skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Bullshit like this is exactly why I think scientists are better philosophers than philosophers are. The text you've quoted, is, frankly, not the writings of an intelligent person.

The reason I'm being very blunt about this, is because bullshit like this is actively harmful. Science is fucking important. Science is what resulted in the technology you're using to read this. Science is, with non-negligible probability, the basis of medicine that prevented you from dying before the age of 5 to be able to read this. When philosophers posit that they can inspect the their own navels and find deep truths about the world, they are undermining one of the fundamental pillars of society that holds up so much of the positive changes humans have been able to make.

We need to call this what it is--nonsense and misinformation--and stop amplifying its signal.

> By ‘Bayesian’ philosophy of science I mean the position that (1) the objective of science is, or should be, to increase our ‘credence’ for true theories, and that (2) the credences held by a rational thinker obey the probability calculus. However, if T is an explanatory theory (e.g. ‘the sun is powered by nuclear fusion’), then its negation ~T (‘the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion’) is not an explanation at all. Therefore, suppose (implausibly, for the sake of argument) that one could quantify ‘the property that science strives to maximise’. If T had an amount q of that, then ~T would have none at all, not 1-q as the probability calculus would require if q were a probability.

Of course "the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion" IS an explanation, it's just not an explanation of a phenomenon we observe, which is why most scientists don't believe "the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion". If we observed something about the sun that was not consistent with the hypothesis that it is powered by nuclear fusion, "the sun is not powered by nuclear fusion" would indeed be an explanation of what we were observing.

This is all sidestepping the absurdity that Deutsch doesn't seem to understand that "none at all" has a mathematical representation, 0, meaning that if p = 1 - q = 0, then q = 1. This is not difficult math here, folks.

> Also, the conjunction (T₁ & T₂) of two mutually inconsistent explanatory theories T₁ and T₂ (such as quantum theory and relativity) is provably false, and therefore has zero probability. Yet it embodies some understanding of the world and is definitely better than nothing.

Uh sure, which is why nobody with a brain takes the conjunction of those two things. This isn't a criticism of Bayesian philosophy of science, it's a straw man argument.

> Furthermore if we expect, with Popper, that all our best theories of fundamental physics are going to be superseded eventually, and we therefore believe their negations, it is still those false theories, not their true negations, that constitute all our deepest knowledge of physics.

Deutsch apparently doesn't know what an approximation is, and instead thinks of correct/incorrect as a binary. Relevant https://hermiene.net/essays-trans/relativity_of_wrong.html
Two wrongs don’t make a right, and it seems weird to me you‘d want to work for such a most-selfish cheater in the first place.
Wow I completely didn’t notice that until I read your comment. My brain must have automatically filled in the correct word. I had to go back and re-read it to confirm.
>There's no way the compiler can run that, because it doesn't know what x is (indeed, it would have a different value every time you run the function with a new argument). So your proposal would ditch const completely except in the constexpr case, everything runtime would have to be mutable.

Yeah, I see no problem with that.
Non-constant expressions usage of 'const' has always just seemed like a waste of time for me, never found it useful.
But I guess a lot of people really liking typing const and "preventing themselves from accidentally mutating a variable" (when has that ever happened?), so as a compromise I guess you can have a new keyword to force constant expressions:

constexpr auto x = foo(); // always eval at compile time
const auto x = foo(); // old timey const, probably runtime but maybe got constant folded.

but it's not really a big deal what they keyword is, the main point was that "give me a constant value" should be at the usage site, not at the function definition.
Can you explain more? What exactly did I say which was incorrect?
There's also the Lisp philosophy which emphasizes that you are your own libraries' author, too! Third-party libraries can only help you with common business code - anything specific to your domain, or your business, you have to model yourself. Using macros is fundamentally not different than using classes or functions to create an environment[0] where expressing your business logic is straightforward, and invalid states are not representable. Metaprogramming just lets you go further in this direction than "traditional" tools languages offer.

--

[0] - The correct term here is Domain-Specific Language, but by now it's badly overloaded and people have knee-jerk reactions to it...
If you need to create a script, and generally you don't, then you just copy a template that has start, stop and restart functions. Generally it's not more than launching an executable and killing a process or doing both.

It's certainly not more complicated than authoring a unit file.
"or actually reason." how can you be sure it actually do "reasoning" ??? all I can see just made up some nonsense words
That doesn't seem obvious to me. Would you mind elaborating?
I think you are both right.

AI will let some people conquer skills otherwise out of their reach, with all the pros and cons of that. It is exactly like the example someone else brought up of not needing to know assembly anymore with higher level languages: true, but those who do know it and can internalize how the machines operate have an easier time when it comes to figuring out the real hard problems and bugs they might hit.

Which means that you only need to learn machine language and assembly superficially, and you have a good chance of being a very good programmer.

However, where I am unsure how the things will unfold is that humans are constantly coming up with different programming languages, frameworks, patterns, because none of the existing ones really fit their mental model or are too much to learn about. Which — to me at least — hints at what I've long claimed: programming is more art than science. With complex interactions between a gazillion of mildly incompatible systems, even more so.

As such, for someone with strong fundamentals, AI tools never provided much of a boon to me (yet). Incidentally, neither did StackOverflow ever help me: I never found a problem that I struggled with that wasn't easily solved with reading the upstream docs or upstream code, and when neither was available or good enough, SO was mostly crickets too.

These days, I rarely do "gruntwork" programming, and only get called in on really hard problems, so the question switches to: how will we train the next generation of software engineers who are going to be called in for those hard problems?

Because let's admit it, even today, not everybody can handle them.
This seems to be left out of the conversation when comparing Bluesky with the wider fediverse. The AT protocol relies on a bespoke setup and is complicated to implement. ActivityPub is comparatively simple, and can be implemented on pretty every thing with just a few endpoints.
I'll also share a little of my brush with management... there's "easy mode manager" and "hard mode manager".

"Easy Mode" is when you're naturally promoted from IC to Manager in a problem domain you know, and already have the respect and admiration of your peers.

"Hard Mode" is when you're transitioned to manage a team where you don't know the problem domain, and don't already have a good working relationship with the people you'll be managing.

Much depend on your personality and support structure. If you're a "technical homebody" or don't have good support/rapport with the new director? This would be signals that this new role isn't the best fit for you.
My guess is it's more due to insurance at the venue. I don't know who pays in those situations, but I would imagine they require "no guns" posted and announced. And if there is any form of gunshot injury they have very strong teeth to dodge the claim.
What I don't see here is how the EU is actually defining what is and is not considered AI.

> AI that manipulates a person’s decisions subliminally or deceptively.

That can be a hugely broad category that covers any algorithmic feed or advertising platform.

Or is this limited specifically to LLMs, as OpenAI has so successfully convinced us that LLMs really are Aai and previous ML tools weren't?
So suddenly we're in a state where:

- AI companies ask candidates to not "eat their own dog food"
- AI companies blames each other of "copying" their IP while they find it legit to use "humans" IP for training.
Well, "perfect" and "good" are very relative by themselves already, namely most of the time are meaningless if we stay honest with ourselves.
Many a grad a moment: your subject's technical debt is beyond your chops
They do, but safety and social control go hand in hand.

In any case, its not as if your kid is safer at a private school. Kids are violent, no matter where they are; maybe you remember going through school yourself?
The point of coding is not to tell a machine what to do.

The point of coding is to remove ambiguity from the specs.

"Code" is unambiguous, deterministic and testable language -- something no human language is (or wants to be).

LLMs today make many implementation mistakes where they confuse one system with another, assume some SQL commands are available in a given SQL engine when they aren't, etc. It's possible that these mistakes will be reduced to almost zero in the future.

But there is a whole other class of mistakes that cannot be solved by code generation -- even less so if there's nobody left capable of reading the generated code. It's when the LLM misunderstands the question, and/or when the requirements aren't even clear in the head of the person writing the question.

I sometimes try to use LLMs like this: I state a problem, a proposed approach, and ask the LLM to shoot holes in the solution. For now, they all fail miserably at this. They recite "corner cases" that don't have much or anything to do with the problem.

Only coding the happy path is a recipe for unsolvable bugs and eventually, catastrophe.
Copying and pasting from stack overflow is a tool.

It’s fine to do in some cases, but it certainly gets abused by lazy incurious people.

Tool use in general certainly can be lazy. A car is a tool, but most people would call an able bodied person driving their car to the end of the driveway to get the mail lazy.
Can I request that they not use AI when evaluating my application, and expect them to respect my wishes? Highly doubtful. Respect is a 2-way street. This is not a collaboration, but a hierarchical mandate in one direction, for protecting themselves from the harms of the very tools they peddle.
Don't worry, you can appeal at the GMAFIA robot. Who will instantly deny you.
"forces of nature in the service of man" - classic polish comedy ;)
That is surprising. If anything, I would expect the toslink signal to be superior as it is completely galvanically isolated. Is it possible that there is dirt affecting the signal, either in the sockets or on the plugs?
The fundamental difference is that X is focussed on its "For You" feed while Bluesky focusses on "Following". They are similar tools, but the different approach means one is far closer to "self-promotion and PR" than the other, and I don't think it's inevitable that Bluesky will descend to X's depths.
Is there a term for the situation that, when there's a dozen different products competing in the same space, there may as well be none?
> unacceptable risk applications — the focus of this month’s compliance requirements — will be prohibited entirely. Some of the unacceptable activities include:

…

what follows is a list of some pretty nasty and insidious use cases.

it’s not “AI is completely banned”, it’s “consider the use cases you are working on responsibly”. only for those specific use cases, mind you.

for all other use cases not in the list, which is a significantly larger subset of development, just ensure you do the required safety/regulatory sign off work.

just like when we get our SaaS webapps evaluated for compliance to security standards, its just a box ticking exercise for the most part.
Exactly. I saw way more Elon and Trump posts on Bluesky than I saw on Twitter.
The problem with “build more affordable housing” in countries that are desperately importing the entire world in an attempt to keep welfare programs afloat is that the amount of housing required to be built EVERY YEAR is staggering.

When a new citizen is born, there’s 18+ years for the required housing supply for that person to be created. When a new citizen is imported, they need housing TODAY. It’s just not a sustainable model on a continuous basis, but no one wants to hear that.
Specifically for engineering I think it could work if you really press on that it's about teaching something. A core part in an engineering team is to walk eachother through concepts, so judging how you can explain concepts to someone is actually a good thing i believe?
> A major differentiator for DeepSeek is its ability to run its own data centers, unlike most other AI startups that rely on external cloud providers. This independence allows for full control over experiments and AI model optimizations. In addition, it enables rapid iteration without external bottlenecks, making DeepSeek highly efficient compared to traditional players in the industry.

Very interesting. So, effectively, their ability to self-host is a big part of what has made them successful.
I run commands and check their outputs, and most commands come from my recent history (atuin these days). Change folders with "z <part-of-path>" mostly. When working with multiple files I'll open the folder with "code ." (Cursor) and continue there. For some reason I can't get myself to use the VSCode terminal that much. I think its because I cmd+Q by accident too often.
Progress is built on top of an infinite number of dependences.

In many ways people that don't use sat nav are at a disadvantage: real time traffic and redirection, high precision ETA, trip logging, etc.
Sort of.

There are two basic ways to orient a career: around a set of people that you are loyal to and work well with (and then let the specific assignments float to whatever needs doing), and around a type of work that you enjoy doing (and then let the people come and go, standing out by your competence in the domain).

I've found that the former often leads to more promotions and opportunities, because people make the decisions after all. But OP's expressed desires indicate more the latter. He gets satisfaction out of the work itself, understanding the technical domain and challenges. If that's your personality type and your inclination, you can make yourself very unhappy (not to mention underperforming) by pushing yourself into types of work that don't give you satisfaction, for the sake of preserving relationships. Sometimes it's worth it to forego the attractive opportunities favored by senior leadership so that you can continue to work on the things that you find enjoyable.
Now imagine a world where most kids were raised with this bullshit and it's normal to them.
> Forgive me, but I just don't see the problem here.

There is no problem. But some people will create problems out of thin air, when there is none.
I recently took their CodeSignal assessment, which is part of their initial screening process.

Oh, wow. I really believe they are missing out on great engineers due to the nature of it.

90 minutes to implement a series of increasingly difficult specs and pass all the unit tests.

There is zero consideration for quality of code. My email from the recruiter said (verbatim), “the CodeSignal screen is intended to test your ability to quickly and correctly write and refactor working code. You will not be evaluated on code quality.”

It was my first time ever taking a CodeSignal assessment and there was really no way to prepare for it ahead of time.

Apparently, I can apply again in 6 months.
No Ads.

100% user-centric moderation controls. Blockity block! Block lists are a godsend. This is what made Dorsey quit the board and abandon the platform. He actually believed the masses wanted a libertarian platform that forced you to listen to assholes. We don’t.

No opaque algorithms controlling your timeline.

Feeds to create topic centric timelines.

Decentralized. You can host your own data. Other hosts can offer refuge if Bluesky went rogue. Bluesky doesn’t own the data.

Many independent journalists have moved over so we’re getting significantly better news and not the false equivalence nonsense peddled by most of the major media outlets.

And kittens, birds, dogs, deer, raccoons, and other heartwarming animal posts.
Dušan Popov (Agent Tricycle), the Serbian double agent that inspired James Bond
The Language Construction Kit (1996, 2012)
Sounds like the interview process needs to be improved then?
Having looked at a lot of these platforms, only Hive (formerly Steem) operates in a properly decentralized manner.
Related:

FBI Agents Are Stunned by the Scale of the Expected Trump Purge

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42895118
Thanks - very eye-opening. My rough calculations show that four million US lives could have been saved over the past 100 years if only we had adopted handedness-sensitivity and modified schools and workplaces to account for left-handedness. I'm now thinking of pushing for a right-to-left version of written English.
It’s hardly that. This is one component of an interview process - not all of it!
Note that the channel was 15 years old, not the person running it.
Void 20250202 Supports Apple Silicon, Lenovo ThinkPad X13s, and Pinebook Pro
Did you use this: https://joinmastodon.org/servers ?

I used it and found a decent one, managed by someone relatively local and active. Most of my followed accounts are on other servers but I haven't seen that as a big issue.
I wish there wasn't a need for a business-model to begin with for social media. Honestly, being business-driven is what turns them all to shit, as far as I'm concerned.

That being said, the lights need to be kept on somehow... some model similar to what Signal or wikipedia does might be a solution. Content-moderation is probably the big challenge though that they do not have to deal with to the same extent, so not quite sure how that could fly either...
It doesn’t affect our process, we even let people use AI/LLMs on the coding test.

Just asked to add a small feature or make a small change after the present the initial code (without AI help). That makes it really easy to see who doesn’t understand the code they are presenting.

I don’t care how much AI you use if you understand the code that it writes and can build on top of it.
What's the point of posting on those platforms? Self-promotion and PR. The difference you highlight is very superficial and ultimately it is the same thing.
You forgot calculators ;)
The title on HN needs to be updated. Right now it says "YouTube shut down 15 years old audio developer's channel for "reasons""

It can be read as saying the age of the person is 15 years old. But the developer said they had the channel for 15 years, not that they are 15 years old:

"How they are willing to insanely shut down a 15-year-old channel with not a single issue on record, without any warning or question, is beyond crazy." [0]

[0]: https://bsky.app/profile/sinevibes.bsky.social/post/3lhbep5p...
I saw Elon posts on my following feed (whatever X now calls it) even though I wasn't following him. I even got notifications for them! I don't really know how anyone can think that's acceptable.
"Because THAT'S what heroes do."

- The AI bot costing billions in development, compute and energy who just banned your account based on a false positive
I’m on mastodon but the people I want to follow mostly aren’t :-(
Could it be related to them selling a product called Switch? Although unrelated, could match some overzealous Nintendo filter. Who are on a quest against anything emulation recently.
Then you clearly follow the wrong people. I do not have this issue...
I picked e-mail validation as an example precisely because it's something even experienced developers would be well advised to google if they want to get it right :)

Of course, if someone can get it right off the top of their head, more power to them!
They reference an earlier analysis from PwC that does show some decompilation pre and post deobfuscation.

https://www.pwc.co.uk/issues/cyber-security-services/insight...
Most of the time, those take home tests cannot be done in 2 hours. I remember one where I wasn't even done with the basic setup in 2 hours, installing various software/libraries and debugging issues with them.
What do you do if a junior asks for help and it's easiest to code through with them?
Google running the "Dear Sydney" ad is in strong disagreement with that claim.
Then perhaps you’re following the wrong people? I’ve not had that issue.
They don't want a motivation letter to be written by an LLM (because it's specifically about the personal motivation of the human candidate) - as far as I can see this not reflect either positively or negatively on their level of optimism about AI impact in general.
Monthly active users in a vacuum docent mean anything. Facebook has 3 billion monthly active users but has zero relevance. Bluesky and Threads have no cultural foot print compared to X.
Not sure if serious.

It’s not like fentanyl goes through customs (legally) now. Not sure how tariffs will help.

Also not sure why we’re being punished because our government can’t or won’t stop fentanyl smuggling across the southern border. I don’t see how that’s my fault. Or yours for that matter.

Are we going to slap tariffs on Colombia too for all the coke that also doesn’t clear customs?
concepts finally allowed retiring stupid SFINAE tricks. They are a huge success if only for that.
there shouldn't ever be a print or scan step in the pipeline.
The difference is your audience. Are you talking to people you know or are you talking to 'the world'. If I'm talking to a bunch of my friends in the pub, I don't consider that "self-promotion". If I'm stood on the street corner saying exactly the same kind of things, it would be. In fact, that means I think that posting a comment on Hacker News is more self-promotion than posting a comment on Bluesky. Which I do.
Some designs for nuclear bombs included live chickens which would produce enough heat to keep the electronics active:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3588465.stm
Russian bots are not "cultural foot print"
> "Default constructible and assignable stateless lambdas?

this comes up surprisingly often.
Pretty ironic that they use an automated system called CodeSignal that does the first round of the interviews
I've had a few people chuck the entire problem into ChatGPT, it was still very much useful in a few ways:

- You get to see how they then review the generated code, do they spot potential edge cases which the AI missed?
- When I ask them to make a change not in the original spec, a lot of them completely shut down because they either didn't understand the code generated well enough, or they themselves didn't really know how to code.

And you still get to see people who _do_ know how to use AI well, which at this point is a must for its overall productivity benefits.
If ActivityPub is “simple” then that’s a recent’ish development. It used to be a mess.

I would imagine AT gets easier to use/setup given time too.
My reaction is "No way, not again !!". I personally done this internal orchestration at scale at a large enterprise spanning millions of execution and it has scalability problem. we eventually externalized it to bring back sanity.