skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agreed, global variables are fine up to a certain scale, especially if they're only used in the main file. They only really become a problem if you start modifying them from inside different files.

The real underlying problem is 'Spooky action at a distance'; it's not an issue that is specific to global variables. If you pass an instance between components by-reference and its properties get modified by multiple components, it can become difficult to track where the state changes originated and that can create very nasty, difficult-to-reproduce bugs. So this can happen even if your code is fully modularized; the issue is that passing instances by reference means that the properties of that instance behave similarly to global variables as they can be modified by multiple different components/files (without a single component being responsible for it).

That's partly where the motivation for functional programming comes from; it forces pass-by-value all the time to avoid all possibility of mutations. The core value is not unique to FP though; it comes from designing components such that they have a simple interface which requires mostly primitive types as parameters. Passing objects is OK too, so long as these objects only represent structured information and their references aren't being held onto for future transformation.

So for example, you can let components fully encapsulate all the 'instances' which they manage and only give those parent components INFORMATION about what they have to do (without trying to micromanage their child instances); I avoid passing instances or modules to each other as it generally indicates a leaky abstraction.

Sometimes it takes some creativity to find a solution which doesn't require instance-passing but when you find such solution, the benefits are usually significant and lasting. The focus should be on message-passing. Like when logging, the code will be easier to follow if all the errors from all the components bubble up to the main file (e.g. via events, streams, callbacks...) and are logged inside the main file because then any developer debugging the code can find the log inside the main file and then trade it down to its originating component.

Methods should be given information about what to do, they should not be given the tools to do their job... Like if you catch a taxi in real life, you don't bring a jerrycan of petrol and a steering wheel with you to give to the taxi driver. You just provide them with information; the address of your desired destination. You trust that the Taxi driver has all the tools they need to do the job.

If you do really want to pass an instance to another instance to manage, then the single-responsibility principle helps limit the complexity and possibility for spooky action. It should only be passed once to initialize and then the receiving component needs to have full control/responsibility for that child. I try to avoid as much as possible though.
So the f-string literal produces a basic_formatted_string, which is basically a reified argument list for std::format, instead of a basic_string. This allows eg. println to be overloaded to operate on basic_formatted_string without allocating an intermediate string

std::println("Center is: {}", getCenter());
std::println(f"Center is: {getCenter()}"); // same thing, no basic_string allocated

In exchange we have the following problems

// f-strings have unexpected type when using auto or type deduction.
// basic_string is expected here, but we get basic_formatted_string.
// This is especially bad because basic_formatted_string can contain
// dangling references.
auto s = f"Center is: {getCenter()}";

// f-strings won't work in places where providing a string currently
// works by using implicit conversion. For example, filesystem methods
// take paths. Providing a string is okay, since it will be implicitly
// converted to a path, but an f-string would require two implicit
// conversions, first to a string, then to path.
std::filesystem::exists(f"file{n}.dat"); // error, no matching overload

There are two other proposals to fix these problems.
Yup. The top 7 most spoken languages in India are in the top 30 worldwide.

And the top 3 in China are in the top 10 worldwide if you split up Cantonese (which is mutually unintelligible from most Mandarin languoids)
This links to a “decays_to” proposal:

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2024/p33...

And observes that this additional feature is needed to avoid dangling references. And, as a long time C++ programmer, this illustrates one of the things I dislike most about C++. In most languages, if you make a little mistake involving mixing up something that references something else with something that contains a copy, you end up with potential overhead or maybe accidental mutation. In Rust, you get a compiler error. In C++, you get use-after-free, and the code often even seems to work!

So now we expect people to type:

auto s = f"{foo}";

And those people expect s to act like a string. But the designers (reasonably!) do not want f to unconditionally produce an actual std::string for efficiency reasons, so there’s a proposal to allow f to produce a reference-like type (that’s a class value, not actually a reference), but for s to actually be std::string.

But, of course, more advanced users might know what they’re doing and want to bypass this hack, so:

explicit auto s = f"{foo}";

Does what they programmer actually typed: s captures foo by reference.

What could possibly go wrong?

(Rust IMO gets this exactly right: shared xor mutable means plus disallowing code that would be undefined behavior means that the cases like this where the code might do the wrong thing don’t compile. Critically, none of this actually strictly requires Rust’s approach to memory management, although a GC’d version might end up with (deterministic) runtime errors instead unless some extra work is done to have stronger static checking. And I think other languages should learn from this.)
Just wait because all official EU sites now use the Irish flag to represent English, and it's getting more common in other websites made in Europe.

As an Irish person I can't help feeling a frisson of satisfaction.

But as a developer, this is just asking for confusion, especially since the Irish flag is already confusing enough.

I mean, we could have a beautiful white harp on a green background representing Irish culture. The Welsh got a dragon...

But no, it's a political statement from 120 years ago represented in three boring vertical stripes, just like everyone else's flag. It's identical (ok, mirrored) to the Ivory cost flag. It's the same three colors as the India flag, rotated 90 degrees, which itself is very similar to the Niger flag. And if you squint, or just don't know your flags well, it could easily be the Italian flag. It's a terrible choice to represent a language.
That's Dale Brown, not Dan Brown. And yes, having read more than my share of Dale Brown novels, they didn't really improve from the first. Nonetheless, they were a great guilty pleasure read for me in middle and high school.
It's likely that Canada will target exports from Trump-supporting states, which is a strategy that seems to have worked before. It may not have a large impact on the whole US economy but it can concentrate the pain to optimize the political impact.
Honestly, Dan Brown was my first introduction to any sort of literature that was not manga/comics and I liked every book. Granted, I read the Portuguese translations so there might be differences in the “writing style”.

There is a lot of history and art embedded in the books (as I believe his wife is a historian and is greatly involved in the making of the books, if I’m not mistaken) which I believe is the highlight, a lot more than the plot or anything else. I distinctively remember reading The Da Vinci Code in my grandfather’s house - there is a piece in the book about secrets in The Last Supper and my grandfather had a big clock in the house with it as the background. I remember going to the clock to check out what the book was saying about the painting and being mindblown. I don’t even remember if everything made sense but that stuck with me.
So, first, this is factually wrong, there are obviously new ideas, often rediscovered independently.

Second, seeing things in black and white is a fallacy. The amount obviously matters and what also matters is the _human_ work on top of the original work. LLMs are fundamentally different, human time (and work) has value, LLM time does not (it costs money to run but that is both different and inconsequential in comparison).

Third, you seem to forget that you can base academic work on that of other people, as long as you give proper credit. Just like are can base your code on that of other people, as long as you follow their code's license.
Yes but pure laminar flow wings have undesirable stall characteristics.
The "god object"
If Chin poisons itself to make goods for USA, instead of USA poisoning itself, that's good for the USA. China chose to take that risk.

Not a "citizen of the world" perspective", but a nationalist perspective.
The best part of every post in the ycombinator is the comments. Always learn a lot.

I think another big problem is pharmacies. The amount of data shared with health insurance companies must be huge.
My guess is OP is saying that we used to deploy pigeons for letter transport. They didn’t disappear like horses though. Instead, they’ve organized as gangs in our cities.
Is this for laminar flow or is this a vortex generator?
The Mouse.
Would you hire a well known electrician who was not bonded and insured? Sometimes it's nice to know there is more than blind trust.
I mean humans have short term and long term memory, short term memory is just our context window.
The Register has often added a playful angle to their headlines and articles. They used to be wilder. Not for everyone.
it's funny how we keep solving the same problems over and over. While we have these great frameworks why is it so hard to make a product that has desktop, web, mobile and tablet options. If anything development seems slower and more costly now then 10 years ago.
Apparently he's written several - which one are you talking about? The most recent?
Honestly, LXD commands and LXD cli would probably have worked with any backend.
The nuance here being that this only proves additional censorship is applied on top of the output. It does not disprove that (sometimes ineffective) censorship is part of the LLM or that censorship was not attempted during training.
That would be the logistic curve then
I actually believe that it would be possible to provide a read only clone url in a resume link but I don't know if a way to make a link to a browsable version (short of having a proxy server type setup, or, of course, a slim server protected by http basic)
> What do you want to see if there's more than one sale date with the lowest price?

Either one is fine.

PostgreSQL has an extension (DISTINCT ON) that allows to do what I want without subqueries. But standard SQL is simply deficient in this regard, it should be straightforward but it's not.
Ah, interesting...man, software is fun. I wouldn't have guessed in a million years that it could cause panics as an optional component, like, it shouldn't be running code unless it is being used, and it shouldn't be called because it isn't mandatory in the kernel.

I guess I'm still grokking software complexity, Linux, and how much work an OS is truly is, 25 years after I built my first Linux box...because in another sense, of course that could happen.
What hammer? It's legal, that's the problem.
Rust has sane debug printing and doesn’t have to allow everything to be public. Opaque types are a thing in C for these reasons. You don’t want users of your code to depend on how it works internally.
I understand this sentiment for experienced developers. It is an imperfect signal. But what is in your opinion a better signal for junior or new grads?

Every alternative I can think of is either worse, or sounds nice but impractical to implement in practice at scale.

I don’t know about you, but most interviewers out there don’t have the ability to judge the technical merit of a bullshitters’s contribution to a class or internship project in half an hour, specially if it’s in a domain interviewer has no familiarity with. And by the way, not all of them are completely dumb, they do know computer science, just perhaps not as well as an honest competitor.
I'm skeptical that people would want to do this in a single expression.
I mean, most of the "innovation" in the software world stopped when smartphones became a thing, and the target shifted towards monetizing those things. Some things are happening in AI, but again its all about monetization rather than pushing technology.

There are some cool software jobs that deal with embedded SoCs, but those don't pay nearly as well.
does incogni work to erase your data and prevent these SSP/DSPs from never collecting your data?
Or he can simply choose to ignore the arbitrary and often pointless requirements, do the interview on his own terms, and still perform excellently. Many job requirements are nothing more than a pointless power trip from employers who think they have more leverage than they actually do.
Not saying you are wrong but tell me why it would be a good idea to have hundreds of keywords for a programming language.
While this seems to be a legitimately strong technical achievement pushing the SotA, I can't help but feel that it's cheapened by the use of the word "Deep" and the way in which their "Deep research" button seems to be a UI copy of Deepseek's "DeepThink" button.

Am I right that at least from a marketing standpoint, it appears that OpenAI are now on the defensive?
It's not about assumed breaking, it's that when you upgrade libc++ you can become incompatible at runtime with your distro or any other number of libraries outside your control in ways that are difficult to detect
I notice that often in these debates someone will make the comparison between a low level mechanism driving LLMs, and a high level emergent behavior of the human mind. I don't think it's deliberate - we don't fully understand how the brain works so we only have emergent behaviors - but how can you be so certain that deeply complex navigation of reality can't emerge from interpolation of a linear regression?
Why are singletons better? That's just a global object.

> wrap a mutex

What if my program has one thread? Or the threads have clearly defined responsibilities?
When I was last interviewing people (several years ago now), I’d let them use the internet to help them on anything hands on. I was astounded by how bad some people were at using a search engine. Some people wouldn’t even make an attempt.
https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/1057sjo fda_oks_lecanemab_for_alzheimers_disease/

"Lecanemab resulted in infusion-related reactions in 26.4% of the participants and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities *with edema or effusions in 12.6%*."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_edema

"After 18 months of treatment, lecanemab slowed cognitive decline by 27% compared with placebo, as measured by the Clinical Dementia Rating–Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). This was an absolute difference of 0.45 points (change from baseline, 1.21 for lecanemab vs 1.66 with placebo; P < .001)"

https://www.understandingalzheimersdisease.com/-/media/Files...

Sum of boxes is a 19 point scale. So, for those keeping track at home, this is an incredibly expensive treatment that requires premedication with other drugs to control side affects as well as continuous MRIs for an ~%2.3 absolute reduction in the progression of dementia symptoms compared to placebo, with a 12% risk of cerebral edema.

Now, I'm no neurologist, but I'd call that pretty uninspiring for an FDA-approved treatment.
I went into Lost thinking it was sci-fi, but in the end, it was all fantasy. So for me, Lost never really answered its core mysteries and that was before it threw in the whole purgatory flash-sideways stuff. I did actually start to lose interest because it felt like the show was stringing us along, but hung in there for answers. Instead I felt like all I got were narrative dead ends and then a conclusion where most of them die. It was immensely unsatisfying.

(I'm reflecting back now on 15 year old memories. I'm actually surprised to learn it aired from 2004-2010. Gosh, I remember this as being a show from the 90s.)

It's also not like there were a lot of options for other shows to watch at the time. I'd never stay with a show like Lost today. I punted on Yellowjackets as soon as it started bringing fantasy into the story.

You have to know that how a series wraps up is important to its viewers. A great or terrible finale can make or break how a show is later perceived. The Lost finale was the most disappointing of any show I've seen.

Great finales I recall are The Americans and Justified.

A terrible last book chapter or poor movie ending can ruin all that has come before for me. When deciding whether to read a book, I'll read the last chapter first. Spoilers don't ruin good stories for me. But bad conclusions do. And Lost's conclusion was just terrible. I'd rather it have been canceled.

It's not like I need literal answers for everything. I love Mulholland Drive. But I felt like Lost spent six seasons just jerking me around.

$0.02.
AWS is highly unlikely to get cut. That was the whole point of Bezos and Zuck meetings with Trump, because they understand that the best course of action is dangling money in front of a manchild as a way to avoid attention.

Of course, nothing is for certain, but my opinion is based on the fact that all the negative rhetoric about Trump tanking the economy is coming from the same places that predicted Kamala win.
As someone who uses websites, if you're not going to respect the browser's language setting (and most websites don't, for good reason) then please use a flag so that it's easy to find where I can switch away from your incorrectly-geodetected language setting. Flags do in fact represent languages, in that they are understood to denote languages, even if some people think they shouldn't.
To some degree it reminds me various pieces of "thinky" scifi (a lot of Stephen Baxter or Larry Niven work, for example), where the plot and characters are constructed around exploring some interesting ideas or concepts for the reader. Often in that territory the writing is stilted by necessity, because the writer doesn't want to overload things with complex character relationships or elaborate internal lives on top of the Big Ideas.
Look, who's copying who now. They added _the_ button!
Bit off topic, but if you ever travel into Australia never don't declare that package of chips.

It could easily turn into your most expensive bag ever.

All food items simply _must_ be declared. There's two lines, so join the "something to declare" one. You'll be waved through after a quick inspection, or asked to surrender any offending items. Super easy. The declare line is often quicker as well.
"Hiper" refers to something bigger than "Super", and it's common to respect that convention. Wikipedia defines both [1][2]. From this photo[3] the size of "Super Mario" follows that convention. It is obviously true that there are more options for names but congratulations to "Don Mario".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermarket

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarket

[3] https://www.techspot.com/news/106591-super-mario-supermarket...
I'm not sure if this is worth a subscription. DSPy and DeepseekR1 can already move this direction, if I understand right.
We have a reasonable source for 70%[0].

There are a number of anti-Anki users (and to be honest, I don't blame them: there's 30k+ cards that they should learn in the 'meta' decks, and our onboarding is lacking). They've got an abusive workload.

The longer I'm US med-adjacent, the more jaded I become. There's continuing score creep, and this is due to the bar being raised[1], in order to maintain a failure rate.

I believe there's systematic academic misconduct due to the pressure to publish. The AVERAGE successfully matched neurosurgery resident has 37.4 research items (papers/presentations/abstracts)[2].

[0] https://www.cureus.com/articles/70371-an-analysis-of-anki-us...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gKKAZ5aO8E [mean score in 2022-3 was 248. This was a 99th percentile score in 1993-4. Mean student in 1993-4 would no longer meet the passing score, exams are not getting easier]

[2] https://medschoolinsiders.com/medical-student/how-many-publi...
Never really understood why people like Tom Clancy, it's not as if it's enjoyable to read about a bunch of mililtary hardware. At least with Dan Brown you've got a load of interesting mysteries and locations to get off on.

(more seriously: I think both authors understand their markets and are savvy about delivering what they want, critics be damned)
Being paid for even excellent performance is a fraud.
I've recently found it helpful to think of problems at the scope of an individual process, rather than a set of functions in a library or framework. This makes it much clearer when a global variable makes sense or not, and generally where to initialize things, and place state.
> You know what is more effective than spaced repitition? Reading, listening, and doing to the thing you are interested in.

No, they are not more effective, they are less effective. The fact that they are less effective is the only reason that people do spaced repetition. It takes less time to learn a fact if you optimize for the way memory works. Reading, listening, and doing the thing you are interested in builds memory just like spaced repetition does, just in a haphazard, random way.

> note that reading/doing something is itself spaced repititon.

But worse. There are plenty of things that simply can't be learned by spaced repetition because nobody has come up with a good way to do them, and/or they are physical. But some facts simply have to be memorized, and when doing the thing you will have to recall them. You can either look them up every time you have to use them, and a) forget completely if there's too large a gap between incidents of having to look a thing up, or b) spend all day studying something that you'll completely forget in a week. Spaced repetition is about using a timing trick to make those facts reflexive and long-lasting.
I had initially posted a joke reply to this, but I'll post a serious one: I care a lot more about getting necessary services to elderly, semi-literate Russian-speaking babushkas fleeing Ukraine, by giving them an obvious indicator (on e.g. a name tag) that someone can speak to them, help them, then I care about your completely absurd, concocted 'well akshuallys'.
More recent article, this plant is starting to shutdown:

https://apnews.com/article/california-solar-energy-ivanpah-b...
If it has access to play by play data for all sports this could be an absolute playground for amateur sports statisticians. The possibilities…
Any way to do this in Mac M1? I would love to run an android instance on Mac docker where u can install apps and can persist storage.
It appears that OpenAI is in panic mode after the release of DeepSeek. Before they were confident in competing against Google on any AI model they release.

Now they are scrambling against open-source after their disastrous operator demonstration and using this deep research demo as cover. Nothing that Google or Perplexity could not already do themselves.

By the end of them month, this feature is going be added by a bunch of other open-source projects and this feature won't be as interesting very quickly.
US highway system accidentally kills over 40k people a year.