skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Unsafe is a tool for producing safe abstractions.

I think we disagree on what "giving up safety" means, or perhaps you thought I meant "you are giving up all safety." (And honestly, I'm just trying to clarify what I meant when I read/wrote it. I'm not going for a No True Scotsman, or trying to move the goalposts here.)

Manually convincing yourself (proving) that an implementation is correct is how you write correct code in any language. In this sense you never "give up safety" in any language, but that's clearly not the sense that is being discussed in this thread. In this thread "giving up safety" appears to me to mean giving up automated safety guarantees provided by the language and compiler.

I acknowledge that it is possible to write just the bare minimum in unsafe rust to realise an abstraction, and that these "unsafe rust" fragments may be provably safe thus rendering an entire abstraction safe. This may be best practice, or "the way rust works" as you say. None the less the unsafe fragments are not proved safe by construction/use of safe rust and/or automatically safe by virtue of the type system/borrow checker.

My point was that if you use unsafe rust you have reduced the number of automated safety guarantees. It is on the developer to prove safety of the unsafe rust, and of the abstraction as a whole. Needless to say, human proof is a fallible process. You may convince yourself that you have not given up safety, but I argue that you have merely contained and reduced risk. You have still "given up safety."
Slightly related story but, I too, found out my documents were out of wack when I applied for financial aid in college. I originally had two middle names at birth but then it was switched to only (the first) one a year or two later. My birth certificate had both names, my drivers license the first middle name, and my social security had the second middle name. It was a huge pain to get fixed, ended up just changing the two easiest to change to match the third.
Maybe they want it for 5x, 2x is absolutely low ball for most businesses that isn’t making a loss. I would think sam is valuing that as low as possible
Private equity or die trying
Everything is some sort of culture war issue with some people. It has to be exhausting.
I've thought that too (you articulated it well). I mean, there are other uber rich in the world that, you know, are president of a different country — and might feel threatened by Musk's wealth.

I too would have liked to see Musk go to Mars.
Okay and the GUI was started by Apple as far as PCs. Where did that leave Apple as far as the PC market compared to Microsoft?

And “disruption” doesn’t mean whet you think it means. Were any of the existing car manufacturers ever threatened by Tesla as far as market share and revenue like what happened to RIM and Nokia in the smart phone space?
In memory constrained environments you just make the underlying array a sparse vector, then it can be mostly empty without using much memory at all.
Well that's Google Maps deleted off my phone then.
Using incoming Alexa Drop-in Call as a HomeAssistant event trigger (2024)
> If anyone has an argument that I'm missing something in this assessment, I'm happy to listen.

Hi, British person here. Yeah, we have a bit of, ahem, experience, of showing up to places and just changing place names and stuff because "it's just better that way... according to us". Generally speaking, people didn't like it. Factor in the statements about taking over Canada/Greenland/Palestine/Panama for USA's own personal gains, regardless of whether they are negotiating positions or not, and it sure seems similar to what we used to do "back in the day". You didn't like it when we did it to you. I'm not surprised other people aren't liking it when it either is being done by the USA, or even just appears to be being done as a result of some "negotiating position".

> I doubt any Mexican ever felt the old name was inappropriate.

There's at least one Mexican who believes the old name was appropriate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cvg6gndgl1ro

> it's obviously arbitrary

If it's arbitrary, why is there a need to change it in the first place? it doesn't matter. it's a body of water. who cares what the name is. we could call it 75928ajfh3845.

so why the need to change it in the first place? (cough see first point cough)
It shows "Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)" in Canada (aka The soon-to-be 51st State).

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
how is the theatre also necessary?
Yeah easily by saying we’ll make 10x that in a few years.
First, the idea that the bank is lying is unfounded speculation, not a given. Second, if you were auditing a bank you would be scrupulous about how you get access and keeping it limited because you be would want it to hold up in court and avoid any questions about tampering or planting evidence. You’d use qualified auditors with clean records, not someone who couldn’t pass a background check.

Now, of course, if your goal was to create propaganda or to install extra-legal modifications to block payments without having to follow normal processes, you might do this because you’re getting you’ll never have to defend your actions in court. That would be consistent with what we’ve seen of the “fraud” being talked up despite being quickly debunked because most of the people sharing stories don’t care whether it’s true as long as it feels right.
Seems a little harsh. What app do you plan on switching to?
> private equity avoids reporting standards that are mandated for public companies?

So do startups and small businesses. I’ve made money in both (as well as hedge funds).

Good investments aren’t measured by consultant spam. I’d be furious if my managers burned my money on e.g. commissioning boiler plate risk factors.
Why are you singling out hedge funds? The blame lies equally with all active fund management, as well as the investment managers (e.g. pension funds) who decide to allocate to them instead of to a passive tracker.
Shawn Charland: https://www.youtube.com/@skyindustries/videos
QGIS has a plug-in for this. I've toyed with writing my plug-in for a colorful 3D format for 3D printing purposes though.
If they were doing something cool with the money, great! But seems like it just gets funneled into yachts and converting perfectly good Hawaiian real estate to doomsday bunkers
https://www.youtube.com/@JohnsBasement
Genuinely can't tell if you are trying to be sarcastic with the first sentence, but I'll just point out that Tesla can both have accomplished a lot as a company, been a net benefit for humanity, be wildly overvalued as a company, and have no real moat. They were the first automaker to put substantial money into selling EVs as a business and that gave them a first mover advantage that has now largely disappeared (but still exists in certain areas such as still having the best charging network).
> a 3-dimensional bus

It's not. There are "air routes." Your plane will be delayed if they are too busy or cannot be sequenced into arrivals from the route at an appropriate rate. This happens flying into JFK and a fair amount flying out of it.

Landing and takeoffs put the plane within seconds of domestic infrastructure below. It's even more controlled.

Your pilot is considering all of this, plus weather deviations, along the entire journey and at the destination, before you even leave. Your '3d bus' doesn't actually exist unless you're flying private VFR. Then, and pretty much only then, can you get out there and just "fly around."

Finally your "2d bus" can just stop. It can literally just stop and do nothing. Your plane cannot without significantly implicating your life.
I was surprised to learn when living in Bahrain that what I knew of as the "Persian Gulf", is there known as the "Arabian Gulf". Only tangentially relevant, but kind of interesting.
One of my personal favorite channels for relaxation is this gaming channel:

https://www.youtube.com/@BinaryVigilante

I cannot believe how many good videos this (down to earth) guy has uploaded (1.1K) and for how long he has been doing it, yet still has hardly been noticed.
>But because Trump did it, some Americans find this inherently problematic,

It's not "because Trump did it".

It's very unusual for geographic place names to be renamed at the whim of a single politician. It's extremely unusual for it to happen by fiat, so quickly. It's absolutely unheard of for a feature so large, and shared by more than one country, to be renamed in this way in the modern era.
> That misses the point that there may be breakthroughs that are much harder or near impossible to make if you're familiar with the state-of-the-art.

If that's the point, you should maybe try and find even a single example that supports it. As the article points out, Krapivin may not have been familiar with Yao's conjecture in particular, but he was familiar with contemporary research in his field and actively following it to develop his own ideas (to say nothing of his collaborators). Balatro's developer may not have been aware of a particular niche genre of indie game[1], but they were clearly familiar with both modern trends/tastes in visual and sound design, and in the cutting edge of how contemporary video games are designed to be extremely addictive and stimulating. To me, these examples both seem more like the fairly typical sorts of blind spots that experts and skilled practitioners tend to have in areas outside of their immediate focus or specialization.

Clearly, both examples rely to some extent on a fresh perspective allowing for a novel approach to the given problem, but such stories are pretty common in the history of both math research and game development, neither (IMO) really warrants a claim as patently ridiculous as "the best way to approach a problem is by either not being aware of or disregarding most of the similar efforts that came before."

[1] And as good of a video game as Balatro is, there are plenty of "roguelite deckbuilder" games with roughly the same mechanical basis; what makes it so compelling is the quality of its presentation.
Not disagreeing with you, but just want to point out that billionaires and political lobbying groups have used funding (or the threat of funding) primary opponents to coerce congress for a long time.
> I’m wondering under what definition he “founded” Tesla rather than being the investor who took it over years later kicking the founders out?

I wouldn't call him a founder precisely because of this, but at the same time they produced, I forget the exact number, but less than 200 individual vehicles before he took over.

The company was seen as a financial disaster, a pipe dream, and a money sink for a very long time, and he did actually make it profitable.

(Although, given he's ranted about the difficulties of being a public company and having to listen to shareholders, I'm not sure how much this happened because of him rather than despite him).
oh, off by a bit, then. Thanks.
Here is what Marilyn vos Savant had to say:

> So let’s look at it again, remembering that the original answer defines certain conditions, the most significant of which is that the host always opens a losing door on purpose. (There’s no way he can always open a losing door by chance!) Anything else is a different question.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130121183432/http://marilynvos...

What you are discussing is a different problem.
In a similar vein: the origin of nicknames Junior, Chip, Trip, and Skip:

When the father and the son carry the same first name, the son can be nicknamed Junior (this is commonly known). But he can also be said to be "a chip off the old block" or "Chip" for short. When the grandfather, father, and son all have the same first name, then the grandson is the third (or triple) of the same name - ergo "Trip".

What about Skip? When the grandfather and the son have the same name, but the father is the odd one out. The grandson is now "Skip" with the name having "skipped" a generation before making a return.
> IMO the only thing that will defeat the plan is a nationwide general strike

Or a boycott of their products. Save America: don't buy Tesla.
I think the gulf of America is in Washington right now.
It's actually a neat idea. So far solar has been a suburb only thing, but the balcony idea is great! Particularly in denser countries it has a lot of potential.
I'm interested to hear more about this. I think I have a tendency to want to do this myself. Any additional reading on this concept?
Ah, missed that aspect. Of course…
>Nothing is black nor white but npm brought its fair share of dumb shit

Sure. So too have books. In that instance, does the blame lie on the advent of books, or to the reader too naive to tell the difference?
TIL that when Trump was saying "make america great again" he was actually talking about mexico
Oil companies have been doing this for 100 years.
This has been something like 80% of all the moderator commentary on HN for the past week, it has a totally predictable explanation that is in line with a decade of HN moderation practice, and the question itself is (and always has been) off-topic. It's not "technically" against the guidelines; it's flatly against them. Take questions about moderation to email: hn@ycombinator.com.
I personally think ALL of his Canada BS is mental, so, no arguments there. But what right does Mexico have to object to what we call a body of water? He's not renaming what we'll call Mexico itself.

These things serve a real purpose which is to troll the easily offended. In that, it's a huge success, as every breath wasted whingeing about this harmless renaming is one that isn't used to ask good questions like "Why fight a trade war with Canada instead of asking why we even have free trade with a country (Mexico) whose wages are so low that it promotes the gutting of American industry." That would be a good question to ask Trump.

We should have a bilateral trade deal with Canada, which would strengthen both countries, and cut Mexico out of it. But all this has distracted from how poorly he's executing his tariff strategy.
Discrete vulnerability to pharmacological CDK2 inhibition and cancer cell cycle
All scientific progress consists of leveraging some past work and overturning other past work. This is no different.
>Were any of the existing car manufacturers ever threatened by Tesla

Yes, that is why almost all of them started heavily investing in EVs after Tesla proved they were a viable product. You seem to believe that "disruption" can only come from wild financial success. All it means in this context is that they blazed a new trail for others established players to follow.
JSX operates based on a loophole in the part 135 rules, but that only allows 30 seats. A CRJ doesn't have the range for (nonstop) transatlantic, bigger planes would be impractical, and smaller ones with the range won't hold 30 people.
I’m saying simply it no more matters in nerd circles than Mac geeks arguing about Apple bringing the GUI to personal computers when it was almost dead in the late 90s.

It is just as meaningless now on HN as it was then on comp.sys.mac.advocacy back then
Yes, actually - You can hear how individual that scream is and how small the applause is compared to the rest of the clapping, and how the crowd goes more silent as he brings up that point.
There's always manual manipulation. In the early days of the site, the saying was "without manual manipulation, the front page would be nothing but cat pictures". Today, it's clear that it would be nothing but Musk stories.
Indian government tried giving things 'post-colonial' names but not all of them stuck equally. I do think Bengaluru is a slightly cooler name than Bangalore though!
> "We believe an OpenAI-P owned by Elon is fundamentally against our mission."

But OpenAI-P of course wouldn't be owned by Elon, he would just own $40B worth of OpenAI-P according to their own valuation of it. A tiny minority stake of the $157B enterprise.

OpenAI-NP, could just go back to other OpenAI investors and buy back their "$40B" stake plus have $57B leftover to apply to AI safety. Silly Elon, overpaying by almost 2.5X for something of such little value!

It's a hard point that they would likely have to make in court! Harder still with Elon having originally been involved in founding OpenAI-NP.

Everyone hates Elon reasonably but few people seem to care the Sam Altman is conducting a theft on the order of $57+B.
> culminating in his advocacy for a treatment - that none of the specialists had thought of - which proved critical in extending his dad’s life.

I'm not sure how your friend could know that it was critical in extending his dad's life.

All treatment decisions in oncology are basically "look at the available data, make an educated guess which one is best for the patient".

When it comes to some treatments, it's more an art than a science. Plenty of the available data is anecdotal at best - small trials (or retrospective data) on half a dozen patients with no control.

The role of the oncologist is often being able to interpret that data to make the best recommendation they can. This isn't easy, and for most oncologists who aren't doing research (and arguing with other oncologists about the latest data), they are going to rely on guidelines which attempt to look at all the literature and make recommendations based on the most robust data.

But whether your friend's dad has gotten therapy X or Y, nobody knows what the course of the disease would have looked like using the alternative.
criminally overvalued is an interesting term to explore. I wonder when after all this shakes out in the courts, how much of his oligarchal access to government will be seen as illegal, therefore undermining any stock premium Tesla has from that access to government.
When he's not fascing. Like maybe when he's asleep, or playing video games.
The 0's don't give you anything. You could just say 1.

As for why they're equal, there are various proofs and explanations, but the simplest proof is probably:

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

0.333... + 0.333... + 0.333... = 1

0.999... = 1
> obviously pointless and silly

Ironically, it’s the same language policing that got the left in trouble. We have better things to do with our lives than keep a running tally of the right and wrong names for things.
Lithuania has interesting rules about the surname, as it is gendered, and the suffix changes when the woman is married. Typically the father's surname is used, and the suffix is changed to match the rules.

For sons it's easy, as the surname doesn't change, it just ends in a masculine ending. Most commonly -as, but less common are -is, -ys or -ius.

For daughters, the masculine ending is replaced with a feminine ending such as -aitė, -ytė, -utė, or -ūtė.

I'm not aware of cases where the father and son have different endings, but technically you could.

However where it gets interesting is marriage. Typically married women take the husband's surname, but they change the ending to -ienė to indicate they are married.

So a family with a daughter would result in everyone having a different surname, for example:

Father: Tomas Žukauskas

Mother: Eglė Žukauskienė

Daughter: Gabija Žukauskaitė

Divorced women typically take their father's surname, but use the married -ienė ending as it appears more sophisticated. Well known people may keep their father's surname even when married, but change the ending.

Gendered suffixes are used for first names too (typically Lithuanian's only have two names), but they don't change for married/unmarried. For example Paulius for a man and Paulina for a woman.

Lithuanian's love diminutives though, so a parent may refer to their children as Pauliukas (the son) or Paulytė (the daughter). And to make things even more fun, the suffix of names changes depending on gramative case.

In the media foreign names are usually converted to their Lithuanian counterpart, for example Donaldas Trumpas.
When training physically, you can overtrain one muscle and depend on them. By not using those muscles on purpose you can improve your other muscles.

It is well known that limitations improve creativity.

That said I still think the best path is to learn a classical path, if you want you can question some axioms, but it's mostly irrational in that there's almost no reward for you personally, except clout, most of the reward goes to the whole science.
I listen to Cohen on his podcast and on YT. He was once Trump's right hand man, they were buddies for 15+ years. Even he says Trump will cast Elon aside when he is no longer useful.

I know a lot of people don't like Cohen. I have my own friends I've had for 15+ years and I know them well, just as much as Cohen knows Trump, so I feel there might be some validity to his thoughts.
Who or what is Elon?
Actually they are backing off from EVs

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/03/13/ev-euphoria-is-dead-auto...

> You seem to believe that "disruption" can only come from wild financial success. All it means in this context is that they blazed a new trail for others established players to follow.

That’s not at all what “disruption” means according to “The Innovator’s Dilemma”.

https://duartem.medium.com/summary-of-the-innovators-dilemma...

Also look at “low end disruption” a “sustaining innovation”, “over serving the market”.

Most people who talk about disruption have never read Clay’s books.
A great idea! I rather like beaver-land it sounds like such a wonderful place.

In all seriousness this started in trumps first term when he insisted on changing NAFTA to USMCA while canada calls it CUSMA and Mexico calls it T-MEC … so it’s the no one agrees on anything agreement
Unless of course the Buyer is another speculator who is only interested in flipping the business for a short-term profit
What initial question? It seems like you are confusing threads (again).

Is that a pun about cannabis?

I just don't think Sam Altman is gonna be the guy to command a droid army, and I also don't think they'll look humanoid, and I also think us saying he is a dipshit in public helps undermine his efforts to waste vital resources pursuing that dystopia that he may or may not want and almost certainly won't meaningfully achieve.

Maybe we're just operating on different assumptions. And maybe we have different goals. Perhaps I'm just replying to weigh down the conversation and thread, dilute Altman's profiteering propaganda.
Exactly. When this first came down, many Canadians (including me, true confessions) had their petty quibbles at the till about rounding (ok the rounding was sometimes wonky, hence the petty quibbles). Most of us have got over it.
He already owns xAI, valued at $45B+.
I expect that like always the pockets of the usual consulting firms will be filled and nothing competitive with the USA or China will ever come out of it.
Needs to be marked with '[video]' at the end of the title.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
You seem to want to argue against a point I'm not making, so this is me ducking out of our conversation.
Red meat for Trump’s base.
I once left my Tesla unplugged for 5 days and it lost 1%.

So effectively, it should be pretty close to 0%. Even if we assume maximum rounding error (ie, maybe it actually lost 1.9%?), maybe round that up to 2%, 5 days to lose 2% means it takes 50 days to lose 20%. 100 days to lose 40%.

If the car is working properly, then vampire drain is a complete non-issue except for an exceptionally rare scenario where you don't drive and can't plug it in, not even into a standard household outlet, for more than 3 months.
Considering the relative populations of states, shouldn't Canada be at least 10-20 states?
> I do think it's reasonable to say that llms aren't an existential risk and spinning them off to a consumer thing while xrisk and super alignment stays in a nonprofit is plausibly mission aligned

I think you added this after I replied. Even if this is the case, better to do so with $97B and no control in OpenAI than $40B and no control in OpenAI!
5 years ago?

7 years ago he called Vernon Unsworth a pedophile. That was enough for me.
Lex Luthor