skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oh we were a very individualistic nation for much of our history. That does come and go over the years, and like anything it has pros and cons, but it can be done.

If group or societal solutions are the only viable option we might as well cut to the chase and go full socialist. I don't mean that derogatorily, if collectivism is the only solution when individual choices inevitably lead to bad outcomes why bother trying individual at all?

The challenge with individuals making choices that ultimately move in us a better direction is fear. That is really embracing uncertainty and trusting the average person to do what they think is best or "right." Its my opinion that we should absolutely embrace that uncertainty and trust people, but that doesn't land well for most people today.

A group or collectivist solution sounds much safer. As long as we have a good plan and trustworthy people in charge, we just need to empower them to do what they know we need. That can run into just as many, and just as dangerous, end points as an individualist model.

Both are risky. Both can work, and both can go horribly wrong. I just prefer the one where I get to trust myself and everyone around me to think for themselves and do what they think is best. I also personally prefer the bad result of reaping what we sow rather than it going wrong because the well intended leader was wrong or the ill intended leader was right (I.e. got what the evil end they wanted).
That’s amazing. Really nails his stilted prose.
These moral questions stand unsolved for decades, and many people are acutely aware of them. IMO it's time we start putting those executives in jail for it. But we all know it ain't ever happening.
Where did you get this definition of an attack? If I slap or kick someone, it is not an attack, because there is no blood? And if I pull out knife on someone, it is not an attack, because "it was just a threat"?!

Dictionary definition is: an aggressive and violent act against a person or place

Not just a bite, but scratches, even jumping.
Not everyone wants to get their shit spread all over them!

Edit: If you go with legal definition of an attack, we should include legal definitions of battery, harassment, assault, sexual harassment...

Even blackmail or abduction would fit, "do not ran, or my dog will attack you"!
Framework for writing functions, microservices, or monoliths with Web Assembly
So, Nintendo of America, whose president is Doug Bowser, and who previously sued a Gary Bowser, had gone to court with a José Mario Alfaro González, who owns the supermarket chain Super Mario.

I'm pretty sure, at this point, they're just joshing us all.
When you design a call tree so that any data used later is passed explicitly down the call tree instead of looked up by ID over and over, then you can be sure that all of the decisions about that data are made on a consistent copy of the data.

When you look up the same value 10 times, you not only pollute the flame graphs and call counts which makes proving that a better algorithm is necessary or has any effect much harder, but more importantly, you could get 3 different states and try to make a bunch of updates based on what should be mutually exclusive states in the system. That's the global shared state problem.

When you look up a value once and remember it throughout a calculation, it may not be the current state, but at least you have a clean snapshot of the data. Which in situations such as cancelling an account immediately after getting one last discount on a purchase, well, we know which scenario the customer probably meant.
My understanding is it's not even close to the output and capability of modern LLMs
Because you could tell me, you say it's something other than boycotting or people being mean or the internet, what was done exactly? Someone protested their presence at their work? Some people refused to work with them (which, to be clear, is close to boycott but is not, and so i would have to amend my conception of "cancel" which is "call to boycott" to "call to boycott and ignoring them at work")? Or was there assassinations, physical aggression, or even agression toward stuff they own?

Because in the mid 80s, Lillian bettancourt purchased a manor in Brittany, a few years after an oil spill that devasted the coast and fisheries. Some locals associated her with her shares in Total, and in Loreal (which she owned and was a beneficiary of a refinery the tanker was going to). They filled her pool with liquid manure, and oyster farmers/regular farmer managed have one of their tractor break down every day on the only road access to her new manor for a bit ore than a month (never the same one). This is what i would call very mean, and should be avoided. If the persons you talked about did not suffer a tenth of that, frankly, they ought to toughen up and stop complaining.
…some dogs attack 50 times a week!

A single dog, seven attacks per day in a week? I’m extremely skeptical. That, or put your spreadsheet down and call animal control.
UK scientist wins prize for invention that could help avert 'phosphogeddon'
Thank you for your lengthy response, appreciated. You must have done something extremely bad in your previous life for having this job. A short response:

> The issue here is repetition.

I trust your word about that. I understand you did the flagging in this case? If so, in that case it might spare you explanations if you had a toggle for "too much related subjects at this moment", and it would spare others submitting relevant pieces about the subject. Like [dupe] is also a helpful tag.

In this case, the MOT topic that is allowed to be discussed (afaik) is the purging of information by the Trump decrees.
The topics we posted here are about something else, namely the fact that Musk's servants are taking highly sensitive, personal data from government systems (even from air gapped ones).

Also, I am sure to have seen high quality submissions taken down months before these things became actuality. You can guess that if you see these kinds of topics over a longer period of time taken down, you start to form hypotheses.

> "this time" always feels different.

I understand that people can be passionate about many things. The problem is that the flood of things happening are overwhelming, precisely to avoid meaningful discussion. We are not discussing the new logo of Twitter, we talk about new history lemmas on Wikipedia.

In the end it is your call, and I can see that you are in quite an impossible situation. My personal view though is that at the time the house of Weimar is burning down, we should be able to process more than 1/2 "actuality" topics. So yes, you can tell I think this time is different. As a personal statement, my fear is we will look back and conclude that this time indeed wasn't different from its future. We made it so.

Whatever you decide going forward, I respect your work and wish you good luck!
> rather than building something truly exciting.

What were we doing that was so exciting a decade ago? We were stitching together different APIs, wrestling with jQuery, and managing servers.

I mean, you're not wrong - someone was out there creating React, and Kubernetes, and AWS, and programming languages, all the stuff we're using now. But most of us were still doing the same stuff. And turns out, it still paid the same bills.
Is that a positive thing? If anything I would consider that as the reverse - LLMs have the "intelligence of vegetables" because even with literally the whole of human written knowledge they can at most regurgitate that back to us with no novelty whatsoever, even though a 2 years old with a not even matured brain can learn a human language from orderS of magnitude less and lower quality input from a couple of people only.

But any Nobel-price winner has read significantly less than a basic LLM, and we see no LLM doing any tiny scientific achievement, let alone that high impact ones.
The article already acknowledges that anyone with bad intentions will circumvent any measures like this, and any kind of mandated audio filter would likely just be parsed by people as a connection issue, especially over the phone with a bunch of VoIP compression already. If anything, I think requiring an actual spoken disclaimer that you're talking to an AI with an AI generated voice, like requirements most states have for disclosing calls being recorded, would make more sense.
Previous conversation

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42868220
If all the posts concerning US politics that have showed up in my HN feed[0] today (maybe ~40% of all feed items) had ended up on the frontpage, the site would be useless to me. And probably to all those other users that flagged them as well, because US politics is not why we come here.

[0] https://hnrss.org/newest?points=10
In the Western US, there are places and times when you could start a wildfire. Better get ready for life-altering legal bills.
> All of these men see themselves as the heroes or protagonists in their own sci-fi saga. And a key part of being a “technological superman” — or ubermensch, as the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would say — is that you’re above the law. Common-sense morality doesn’t apply to you because you’re a superior being on a superior mission. Thiel, it should be noted, is a big Nietzsche fan, though his is an extremely selective reading of the philosopher’s work.

> The ubermensch ideology helps explain the broligarchs’ disturbing gender politics. “The ‘bro’ part of broligarch is not incidental to this — it’s built on this idea that not only are these guys superior, they are superior because they’re guys,” Harrington said.

[…]

> The so-called network state is “a fancy name for tech authoritarianism,” journalist Gil Duran, who has spent the past year reporting on these building projects, told me. “The idea is to build power over the long term by controlling money, politics, technology, and land.”

Also maybe "Why big tech turned right":

* https://www.vox.com/politics/397525/trump-big-tech-musk-bezo...
Do you honestly think that people who believe these things will be swayed by facts and evidence?

Go watch some flat earther videos on YouTube. Lots of people are very committed to a particular conclusion and have developed elaborate processes for disregarding evidence that would persuade a rational person.

The US political system right now is built on believing easily disprovable lies. Unfortunately, their bad choices affect everyone.
I listen to a few hundred audio books a year while working. There seems to be no correlation between the quality of the writing and the fame of the book. As disheartening as it is that thousands of great novels are never recognized, it is also awkward that some percentage of awful novels sell well and need to be reviewed.

I don't think we should make fun of Dan Brown, or assume that all of his novels will be awful, but we should take his individual novels for what they are, and for every one I've read, they're squarely in so-bad-it's-good territory.

For anyone else who enjoys such novels, I highly recommend Dan Brown's Digital Fortress. There's also commentary on the novel by the creators of RiffTrax in episodes 71 through 77 of the 372 Pages podcast: https://372pages.com/ep-71-if-bizarre-foods-went-horny
Sure, I didn't mean to say data is unimportant or not needed at all. My point was just that data solves nothing without context (among other things, pike discernment and critical thinking).
To me this proves that LLMs are hallucinating.

None of these have any depth and most of the stuff it says are absurd.
There’s a good discussion in the previous article discussed on HN, including links to various papers.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42893627

2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8234998/
If you have to refetch on a cache miss you're going to be doing both. But all optimizations are always playing with the trigraph of cpu time, memory, and IO (with the hidden fourth dimension of legibility), so I don't think you're saying anything that can't be assumed as given. Even among people who tend to pick incorrectly, or just lose track of when the situation has changed.
The #1 skill of a software developer is to translate incomplete specs from other humans into a product.
we adapted to the rise of language, the industrial revolution, automation of agriculture, roads and cars, all the previous forms of computer-driven automation ... all of which made some parts of us redundant. and which taken together left us richer, safer and freeer. AI will probably come a few signal benefits (an AI doctor for every person on the planet?) and plenty of sludge and pollution - and we will adapt to that in many ways.
Is it cheating if I can solve the problem using the tools of AI, or is it just solving the problem?
How does threatening your closest allies with invasion fit in with "things like that"? How does unelected oligarchs gaining control over Treasury systems with no oversight or legal basis?
Where did you get this definition of an attack?

Many state laws and local ordinances use that very definition as described by GP.
You can also do like a lot of major sites and just identify the codepoints and replace them with images as a kludge. I think Twitter does this since Elon thought the water gun emoji was too "woke".
> the pulchritudinous brunette’s blonde tresses.

Think this is my favorite joke in the whole thing.
>If I write a book that contains Einstein's theory of relativity by virtue of me copying it, did I create the theory? Did my copying of it indicate anything about my understanding of it? Would you be justified to think the next book I write would have anything of original value?

If you, after copying the book, could dynamically answer questions about the theory, it's implications, and answer variations of problems or theoretical challenges in ways that reflect mainstream knowledge, I think that absolutely would indicate understanding of it. I think you are basically making Searle's chinese room argument.

>But it is clear humans are capable of creativity and reasoning that are not reducible to mere pattern matching and this is the sense of reasoning that LLMs are not currently capable of.

Why is that clear? I think the reasoning for that would be tying it to a notion "the human experience", which I don't think is a necessary condition for intelligence. I think nothing about finding patterns is "mere" insofar as it relates to demonstration of intelligence.
I'm referring to devices and apps that are 'hard-coded' to query specific DoH servers/providers, therefore bypassing and regardless of any user-configured DNS server/s. And because DoH operates on outbound TCP/443, the lookups are indistinguishable from any other 'web' traffic.

Even some of the most popular desktop web browsers are configured to utilize DoH by default nowadays.

The most that a network administrator can do to prevent this is configure firewall IP blocklists of known DoH servers and NAT all outbound 53 (and 853) traffic to a desired resolver (like a local Pi-hole instance, for example).
Or a traveler and a company doing $30 billion in de minimus import sales annually.
Why did you use letters to send your reply? Letters are a symbolic representation of language, but they are imprecise. I don't know the prosody of your utterance, what tone you used, what accent you're speaking, etc. This is unacceptable and I am very offended. /s

Symbols are useful. You can quibble over the symbols chosen (they don't seem to do a lot of physical weighing in courts?), but that is fundamentally besides the point, which is 'how do I convey this widely understood concept in a limited amount of space?'.
Saying something is apolitical is like saying someone is speaking with "unaccented English". It just means it contains the politics of the status quo.

Most of the time, the accent of the person speaking is irrelevant to the topic at hand but at the same time, denying that it exists is an act of obfuscation. We should all be able to recognize the politics that come embedded with our positions and talk about how those inflections affect how they color the topic.
High hopes, low expectations :-). That said, 'quantum thermal diode' sounds like something that breaks on your space ship and if you don't fix it you won't be able to get the engines online to outrun the aliens. Even after reading the article I think the unit of measure there should be milli-demons in honor of Maxwell's Demon.
There are betrayals so severe that a grindingly slow due process is actually itself an addition betrayal. Not arguing for a kangaroo court, but tenure should not be a defense for blatant cheating.
Yeah, I have 2 such from AliE and they perform well and haven't lost anything yet even though they have dozens of thousands of files at rest that are updated 1-2 times a month, for almost 3 years now. Quite pleased with them.

They are indeed more expensive but nothing that a programmer salary would notice even if you bought 10 of them. I am wondering whether I should buy another pair and use it as a metadata mirrored vdev on my media NAS. Haven't decided yet.
> I also don’t understand why ‘oligarch’ is not applied to the other side, when Harris had a much broader base of corporate support and raised more funding overall.

I think it's an order of operations thing:

* oligarchs are where the government is corrupt first and helps to enrich some folks who then help prop up a regime

* what we're seeing is that the government isn't corrupt (e.g., elections are not rigged (directly)), you then have the very rich subvert the government
I miss super Josette markets
My wife and I both thought the pacing was glacial. The subject matter was also pretty depressing (not unusual with his stories) and I didn't think the payoff was that great tbh.

Overall, it's a fantastic book though.
How is the MAID <> IDFA link constructed?
If you’re spending the time applying and submitting something then you might as well spend the extra 30 minutes or so to do it right, no?
If you genuinely want to know: read Karl Marx.
Varoufakis: The master of muddying waters. On day 1 he says he is a communist, on day 2 he seds tears because we now live in the age of technofeudalism, poor proper capitalism has been sidelined. He wants to relive the good old days of proper capitalism (lol?). He is a marxist, he is a postmarxist, he is a soscialist, he is a democrat, he is a communist, he is an anarchist, he is a pro-capitalist, he is an anti-capitalist, he is a pro-anti-anti-pro-capitalist and anti-pro-anti-communist, he is a reformist, he is a revolutionary, and when you are everything, then you are really nothing, or much better, you are trully a clown
Never really understood why these modern best-seller writers are so popular. It's not as if the text is even easy or enjoyable to read! At least with guys like Tom Clancy you got a load of military hardware stuff to get off on.
I really hate this narrative, because Democrats have been fighting against this for a decade at this point. We warned about this at the first impeachment and the second one. Short of armed rebellion, we did everything. Which action would you have liked to have seen happen, which didn't?
If the essence of your question is "are there US-aligned/non-China countries who would have issues about certain flags", the answer is yes. Good example: the flag for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, aka North Korea. The Western world acknowledges North Korea as a separate entity. South Korea does not and considers the North part of its territory. They wouldn't be too happy about a NK flag on their operating system giving legitimacy to the state.
> No, people don't know the ISO codes for their languages.

As a canadian, i know what EN means. However when sites use flags its a mystery. Am i supposed to pick canada or is that "canadian french". Maybe im supposed to pick the american flag, but eww feel like a traitor and i want the u's in my words. Is it the british flag? I have no idea. Flags for languages are stupid.

Not to mention for all those languages that are not the majority language in any country.
Formatting is a base level test that doesn't require any additional software.

A lot of cheap cards from China can't even pass this basic test.
Genius comedian Stewart Lee likes to poke fun at Dan Brown…

https://youtu.be/-yUDh_IErT4?feature=shared
Do you mean John Oliver?
A friend of mine works with industrial machines, and once was tasked with translating machine's user's manual, even though he doesn't speak English. I do, and I had some free time, so I helped him. As an example, I was given user manual for a different, but similar machine.

1. The manual was mostly a bunch of phrases that were grammatically correct, but didn't really convey much meaning

2. The second half of the manual talked about a different machine than the first half

3. It was full of exceptionally bad mistranslations, and to this day "trained signaturee of the employee" is our inside joke

Imagine asking ChatGPT to write a manual except ChatGPT has down syndrome and a heart attack so it gives you five pages of complete bullshit. That was real manual that got shipped a 100 000€ or so machine. And nobody bothered to proofread it even once.
I guess its more of a question if you can solve the problem without AI.

In most interview tasks you are not solving the task “with” ai.

Its AI who solves the task while you watch it do it.
Sounds about right. I remember around 15 years ago a family member got a new phone and I thought it was laughably big. Probably smaller than what I'm currently using in retrospect.
Once again, we see that deceptive marketing is one of the great legal evils.

Their marketing department assuredly pulled long hours carefully and intentionally crafting statements meant to cause the recipient to believe something false or at the very least different than what they actually believe, i.e. deception. They almost certainly ran focus groups verifying that their targets would, in fact, believe the untrue things they wanted them to believe that would enrich themselves.

In court they will say: "Technically, your honor, the words used could, in the most contrived and worst of all possible universes, actually mean something true; so our deliberate and intentional actions to make sure that they would be misinterpreted by our victims can not be held against us." If you carefully crafted a statement and verified its reception and interpretation, and only after it has been misinterpreted as intended then claim that "technically, your honor..." you should be guilty of false advertising or equivalent. You had plenty of opportunity to make sure that the standard interpretation of your statements would be accurate, but you intentionally chose to make it deceptive for your own enrichment.

The more time, money, and effort spent on a message, the more accurate, truthful, and only unintentionally misinterpretable to your benefit it should be. All of that effort now spent on focus grouping how to make it intentionally deceptive must instead be focused on making it intentionally truthful. This would reward true, accurate, and helpful marketing that seeks to inform at the cost of hampering false, deceptive, misleading marketing seeking to separate society from its money for garbage or actively harmful products and services.

"Technically, your honor..." should be met with "Go directly to jail".
UFO as Aliens Odds, Spending
> Then again, I've never seen cigarettes ruin an entire family and for them to end up in financial ruin and without a house.

In the US, your hypothetical mother who smokes and gets lung cancer could easily bankrupt the family and leave them in financial ruin (you know, if your family tries to pay for the treatments so she doesn't die).

Oh yeah, we're talking about the UK here...carry on.
I Use ChatGPT
I agree that there's nothing fraudulent with using a tool you would use on the job when you are interviewing. But in no way are LLMs equivalent to calculators. Calculators actually give the correct answer reliably, unlike LLMs. A sporadically reliable tool is worse than no tool at all.