skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Reflection is spectacularly useful and sorely missed in C++

But because this is C++ the committee designs the most insane and terrible version of reflection possible
Note: I'm not making any defense of the idiotic Canada/Greenland stuff. I don't approve of it and I won't defend it.

> showing up to places and just changing place names and stuff because

> You didn't like it when we did it to you.

My whole argument was only that international waters between multiple countries is a special case where nobody can claim to be the "rightful" namers, except maybe for an argument that say, Australia or Japan couldn't be taken seriously at naming the Gulf since it doesn't touch any of them.

My point was only that it's a troll that we shouldn't care about.
In the end, people have to speak for themselves. So anything any of us say is at best secondhand knowledge and more likely (as in my own case) conjecture.

I don't like the visible surface of Musk's engagement in the wider public conversation. Either as an enabler of the tech (he has made choices which have massive impact in the wide) or as a user (he makes choices to like and comment on content which I regard as divisive and a-social)

But, there is a view that people need to be seen as distinct qualities, and his ability to monetize technology investment and attract smart people into enterprises which make amazing things is visibly there. I think defenses of Musk tend to emphasise this, as if it somehow outweighs the other problems (such as they are)

The other thing is that people are complex. Sometimes, people actually approve of what Musk is doing in public. It brings out a side of the super-rich and smart which I find very unfortunate. I think the diversity of views here (amongst the VC class) interesting: Obviously they value money highly. Obviously, in this niche they value the money-tech nexus highly. But, when it comes to tax, or unions, or social policy, or the astronomical divide between super rich and normal people let alone normal people and poor people, there is a divide: Very few people chose to voice things the way Mark Cuban or Warren Buffet do.

I have never knowingly met PG or Musk. I can only comment on their public persona. I am saddened that PG seems to foster mutuality here, but then backs or excuses behaviours from Musk which are not mutual, are extreme, are destructive to human capital.

X is not "the commons" in any legalistic sense. It has T&C and is backed by diverse investors lending money to Musk as well as his own money. It's not a free speech space. It has historically had editorial policy which was complex but at least visible, pushing back on some extreme right wing voices. Musk made a choice to publicly repudiate that, and then launched his own voice in this space, tending to favour extreme right wing views. That speaks for itself.

I left Twitter half a decade ago. I don't think it's good for my mental health, and I judge from how it's reported on, its not good for Kanye, or Musk, or very probably anyone's mental health, and I also believe (without strong evidence, based solely on reporting in establishment news) that it is being gamed by cyber activists in support of extremist, antisocial political goals. It's probably part and parcel of the destruction of goodwill and mutuality in much of the west.

Thats truly worrysome. Thats why I say being told PG is visibly supportive, or excusing of Musk so concerning. PG has money, and "power" in the wider sense money brings. Using it to validate what Musk does, thats (in my view) bad.
How does this work? Naively I'd have expected that to implement a sparse vector with efficient random access, you'd use a hash table, but I assume this must depend on the sparse vector not being a hash table or otherwise there wouldn't be an improvement. Are there other ways of implementing the efficient random access, or do you sacrifice the performance of random access?
Related The US government-funded 'private social network' attacking pesticide critics (46 points, 4 months ago, 5 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41715728
I think we're disagreeing about how much it's reasonable to assume. I'm happier treating it as a self contained problem (in which case I'd say that the form quoted by CrazyStat is underspecified); but if you're familiar with the TV show it's based on, you can reasonably assume that he always opens a door with a goat and gives you a chance to switch.

My objection is to the claim that "most people get it wrong", if most people are being fed the underspecified problem. I think the gut reaction is not to switch, because in most comparable situations across human experience it would be a mistake (imagine a similar situation at a sketchy-looking carnival game rather than a TV show). They then try to justify that formally and make mistakes in their justification, but the initial reaction not to swap is reasonable unless they've been convinced that Monty Hall always opens a door with a goat and gives a chance to switch.
Which number is bigger isn't the only calculation to make. Elon has shown himself to be a capricious and distracted steward of the companies he assumes control of. He has a lot of debt and is already over-leveraged on multiple companies as well as his new roles in government. X has plunged in value, Tesla sales are plummeting worldwide, Elon's scorched earth political agenda invites unending controversy that OpenAI already has enough of on its own. Even if you ignore those glaring concerns, there's a compelling argument to be made that OpenAI's current leadership has already proven itself more than capable of world-class innovation and vision when they effectively created an entirely new industry.

It wasn't long ago that the company almost fell apart because senior folks who actually care about the company tried to oust sama - the chaos that an Elon takeover would introduce is a critical risk that cannot be ignored.

"I'll pay you double" isn't the instant checkmate you're suggesting.
Neon signs have more charm.
For every case like this you have thousands of people who waste a huge amount of time and mental effort recreating something that has already been invented.
Popular at the time (1398 points, 128 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31729040
Anyone getting access to a federal system is going to need some kind of background check; training on and agreement to follow the rules about not misusing that data, copying it to unauthorized systems, trying to circumvent a security control, etc. If the reports about having administrator access are true, that would likely involve stronger policies since administrators not only have greater access but also fewer constraints which could prevent misuse of that access (e.g. the normal user interface might not let you download PII in bulk but a SQL query wouldn’t have that restriction unless carefully built in).

Again, none of this is remotely normal and it hasn’t previously been a contentious point that sensitive data has safeguards. The difference here is that they’re impatient and acting like it’s a hostile takeover.
Real world hash table can either be resized to avoid worst-case degradation or else be provisioned to have a good amount of slack when the worst expected case occurs. (E.g. a hash table used a cache will apply pressure to evacuate old entries before it gets foo full.)

Bucket hashing obviously has no problem finding a free spot. I didn't say chained on purpose because chains can be resizable vectors, so we load at most one pointer when going from table to bucket.
> terms of the 'skin in the game' that startup founders

I’ve done a startup. My skin in the game was significant, but I was less dependent on the outcome of the startup than I was keeping my job earlier in my career.

In any case, fraudsters also have lots of skin in the game. This argument is irrelevant to the irrelevance of public reporting requirements, or the empirical track record of private equity for LPs.
Once an LLM knows an indigenous language, even if the last speaker dies out, future generations will be able to learn the language and use the LLM to converse with them in that language.

Learning a new language is a good use case for LLMs, not just indigenous languages, but any language.

As for your comment "ree bad British man destroyed India" this sound more like politics than anything of substance.
How does that make any sense at all?
One code should be fine.
They can identify in both directions within different time windows.
That will be a real deal. Recommend the exact medical services you need. It can potentially optimize the medical supply chain, reducing cost and waiting time for everyone.
Yep. Sometimes I take a 1 hour flight to Canberra. But it's really more like a 3.5 to 4 hours, from home to the city centre, and can cost $400.

Alternatively, I can take the train. It takes 9 hours home to city centre, and costs $35. It's a much better experience all around.
That's what I am saying, Musk shenanigan so bad they EVEN vindicated CCP.
"People hate it" because the motivation for it is xenophobia
> Yeah, we have AI here in the future. It’s pretty magical, except when it’s totally terrifying

That feels so true. Can’t decide whether it is a privilege to be alive in such exciting times of changes. Or fucking terrifying
No, there genuinely used to be purely mechanical mirror controls. You'd twiddle the little joystick and it would more or less adjust the mirror, in a way that at least in my experience was slightly imprecise and rubbish, but definitely didn't demand any electronics.
We have folk who believe in a flat earth, I wonder if there is also a "flat core society"...
> it would be easy to mistake the radii as the measured quantity instead of the area

Humans perceive the area as the measured quantity even when radius is the intended, so this isn’t going to be a problem.
I think that shows how great the trapezoidal rule is. I feel like this is brought out too many times, that now it is used to make fun of people. It is 18 years old at this point.
Does anyone else remember the early third party tool that would help you find extension conflicts by enabling half of them, asking you if the problem was still there, and then subdividing again and again? (Can't remember what it was called, but boy! was it helpful.)
This is only the case in a few markets that still do 1:1 net metering. I still get charged a grid connection fee (which you’re charged even if you use zero electricity) and when I sell power back to the grid I only am credited the production value and not the full kWh rate. As a result anything I net back I still pay the cost of the transmission infrastructure.
I had to learn it for the interview homework for a quant job. It is a fun language to to solve small-ish problems. I somehow got a feeling it's a good language to show off clever solutions, but in the same time I can't comprehend how one could use such a language for any serious large code.
That July 2017 article you linked cites Volvo committing to switch their fleet to all electrics and hybrids. If you click on that hyperlink you will find this paragraph:

>Of Elon Musk’s Tesla, whose ‘mass market’ Model 3 is expected to roll off the production line later this week, Samuelsson [Volvo's chief executive] said: “It’s a tough competitor. But with this decision we are really becoming the second premium car maker in the world which will also be all-electrified.”

The EU followed France. France followed Volvo. Volvo followed Tesla. Tesla was the spark.
Let him rest. It doesn’t matter what he looked like. Accept his work as having value or reject it. Slinging his skull around is macabre and obscene.
I’m quite late here, but if you want a diagram you can ask the LLM to output Mermaid syntax and then paste that into Excalidraw or something else that can render based on Mermaid.
itt technocrats complaining about how bad elon is with tone a reasoning no better than his
> Visual inspection of the carcass revealed that the liver ... and reproductive organs were missing

There's a joke in there somewhere
It was to IEEE. Maybe that was hard mode? It was for a Cloud Conference in 2023.

One of the comments

“ This paper shows a linear programming problem to address cloud security. It's not clear why the LP program addresses security. Comparison with SOTA is also lacking.”

“ The paper attempts a fresh perspective on Cloud Security Decisions using a well-known approach.

Unfortunately, as currently presented, it does not deliver any significant research results, and thereby its contribution is limited.

The paper as formulated is closer to a vision paper -- not that it actually is -- than to a research paper. This reviewer notes the limited results. No surprises, the paper is also missing an evaluation analysis of the results.”

I had evaluation of results. I had never heard of a vision paper.
Recalling that almost all the OpenAI employees signed to support the reinstatement of Altman... it'd be funny if all someone else had to do to seize control of OpenAI was to offer the employees more money.
Approximately the same population as the existing state of California. I suspect giving Canadians 40 senators and proportionally more representatives by splitting it up would be a political concern for annexation-hawks.
You are right about Social Security. It only holds Treasuries.
But, there are many other pension funds like teachers pension, government workers pensions, etc that manage working class money.
The board can and should be friendly with the p-corp owner. Almost all the time they are going to be green light everything. They are really just a "sanity check" (literally).

Now you could say how do we "make sure" the board acts when the time comes? Stands up to the owner? Maybe we don't. We put the mechanism in place, and if the board fails to stop the owner, then it didn't work in that specific case. And the world will know that. But as long as it works "most" of the time maybe that's enough.

Also I forgot, apart from a board a big thing might be reporting. Your p-corp activities would have much more stringent reporting requirements compared to a private individual. You can do anything you want with your $300M in private funds, including get it as small bills and roll around in it, but the p-corp funds need to be much more closely monitored. That alone, even without a board, would be big.
[self-promotion] My paid browser extension for Mac and iOS has a "Stop animations" feature if this kind of stuff drives you mad: https://apps.apple.com/app/stopthemadness-pro/id6471380298
If mean, if you're monthly bill is that high, JHC, to be sure. My highest monthly bill gets in the neighborhood of the low end of that scale, but that's when it's well over 100° (over 40°C for those that can't do the maths) during the summer months, and that's with shitty windows that leak like a sieve.

I'd be taping cardboard over the windows if my bills were as high as your one month
Wild. I never ran into one of those - the only Mac peripheral I knew of which did that was the PC Compatibility Card.
Well, people need to understand that it's not just one group of people, but an ever-evolving group of people that don't always share the same interests - but have very similar, overlapping interests - and will gladly take each other to court, but will just as gladly unite to vanquish outsiders.
The existence of such people isn't (I don't think) in question, the question is how you organize a system so that their being in a position to run an organization isn't an unstable, non-equilibrium state.

It is not just bad luck or accident that businesses at scale, while they may temporarily be run by idealists of that or other stripes, either fail or end up run by people whose interests is in having the organization run as an optimized profit-returning (either directly or by increasing stock value so that investors can realize gains by liquidating some part of their holdings) machine above all else. It is the structural incentives of the system in which they operate.
> I like to wonder what would be the maximal amount of damage to humanity an extremely wealthy person could do entirely legally.

We seem to be watching this in real time. Musk bought influence over the US president, gained access to critical US systems, and is about to benefit from the EO pausing of enforcement of law banning bribes to foriegn nationals.

He bought power. He is buying more power. We are watching a supervillian rise.
"it is well known that a vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you are attempting can’t be done."
— Terry Pratchett (equal rites)
I read through this and I'm not sure if people have heard of dictionary trees for hash tables. Of course, quantamagazine.org has been known to sensationalize these types of things.
https://www.crisesnotes.com/
Previously I would have said buying election results. But apparently the electoral college makes it surprisingly cheap. Musk buys twitter for 44 billion dollars and yet he only needed a quarter of a billion to buy the American government.
> We get Hodge / Hodges / Hodgson / Hodgkins from "Hodge", an arcahic nickname for Roger.

I wonder if the Brazil Rogers - which are pronounced Hodger - are related to this older version of the name.
Don't we need a law that permits rounding of prices though?

If stores round down, they can potentially collect too little sales tax. If they round up, they're charging above the advertised price which, afaik, is fraud.
Plenty of cars for you then. Only pity you pay 2x price for 1/2 features. But at least it looks good!
s/preserve/hallucinate/

The next few decades are going to be really, really weird.
The article is misleading, it's not because it's liquid. Kimchi has a potent odor that can be overwhelming, especially in a closed-air environment like a plane. It's the same reason airports ban durian.
Shouldn't this problem self-regulate, though? Ultimately, investors mainly care about the returns and if you can get better returns elsewhere due to these fees, they will switch.

If they can charge large amount of fees and still stay competitive, then good on them, right?
Do you think the millions of people with HIV, TB or Malaria wish USAID (or some USAID contractors) had donated several million dollars to the president's inauguration festivities?
To put it in gaming terms, the hijacking meta changed. Before, you had relatively minimal consequences as a hijacker. Now if you try anything funny, EVERYONE is going to be your enemy.

You aren't locked in the airplane with the hijacker. The hijacker is locked in the plane with hundreds of people with nothing to lose.
Regardless of how you feel about the potential consequences of Musk being a significant shareholder of OpenAI, the alternative is not to let sama and other preferred investors buy the non-profit's stake at a >50% discount as they had planned to do before this offer.
Tesla sales are collapsing globally partly due to Musk's mental breakdown and are not likely to recover much, especially since Tesla no longer really has a CEO.
> Are you saying, a potus appointed commission for auditing government system […]

You don't need read-write access for auditing. You don't need root/admin-level privileges.
As a thought experiment, I like to wonder what would be the maximal amount of damage to humanity an extremely wealthy person could do entirely legally.

Ian Fleming explored that idea rather effectively with Hugo Drax in the original Moonraker novel (which doesn't have much besides the name in common with the movie.)

The way things are playing out, Drax must have been Musk's childhood hero.
I was trying to get into the more software-engineering side (e.g. stuff like what Jane Street advertises). I have plenty of experience at BigCo tech companies, but that doesn't appear to be enough.

I'm not bitter about it or anything, I'm not entitled to a yuppie finance job, but thus far no luck with it. There might be some magical configuration of my resume to make it stand out better to these companies, but I haven't found it yet if there is.
A while back I was asked to write some software to make print out labels small enough to fit through a button hole. I convinced myself it wasn't possible because the spacing between the cutter and the print head. Then my boss showed me a label that was printed by a competitors system and I had it figured out within an hour or so. Although this was a minor thing it convinced how powerful knowing something is possible (or not) really is.
There are ways to do this sort of thing with inetd, pam.d, etc.
It would be better if it came from AI, as it would show that AI will be able to make helpful improvements to technology.

AI has come up with impartments to other algorithms, such as matrix multiplication, so it's not super farfetched for it to come up with something similar to this, especially with all the improvements to AI lately.

So much pessimism about AI...
It takes time to read all the prior research. You could grow old by the time you get through it all. Likelihood of contributing to the field declines with age.

You might believe someone's proof of a conjecture and then be discouraged from delving any more into that rabbit hole.

More often than not you will be reinventing something. But that's not necessary less productive than reading other people's work. In the former case, you're at least making something, if not new.

So there are some arguments for being fresh in a well-trodden field with an ocean of research that you cannot boil all at once.

On the other hand, there is the publish-or-perish pressure in academia, which requires original research. You could just keep busy and throw enough shit agains the wall such that enough of it sticks.
> The fact that it's worth more than all the other automakers combined.

The South Sea Company was also stupendously valuable until it wasn't.
The issue isn't OpenAI-NP having some stake (which will obviously be the case no matter what), it's Elon having some stake.

If OpenAI-NP has a reasonable case to believe that Elon will be a bad steward of the technology and work against their charter (https://openai.com/charter/), they shouldn't sell to him, even if his offer is more than another. Unlike a normal board, the duty-to-shareholder isn't the only duty, a hostile buyout like with twitter doesn't necessarily work.

> 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.

IDK, Musk's offer is apparently for the nonprofit, not for a partial interest in the not-yet-extant for-profit subsidiary.
Whatever you do, don't right click on the map and select "Report a data problem".
I mean, it sort of deserves being made fun of. 18 years ago Google existed, surely you'd search for "area under a curve" before going through all the effort of writing a paper reinventing integrals?

Edit: actually the paper was written in 1994, not sure what the "18 years" was referring to. But still, peer review existed and so did maths books... Even if the author can be excused somewhat (and that's already a stretch), peer reviewers should definitely not let this fly.
Maybe Trump's plan to make Canada part of the United States, just rename Canada to the "United States" in the GNIS database and they appear part of the same country (at least within the real "United States" borders, Google implements names based on a Geo fence for each country).
Sounds like a total win for Firefox! Hope it stays this way.

Use Firefox! It does not support sites that make you physically ill when you scroll them!
I have thought the same thing. Musk can protect himself from the average nutjob but he is working very hard to make the kinds of enemies he will NOT be able to protect himself from.
Maybe the best way to have the best of both worlds is to ensure well-established areas of research are open to “outsider art” submissions on the topic?