skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a widespread problem in the medical world, and it is infuriating.

That said, self-diagnosis using a AI tool makes me cringe.

As an engineer, I know I could use this properly the same way OP did. As in, I would look at what the AI is telling me and triple check with all the information I can get from actual medical reference books. Also, I know I am fairy good at not making up symptoms not to match some diagnosis.

But I would never put this in the hands of people who visit webMD twice a week only to conclude that they probably have toe cancer.
Hi, author here. When I re-read this (it's from 2020) I had the same thought and wrote up an extended example of this just last month: https://www.ilograph.com/blog/posts/breaking-up-the-master-d...
1. Advertising inadvertently drives the want for an infinite scroll and a better algorithm for content delivery to keep you scrolling for longer. You being on the app for longer due to infini-scroll and ‘the algorithm’ = seeing more advertisements = more money for the platforms. If you paid a monthly fee to use the app(1) the platform wouldn’t be incentivized to keep you on an infinite scroll cause they already got the money, all they would be incentivized to do is makw sure you are as satisfied with the experience as possible so you keep paying them.

2. “What google has done for the web; youtube, maps, gmail/gsuite, chromium/v8 are fantastic products that cost huge sums to develop, and the world gets to use them for free”

That is a financially “free”, sure. But the world doesn’t get to use it for free at all really, we pay by giving google our statistics and my god, first of all the amount of statistics collected would surprise most people, yeah you hear about “big businesses are collecting your data” but to see what data they can collect through like a webrequest can actually make it feel real.
The world does not get any Google product for free, not in the whole sense of the word at least. To sum it up best I’d say Google and businesses like it have you get used to a (financially) free product, to such an extent that you integrate it as one of the base pillars of your online existence and then they enshittify that ‘free’ version to such an extent that they kind of threaten to pull that pillar away unless you pay.

(1.) which I also don’t love, cause subscription models also feel like you don’t own anything but in the case of a YouTube it’s more sensible than buying individual videos if ads weren’t a thing.
The irony of the amount of self-advertising this and in its contents is mind blowing
https://english.radio.cz/beavers-build-planned-dams-protecte...
Are you disagreeing with the analogy by accident or on purpose? All metaphors and analogies are imperfect. They were refuting the idea that self healing == immortal. Your nitpick over the 30% number doesn’t really diminish that. Or if you’re trying to make a joke, then could you state your support/opposition clearly and independently from your joke please?
A companion guide that I always recommend if interested in K is: Q for mortals, found here - https://code.kx.com/q4m3/

Note, from wikipedia: Q serves as the query language for kdb+, a disk based and in-memory, column-based database. Kdb+ is based on the language k, a terse variant of the language APL. Q is a thin wrapper around k, providing a more readable, English-like interface.
Using the arrow keys to navigate the current input is well supported on most modern terminals, and has been for most of my adult life. If this isn't working properly in your terminal, then I'd recommend experimenting with the various settings available to you.

Some terminals also support mouse navigation, so keep an eye out for that as well.

I'm sorry that you've been dealing with this frustration for so long and under the impression that it was just supposed to be that way and not fixable. The good news is that it's NOT supposed to be that frustrating and you CAN fix it

Edit: you edited your comment somewhere between my first seeing it and my reply posting. I haven't had to modify the default settings on my terminal to fix things like this in about 20 years. I've changed them to tweak various preferences like scrollback, cursor shape/size, etc. But arrow navigation has worked out of the box for me for so long that I literally can't remember when I last had to fix it. I don't know why our experiences have been so different, but I'm sorry that a tool that has been so useful for me has been so frustrating for you.
How does fuel usage compare to mainstream aeroplanes?
(hey! atuin maintainer here!)

Thank you for the kind words! Glad you find Atuin useful!

> It’s pretty easy to run your own sync server if you’re not big on send your commands to some random server somewhere.

We always intended to keep it easy to run a sync server! But also fwiw, sync is e2e encrypted, so we can't actually see anyone's commands
Only if one buys such a "goodybag".

My father doesn't and so pays PAYG rates when he uses his. Which probably makes sense for him, given his infrequent use pattern.
True. Let’s hope they don’t actually get migrated (being copied outside of standard operating procedures is bad enough)
So far the department of education have been creating those in scores.
It is definitely still active
haha you beat me to the punch.

was thinking the exact same!
The linked document only contains a warning about how versioning is weird, and a description of the syntax. No examples beyond trivial one-liners.

What problem is K trying to solve? What does a K program look like?
Not all the work we do is as part of large teams or on multimillion loc codebases.

In your context what you say is definitely the correct take, but I stand by my take that there are relatively simple programs written by individuals/small teams that don't need to be complicated by corporate scale concerns.
Monkey blamed for nationwide power cut in Sri Lanka
In Denmark it is not uncommon for people to cherish TV ads from the 1990s and 2000s as our common cultural heritage. But we have always had laws against misleading or overly distracting TV ads (down to rules about the sound levels not being higher than the regular programming). But now half of our TV channels are broadcast from West Drayton, UK so they don't have to comply with advertising regulations. On those TV channels most ads are sports betting, online casinos, mortgage companies etc.

I believe advertising has a useful role enhancing market efficiency and providing information to consumers. But it has to be regulated. Misleading advertising should be as punishable as misleading information on the back of the product.
ok how about the plot of the movie

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

that's definitely coming and those babies aren't just lucky.
That is a false dichotomy. We can certainly place restrictions without resulting in an authoritarian society. We can ban billboards. (Some states do this). We can ban gambling and drug ads. We can place ownership
limits on media markets. There are all things we have had in the us at various times and in various places.
Sounds motivating to both have better margins while serving customers. It's the kind of tasks without downside: satiasfying.
How much would our life increase if we got 30% more self healing, though?
You have to wonder where we fucked up because clearly it wasn't like that even 30 years ago. A few generation ago you had family doctors who knew pretty much everything about you from your birth to their retirement (or death even). Even I had that as a kid, and I'm not 40 yet.

Now we have 10 minutes online consultations with random doctors we'll never see again. Last time I went to mine they refused a preventative blood check, the reason? "it's too expensive and you're healthy anyways". I went to a private lab and paid for it, it ended up costing less than 10 euros, meanwhile I pay 500+ a month for health insurance.
What’s wrong with that? Certainly advertisers can do bad or irresponsible things with personal data, but the mere fact that they’re shaping preferences doesn’t seem like a huge problem. It’s not like our pre-advertising preferences are an edenic blank slate.
> Non-Chinese Apple accounts also work perfectly well in China, which leads me to believe that the extent of data sharing is greater than has been disclosed (or dissidents could just use a foreign phone to avoid surveillance).

The Chinese state could make foreign iphones unattractive to dissidents fairly easily without needing to compromise icloud.

Simply discover the foreign iphones by a process of elimination, and make it clear that having one attracts much more surveillance.
The problem is, the architect is the person who can ship that mvp both viably and in minimum time, because building that fast soundly requires experience.
Could humans survive without the “good advertising”?
Advertising of product is proof that product itself is not good enough to be sold.

Good thing is, that you can block it at home. Bad thing is, that if you avoid commercial advertising, you are struggle with income as freelance audiovisual producer.
Perhaps structurally but the tech stuff isn't improving safety.

With the absolute slightest bit of fog, excessive humidity, rain or snow by Mazda tells me one of its radar systems isn't operable and to please drive safely.
I've had a new Toyota Corolla over the weekend, and the beeps were driving me nuts.

The car reads signs, and beeps everytime it detects a change in speed limit. If you go over the speed limit, even if its 1 km/h the car starts beeping as well.

I never drive really fast, when the car says I'm driving 1 KM over the limit my GPS speed usually is 5 below. This makes the signals extra annoying.

They should have used beeps when you're 10 or more over the speed limit or something like that so you don't get spammed with notifications all the time. The system being as it is, I'm 100% sure I will get it removed by a tuning shop.
> 3. "Infrastructure Sabotage" - this is the one that I think annoyed me the most, because I've seen cloud costs explode where hardly anyone had a good grasp on where that money was going.

On the other hand, I worked in a place where the Change Request -> code review -> merge pipe took ~two days on average, and could sometimes span over a week, all because of ridiculous penny-pinching on infra. The CI build itself took 1.5h of which > 60% was testing. That was understandable, if not ideal. The problem was, however, that the whole infrastructure could support evaluating maybe 5-6 builds in parallel (20-ish runners, each build typically consuming 3 or 4, depending on type and platform configurations), and that was shared with automated tests (that run nightly), as well as all kinds of one-off release builds for QA, manual builds, etc. So it took two or three changesets being built in parallel before the next one had to wait on bots to become available.

Add to that a few flaky tests that would fail one of the builds for your changesets about 30% of the time for spurious reasons, and people submitting more patches (= more build jobs) in response to review feedback, and you can imagine what it did to work cadence. To top it off, there was a cultural push for "best practices" of small and frequent changes; of course doing that basically meant you were submitting changes faster than they were built, DOS-ing the build system for everyone else.

And, lord forgive you if you tried to submit a stack of commits at the same time. My co-worker and I both independently discovered that if you do a big enough stack (working on a large feature, broken down for reviewability), say 7-9 commits, not only you'll saturate the build system, but apparently OpenStack or whatever it was managing it would run out of resources and cascade failures to some other systems elsewhere in the company, because of course it would do that.

I've fought to get this improved since almost day 1 on that team, but it was always met with reactions from IT (later, "devops") along the lines of: "what is your problem?" or "yes, I know, but we don't have the budget" (seriously? compute is, and was then, almost too cheap to meter), and eventually stringing us along with half a year of "we're migrating to $BigCloudProvider, afterwards we'll have plenty of compute", which ultimately never happened before I left.

So I've seen first-hand how ffrupid (double "f" is intentional) otherwise smart companies with large budgets can get with compute for devs, even as this wasn't just destroying morale and preventing the team from adopting some good practices, it was actively slowing down project work, delaying both scheduled releases and emergency fixes.
I remember an American History teacher explaining that the most amazing thing about the new American government was that when we went from Washington to Adams nothing changed for the American citizen. Certainly that has not always held true but certainly I agree with you - thinking about the government is one of the last things I want on my mind.
> At this point I can't see us going back to the way things were. I can't imagine any new systems programming languages gaining traction that aren't at least as safe as Rust.

I see Rust being used in many context where it's safety features aren't really needed or even a hindrance like game dev.

Honestly the safety is overstated in importance. The amazing tooling, decent package manager, great error messages, the inclusive community, the type system that took the low hanging fruits from the academic functional programming world, are much more relevant for its success.

The problem with Rust is that it made using languages without automatic garbage collection acceptable again and I am not sure if this is good. The borrow checker is a neat solution and might be a good fit for certain niches but automatic garbage collection is just vastly more ergonomic to use.

We had Lisp Machines, we need to go back to future.
> If I were to implement some feature by writing a test for it first, I'd have to have a very clear idea of exactly how the feature should behave. I'd need to have chosen a suitable name for it, worked out what parameters it should take, and what it should return. And when I came to write the function in question, I'd find that most of the hard work had been done up front, and the tough design decisions taken already, leaving me only the task of writing some relatively trivial code to make the test pass.

One difficulty I have with this is that, while defining everything upfront like this works nicely in well-understood domains (such as implementing pre-established business logic), elsewhere my understanding of the problem only really forms through writing code and seeing what approaches work.

Normally I try to keep code minimal and easy to change to start with so I can quickly refactor, and then stabilize with proper tests/documentation/interfaces/extensibility as other things start relying on it. Maybe this should be a separate prototype phase, which I throw away before starting the proper TDD production version? But I'm not sure if it's usually cleanly demarcated enough for that.

> Of course, this assumes that the code works right now, but why wouldn't you assume that?

I feel TDD has to some extent the same problem in the opposite direction: you're writing code to pass the test, so the test becomes less useful at finding potential errors and logic issues with the tests may be copied over to the code.
Maybe something like this: When the one displaying the picture (or whatever), the one providing the picture, and the one viewing the picture are three different parties, and money flows from the person providing the picture to the one showing it.

It's not perfect but I think this definition would include e.g. billboards, newspaper ads and most internet ads, while excluding non-advertising integrations of third-party data (e.g. when a navigation company buys maps from a mapping company to show to their client, it does not fall under this definition because money flows the other way).
Don’t worry, I have a therapy about that very specific topic, just sign this NDA and this check over here.
Because writing improves thought, and I like having a collection of my good thoughts.
>The last few years of LLM progress have shown we can predict human "reasoning" responses to inputs by modeling likely human responses as if LLM generated. Put another way, most responses are not particularly reasoned, but chain of tokgen*.

Sorry, but I don't get the point of your comment as a whole, and of this part in particular. Yes, most human day-to-day conversations are quite predictable, but some people are still capable of generating original thoughts from time to time. And still, how is it related to the comment you are replying to?
Very few things grind my gears like having to search through a wall of "--help" output and lengthy list of arguments to find the error that describes the problem. Screenfulls of text when the error is "Option 'b' unknown" isn't helpful.
so then it follows that for a fresh story it only takes a couple of people flagging...

that means two or three people spawn-camping the new queue can control what stories will or will not get through
except it did even in this made up story

"it wasn't until I visited a rheumatologist who looked at the combination of my symptoms and genetic test results that I learned I likely had an autoimmune condition."

It should prbly be phased as

"why ppl fall for any BS on the internet"
"Sadly" I don't think we have enough babies to worry about which ones are valid or not
I’d like to. The whole field is in flux and it’s nearly impossible to find balance.
I would say proper transitions of power is part of good government. Your phrasing makes it sound like governance doesn't need to be good as long as it transitions properly.

Improper transitions of power cause bad governance.
It can fetch everything about you if it wanted to.

Fingerprinting every request likely costs them compute money, so they phone it in with an IP check for the humdrum stuff.
Discord introduces a feature to ignore rather than block users
The main project page[1] contains links to various papers used to investigate this, including a 3D acoustic ray tracer[2] developed for this.

[1]: https://ascent.aero/project/acoustical-model-of-mach-cut-off...

[2]: https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/catalog/18490zfh5044
FOSDEM 2025 – Flutter for all the desktops and beyond [video]
One critical possibility was unmentioned. There seems to be a very strong argument that it's advertising that is driving declines in fertility rates. The entire point of the modern advertising machine is to generate endless desires and wants that one might not otherwise have, always chasing the next product - basically to create consumerist societies. The most common reason middle class+ people say they aren't having children is because they don't have enough money, but it's simply untrue.

In most of every society, certainly including the US, there are plenty of people having children with far less than the incomes of these people that claim to be unable to afford it. So what they really mean is that they would rather spend their money on other things. But this is extremely unnatural. Our bodies and minds are heavily evolved to wanting to procreate - it takes a very strong force to fight back against the biological clock and it seems that advertising is just that force.

I think evidence for this is widespread. Many places like Thailand have low education, low income, and low fertility (on par with Japan now). The classic explanations for declining fertility would predict high fertility in such a place. But what Thailand has is an exceptionally high degree of consumerism. And vice versa this also explains why religion often correlates strongly with fertility.

There are varying views on sexuality, education, equality of the sexes, and so on - but most tend to offer a life purpose that supplants any meaningful role consumerism could have. Another bit of evidence is that fertility rates among the extremely rich are also extremely high. Again when one has billions of dollars you can't really be a consumerist because at that point there is basically nothing one could not buy, so you need to look elsewhere for meaning and fulfillment.
young people hack because of curiosity and some sort of believing in justice (fight corporations, political activism). They are not regular gangsters.
I’m torn between believing the vast majority of this, and being completely freaked out about our future.

But, on the other hand a part of me thinks perhaps this isn’t some well thought out master plan. But rather a bunch of selfish a-holes who are trying to grab as much capital and resources (still terrible) but without a master plan to reshape the future of civilization.

I guess we’ll know more over the next few years. Regardless, scary times ahead
For point 1, he gets into that more later in the video - e.g. specifically on counting, and about how/when to have models invoke tools instead of doing math themselves, etc.

Also for the second point, check later in the video when he talks about RL and (simulated) RLHF - he gets into the feedback loops of models training each other and the collapse that follows.
> [T]he mythos of people having popped out from the same area or region that they their most recent ancestors have lived […]

>> Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and
religious nuts are supporting alternatives.

David Reich (author of "Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the new science of the human past") says[^0]:

"
The modern human lineage, leading to the great majority of the ancestors of people today, was probably in sub-Saharan Africa for the last 500,000 years at least. It might be much more. Certainly our main lineage was in Africa, probably 3-7 million years ago.

But in a period between about 2 million to 500,000 years ago, it's not at all clear where the main ancestors leading to modern humans were. There were humans throughout many parts of Eurasia and Africa with a parallel increase in brain size and not obviously closer ancestrality to modern humans in one place than in the other. It's not clear where the main lineages were. Maybe they were in both places and mixed to form the lineages that gave rise to people today.

There's been an assumption where Africa's been at the center of everything for many millions of years. Certainly it's been absolutely central at many periods in human history. But in this key period when a lot of important changes happen—when modern humans develop from Homo habilis and Homo erectus all the way to Homo heidelbergensis and the shared ancestor of Neanderthals, modern humans, and Denisovans— that time period which is when a lot of the important change happened, it's not clear, based on the archaeology and genetics, where that occurred as I understand it.
" (emphasis mine throughout)

---

[^0]: https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/david-reich
The lit2go and librivox audio sources should all be human. The project Gutenberg are all AI generated.
Does the YouTuber who’d like to tell you about today’s sponsor have a right to speech?
I'm not going to download and run an unknown exe...

Can you give more details? It's a joke that opens a fake terminal and show a fake filesystem? Can is open windows with fake aplications? Do the fake application work?

Can you give more details and a few (10!) screenshots? Perhaps a blog post about it can be good enough to convince people to download it (and run it in a virtual machine).
Renaissance Books! I’m reading a first edition of Ataturk I picked up there now. It’s not your average airport bookstore.
MKE also has a coat check. Very handy for quick trips to warmer locales in the winter.
It's very similar to sponsoring a TV show: instead of charging for the TV show; all costs are paid for by the advertisers and the show is shown free.
Selling your game for money is one way of monetizing your game, out of many. Parent says they want to monetize the game, and then outlines in what ways they find it acceptable to do so. "Monetization" isn't strictly about IAPs, ads and deceptive subscriptions, although many developers seem to default to monetizing games in those ways.