, to be doing well in various courses. My physics E&M prof asked me how I was able to do so well, better than the engineers and physics students. My math profs asked me why I was taking math courses for fun.

CS courses generally were a joke; a prof told me he had been trying to figure out how/where he was failing in his teaching content, until I showed up and it was clear that the problem was not with the content, but with the quality of students. I am pretty certain the majority of folks who took the C programming course still don't know how to work with pointers.

In-state tuition was still ~$15-20k/yr.

I got quite frustrated by my peers. They just didn't seem to care about the content or technology. I'd internally think "why are you even here then in this degree program"? It was clearly frustrating to the profs, it was frustrating to me, etc. At the time, my peers would especially be loud/demanding that the profs put in more work in education, and to some degree struck me as rather entitled. I would tinker a bit beyond what was required in the curriculum / syllabus, primarily because it was fun and interesting, not motivated by any sort of desire to get ahead, etc.

The state of education is not great I agree, but imo somehow we have created generations of students who don't care or are less able to do critical thinking, and certainly that impedes and/or unravels the progress any educator could hope to do.
Looks like there is no way i can use it without giving up on screen real estate. I'd love to have it pinned in the browser toolbar and I click it when I need it. But it wouldn't allow itself to be hidden and needs to have a floating circle taking up page real-estate.

Disabled it.
> so there was basically no chance that models had been trained on submission code yet. I do suspect performance on AoC 24 will increase over time…

No, but several of the problems were similar to problems in the training set from other challenges.

There was one that was almost exactly the same as one on Google Foobar called 'Prepare the Bunnies' Escape' as an example.

It is pretty hard to make these challenges that work across multiple langs, skills etc.. without making them into 'which works dfs/bfs/a*/dykstra' problems.

Obviously outside of the leaderboard group, an LLM being able to solve it doesn't really matter.

My friends and I flipped a coin for TDD vs traditional with each day, testing out assumptions and evaluating what was most readable/maintainable.

It was great for that.
Single mutation in dairy cow-associated H5N1 increases receptor binding breadth
The security of desktop Linux is just not there. Flatpak is a thing, but most users won't bother and they run all their desktop apps using the same uid and zero auditing or sandboxing. There is just no easy-to-use solutions, and none of existing mechanisms are default out-of-the-box.

One may argue that running an application means you have to trust the developer/distributor/etc. But no, I don't trust a single binary because I don't and won't have a full knowledge of what it's doing.
This kind of mirror my experience with LLMs. If I ask them non-original problems (make this API, write this test, update this function (that must be written 100s of time by develoeprs around the world, etc), it works very well. Some minors changes here and there but it saves time.

When I ask them to code things that they never heard of (I am working on a online sport game), it fails catastrophically. The LLM should know the sport, and what I ask is pretty clear for anyone who understand the game (I tested against actual people and it was obvious what to expect), but the LLM failed miserably. Even worse when I ask them to write some designs in CSS for the game. It seems if you take them outside the 3-columsn layout or bootstrap or the overused landing page, LLMs fails miserably.

It works very well for the known cases, but as soon as you want them to do something original, they just can't.
This is not true of adjacent bitfields, at least for C99:

An implementation may allocate any addressable storage unit large enough to hold a bit-field. If enough space remains, a bit-field that immediately follows another bit-field in a structure shall be packed into adjacent bits of the same unit.

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf 6.7.2.1 § 10
Why does Google need Mozilla at this point? Firefox has 2.6% market share. Sure, I imagine the cost/benefit ratio is slightly positive for Google, but Mozilla needs Google since that's the majority of their revenue; the reverse is definitely not true.
Your experience is selection bias. And if you never had issues with ext3fs, I assure you it's because you never checked.
I started on an Amiga without a compiler, and I've learned my first programming language there.

Then I got my first PC with Windows, and I learned a shit ton on it.

I am sure you had little effort to get your games, didn't you?

If you wanted to code, you would have done the same effort to get what you needed.

Magazines were a thing too...

Cheap excuses, the OS is irrelevant here.
From your link:

>In this case "hash" will be the same as SHA1(input) in all cases, except those where the input is detected to be malicious (as in the SHAttered attack)

I don't see how this can be more than a fundamentally forward-incompatible sticking plaster over the problem. The problem isn't merely that "detecting maliciousness" seems fraught in itself (how does one infer intent reliably?) -- it's that today's SHA1DC() implementation can only detect and optionally correct today's known attacks, so each new attack necessitates a new, incompatible version of SHA1DC().
The entire democratic party is more concerned about trans people, abortion, and immigrants than progress.
Tbh monokai (and solarized) never appealed to me, personally I dislike both. The best colorscheme is the one you make yourself. It’s not that hard once in a lifetime after you settled with an editor and 80% of it is the background and the primary keywords color. Red on dark is unreadable to me. Instead of code structure, I see white identifiers everywhere.
Well, if you're in a position where you can only put faith in someone else's word as to whether it's good for your needs (this is the vast majority of people), there's this: https://community.signalusers.org/t/overview-of-third-party-...
The basic Turing machine model isn't interactive, but Turing also discussed "choice" machines that were. They're a variant of what we now call non-deterministic turing machines where the decision is determined by a human oracle instead of some other method.
That and Firefox can run a full-grown version of uBlock Origin that actually works... at least for now.
Microsoft's AI setback: an imaginary letter
Upper right quadrant would be an 8-bit (or maybe 16-bit) CPU paired with a 3D graphics capable GPU. SNES + the SuperFX chip is the closest example I can think of. Similarly, there is the Genesis/Mega Drive + SVP chip.

I can't name a fully 8-bit machine with a 3d focused graphics chip. Maybe there are arcade boards?
> Some people just can’t wait to spend other people’s money and aren’t too picky about whether or not it’ll accomplish anything

What value does that have? You must have something valuable to contribute.
thanks for that, i kept running in circles look for a build of 22 wondering if i was doing something wrong
If you compile it yourself, can you still connect to the Signal servers?
Is this about having application logic in multiple places, or having application logic co-located with the data? Does it make a difference if the procedures are database triggers vs being directly called by the application code?

Would splitting off some of the logic into a separate service (that does its own database accesses) have the same issues?
as crazy as it sounds - they don’t. you can open them side-by-side and you’ll often see much different routes.
I agree on the "just work" principle, but stuff like "docker compose" is easy enough to use, and "standard enough". Typing "docker compose up -d" once isn't that much effort. And make sure the connection string is configurable through an environment variable so people can use $something_else if they really want/need to.

Practicality beats purity, and all of that. Especially when it saves quite of complexity in the code itself – new contributors are going to struggle with that, too.

In short, the setup doesn't need to be manual.
„You have exceeded your monthly git commits. Every additional commit will cost 0,20$“
I appreciate the reply and discussion. I am aggressively data driven, so I must ask “How did we get here?” because if we want to do better, we have to ask why. Don’t feel bad, I’m a terrible judge of character myself (too much empathy and trust makes me not skeptical enough until “fool me twice”). The people who desperately want the job…sometimes shouldn’t have the job. Why do they want the job? we must ask.

I highly recommend the book “Calling Bullshit: The Art of Scepticism in a Data-Driven World” by Carl Bergstrom and Jevin D. West on the topic of seeking truth in discussions.

With regards to the topic at hand, the cuts available are…military spending. Also, most tragically, taxes will need to go up to pay off tens of trillions of dollars of debt. It is impossible to cut our way to fiscal responsibility.

> The federal government allocates funds across a wide range of programs and services. About 18% was spent on defense and veterans, and another 18% went to state and local governments. Other spending categories include debt interest payments and benefit programs such as SNAP.

> Social Security and Medicare are two of the largest individual programs funded by the federal government. In FY 2023, 22% of the federal budget went to Social Security and 14% went to Medicare. These programs are part of the government's “mandatory spending,” which is required by law and is not subject to annual congressional appropriations. For example, the federal government is required to provide Social Security payments to all eligible beneficiaries at levels specified in the Social Security Act, regardless of cost. Congress does not have the power to reduce mandatory program spending unless it changes the rules or laws regarding the programs themselves. Mandatory spending has increased from 45% of the budget in FY 1980 to 62% in FY 2023.

https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-debt-does-the-us-have/...

> How much debt does the US have?

> About $34.3 trillion as of September 2024.

> $102K
in debt was held by the US government per person.
My feelings about this very much hinge on whether or not it is in fact the original creator of the theme who gets paid for it.

If so? Fair enough, a very small ask for a very useful thing.

If not? Fuck your own face.
Surely there’s an extension that does vertical tabs…
It’s amazing how genes choose from the chaos if 10^200 possibilities and don’t self destruct.
Yes, they are very careful about not breaking userspace. That has nothing to do with holding the _user_ in high regard, though.

The sweeping changes in Linux are amazing, but they also break a lot, frequently, and the testing approach leaves a lot to be desired. I am old and a former embedded coder, I understand how the 90s developers feel about unit testing, and I am sympathetic to the idea that test-driven-development and heavy UT in modern teams is often completely out of control, but Linux is distinctly lacking in real testing of independent units in isolation. I am aware of kunit, kselftest, etc.
Your evidence is some anecodtal experience from a decade ago? How do you know the causes of what you remember seeing?
uBlock Matrix, not Origin, if you actually want fine-grained control.
We are so way too late.

ByteDance owns TikTok, part of Reddit, and many games. Also, the CCP runs almost the entire manufacturing sector. Not just electronics, but ships.

The Xiaomi SU7 is .1 revs away from Tesla & Porsche.

The choice to sell ourselves to the CCP, for short term profit, was made decades ago by the consulting class.

The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them

I hate the person being quoted above with all my might, but that does not make the prediction any less true.

My last hope was that the corruption of the CCP was worse than the corruption of the USA. Given the latest election, I am not so sure about that anymore.

Has your employer contributed to POTUS's inauguration, if not, please ask them to do so or else you might be unemployed! This is the CCP-level corruption bullshit. WTF.
Is this why China is such a great and technically advanced country?
It's just substituting gravitational redshift for cosmological redshift; one can also substitute kinematic redshift for cosmological redshift. The redder bits are running slower, which one sees from spectral lines that are reliably generated by quantum processes. There are reasons for preferring cosmological redshift, and in particular it's because whatever is going on with the distribution and motion of galaxies, it's doing an excellent excellent imitation of a big (~70%) stable energy-density smoothly at every point.

The reverse of your question is interesting: a quasar host galaxy or a Seyfert galaxy isolated deep within a supervoid should be much less redshifted than similar cluster and filament galaxies (one would have to "weigh" the galaxies, and so would lean on angle-diameter-distance and other geometrical relations, relative redshift of hydrogen-alpha (and millimeter CO and 21cm neutral hydrogen spin-flip etc.) at the galactic limbs and in globular clusters). The side-effect of Timescapes running clocks much slower in filaments is that they run much faster in supervoids. Many known voids have small numbers of galaxies in them (the emptiest of voids have something like a tenth of the radio-generating matter compared to large galaxy clusters, so they're nothing like "empty", which in turn drives the focus to the evolution of Timescape's "void fraction") so looking for faster-running galaxies in voids is not an impossible observational test.

Going forward again, the late-time Integrated Sachs-Wolfe structure would be anisotropic, with strong nonlinear differences between ISW radiation through filaments (because of the significant gravitational backreaction central to Timescapes) and ISW radiation through voids. Coarsely, that's not what we see (nonlinear effects are subdominant) and is an obvious target of study of the Timescapes proponents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachs%E2%80%93Wolfe_effect#Lat...
You don't really need an elaborate setup; it's sufficient to know how to install packages and explore some possibilities. It usually takes someone experienced to convince them that Emacs is truly the best choice for dealing with plain text. I'm not a musician, but I suppose if I was an aspiring and very talented guitar player and someone would convince me that Gibson Les Paul or Fender Statocaster is just the hands-down the best choice for the job - nothing would ever stop me from finding a way to have and use one, right?

And to leave you with a practical recommendation, not just philosophical rambling, here's https://github.com/pprevos/emacs-writing-studio. Note that I haven't used it myself. I don't know anything about it, beyond its existence.
I am also an immigrant and went through a US undergraduate CS program and agree with all your points; I observed all the same things you have. :)
> if you need mocks to test a code path, you are probably "doing it wrong" as there are much better ways to do that.

Most code paths you want to test are error branches, and creating real error conditions is hard to completely unrealistic (e.g. causing hardware malfunction on each test run). What is the better way in your mind?

Mocks can only exist at the integration points, fundamentally. There is a natural interface there, an interface that you are not supposed to be testing. Those tests already exist around the module that provides the integration. You don't need to test it again.

If a mock standing in for the real thing causes ill-effects, you've done something wrong. You're not supposed to be testing the mock while using the mock. If your mocks need tests (they probably do!), they should be tested outside its use.
Ok so China invaded Taiwan in 1949.

Per your argument this is so far in the past that
the invasion and occupation doesnt matter anymore
To the winner goes the spols right.
The rights of the natives are well past their sell buy date.

How many years do you count from an occupation begins
until it does not matter anymore how or what the nation
was has no meaning anymore?

20 years? 40 years?

Do you care to then apply your time of expiration of a nation
and its peoples to other conflicts we have had have had
in the world?

Or is Taiwan a special case?
Kubota Future Cube in Three.js