skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just because someone comes up with one illogical idea, it isn't reasonable to say it likely "differs in other ways too". Instead maybe establish one unusual thing to be verifiably true before stacking on more.

> Sayings "priests" seems and off choice of wording.

Meh. Priests set the norm for the regional communities.
Money has a perception of value because of scarcity + demand. The government could, in theory, 'print' enough money to make every single American a trillionaire tomorrow.

Of course all that would do is make the dollar worthless and completely destroy the US economy. I think you would obviously agree.

That also means that we must agree that 'money printing' taken to an extreme can have catastrophic effects. So where we disagree is where we are on the line between the points of inherently valuable and stable currency, and lol funny money.

When the interest on the debt is starting to exceed our total discretionary budget, let alone at a major inflection point in global economics/relations, I tend to think we're prettty far down that line.
Another Ph.D. physicist here (Ivy, not Stanford/Berkeley)

As others have pointed out, your prospective advisor(s) are the most important thing to consider. You can't go wrong with either school.

That said, when choosing an advisor:

* Pay attention to where the advisor's former students ended up. The former students are a natural "network" for you when you graduate. If you can, ask relatively recent grads about their experience.

* Meet the prospective advisor's current students and post-docs - are they happy? Will you fit in with them? Do they graduate in a reasonable amount of time? Ask other grad students about the professor as well. Trust me, each professor is going to have a reputation.

* If you want to stay in academia, mid-career advisors are the "safest" - an assistant prof may be working on something exciting, but the research will probably be more risky, and the professor might even have to leave mid-way through your thesis work if they don't get tenure. A late-career advisor may presently sit on a lot of committees and be more well-known, but by the time you need their recommendation for jobs/tenure they may have considerably less influence (that happened to me, although it was fine in the end.)

Read Feibelman's "A PhD is not enough" - still lots of good advice even though written 30+ years ago.
A big challenge is that most doctors can't operate outside of the most common conditions and differential diagnoses of their specialty and have to punt patients.

Of course, to the doctor's defense, patients are not an easy population to work with, "Why can't I eat candy and cake 3 meals day and my diabetes is getting worse?"
Lots of verbs too.

For example, 'to be' - French 'etre' (circumflex over the e indicates old 's' after the e), Marathi 'asane' (pronounced esnay)

'to go', German gehen, Marathi jana (when conjugated the j becomes hard)

'to give', french 'donner', Hindi 'danaa' (pronounced similarly)

'to mix', french 'melanger', Hind 'melaanaa'

Other non-obvious ones:

Vedas and Wisdom / Wit. Alternatively, Latin video (to see)

Dyaus-pitar and Jupiter, Zeus-pater

'that' in English is 'que' (that/what) in french and 'kya' (for what) or 'ki' (for that) in Hindi (pronounced similarly to French 'que').

English burden or 'to bear' and Hindi bhar (burden)

English 'ignite', Latin 'ignis' and Indic 'agni' (fire)

'Raja' and 'regal' or 'royal'

'Dental' and Hindi 'dant' (tooth)

Greek 'polis' and Indic 'pore' / 'pur' / 'puram' (the 'r' is pronounced like a soft l)
> But -y/-ie remains by far the dominant diminutive. It shouldn't be confused with several other uses of the suffix though (such as with the meaning of -ish).

I think the -y meaning of ish is very closely related to if not identical to the diminutive use.
That tracks well with my subjective experience.

At day job - finance/office stuff - essentially zero traction despite everyone having enterprise AI subs & brainstorming sessions about use cases etc.

Then go home & do some hobby coding and suddenly it's next level useful.

It's not that the one is harder than the other, but rather that many jobs don't have an equivalent to a code base. The AI could I think grok parts of the job but typing up relevant content & what is required would take longer much than doing the task. There is nothing there to copy & paste for a quick win in the same way as code.
> I've noticed that recruiters recently will use euphemisms for crypto/blockchain/etc

I've seen this also, and I think its lame.

This is why at Fetchfox I explicitly use the phrase "crypto token" in the article and in all offers offers to prospective hires. It's a crypto token, so we call it that.

There are a lot of negative associations with the term, but using euphemisms just confuses people and makes it seem like you're afraid or that you're trying to trick them. I say, call a spade a spade, and call Voldemort "Voldemort".
The whole film is marvellous, Emma Thompson's adaptation is brilliant.
100k would be more than double my current salary, with more than a decade of experience. US salaries are fucking insane.
Why do you need crypto for that? Why not just 'a share of the company'?
He looks semi-hench in the pic on this page with David Lee Roth: https://lamag.com/news/steve-wozniak-us-fest
> like Carbon API which I didn't even know about

Yeah, I hear that kind of excuse a lot.

Last time, someone had come up with some kind of new database-oriented language or something and they called it "Limbo".

Limbo is the programming language in Inferno. Plan 9 is what the Unix creators did next -- it's UNIX 2. Inferno is UNIX 3; it's what Plan 9 developed into.

It is the next language from the team that developed C.

It may not be widely-used but it's important, significant, and just as someone knowing their history makes me take their work more seriously, someone not knowing their history makes me think they have less to contribute, because they clearly haven't gone looking at prior art.

Ignorance is no excuse.

For someone to know what they're doing, they need to have at least a vague idea of whose shoulders they're standing on (as Isaac Newton put it). If they don't, they could be reinventing a wheel, and if they call things "struts" and "roundbuffers" and "spinny-pivots" then this says they don't know about "spokes" and "tyres" and "hubs". And making it hexagonal.

The flipside of this coin is making life easier for the community to search and learn.
I would agree that the products coming out so far lack imagination, but hard disagree on the impact. LLMs have completely transformed multiple industries already. In SWE, I would estimate that junior positions shrank by 70-80%, but even that is less extreme than what is going on in other industries.

In marketing, the entire low-end to mid-tier market is gone. Instead of having teams working on projects for small to mid-sized companies, there's now a single Senior managing projects with the help of LLMs. I know multiple agencies who cut staff by 80-90% without dropping revenue.

Translation (of books, articles, subtitles) was never well paid, even for very complex and demanding work. My partner did it a bit on the side, mostly justifying the low pay with some moral bla about spreading knowledge across cultures... With LLMs you can completely cut out the grunt part. You define the hard parts (terms that don't translate well), round out the edges and edge out the fluff, and every good translator becomes two to ten times more productive. Since work is usually paid by the page, people in the industry got a very decent (at least temporary) pay jump, I would imagine around 100%.

Support is probably the biggest one though. It is important to remember that outsourcing ot India only works for English speaking countries. And even that isn't super cheap.
Here in Germany, if you don't have back-up wealth, it is your constitutional right to get some support from the state (~1400 euro), but you are obligated to find a job as soon as possible, and they will try to help you find a role. Support was always one of the biggest industries to funnel people towards. I talked to a friend working there, and according to them the complete industry basically stopped advertising new positions, the only ones that are left are financial services. The rest went all in on LLMs and just employ a fraction of the support stuff to deal with things escalating enough.

And that's not even touching on all the small things. How much energy is spent on creating pitch decks, communicating proposals, writing documentation etc? It probably goes up as far as 50% of work in large Orgs, and even if you can just save 5% of your time by using LLMs to phrase or organize, there is a decent ROI for companies to pay for them.
> ...tutoring doesn't work, because it isn't scalable...

If you somehow RIF'ed 95% of the administrators, consultants, experts, ideologues, lobbyists, professional activists, etc. - most of whom earn more than any mere teacher - then there just might be enough money to try tutoring.

My grandmother spent her teaching career as the sole teacher in a small town's one-room schoolhouse. She had 1st through 8th graders. And (with respect to her schoolhouse and students) the only other school district employee was the District Superintendent.

Grandma's teaching qualifications amounted to a year or two at a little Normal School - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_school#Midwest

Every year, one of grandma's "alumni" was the valedictorian at the local(-ish) high school.
I'm pretty sure the majority of people I interview (in big tech) are now cheating with some kind of assistance. Usually it's obvious, but not always. I am just plodding along though, and hoping my company moves back to on-site interviews. Alternatively, interviews need to be designed for AI assistance (e.g. much more complex problems).
The oldest attestation of Indo-European language is now the long extinct language Hittite who used to live in Bronze Age Anatolian Steppe. The language is attested in cuneiform, in records dating from the 17th to the 13th centuries BCE.

Hittite people created an empire centred on Hattusa, and also around northern Levant and Upper Mesopotamia.

> On a tangent, with the advent of AI and the final decades of our species, we should make more clay tablets to leave lying around

The irony is that even with AI we have yet to decode Indus script perhaps due to the lack of the equivalent of Rosetta Stone [1]. I think there's a Nobel prize waiting for those who can decipher the Indus script with AI or not [2].

[1] Rosetta Stone:

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

[2] Indus script:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_script
The bigger lie is that 1% doesn't mean 1% of the total sale price of the company. It means... whatever the founders and investors want it to mean. Every time the startup gets a new investor, the founders print new shares and give them to the right people who deserve it: the new investor, the old investors and the founders of course. The thought of giving more shares to the "founding engineers" rarely crosses their minds and the original 1% quietly becomes 0.1%, then 0.01% and then nothing. If you want a real 1% you need a contract similar to those given to investors.
Another example for Harry: nickname for Harcourt. Used in 2 episodes of the original Star Trek series for Harry Mudd (Harcourt Fenton Mudd).
I'm conflicted on this. On one hand, no one can seriously argue that the healthcare system(esp in the US) is good or even adequate for the edge cases. The process is a lot like navigating tech support where the initial layers are oriented towards rapid triage and (barely) adequate resolution of the most common cases. Note that this does not mean that the individuals are not capable of more. It's just that the system is not set up to do so. Getting through to 'L2' support can be just as frustrating as in the tech world.

On the other hand, interpreting domain specific data takes a lot of training and experience. Somewhat similar to looking at logs, knowing what to ignore is often more important. LLMs can dump a bunch of possible causes, some of which are perhaps hallucinated, however knowing what next steps to take with the results isn't really something most people will be capable of.

Perhaps the most likely immediate benefit for tools like this might be for the individuals who are motivated and determined enough to put in the time and gain the knowledge necessary to be effective with such tools(like with most things in life).

One thing is for sure though. As others have pointed out in this thread, you need to be your own advocate in the healthcare system.
Save the AI
Test Double is a consultancy that's now employee-owned https://testdouble.com/news-and-awards/software-consultancy-...

But yeah that was a situation of a privately held company opting to make that transition, I'm not sure they had any investors to complicate things. And they're definitely an outlier.
I know a couple who combined half each of their original surnames to create a new surname. I thought it was a cool idea, but of course won't work for everyone's names. Their "invented" name turned out to be a fairly reasonable surname that is probably in not-uncommon use in general, so that worked well for them.

I feel like that could kinda work for my wife's name and my name, but the possible new combinations still sound a little off to me. (We both kept our original surnames.)
It’s uncommon for it to be true—but patio does go on to supply third-party blurbs to support the idea, and as far as I understand his reputation, I believe his claim is probably accurate.

In context it strikes me less as stroking his own ego and more as contextualizing the bank CEO’s claim.
I'm interested in how you've translated "grep".

I would guess you chose something like mapping "Global Regular Expression Print" to "Imprimir Globalmente Expresión Regular". But of course "grep" isn't really an acronym, but a contraction of the ed (and ex) command "g/re/p". Surely you don't mean to alter the syntax along with the words!
A high enough pressure makes the transition between gases, liquids, and solids all very fuzzy.

I do think Earth is not large enough for that, but it's certainly not as crisp as you would assume if you only know how matter behaves at the surface.
Maybe it's not about the money.
IMO if you're reasonably talented and working harder than the founders as an early employee, it's time to value your options at 0 and look for another job.
Memecoin Pumps Are Just for Fun
It's like a corollary to Boots Theory.
Necessary quote from my favourite movie

> Dr. Josh Keyes: The core is the size of Mars. You're talking about jump-starting a planet. This is a superheated hyper-fluid of molten iron and nickel at 9,000 degrees Fahrenheit. And the deepest we've ever been is... 7 miles, with a two-inch drill bit. Space is easy. It's empty. We're talking about millions of pounds of pressure per square inch. Even if we somehow came up with a brilliant plan to fix the core, we just can't get there.

> Dr Conrad Zimsky: ...But what if we could?

[1]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/
You're somewhat exaggerating the effect, the headline uses past tense and your comparisons don't.
That is basically the 1% equity founding engineer model! You "buy in" with free labor, the delta between your compensation and market rate. Some of the problems are:

* You can only "invest" in one company at a time this way, so the risk profile is much worse for you than for a VC with a lot of different portfolio companies.

* It's rare for a 100-person company to be valuable enough that a 1% equity stake is competitive with the levels.fyi payscale.
I once wasted a couple of hours trying to find information about my great-grandmother, Selma Brenner Rauh. I found nothing.

... until I started looking for Mrs. Sidney Rauh ...
Rock is not very compressible. The cavities created by underground nuclear tests aren't that large: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_nuclear_weapons_te... . They did get surface subsidence, but maxing out at a scale of "over half a mile", and not terribly deep. To create "huge caverns", that volume still has to go somewhere, and when you're talking about vaporized rock that mostly means atmosphere or nothing, more often the latter. But at least they didn't always get fallout, that's nice.
For what its worth, the top google result for USofAian is literally this thread.
Moreover, in a later picture on the page you can see an example showing a -dóttir name in that field (I had wondered if perhaps it was only used for people who happened to have a "real" surname as opposed to a patronymic, e.g. foreign-born citizens)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_passport#/media/Fi...
I do, save for code I'm simply too lazy to publish...
Yeah. I had to get a second last name when I was granted Spanish citizenship, which leads to my full name not matching my Argentinian ID. This generates (small) problems when flying between Spain and Argentina. Also partially due to my full now being too long to print on a boarding pass.
> While I agree that 1% is low. 25% seems crazy?

(author/fetchfox ceo)

I usually make a few different offers that have cash / token allocation tradeoffs. Higher token = lower cash, and lower cash makes you more like a founder.

Just to give a concrete example, for a recent very good candidate, the offer on the high token side was ~20% of the expect total allocation and 150k cash. There is also a higher cash option with lower token allocation.

For less exceptional candidates, the offers are a lower token allocation the equivalent cash.
I think as you move further from the specific work your lab did, school brand name matters more and more. Berkeley is a public school, and it’s going to be more closely associated with other top public schools like UW-Madison, while Stanford will be associated more closely with private schools like MIT.

I think people in the Bay Area forget this, but as you move further from the bay Berkeley is regarded more and more like another public school. I’m not saying it’s fair, but it is just another public school, where Stanford is a globally recognized school.
What do you mean by “statistically”? The end results would be like three orders of magnitude apart. Wouldn’t the desired sample size depend on the size of the population itself?
*perfectly reliable, but yes.
Equity isn't mainly based on performance. It's based on risk. If I join as the first engineer, before any paying customers, that is in fact worth exponentially more than when there is some revenue, the first cease and desist is conquered, the rest of the core team is put together and working well, etc.

Trusting a potentially insane one-man shop of the founder is way different than trusting a group of 5-10 people who pay rent at the end of the month as proof that the concept might work.

Investors have even less to go on: the founder might be an outright crook and run off to the Bahamas.
Ion Cannon - content collection and analysis system that uses multiple LLMs
Thank you for your comment. I can totally understand. I’m always tempted to stop worrying and go « default mode » for everything as I have a tendency to trap myself in rabbit holes configuring and fine tuning but sometimed it's too hard to resist !
"k" was used in lowercase throughout the article, including the title.
100% agree.
I'm happy to trade hypothetical equity in one startup for same salary and hypothetical equity in a brand new startup, if the new startup has just plain a cooler founder, or tech, or broader opportunity. As an early founding engineer, my impact is much much higher as well.
They are, but my health insurance premiums (which don't cover everything) went up to $3,600/month this year, and I've got two kids going to college soon.

I'll happily take substantially lower salaries for publicly funded healthcare and undergrad education.
display the help message and exit

https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/echo.1.html
Theoretically customers can give their money to some other company, but we have seen massive consolidation across most industries over the course of decades. Many important markets are dominated by only a few large companies.

The free market works when there is actual competition. If we want a healthy free market, then we need vigorous antitrust action to block mergers and break up companies that get too big.
And it's being addressed, but doing that takes a long time. In the meantime, real people are suffering actual hurt that is alleviated by this medicine.
I'm taking a Zero Trust approach to the movement of money. You have to assume there are insiders in banking and government with malicious intent. How do you protect against them? Could cryptocurrencies be worked into a solution?
The point that this article makes is that founding engineers shouldn't accept 1% equity. I think it's more nuanced. I've worked in startups for a long time and my experience is that early engineers are more motivated by the 0 to 1 aspect that by equity. Most of them leave within a few years and do not buy vested equity anyway.

I think the experience and exposure to new tech, new people and the professional growth is what makes it worthwhile for more junior folks.

I agree that for the top engineers that doesn't make any sense.
Self driving cars?
there's only a couple of coutries that have the area/population demographics of the US. it isn't bad faith. what you're doing is conflating "The US" as just "any other country" when it isn't. we're the third or 4th largest area nation in the world.

is it because you wanted to say bleach and UV?

edit: "look what UK and denmark did!" is so completely irrelevant that it's ... not "good" faith to suggest it.
https://archive.ph/Kw3IF
Sort of a side note, but the exit assumptions in this article are naive. If your YC backed company makes an early exit, I'd imagine it's pretty much guaranteed the preferred equity holders are going to get most, if not everything, of the acquisition price.

Also, founders may get some liquidity at funding rounds, but I don't think founding engineers typically get to benefit from these.
This sort of suggestion is for that worst case that you already have brownfield consumers that don't care about the signature using outer fields and you need to add the signature without breaking those consumers.

The redundancy is absolutely a recipe for disaster, but so is the part where you have brownfield consumers that you can't break and know that they also don't care about message security.

Unfortunately, it's an all too common brownfield to find yourself stepping into, which is why it is such a too common ask for "inline JSON signatures" (or other document languages like XML) that don't change the outer shape of the JSON document to break backwards compatibility with dumber consumers.

Also, unfortunately the most correct answer in cryptographic practice is also often the hardest to sell to those consumers (or to business people prioritizing changes to them): break those consumers and force them to care about security so that a rising tide lifts all boats.
I call parallel evolution!
I am making absolutely huge unfounded assumptions? Show me the existing technology to alter or completely redesign the human body "plan" (whatever that means) to make it compatible with living on Mars. Otherwise, it's you who is making the absolutely huge unfounded assumptions.
While you have a point wrt. 'tutoring' as part of ordinary instruction, that's not what "aristocratic tutoring" means. That's specifically about getting one-to-one instruction full-time from a handful of very highly educated tutors (PhD-equivalent or so in their subject matter would've been typical, back when this sort of tutoring was common.)
I'll comment this here as I got downvoted when I made the point in a standalone comment - this is mostly an academic issue, since you don't want to use step of pixel-level if statements in your shader code, as it will lead to ugly aliasing artifacts as the pixel color transitions from a to b.

What you want is to use smoothstep which blends a bit between these two values and for that you need to compute both paths anyway.