skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Further, the fact that so many of those maintainers are purely on volunteer time.

Greg pointed out in that email thread that:

> over 80% of the contributions come from company-funded developers. [1]

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2025020738-observant-rocklike-7...
I like it! Very fun!
Few ideas:

- The "submit" box isn't clear on whether it needs the name or the suspect id for the first case

- It would be nice to have a "copy to notes" button in the output

- It would be nice to have some docs on what functions are available / which dialect this is.

I think this very valuable, it's so much more easy to learn if you actually have a small project to work on
> ...they were agreeing with you, not being insufferable.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive :-)
oh man, that's awesome!
You are probably saying this as a troll, but I’ll bite. I mean, sure Rust would have helped.

Technically, the borrow checker and bounds checks wouldn’t have done it here (I’m aware I’m being obtuse by not just linking the bug).

Having cleaner types and abstractions would almost certainly have solved the problem though. Normal C++ would have worked as well as Rust.
Whenever AP comes up I feel I see the same discussion over and over:

A bunch of people with AP state that AP can't be learned in adulthood, that it is a rare gift that can only be learned in childhood.

Another group of people who enjoy music deeply who did not learn AP as children counter: they have trained themselves to be able to recognise notes well enough that they can play or sing by ear, to a high degree of accuracy.

AP crowd counter: you've learned relative pitch. That's a party trick. The "gift" is being able to hear an obscure note and immediately recognise it out of context and to tell when it's even very slightly out by a tiny amount.

The other group counter that that sounds like a party trick, and anyway, doesn't that make getting old really horrible as hearing changes?

AP group insist that no, it's not a party trick and you can't come in. The difference is like being a native fluent speaker of a language instead of learning it as an adult: when you learn a language you translate it in your head, that's not true fluency, and people with AP have "fluency" in tones in a way that isn't like a "translation step" that learned behaviour is like.

Then the other group come back with "Wait, I know people who became fluent in another language in adulthood by complete immersion and who think and dream in their adopted language, so are you saying that's not real, or that a musical equivalent can't exist?"

AP crowd stand firm: you just don't understand, you can't learn it, please don't say you can, you're doing something different...

And this goes on, and on, and on...

And this thread is just more of that.

People with AP insist it can't be learned in adulthood, but I'm not sure what scientific evidence they have to support this, other than their own (seemingly unscientific) observations and interpretation. Studies that show RP improving towards AP are dismissed because the subjects have yet to reach the same skill level, but without evidence that it can't.

I think most people would argue relative pitch allows you to enjoy listening to and creating music at least as much as AP does, but does not have the downside of hearing degradation causing existential angst and disappointment to the same degree in later life.

As somebody who likes listening to music and occasionally tinkering at a keyboard or bass guitar, I'm a bit confused why this is such a contentious debate every time, and why in particular the AP crowd are insistent they're special even though it seems to be a curse to have AP rather than a blessing, as they themselves describe it.

I'm also not convinced that somebody starting out with RP can't develop "fluency" in terms of AP over time. Instead of everyone just arguing about their own interpretations and experiences, is there clear science one way or the other?
This is temporary. The US has a lot more to lose by siding with Russia
It’s a rewarding experience. A bit voodoo magic until you wrap your head around all the utilities, build systems, workflows, and then quite pleasant.
Wouldn’t an AI make assumptions and fix mistakes?

For example instead of

> The speiling standards were awful

It would produce

> The spelling standards were awful
The government has nothing to do with Stargate.
> He personally cut the knot and asserted that Rust is Linux's future,

When did he say that?

In any event, that could be true (Rust is Linux's future) while the statement "R4L is not in Linux's future" is also true.

IOW, in principle, I may agree with you on something. That doesn't mean I agree with your specific implementation.
What do these people mean?

OSI is about untangling the licenses such that corporations understand which components carry which legal obligations.

in this way OSI is supporting the use of free software.

In that light the "an alternative of free software" part doesn't make sense to me. at all.
Another solution would be a React-native machine translation implementation that updates the TextNodes without replacing them. It would still have the issues of merging adjacent nodes to get a proper translation, but at least it could update on any state change.
This is the correct answer. Trump won because of the current economy. Biden's margin over Trump in 2020 was double Trump's margin over Kamala. Democrats did better than expected in 2022 despite Republicans running with the same DEI garbage.

What's baffling is Trump seems to be fumbling the autocrat's handbook at first glance. There are existing autocrats still around that wrote the book on this. Purging the administrative state requires multi-term government domination. First, you're supposed get the economy or quality of life on track ASAP so you can cement your (or you successor's) seat at the top. Then you use the power the people voluntarily give you over multiple terms to dismantle any checks on your power while lining the pockets and minds of your base. After that, even if the economy tanks you've boiled the frog of resistance in such a way that no one can dethrone you. And then you start designing the opposition in such a way so that there's semblance of "political freedom" you can point to when people start whining about it.

Trump seems to be going about it in reverse. First feeding his base instead of focusing on the economy -- which is a higher risk strategy comparatively. But it hasn't even been a month yet so there is still time for him to start following the handbook properly.
> Eventually an American will independently reinvent the car bomb

Does Timothy McVeigh count?
> 15” MacBook

I just tried it on Duck Duck Go and the first result was from Apple.com

On google I get 3 rows of "Products" but the first real result is also apple.com
Yeah but in this case it's really a wrong way to think about it.

If you have a DAG based on wrong assumptions, it doesn't matter whether you get a point estimate based on null hypothesis thinking or whether you get a posterior distribution based on some prior. The problem is that the way in which you combine variables is wrong, and bayesian analysis will just be more detailed and precise in being wrong.
Sabotaging engines of any ship feels like failure in generic security. Bringing stuff in is a thing, but bringing stuff out should as much be a thing and a risk. Like regular theft of say copper or other materials.
I guess you're being downvoted because people think this is obvious, but dragonflies won't get red eyes because they don't have red blood to reflect the light.

Red eyes are also caused by a particularity of vertebrate eyes, which have their blood supply in front of the retina.

This is also the reason why you can sometimes see moving dots when looking at a bright, blue-coloured thing like the sky: your eye sees the whole capillaries filled with red blood cells, but the brain processes them out because they're always there. The large white blood cells then appear as "less red" dots in the processed-out streams of red, and the brain interprets them as bright dots.

Insects have none of this, they don't have blood or blood vessels but a transparent haemolymph that doesn't really circulate through a complete circulatory system like us.

So there really is nothing in front of the insects' light sensors to reflect light.
LLM as a judge isn't telling you if something is right or wrong, it's telling you if a given generation is normal or an aberration, according solely to the data the model was trained on. This is one reason LLMs prefer their answers to answers from other LLMs.

"LLMs as a judge" is more about addressing the failure mode of auto-regressive (one-token at a time) generation letting an LLM lead itself astray due to its previous choices, rather than telling you any general truth.

Finally I'd note that in every maths challenge I ever completed as a student, you were strongly advised to go back and check your own work at the end if you had time left over, and for me this usually led to me catching things I'd missed the first time.
Most important factor on results of research are personal beliefs, especially in "economics".
The substack.com is a typical example of a problem where the Google Translate extension can crash or cause parts to explode.
this can't edit, its for viewing only. I use it regularly.
> No such resistance has been observed on the Apple Silion computing contraptions.

I think they even left a "direct boot from image" (or something similar) mode as a small door to allow Asahi Linux development, if not to accelerate a little bit without affecting their own roadmap. Even Hector tweeted about it himself!
> Which will always be the best DX for writing code in the browser.

The article we're all commenting on is not about running WASM in the browser.

WASI in particular may never be supported by browsers.
On a similar note, I enjoyed watching the video: https://youtu.be/mQ56uOkjccg?si=1hpwGqv2dQqLQ-ME (by Nutrition Made Simple!)

It takes a specific topic (here, health effects of red meat) and explains how each type of study can provide information, without proving anything. It helped me a lot understand the science related to nutrition, where you never have perfect studies.
I tried CoPilot a while and my biggest gripe was tab for accepting the suggestion. I very often got a ton of AI garbage when I was just trying to indent some code.

Tab just doesn't seem like the proper interface for something like this.
No need when using the timefold solver, the constraint streams allow for a more "human readable" approach.
e.g. Penalise when the minimum is not reached, Penalise when the maximum is exceeded (2 constraints).
and I'm here to understand how, among other things, how other people (who aren't things) work/think. It was clearly important enough of a question for you to bother to login and post the comment asking if it was a bot, and you wanted some sort of reaction from you posting that message, so I ask, in all earnestly and not confrontationally - there are no wrong answers, what were you thinking?
Given the cost of taking 4+ years of your life to train under someone learning a skill, yes, there's a huge financial risk in doing this.

If you're able to ignore that fantastic, great for you and I hope you're happy, but even fully funded positions have just enough money to cover the minimum length of a PhD.
To get the most from it chances are you will either end up with minor debt or wipe out some savings. Unfortunately such is life.

IMO the goal of the PhD shouldn't be to think of a city job as a high frequency trader at the end, but that's my worldview that why spend X years studying in a field of you don't intend to follow it...

Chances are if you say that during an interview for a place, unless it's in studying high frequency trading you won't get a call back.
The fact that you have the law itself is pretty troubling.

And some of the protestors at the coronation of Charles were pretty blatant.

And all the examples of police showing up because of a tweet, often not even hateful just not falling in line sufficiently with rightthink.
> The space industry was dead in the water before spaceX showed up.

The point was space telescopes. Nice attempt goal post move.

You mention NASA and the space industry. Sorry, but I'm failing to see the connection. NASA does cutting edge space exploration. They have no customers, they sell nothing, they aren't by any definition "an industry". Anything that's simple enough to be taken on by "industry" they contract out. They only take on the near impossible stuff - like landing a rover on mars. And they have a near impecible record at pull those sorts of things off. Amazing. Literally world beating. Bravo.

Most of their feats are world firsts, almost all are far harder than the previous one they pulled off. They have no competition. Yet your claim was, and I quote, "Things don’t improve without competition". I'm getting cognitive dissonance here. Clearly they do.

> Because theyre extremely competitive.

Do you develop much open source? Do you even use it? The "man in Nebraska" meme is so common it even has a cartoon: https://xkcd.com/2347/ Trust me, that man truly wishes he had some competition. He doesn't, but he plods on, turning out the code that supports the internet without it. Again we have a clear counter example to your thesis "you can't have improvement without competition". These examples are everywhere. You would have to be willfully blind not to see them.

Look, no one argues competitive markets aren't a great tool. The trouble is they aren't that easy to create. Then competition weakens. The solution isn't to go into denial and claim there will be no improvement. Or worse claim being privately owned means there is competition, so we will be ok if we just sell it off. That's just daft. In fact it's worse than daft. Believing lies peddled corporations that want to control stuff you must buy from them at a price they dictate is like subscribing to a cult.
What makes a separate cellular modem better than an internal cellular modem? Is it because software updates are available for the separate modems?

I am evaluating some Nordic semiconductor parts for a project. They seem to have an internal modem but Nordic uses zephyr. Any thoughts?
The version of doom scrolling then was refreshing threads on your common-interest forum. Or staring blankly at the screen waiting for the next chat message.

Chat obviously still exists but… I don't know. Discord et al don't feel like the IRC channels of yesteryear, but I don't know why. Not having to battle nickserv? Too much external media?

Perhaps speed is part of this. On a 56k, with 30kbps down, you couldn't rush around. Everything in the process came with load times. Forced meditation.

I miss it.
Symbols like that can represent all sorts of things, and numbers are no exception! In fact the Romans had been using other letters to represent their numbers since Etruscan times. Wait until you hear the torrid history of the character V (and its "misrepresentation" U).
I agree with this. I think coder is even worse.

Software engineer or Software developer are much better terms.
> I assume most are ignorant and only a few are evil.

Wilful ignorance equates to evil in this case.
fixed now, thanks
I fear to dream what's next. Push media?
> This person showed me two database entries they were able to push to the website, which are live on doge.gov as I write this (archived here and here)

All you had to do was actually read the article; it’s the very next paragraph from the one I quoted.
Exactly!

Code is just a medium used to build software, the real value comes from analyzing problems and finding solutions.
EU Commission withdraws AI liability directive
I want one. I like tindie but why don't they add a bespoke build thing where you just pay more to build to order.
I can think of a few (nothing super compelling though):

* “batteries-included” std - some of this is platform APIs, so only really the pure stuff. You can use all of this in the wasm extension, whereas you’d need to pull in deps for JS.

* Non-browser use cases (dynamic extensions, cross-platform “binaries”, cloud functions etc)

* probably the same reasons that JS/NodeJS became popular on the backend, but with roles reversed.
Every other intelligence agency on the planet is about to scoop a ton of American data via cyber and basic HUMINT. It's free for all out there, I guess.
No they're going to be insufferable for the next 4 years celebrating literally every action the current admin takes no matter what and blaming every problem on the last guy in office.

Having a front row seat to the fall of the biggest empire in history is certainly something.
> I guess my question is, why is Go compelling as a source language for WASM?

For me it is for three reasons: 1) I mostly write things in Go, 2) My main use-cases for WASM are backend applications, 3) being able to run sandboxed code (in backends) would be really, really useful.

Sadly, right now it is rather fiddly to make use of WASM in Go.

> If I want to do high performance programming I don't want to
> worry about garbage collection

Then don't worry.

For most applications performance isn't going to be lost due to GC, but due to poor design choices and lack of effort. My observation is that most programmers tend to overestimate their own ability to routinely produce high performance code and under-estimate the cost of producing high performance code. The latter is more important. Writing high performance code (regardless of language/runtime) is time-consuming and tends to require a lot of skill to achieve consistently.

That being said, "high performance programming" is ill defined. For the term to have any real meaning one has to be more specific about what one tries to achieve.

> Go has never focused on binary size and probably never will unless
> it actually becomes an issue for Google.

Probably correct. The problems of those who put in the work developing Go is probably going to receive priority. Binary size isn't a huge problem for the things people tend to use Go for.

As an aside; I've been writing software for an embedded Linux platform lately where binary size can become a challenge. I observed that the binaries produced by roughly equivalent C++ programs are about the same size as the Go binaries. Bigger if you take into account that the C++ programs were dynamically linked and the Go programs were statically linked. So your mileage may vary.

It may be that it is possible to introduce tooling and libraries that would allow you to generate WASM output that has a significantly smaller footprint.

> That's the disadvantage of having a corporate BDFL I guess.

No, I don't think it is tied to Google's ownership of Go. As with almost all large open source projects it is about developers and priorities. And a lot of open source gets developed on company time. If you want to help the Go project produce smaller WASM binaries then I don't see why Google would discourage you from contributing. If companies and people do not want to contribute it isn't going to get done.
It's Rob Pike... It would be wrong to expect anything different.
Not the landing page
They literally will not come unless there's indication that somebody will show up to throw rocks at me etc.

I'm Swedish. Qualified immunity is just not a thing at all.
I think there are types of problems that AI will be great at solving. If you can pass in a whole codebase then we might have LLMs that can suggest refactoring etc to improve code quality.

Code mods like upgrading from python 2 -> 3 could also become possible.
I would make a stronger claim: ignorance + power + conviction is exactly equal to evil.

Mao killed tens of million of his own people because of his misconceptions about farming, economics, and ecology.

Hitler killed millions because of his misconceptions about jews.

9/11 was executed becuase of a small group that were very confused about the basic facts of reality ("god").

There is only delusion + power + conviction. There is no other evil.
It befuddles me too. My understanding is that government spending is approved by congress and that all organizations except the Pentagon have passed their audits. This is not to say that there isn't _some_ waste, fraud and abuse in between the cracks, but any large expense is approved by Congress and the executive can't unilaterally override those spending choices.
Paradoxically, LLMs should be the tool to fix traditional OCR by recognizing that "Charles ||I" should be "Charles III", "carrot ina box" should be "carrot in a box", the century of the event in context cannot be that construed through looking at the gliphs etc.
Windows font rendering, especially for CJK characters, remains problematic even with the transition from Skia to DirectWrite. Fine-tuning the ClearType tuner doesn't achieve the same text weight as MacType; the characters still appear too thin. Moreover, Microsoft's choice of UI fonts is also poor.
Especially if the data is unencrypted and only authenticated by source ip and a long lived token-like thing
Open benchmarks are vulnerable to saturation. I think benchmarks should have an embargo periodic, until which only 3% of the question-answer pairs is released, with an explicit warning not to use it 3 months after being released.
> You can easily look it up yourself.

Thanks for the quote and link. I do appreciate those who make the internet a better place even though they toss around a slightly passive aggressive advice along the way!
It also the fault of the guys in Marketing and Product Management who want features to match a competitor's, or to beat a competitor on some pointless metric, or to create different versions for different market segments, or because some corporate big wig made an off the cuff remark wouldn't it be nice if ...
Not that I agree with Vance, but is it finally an admission from the EU that it's lagging behind due to over regulation?
When you make the leap, you're basically living of off your savings.

Until the startup has investors that agree to pay the founders a wage (to reduce personal financial stress so they can concentrate on the company) - or the startup is profitable - it's vital that your savings don't run out...
And it's worth emphasizing that this is a good thing.

Civil law systems (which are used in the non-English-speaking parts of Europe for example) don't have this property. In such systems, court precedents don't really exist, so if something isn't clearly defined by law, and there's no extremely ubiquitous legal interpretation that everybody seems to follow, you don't know whether it's legal or not.

For example, the Polish tax authority lets you ask for a tax interpretation for cases that aren't legally obvious, something that I believe the US would have handled via the court precedent system. It's not unusual for two people in identical situations to receive opposite rulings, and Those rulings are not binding on the authority that issued them.

In other words, you don't know how to handle your tax situation, you ask your tax authority, they tell you "hey, we're the tax authority, we're telling you to do x", you do x, they audit you, they say "this isn't clearly defined in law, we now believe you should have done y instead, here's your orange jumpsuit."