skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No that isn't correct.

The authority of classification rests solely with the executive branch and the policies are established by EO.

A President can absolutely classify and declassify whatever he wants. This has been done a million times.

"It is true that the President has broad authority to classify and declassify, derived from the President’s dual role “as head of the Executive Branch and as Commander in Chief” of the armed forces. The “authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant" ...

"Finally, as the district court recognized, the suggestion that courts can declassify information raises separation of powers concerns.... such determinations encroach upon the President’s undisputedly broad authority in the realm of national security."

- The New York Times v. Central Intelligence Agency, No. 18-2112 (2d Cir. 2020)

The only reason the material was not considered declassified in that case was because the possible declassification was "inadvertent" etc etc.

Even that ruling does not go far enough, and I'd be willing to give 10:1 odds SCOTUS would give Pres. full and complete powers over classification
Dance as if no one is watching, blog as if someone will read it someday.
Yeah, I've seen the two sites that claim that it's a fake quote. The link you posted contains a bunch of doublespeak in an attempt to avoid the fact that fascism leans very heavily into corporatism.
Also after Musk took over my DMs were full of bots (never had a bot DM me before that). And the platform is drenched in outright naked racism and antisemitism in a way it wasn't before because they just decided you don't really need to do anything with that (except if someone says "cisgender", of course).
If each human body needs 0.2 acre of land to grow the food necessary for subsistence, what happens when the price of intelligence keeps dropping and one person's intelligence (even when directed towards the highest-value use!) is not enough to afford the use of that land? In other words, what happens when humans are no longer economically viable?

Jevon's Paradox means that the demand for intelligence will keep rising as the cost drops, so I can't help but expect a steady increase in the economic value of land _when used for AI_. It'll take a long time before it exceeds the economic value of land when used for human subsistence, but the growth curves are not pointing in encouraging directions.
I'm thinking 2/3, but the part you're missing is that the process will destroy US influence around the world. Which may be the real point of all this. It's hard to know where Musk's allegiances really lie.

With that said, the US has been in the dominant world position for so long, it's like they forget what it takes to be there. Soft power, by giving people food and support - like USAID does, is part of what helps keep the US in that dominant position.
Tesla Cybertruck crash on Full Self-Driving v13 goes viral - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42994733 - Feb 2025
Update: Got it running with RetroArch 64 using the 3DO Company Opera core. Found the necessary BIOS to use here: https://github.com/trapexit/3do-bios

I'll leave the ROM search up to whoever is interested :)
You know you have a problem when you're afraid to add a few more metrics because the bill might get too high.
You completely sidestepped their comments on the legality of this all as just "eh, as long as it gets done." The legality and unconstitutionality of it all should be concerning no matter what side you are on.
The use of a terminal is to communicate with an application (the shell mostly, and other REPL software). The text shown is a log of that interaction, not the interaction itself. We could probably design a better interaction model (smalltalk, plan9) but the current one is the most simple.
3rd party attestations tied to secure hardware enclaves.
It feels like lot of the reasoning tokens go to waste on pure brute force approach - plugging in numbers and evaluating and comparing against the answer. "Nope, that didn't work, let's try 4 instead of 6 this time", etc. What if the reward function instead focuses on diversity of procedures within a token budged (10k - 20k tokens). I.e. RL rewards the model in trying different methods or generating different hypotheses, rather than brute forcing its way through, and potentially getting stuck in loops.
The "10x every 12 months" is pure salesman from sama. An engineer wouldn't do these extrapolations from little data in good faith.
i was very careful to use the vague phrasing "features dealing with these problems" and not "Ada has a borrow checker and dependent types".
Normally we turn off replies on pinned comments to avoid this problem, but today I decided to leave it open, to give people a chance to air their objections/counterarguments/feelings and hopefully get responded to.

However, to avoid the thread ballooning at the top of the page, I'm also detaching these subthreads as I reply to them.
Can you point to a country that publicly releases everybody's tax returns, as a policy? I know some countries that release elected officials' returns, but not those of common people.
Consumption taxes are highly regressive. Pure consumption taxes would plunge USA into an even higher degree of inequality. The most progressive way to tax a populous is taxing incomes and wealth progressively.
That’s why I blog. It’s basically long-form GitHub gist, publicly available on the internet.
I mean I still fail to see how comparing these three scenarios

- genetic twins separated at birth

- genetic siblings raised in same household

- genetically unrelated same age siblings adopted in the same household

are teasing out anything but an underlying genetic component and reproducing in studies
With these tower in a park style developments you generally must walk through the park to get to any public street or further mode of transportation.
This is a (very) well-explored issue on HN and the solution we arrived at has been stable for many years: most stories about politics are off topic, as the guidelines say (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), but some stories with political overlap are on topic (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...).

Here are a couple recent posts to look at if you (or anyone) want to understand the principles by which we decide which ones get to count as "on topic":

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42978389

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42911011

If you read those and follow the links there, and still have a question I haven't answered, I'd be happy to take a crack at it.

> What's the point of having the flagging mechanism if you just remove them when people complain?

I made precisely the same point a few minutes ago! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42993906

The answer is that we don't "just remove them when people complain". We only remove them sometimes, when doing so seems in keeping with the principles by which we moderate HN.
I've been experimenting with Claude pretty heavily the last week or so and the most frustrating thing is no matter how many time you tell it to produce 'a full and complete' <whatever you're working on> it just can't resist chopping out sections of code and replacing with a placeholder comment.

It also hits its 'maximum limit allowed at this time' quite often due to it's inability to understand its own environment and just modify an existing software artifact rather than regenerating the entire thing. I know it can do it, it knows it can do it because it will tell you why it failed but it just wont do it for some reason. Of course this comes after you manage to convince it to quit removing sections of code so its context window is already polluted from past failures.

I spent a solid three days trying to get it to successfully do a somewhat simple thing (something that would've taken me an afternoon if I dedicated myself to the task) just to see if it could manage to do it and it failed horribly, multiple times, even after it was able to say why it was failing, no matter how many tries I gave it. And it's not like it is some impossible task either, it was able to successfully (might I even say impressively) accomplish the exact same task with no problems at a smaller scale.

It's also pretty horrible at debugging, even if you tell it exactly the problem, but that's just me testing the limits of what it can do.

So, like TFA states, it is pretty amazing at smaller tasks but utterly and completely fails at anything larger than a couple hundred lines of code.
Please read through the description and follow-up articles on the BenchmarksGame website. People did submit benchmarks, but submitting yet another SIMD+unsafe+full parallelization implementation is not the main goal of the project. However, this is precisely the subject (at which Go is inadequate) that we are discussing here. And for it, my suggestions in the previous comment stand.
What is reasoning if not a chain of logically consistent thoughts?
The nature of the problems makes it relatively easy to follow along with the models' reasoning and reasoning errors. For example, on this problem (answer "New England"):

> Think of a place in America. Two words, 10 letters altogether. The first five letters read the same forward and backward. The last five letters spell something found in the body. What place is this?

R1 fixates on answers of the form "CITY, STATE" and eventually returns some confidently wrong nonsense. It doesn't try to explore answers that don't fit the "CITY, STATE" template.
I don't really understand how this is an audit? Shutting down departments, getting root access to systems, read/write access to codebases these are hardly the actions of auditors doing a audit. Does a audit really require this level of access?
> all usual controls were bypassed and the DOGE people had very low level access to systems

Before DOGE, somebody obviously had to have this access as well, and similarly could have copied and stored. Why be concerned with DOGE but not their predecessors? Honest question.
Check out powershell
I agree he's probably always been a piece of shit, but Nazi salutes on live TV at the inauguration is absolutely next level.
You clearly have your perspective and the rest of the population has theirs. If he / they broke the law, I encourage you to engage your representatives and push for the appropriate actions. Take charge. Until then, it is what it is.
yes, UBI is the solution usually proposed but i guess there's a few problems.

First problem i see is UBI is gonna be paid by governments when it's (mega-)corporations making (disproportionate) profits thanks to AI and not employing humans anymore.

Something would need to compensate for this.I guess a new taxes scheme based on the number of AI agents a company would employ ?
I can’t access my computer’s Documents directory on my phone when I’m away from home.
Work at the Mill, Or, the Story of Digital Equipment Corporation
This is going to be like coming home from a vacation and discovering that squatters have been living in your house for a month, going through your stuff. You'll probably end up bulldozing the place and starting over.
The problem with 'motion' as the load-bearing property here is that there's an infinite number of derivatives at stake: x', x'', x''', etc. -- what is "the motion" ? What is supposed to be conserved about that motion?

The intuition here seems to be that there's a continuity of some property involved in the "transmission of matter over time" which is unbroken, but its not clear what this is supposed to imply.

It doesnt seem to imply, for example, that the universe operates like a closed system of motion simply because this property (whatever it is) is unbroken. There can be "global motion" without the need for discontinutiy/randomization/discretizatino/etc. in the trajectories of matter.
One Text to Speech wrapper for Python for all (?) TTS engines
Well all, its a bit endless.. this is a hard task since few of the new players (11labs, PlayHT) bother with SSML or word timings.. but you know, we try and deal with workarounds. Feel free to get on board if TTS is your thing..
Sensitive data includes things like home addresses, personal income, personal debt, personal wealth, dates of birth, medical status, etc. I don't know if it's true that some nations publish that (I don't personally know of any) but whether that's the case or not doesn't make any difference to whether it's sensitive.
I like it. It's pretty basic but it is very good for a broad audience and covered things many people don't understand. I liked that you mentioned not to anthropomorphize the model. We would greatly benefit from 50+ year old policymakers and more taking the course even more than 19 year old freshmen.
> If the executive refuses to abide by the laws of the country, who has control to stop it?

Three years ago J.D. Vance and others were already thinking about this and anticipating court cases:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right...

To quote the article: “I think Trump is going to run again in 2024,” [Vance] said. “I think that what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people.”
“And when the courts stop you,” he went on, “stand before the country, and say—” he quoted Andrew Jackson, giving a challenge to the entire constitutional order—“the chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.”

They've been preparing themselves to ignore judicial rulings and they may well do that.
If they are not willing to give complete power to the user, it will not happen, ever. Linux isn't designed for granular permission management like Windows is. A Linux desktop administrator has to choose between all or never. Moreover there is no equivalent of Active Directory or Group Policies.
Turnstile Debug Tool
Uh, "do not sound like Bach"? That's a regression from what David Cope was doing a few decades ago now.
Sounds like the mortgage market would go through a correction? Or UBI would be bumped up to $4k. Lots of possible outcomes.
you're probably being dowvoted because there are thousand of regulations and a multi year program exclusively made to educate young soldiers, besides giving them guns.

your argument starts well, but then compares the top well behaved military machine with a war lord arming children and throwing them on the front.
Wonder if there is a way to use that kind of technique as a filter.
> with no security clearances

Everyone has the necessary clearance. People need to stop treating clearances like a magic totem, the executive can grant access like candy if they wish, and often does when expedient.

DC is organized around minimizing the need for a formal clearance/access process because it is slow. Between the executive carte blanche and various title authorities with their well-understood loopholes, you can often just do things.
With a word like that, it’s more like a discovery than an invention
> The socioeconomic value of linearly increasing intelligence is super-exponential in nature.

I'm still stuck thinking about this point. I don't know that it's obviously true. Maybe a more bounded claim would make more sense, something like: increasing intelligence in the short-term has big compounding effects. But there's also a cap as society and infrastructure has to adapt. And I don't know how this plays out within an adversarial system where people might be competing for scarce resources like human attention.

Taken to the extreme, one could imagine a fantasy/scifi scenario where each person is empowered like a god in their own universe, allowing them to experiment, learn and and create endlessly.
> Doesn't seem entirely unreasonable to me.

It does to me, sounds like Lamarckian confusion, not evolution.
Do you expect to go inside a plane and fly it with no training? Or pick up a violin and play a sonata? The terminal have its flaws, but all other interactions models have their own. But when people don't try to learn the basic tenet and just ask why it can't be like $other_system_they've_learned_first, you bet that they're going to point you to the manual.
Any decent brand is using molecularly distilled fish oil.
thank you for presenting this in digestible format.

fortunately unfortunately, people who know llm's shill bullshit are the ones selling llm's while they wouldn't feed llm's to their kids or eat llm's.
The Intimate World and the Remote World
> The goal would be to make things asynchronous (so you could read at your own pace) without getting hit with spoilers.

I don't, personally, think that works super well?

I don't want to join in at the tail of a thorough discussion and add my 2 cents to people who have moved on.

I also wouldn't want to keep getting dragged back to prior threads on bits I won't remember as well (most specifically where the spoilers start).

So, I could well be wrong, but it sounds awkward to me
fair, but "logically consistent thoughts" is a subject of deep investigation starting from the early euclidean geometry to the modern godel's theorems.

ie, that logically consistent thinking starts from symbolization, axioms, proof procedures, world models. otherwise, you end up with persuasive words.
I read the whole course. Lesson 16, “The Next-Step Fallacy,” specifically addresses your argument here.
> There should be an anti-downvoting/flagging facility

Like upvoting and vouching?

To be honest, I don’t think that comments are the problem. The community mostly does a good job of policing itself, especially once a thread gets enough visibility*. The problem is all the threads that get killed before they reach the front page (this post is a case in point).

* Although I will admit there are glaring blindspots you could drive a Panamax tanker through (especially political ones on the boundary between ideologies).
a) to be free from the enforcement of someones desperate desire to hard-code envy into children via products, ads and media

b) to not have schools and teachers filter and then reinforce pupils for jobs that serve class construction

c) to make sure that every kid can get it's near infinite and non-hazardous (before creative construction) LEGOs that they can play with in peaceful environments where fathers and mothers have enough on their accounts to provide peaceful and unhealthy-stress-free
environments and food and water

c) so that anyone can at least try long enough, if they so wish, to become a polymath scientist, artist and craftsman, and if it doesn't work out, to never have to be angry at some pre-emptively envious people who create and abuse crisis to drive pointlessly higher and higher prices that are NOT supported by any logic or otherwise reasonable justification
I think we could just regulate the industry properly and then find out what the actual cost is. It may have to be subsidized. With that said, I wouldn't want any new mining operations started in my state.
Since you are on Frankfurtian bullshit, why don't you consider Late G.A. Cohen's take on intellectual bullshit (bullshit perpetuated in the academia), as the latter's notion of bullshit is linked to knowledge, unlike the bullshit we hear from salesmen, showmen, etc.
Also keen to hear about any one else that has been working using agents for analysis around financial markets!
How does it allow to own your hardware?
If it's mimicry of reason is indistinguishable from real reasoning, how is it not reasoning?

Ultimately, an LLM models language and the process behind it's creation to some degree of accuracy or another. If that model includes a way to approximate the act of reasoning, then it is reasoning to some extent. The extent I am happy to agree is open for discussion, but that reasoning is taking place at all is a little harder to attack.
I'm amazed that this has reached the almost-top of HN.

It's a very confused article that (IMO) is AI Slop.

1. Naming conventions is a weird one to start with, but okay. For the most part you don't need to worry about this with PKs, FKs, Indices etc. Those PG will automatically generate for you with the correct syntax.

2. Performance optimization, yes indices are create. But don't name them manually let PG name them for you. Also, where possible _always_ create the index concurrently. This does not lock the table. Important if you have any kind of scale.

3. Security bit of a weird jump as you've gone from app tier concern to PG management concerns. But I would say RLS isn't worth it. And the best security is going to be tightly control what can read and write. Point your reads to a read only replica.

4. pg_dump was never meant to be a backup method; see https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/70b48475-7706-426...

5. You don't need to schedule VACUUM or ANALYZE. PG has the AUTO version of both.

6. Jesus, never use a DEFAULT value on a large table that causes a table rewrite which will cause you downtime. Don't use varchar(n) https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Don%27t_Do_This#Don.27t_use...

This is an awful article.
Most science papers are only read by a tiny circle of experts, maybe a dozen or so. The process still works out. The critical challenge is to have some quality human readership (instead of the AI bot brigade and random zero second clicks).

Theoretically the internet would have enabled the long tail, making tiny domain focused niches viable. In practice discovery is the most gamed algorithm in existence. Unless you have the resources and inclination to spend quality time towards useless "SEO" nobody knows you are alive.
People occasionally stumble on it and find value.