skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This looks to be a degree more sophisticated than that.

Authors in the comments here mention that the flo compiler (?) will accept-and-rewrite Rust code to make it more amenable to distribution. It also appears to be building and optimising the data-flow rather than just distributing the work. There’s also comparisons to timely, which I believe does some kind of incremental compute.
Right, the article isn't very clear. I would assume that the 7th amendment to a jury trial would apply here, but it is unclear if he was denied this right or chose not to try assert it until after he ran out administrative appeal options.
In my view one of the most pressing shortcomings of Ghidra is that it can't understand the lifetimes of multiple variables with overlapping stack addresses: https://github.com/NationalSecurityAgency/ghidra/issues/975

Ghidra does have an extensive scripting API, and I've used LLMs to help me write scripts to do bulk changes like you've described. But you would have to think about how you would ensure the name suffix is synchronized as you retype variables during your analysis.
A military coup is a kind of coup, but not the only kind. This one, for example, is an auto-coup. Many coups don't look like one at first.
this is...despite happening concurrently with a "democratic transition", a coup, which is going entirely unopposed by the legislature.

this is ... beyond bad.
My chemical engineer friends like to point out that the Haber-Bosch process has doubled global food production, or something like that. In the same “industrial agriculture” category as tractors and combines.
I made an intentionally unhelpful AI chatbot
I was experimenting with Deepseek-Coder and other open source LLMs, and had this idea: what if we made an AI that intentionally refuses to help and gives sarcastic responses? Sort of an antidote to all the helpful AI assistants out there.
The result is BadGPT - an AI that responds with snark, deliberately misinterprets questions, and has zero interest in being useful. It uses the Qwen-2.5 model and some creative prompt engineering to generate consistently unhelpful responses.
Some example personas:

ValleyGirlGPT: Judges your code as either "basic" or "extra"
LiteralGPT: Takes programming terms literally ("OMG, you want to KILL a process?!")
SassyGPT: Responds with maximum attitude and shade

The most interesting feature is that anyone can create and share their own custom AI personalities in seconds. Just write a prompt describing how your AI should behave, pick an emoji, and share the link. We've seen some really creative ones - a Shakespeare bot that critiques your code in iambic pentameter, a pirate that refuses to debug anything without rum, etc.
The interesting part was finding the right balance - making it entertaining without being mean-spirited. It's been fun seeing how people interact differently when they know the AI is intentionally difficult.
It's completely free to use. The code is pretty simple - just a Flask app with Firebase for analytics. Happy to answer any questions about the implementation!
Try it out: https://badchatgpt.com
Tech stack details for those interested:

Backend: Python/Flask
Model: Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct via HuggingFace
Storage: Firebase (tracks chats, custom AIs, analytics)
Frontend: Basic HTML/CSS/JS
Custom AIs: Stored as prompts, reranked daily based on usage

The custom AI feature was inspired by all the custom GPTs being released lately, but I wanted to make something simpler where anyone could create and share their own AI personality without needing to know programming or pay for API access.
Coups do not require troops. They simple require the existing regime to be removed.

Months ago, the leader of Project 2025 said a second Trump term would be "a second American Revolution" and "bloodless if the left allows it to be".

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/04/leader-of-the-pro-t...
404media? Wikileaks? Project Brazen? Motherboard? Bellingcat? Quanta magazine? Rest of world? Intercept? Techdirt?

Even things like BBC, CBC, NHK, NPR - you can whine about their politics but they're journalists at a news organization, trying to do their job as reporters instead of forwarding a particular agenda.

If you think sensationalist bad faith pushers who are trying to persuade an ideology are the same as journalists trying to abide by ethics, accuracy and codes of conduct who value responsibility and integrity then I can't help you.
> DEI is measured as a statistical, after-the-fact, population-level macro mandate.

For this to mean anything it has to be not just a metric but a target, and as soon as it's a target, you're not just measuring something after-the-fact.

> It's not illegal to look at your hiring efforts and decide to cast your hiring net in a different demographical area.

"Not illegal" isn't the issue when the debate is about what the law should be.

Suppose that you want to hit your numbers and that you further know that you can find more qualified candidates in a specific area which is predominantly white. If you advertise in the predominantly white area, you find a candidate in a month. If you advertise in that area and other areas, you find a candidate in a month, but it's the same candidate. Neither of these allow you to meet your numbers. Whereas if you advertise only in predominantly black areas, you eventually find a qualified candidate, and you meet your numbers, but it takes six months and in the meantime you're understaffed.

> If you can't fill headcount, either your bar is too high, your firm sucks to work for, you aren't paying enough, or you need to work harder on hiring.

Or you're hiring for a job with a limited number of qualified applicants while purposely reducing the number of applicants from a particular demographic because they would be qualified but mess up your numbers.
Lemme see, a company publishes a 'survey' that claims that their niche product is very popular, or would be if anybody bothered to purchase it. And because their product combines AI and romance, this press release is the perfect fodder for a Vice article.

Or was the article written by AI?
lobste.rs is still around and quite active. Not on the level of HN, of course.
> It’s possible for someone to make art from GenAI outputs, but that requires taking artistic liberties post generation.

Plenty of people use others' expressions as a form of art, (sharing song lyrics, singing others' songs in the shower, cat memes, and so on).
FDA approves non-opioid analgesic suzetrigine
Journalism is often used as a means to advocate for an ideology, but that's certainly not the definition of the practice. Accuracy, fairness, and avoiding bias are ideals that make for much better journalism, which is why it's a shame that so much of what we actually get was written and publicized by people who don't worry very much about any of those things.

That said, if someone wants to promote an ideology then reporting on events related to what concerns them in order to inform their supporters or gain new ones seems like a very good idea.
Happens every administration. But someone from the opposition party always gets their nose out of joint and it makes news and it’s just the most horrible thing ever.
Although the chatbot in chrome devtools is really useful. I selected a DOM node and ask "why isn't this visible" and it queried the DOM, css and figured out the height was 0 and explained exactly what lead to it being 0.
Art is often still something people do to sell to others. Possibly sport and fitness are the real examples of what machines can't do for us. I spend hours a day over years as a kid perfecting my jump shot and my fastball. Ran miles a day. Here in middle-age, I haven't been in any team sports since school, but still spend a lot of time lifting, working on basic range of motion, and have quite a bit of fun getting as good as I can get at skateboarding and rock climbing.

If you gave me an exoskelton that I could put on that would allow me to just do those things without any practice, I would not want that. I'm not just looking for the thrill of being on the board or hanging from a rock wall. Building the skill to do it myself is the point.

I haven't been into any more explicitly artistic creative endeavors since high school, but I think I'd have said the same thing then. I spent 60-100 hours per painting back then, and I did it because I enjoyed doing it, I enjoyed seeing the fruit of lots and lots of practice, developing skills. If I could have just pressed a button and had the same paintings but not done them myself, it's hard to see what the point of that would have been. The effort involved was most of the reason I even wanted to do it. But this was 30 years ago and I guess it was different days. We had schoolwide and district-wide art shows and it was cool to win awards, but I wasn't selling anything or trying to gain fame in an attention economy, never hoped to make any kind of living off of art and I never did.

I would have said the same about school band, too. Probably a programmed synthesizer could have produced better melody than me, but physically practicing and playing the instruments myself was part of the point to me.

But I think this reveals at least two entirely different purposes to art, creativity, skill, whatever, reflected different in the author, myself, and you. I don't mean to invalidate your approach by any means. Creating something you and others love, by any means at all, even automatically by machine, is entirely valid. There is still that other side, though. Think of the whole meme of engineers who take up woodworking. I highly doubt they ever really make better furniture than could have been made by some more automatic means that doesn't involve their own labor, only expressing a desire and letting someone or something else do the work. But that isn't the point. They're doing it because they want to make something they tangibly did themselves, even if it's shit at first, shit for a long time, or even shit forever. It's why my neighbor (we live in downtown townhouses) insists of growing her own peppers. They're not better than she could buy from the store, or cheaper. DIY is its own reward.
this sort of deeply stupid both-sidesism is one of the strongest enabling factors for people who don't want even notional democracy to persist.

grow up and be better, buddy.
Spotify used to have a "dislike" button for their Discover Weekly which helped with pruning music you don't like, but with the natural law of tech enshitification they removed that feature a month ago.
Abdominal migraine is thought to be what caused the nausea that plagued Charles Darwin through much of his life.
Voting districts and the resulting gerrymandering also doesn't help. Smaller or alternative parties never stand a chance.

Still interesting though that there are a handful of people still voting on those.
I probably came in too hot on that (dealing with some personal stuff). Although I disagree with purported the impact of the paper, I don’t think this is fundamentally incorrect or bad science and I wish you the best on future research.
> they didn't have a "framestore" that is, you painted one image, saved it to tape, loaded in a new one etc etc. There was no real "local" storage for keeping frames, as the article pointed out.

I think that was true for the early generations. The Paintbox only had memory for a foreground, background and alpha channel, so 2.5 frames at most. However, I recently watched a demonstration video for the Harriet which followed only a few years later and it said it could store 12.5 seconds of video to RAM - which would explain it's high price. The video showed recording video clips to this memory by simply playing them in real-time. It also mentioned being able to store up to 30 seconds of video offline on a removable Winchester disk pack (although I'm sure transferring video frames to that over SCSI required quite a while).

That said, there was definitely a long period of time where a lot of computers capable of displaying one frame at a time of video output where used for animation by pairing them with an edit controller and an industrial or professional-grade editing video recorder. The computer would be hooked up via RS-232 (or 422) to the edit controller which would control the VTR to rewind to a certain point, roll forward and at the precisely correct moment record a single-frame insert edit onto the tape. Then the controller would stop tape and wait for the computer to signal it had loaded or rendered another frame for recording and repeat the process all over again. Not counting loading or rendering time, just recording each frame to tape probably took 10 or 15 seconds, so a decent length clip could take hours just to record. This sort of animation recording was common on Amigas (often with a Video Toaster installed), Macs and other computers with decent graphical output. Quantel's Harriet and other systems capable of real-time video playback in this era were the ultra luxury version that avoided trashing magnetic tape around to record animation and affordable only by the extreme high-end. Although even the "low-end" was far from cheap. As I recall, just the edit controller cost around $5,000 and VTRs capable of doing single-frame edits started at over $10,000 (all in 1980s dollars).
> Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct levers and the gloves are off right now.

Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? It just stands to reason, there's not even the weak ties of being members of the same group.

I mean, to be a little outlandish: if there was a conflict, and some foreign adversary could transmit a mind virus to Americans that would cause them to go on murderous rampages and kill everyone, they'd probably do it. It'd be an instant win, and there'd be some sweet, sweet land to colonize afterwards.
> 72% of all votes cast (...), excluding votes of shares owned, directly or indirectly, by Messrs. Elon and Kimbal Musk.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000110465924...
> There's nothing in there about say, valuing accurate journalism that informs the public with relevant information.

I think your criticisms of them are unfair (at least with regards to this specific article) – and I'm speaking as someone who actually doesn't have a huge amount of agreement with their ideology (I'm no libertarian).

The grandparent is pointing out that the case was about a "fine" – the article itself doesn't use that specific word, but it is obvious to anyone who reads it that is what it is talking about. It links for more information to another page – https://ij.org/case/c-s-lawn-administrative-appeal/ – which does use that word. But I think, the author of this article (Rob Johnson) not using the term "fine", is not due to some attempt to mislead the reader – it is because the US government doesn't technically call it a "fine", calling it a "liability" is the language it uses, and being a lawyer he naturally gravitates to using the most technically correct language regarding the case. Part of the reason why it is called a "liability" not a "fine", is fines are ultimately kept by the government, whereas at least some of this $50,000 is allegedly unpaid wages which are to be ultimately paid to the employees, but the employer disputes the government's claim they underpaid them to begin with.

What the court case is actually about, is whether someone who is having a $50,000 liability imposed on them (whether as a fine or as back-payment of underpaid wages) has the constitutional right to have a proper trial before an independent judge and jury before having the liability imposed, or whether a "trial" before a "judge" who actually works for the executive agency issuing the liability is sufficient. Whatever is the right answer on that one, I don't think Johnson's position is per se unreasonable. And Johnson is picking on one of the several counterarguments to that contention that DOJ lawyers make in a brief – that constitutional protections against expropriation don't apply to money because money isn't property – and calling it out as unreasonable. I don't think Johnson is necessarily wrong here. Rejecting this contention wouldn't necessarily win the case for the non-government side, since this is really a threshold issue – are those constitutional limits even in scope here? Just because (contrary to this argument in the brief) you conclude "yes they are", doesn't mean that when you go into their details, you won't find that some exception to them applies. But if the whole thing is out of scope, you don't even reach consideration of the exceptions.
really sad that this is what it's coming to... why are we having to play these games to run a simple search?
I didn’t say you need to follow the steps. But this is the standard playbook for Billionaires seeking political favors and tax incentives.

Incorporating somewhere can get you political favor, which in turn can get you tax incentives. If you’re planning to move your Hq (which is a multi year long effort), it definitely helps if you have the first two steps lined up.
I think he was probably making a comment about Python in regards to PyTorch and AI's energy usage.

i.e. Whether a language exists "at the expense of society" probably depends less on who makes the language, and more on what you do with it.
Chainsaw [video]
Trump putting 'pause' on most US Government websites, source says
The system will work just fine. You seem to be under the impression that the purpose of the system is to prevent teenagers from accessing some websites. That is not the purpose of the system, that's just the pretext for implementing it.
My English Lit friend definitely was aware of a trap of learning to pick apart literature before you can create your own. And then fell into it anyway. I suppose it’s like medical students and the DSM, sometimes it just freaks you out instead of informing.

It should probably be an MS class or a senior level class.
Once I was an editorial illustrator, and the mantra always was "concept is king". Stick figures are kosher so long as they communicate something.

Impressionists emerged following the invention of the camera, as they had no more incentive to pursue realism. I think in the age of AI slop any form of crude image making is better so long as it's human. Scribble something out with crayons. Shape an animal out of a slice of bread, post a pic. It's all legit now, technical art abilities mean nothing. To impress you actually have to have a good idea.
Thanks for sharing this! And no apparent self-awareness! OpenAI has come a long way from the Sydney days: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/bing/forum/all/this-ai-c...
I hate how Zuckerberg tiptoes around Section 230; that's what his hyper-masculine phase is about. Pretending medical information shows up on your front door, pretending Cambridge Analytica doesn't show up, pretending you're acting in good faith. It's all pretend. Sure, this child's HIPAA package was posted on Facebook, we don't know what that is. Instead of exporting a child's medical information to a local church, we're exporting it out of the country. That's what good faith means because I'm a philanthropist and I'm a philanthropist for doing so; we developed Zstandard.
Are you suggesting that the ultimate arbiter of whether something is ethical or not is whether it would be allowed by natural selection?
Why do you a-priori bias yourself to assume that looking somewhere else will reduce the number of qualified candidates that will make it through your pipeline?

How are you so confident that it won't increase it?
Not really impressed by the answers I just got.
I agree with everything you're saying about how hard the privacy issue is, but would also like to add that the social media companies are incentivized to act like they have no idea how to implement a solution, because they want teens using their apps. The Facebook Files make it abundantly clear that social companies see teen users are their most valuable asset, since the rest of the culture tends to follow where teens go. When the social companies, who are collectively worth tens of trillions of dollars, say they don't know how to implement the law without convoluted, privacy-destroying, digital government IDs I just don't buy it.
Taxation isn't covered by the takings clause because taxation is in the constitution the same as the takings clause is. That's an easy one. This, on the other hand, isn't a tax, it's a fine, i.e. a punishment. And punishments are the domain of judges.
> This is not the first time internet sleuths have discovered a way to disable Google’s AI-powered results. Other methods are more complicated, however, like adding a specific string of characters to the search results page URL. This method of swearing and pleading at Google to “just give me the fucking links” is much more cathartic.

"More complicated" is actually just as simple as going to https://tenbluelinks.org/ and following the instructions. It's so refreshing to just see links when you search, and it's unfortunate that the OP makes it out to be something that's prohibitively difficult to do.
As an Australian parent of a 14-year-old, I find social media to be a significant hassle. Yet, I know delivery drivers who are far more technologically proficient than many government leaders. I had expected that, even if the public face was somewhat just a pretty face and a good talker, there would be a knowledgeable team working behind the scenes. However, this ban has convinced me that there isn’t a single informed voice involved in the process.
Ok, so the problem is not that the UK representatives in EU was in minority. This was your argument, that you are now admitting is not a good one. You change your argument now, in your previous message, you say nowhere that one condition for being "unelected" is someone to be not culturally integrated with the EU (or something like that). And that is a different discussion, where there is no winner, because the pro-remain people are probably considering themselves close to EU, and therefore, for them, your argument does not correspond to their reality (and "unelected" becomes rather subjective).

But also, if you don't like Kansas as an example, you can take any different example, taking any region, in any country. You often have parties that are located in some part of a country and not the other (Scottish and Welsh for example, but you probably have that in plenty of other places) and that don't align either with the dominant parties.
Where do you stop? It looks like you it's just an easy no-true-scotsman argument where you just decide that this specific case is "unelected officials", and you can always find unrelated differences to pretend that other cases are ok.
Rather dumb take, she wrote amazing books IMO, we can look at and take inspiration from her way of working to be applied to our own way of working and not like her as a person.
Money is not property.Never was.Never will be.

Money is a construct, which we agree or disagree on its value, and use as a proxy to trade for real goods or services.
The inherant value of paper money is elmost nothing, electronic forms of money, could be viewed as w liability, as it takes energy to maintain its presence.Coins are metal, and embody the effort of extraction and potential re use, so are property.
Why anyone needs to argue this is odd.
Predicting language tokens but without logic probably does not map well at all to system 1 thinking, except where fast=conversation.
Yet, tax revenues are dropping everywhere. At a state level and at local levels.
And yet Kagi isn't anywhere near as good as Google was ~13 years ago.

Yes - a big part of that is that online content is so much worse than it used to be. But it became bad over time because of what Google incentivized.
False dichotomy, when you could have both, and they can have non-overlapping censorship criteria.

What one censors the other doesn't, and you get less censorship when there are more options available.