skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It might make the exploits mildly more difficult in some cases, but adding a synthetic delay (whether randomized or artificially inflated to meet a certain high water mark) isn't likely to help.

https://security.stackexchange.com/a/96493/271113

For example, consider the case of a cache-timing leak (rather than the classical "string compare" one). You'd have to have a lot of control over the behavior of your operating environment to guarantee it doesn't leak bits of your secret from cache misses.

When you add a delay to your processing, unless the same tasks being executed, I would expect power analysis leakage and random jitter from the kernel's scheduler to reveal that fact. It might be a more costly analysis to detect, but it's still there.

Generally, I think this is a doomed line of reasoning.
I like the focus on accessibility. Standards & Accessibility go hand in hand, the splintering of approaches means accessibility is always playing catchup.

It's not in the business of pushing for RFCs, but the U.S. Web Design System (USWDS) has done some really cool work here: https://designsystem.digital.gov.
Doge Pushes Social Security Administration to Cut Off Phone Service
I'm sorry, I see where I wasn't clear.

I'm talking about very specific correlation. Like when I type these words, exactly how and what fires to achieve that. Which neurons and pathways are the thought "hit these keys", what's the signal to the fingers etc. We know "When this area is active, this group of actions can happen".

It's hard to get good resolution.

And I believe it would be easier to replicate consciousness if we knew how it worked, I also believe it's possible we eventually figure it out. It will just be much harder. And we may not know when we do it either. I believe that is where we will need common, agreed upon definitions.

But defining intelligence and consciousness is difficult because you have to define it in a way that includes everything we agree is conscious and excludes everything we agree is not. And we'll also have to agree what is and is not conscious. It's a way more involved problem than a lot of people give credit.
Humans aren't deterministic. I've trusted junior engineers to ship code. I fail to see a significant difference here in the long term.

We have engineering practices that guard against humans making mistakes that break builds or production environments. It isn't like we are going to discard those practices. In fact, we'll double down on them. I would subject an LLM to the level of strict validation that any human engineer would fine suffocating.

The reason we trust compilers as a black box is because we have created systems that allow us to do so. There is no reason I can see currently that we will be unable to do so for LLM output.

I might be wrong, time will tell. We're going to find out because some will try. And if it turns out to be as effective as C was compared to assembly then I want to be on that side of history as early as possible.
That doesn't work with "symmetric" NAT, which was specified by the person you are responding to: in that case, you can't rely on even a third party to figure out the port. To the extent to which this NAT paradigm is chosen for its efficient usage of ports, this is fixable using UPnP/NAT-PMP/PCP, but 1) I've (sadly) never seen a WebRTC implementation which takes advantage of these protocols, and 2) usually this isn't chosen for it's port efficiency: it is chosen because the NAT provider is incompetent (or even actively "evil", lol), and so they are almost certainly also not going to support a port mapping mechanism.

Regardless, I'll claim that the real disagreement is more over how common symmetric NAT is: I claim it is very rare, and that the vast majority of NAT isn't symmetric... however, in another thread, the user you are responding to claims that "in [their] country" they've never seen WebRTC work at all. I'd wager that's a pretty local issue, with what probably amounts to a local oligopoly built with similar limitations, but if you live in that world it must be brutal. However, that's not WebRTC's problem: we should implement port mapping in clients and ISPs should, to put it as kindly as feels fair, "fix their shit".
Real, honest question. Here's an example of report: https://isitcap.com/report/5527aaeb-8745-4b5f-a7f6-7c89ef34b...

The app looks super cool but for some reason, it gets 0 traction!
Some copy feedback

"How does Fakey work?"

"In your dreams" (pricing)

It's cool it replaces the text in the page, makes sense, wonder if it's an overlay or literally modifies the image on the page

Maybe it uses contour finding for the speech bubbles

The other Chiyo
> Or more generally, how do you verify a proof that you don't understand?

This is the big question! Computer-aided proof has been around forever. AI seems like just another tool from that box. Albeit one that has the potential to provide 'human-friendly' answers, rather than just a bunch of symbolic manipulation that must be interpreted.
Bad news, men. The captain says we're behind schedule so beans for supper again!
1. it's the closest a private can get of driving a personal spaceship

2. IT'S AMERICA!!!

/s
Also if you do these things and get no where, talk about it with your manager in your 1:1, cause that sort of behavior really reduces a teams effectiveness, youre all working together so if you have concerns they’re not your own vendetta, they’re a desire for your team to be more effective and to improve work satisfaction
I don't see James from HR being all that good at "urban cleaners" or wanting to get paid what an "urban cleaner" gets paid. Let's assume he lost his job, I'm not sure he or the others no longer paying much in the way of taxes means there's a lot of money to pay "urban cleaners".
They also forgot GCP!
> so GMs just memorize the computer moves for so and so situation and then go back to their past heuristics after n moves

I think they also adjust their heuristics, based on looking at thousands of computer moves.
Taking your question at face value, I would much prefer information be "pulled" rather than "pushed". In other words, I don't want to be informed - I want to search when I decide to search, get reviews when I decide to get reviews, etc. I don't want someone else deciding how my attention is diverted or what they would recommend for me. A notable exception is that I am happy to take unsolicited recommendations from friends and family, but that's because there is a critical distinction: they want to inform me of something for me, rather than for the product manufacturers.
It's somewhat debatable based on lack of results that have made it to market.

In addition to the other comment mentioning Boston Dynamics, they are also the employers of a lot of folks that were formerly at the Open Source Robotics Foundation(?) (OSRF) (it's more complicated than that) which is behind the ROS1/ROS2 framework that are widely (not universally) used; They also have an internal division or whatever, Intrinsic Robotics (or is it Intrinsic AI? too lazy to check). Plenty of smart people that I've met are involved there!

But I remain skeptical of the top level comment's take, given the lack of any robotics product execution of note by Google for a very long time now.
Compare the native picker to e.g. one from antd:

https://ant.design/components/date-picker/

Actually, compare everything they have to native elements. If the project can afford it (in terms of bundle size, etc — it's fine for intranet), I don't even bother with native controls anymore.
Welcome to the Machine [pdf]
FWIW, this doesn't actually imply we disagree, as maybe the vast majority of NATs aren't in your country ;P... we could both be right!
> Or you need to add a library. In C that's #include and a -l linker flag. In Rust, you now need to work through [link to cargo docs]

This is just bizarre to me, the claim that dependency management is easier in C projects than in Rust. It is incredibly rare that adding a dependency to a C project is just an #include and -l flag away. What decent-sized project doesn't use autotools or cmake or meson or whatever? Adding a dependency to any of those build systems is more work than adding a single, short line to Cargo.toml.

And even if you are just using a hand-crafted makefile (no thank you, for any kind of non-trivial, cross-platform project), how do you know that dependency is present on the system? You're basically just ignoring that problem and forcing your users to deal with it.
There are so many ways to get locators wrong.

I have been implementing self correcting locators in my automation frameworks since QTP. The fact is the longer an automation project goes, the bigger that page object model becomes. The bigger the model, the more maintenance when things change. Maintenance is a ROI killer.

This article makes a good point that identifying an element every time it's seen on the page like it's the first time is great. No more looking for an anchor <a> class element when it changed to <button> since the last Sprint. And it usually is just one of many failing my test suite.

This looks cool.
There's some irony in this comment. It's also a textbook ad hominem.

I love the ad and the stunt. I would have been as giddy as a child if I'd seen it in person.

It's also rings true to me that it's rather wasteful and destructive in service of selling TVs.

Shrug, what's done is done so I'm free to enjoy it guilt-free while also thinking we probably shouldn't do stunts like this anymore.
Well established is stretching it. Executive leadership was a joke (so much so that they were caught off guard with their own axing.) Anyone who did an iota of research would’ve known this was the outcome. Brightcove hasn’t grown in the whole time I’ve been here and it’s been rounds and rounds of layoffs prior to the acquisition.
If Musk indemnifies the U.S. for defaulted SS payments, I could get on board with this.
The Soviets were insanely successful: From the 1920s to 1960s they raised the USSR to space age, industrialized it to become the 2nd superpower, won a world war, upgraded citizens from village huts to apartments, from being barefoot to cars and subways.

What 'went wrong' was the economic war that Kennedy admn. started to starve the USSR of GDP by starting an arms and space race. The USSR did not bite the space race bait, but arms race was impossible to not participate. So it did. Then in the 1970s, the US started an economic warfare against the USSR with the help of its Gulf allies by manipulating oil prices. That wasn't enough either, so Reagan started another arms race. In the end all of that combined, crippled the USSR and it went bankrupt.

The US also went bankrupt, but it was able to delay it for ~15 more years by printing money and pumping it into the stock market and real estate thanks to the reserve currency status of the dollar. That came crashing down in 2008. The US did some more of the same and dragged it a decade and half more and here we are, where everything is finally crashing down.

China avoided most of that economic warfare by sitting on the sidelines and taking lessons. Sometime a decade ago, it passed the threshold of being too well-rounded and large to fail. To the point that it became a driving engine of the world economy, but backed with actual goods and services instead of the financial voodoo that the US built everything on.

> Basically, is such 5 year plans a recipe for success

Yes, if your country can keep the private interests and capitalists under control. Otherwise, they derail every plan to maximize their profit by siphoning off state resources for little actual progress. Like how the last US administration's 'build back better' plan was derailed.
So typically I'm fine with something like a $50 upfront cost and then $10/year for updates (that actually get updated).

Or maybe a license with $70 with two years of updates included and then $10/year afterward.

Or what Jetbrains does and reduce the cost of the subscription over time, but let the users still use their last version after the subscription ends.
Just out of curiosity, what issues do you encounter? Doesn't Wayland support Unicode?
Hyper-consumerism took off in the US because it’s a false economic indicator. It makes lines go up, but doesn’t materially improve anyone’s lives.

We’re seeing the effects of ~70 years of hyper-consumerist behavior. It worked for a while, but now the costs have accumulated. There’s shit everywhere, and everything either breaks or is poison. Or both.
How is that fundamentally different than what Google's done with chrome and the topics API? If you don't trust Google's solution, why would you trust Mozilla's?
Not sure about the memory transfer bottleneck and potential mitigations. But out of interest, how insurmountable would it be to 'retool' fastplotlib to use JAX acceleration instead of wgpu?
> use read replicas for BI

Yes this is good advice, until you get really large scale you don't need anything more fancy than some SQL in a read replica.
I mean I'd be surprised if they _weren't_. It's easier to assume that every public website is being surveilled by multiple different entities.
Imagine you spend a family day at the fair, a full 10-12 hours. Allowing your 8yo to get two slushies throughout the day doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Can't help but agree, as much as I prefer Rust over C.

On the other hand, C definitely goes too far in to the opposite extreme. I am very tired of reinventing wheels in C because integrating third-party dependencies is even more annoying than writing and maintaining my own versions of common routines.
Evil Scheduler: Mastering Concurrency Through Interactive Debugging
as sibling comment says, low frequencies are problematic. See what they put around highways, usually a 2cm thick glass and/or stone wall. Maybe put a good fence as far as possible from house?

But then there are even lower frequencies. They go through everything - they are shaking it.. thunder/rumble. A huge mass works, but i don't know if it's only way.

For example, find a hill/ridge that has the city on one side, and nothing/wilderness on other side, go on top of it. You will hear whole city - mostly low freqs. Go a bit further in the "nothingness" direction. Then a bit more. And listen.. the feeling is like your ears are being unplugged - it's that sound disappears - and you are so get used to it..
> The intent is to
produce the mask values without using a plain comparison (“x != 0”) so that the compiler
does not notice that we are really making a conditional move.
The compiler is not fooled.

So practice your martial arts on the bow of a rowboat. Balance, Danielsan.

The whole timing thing is essentially an issue of getting off-balance as in martial arts and the solution is that there are actions you simply never do, and ones that look like they lack economy of motion because so much of the work is in keeping your center of gravity from shifting outside of your base. Tai chi is infinitely better at protecting you from concussing yourself on black ice than it is at protecting you from a mugger.

So if you have a conditional move for one calculation, then move a to b if !c and move it to d if c. And when the compilers chase that down in another generation, or someone notices that the L1 cache timing is different if d gets cold, then use both calculations in the output. Calculate complements where the runtime of a + !a = 1 to several decimal points.

Will it work for eternity? Unlikely. Will it work for a decade? Probably.
> But absolutely worst of all is the arrogance. The hubris. The thinking that because some human somewhere has figured a thing out that its then just implicitly known by these types.

I worked in an organization afflicted by this and still have friends there. In the case of that organization, it was caused by an exaggerated glorification of management over ICs. Managers truly did act according to the belief, and show every evidence of sincerely believing in it, that their understanding of every problem was superior to the sum of the knowledge and intelligence of every engineer under them in the org chart, not because they respected their engineers and worked to collect and understand information from them, but because managers are a higher form of humanity than ICs, and org chart hierarchy reflects natural superiority. Every conversation had to be couched in terms that didn't contradict those assumptions, so the culture had an extremely high tolerance for hand-waving and BS. Naturally this created cover for all kinds of selfish decisions based on politics, bonuses, and vendor perks. I'm very glad I got out of there.

I wouldn't paint all of tech with the same brush, though. There are many companies that are better, much better. Not because they serve higher ideals, but because they can't afford to get so detached from reality, because they'd fail if they didn't respect technical considerations and respect their ICs.
A kind of ancillary note, but it's amazing to me how fragmented this presentation and documentation is:

* the parent link is to storage.googleapis.com

* There's documentation on ai.google.dev

* The announcement blogpost is https://blog.google/technology/developers/gemma-3/

* you try it on https://aistudio.google.com/

It's helpful to have a top-level post like this, but can some PM please consolidate this into, IDK, ai.google.com/gemini?
I had to look up what the abbreviations mean. Seems startup business plan related.

Total Addressable Market (TAM)

Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM)

Serviceable Available Market (SAM)
At least on the compiler level, LLVM already offers a "black box" intrinsic that nudges the optimizer to be maximally pessimistic about whatever it wraps.

It doesn't carry any security guarantees (Rust's documentation on their wrapper for it explicitly strikes out "cryptographic or security" purposes) but one could imagine a similar intrinsic with stronger abilities.
Yes they do (I work in the industry)

It's required by law. Many implants have things in them they don't want put into cremation for example.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H...

What is your source?
In the article, "quiet" and "comfort" are bolded in that section, indicating that they are referring to Bose QuietComfort headphones
No, the first will be Kevin Roose. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/30/technology/ai-chatbot-cha...
I use https://blip.net which is like a cross-platform AirDrop, but also works over the internet in addition to LAN. Probably the fastest one I found.
Is that true? I would have assumed that gassing the trenches was quite effective at killing soldiers.
To become a Director, you need to start solving organizational problems outside your team. Like fixing hiring processes, interview frameworks, etc.
They do, its required by law.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-H...
This risk factor sounds less like a normal chemical substance and more on the level of uranium
100%.

In-Q-Tel (CIA venture capital) invested in Google forever ago, for example, and Silicon Valley used to be/still is a huge DoD R&D center (Fairchild, HP, etc.)

Which is why our govt gutting major departments and having so much AI development come from the private sector is so troubling to me.
If you come from C to Rust to basically have to rewire your brain. There are some corner cases that are wrong in Rust, but mostly you have to get used to a completely new way of thinking about object lifetimes and references to objects.
> one justice per circuit

Choose the court by lot from the appellate bench for each case. The Constitution is intentionally vague on how the Supreme Court is constituted [1].

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-3/
Rewriting all software would cost infinite money.
I've grown rather fond of San Diego.
I'm glad the team was able to pick something because it was a good fit for them and their goals, and not because of perception or love of some tech-stack.

Programming languages are tools. Nothing more.
Devices with constant hum getting quieter can actually make noise annoyance worse! The brain is good at filtering out constant noises, so they are usually less bothersome. But their sounds can actually help masking out more annoying sounds (variable/unpredictable in loudness and/or pitch). This can be used as (part of) a mitigation strategy for noise annoyance.
And I think this is the problem. They have all the necessary pieces and are not yet very successful at stitching them together. Google has a very strong foundation and execution skills but failed to effectively govern it.

Not sure if this is "vision" or "management" or whatever, it feels like that they're just self shackling in every single possible direction. There are something like 50 different teams involved at a major launch and they make some process/infra requirement/review/integration or whatever, from good will. Imagine how much time, effort and compromises you would need to appease all of them.

I think the recent memo from Sergey shows that the leadership finally acknowledges this problem at heart. But solving it is a different story of course. But a long time disconnection between IC, managements and leadership has been the culprit of this problem and at least some awareness might not hurt.
Long compile times with Rust don't really bother me that much. If it's someone else's program that I just want to build and run for myself, the one-time hit of building it isn't a big deal. I can be patient.

If it's something I'm actively developing, the compile is incremental, so it doesn't take that long.

What does often take longer than I'd like is linking. I need to look into those tricks where you build all the infrequently-changing bits (like third-party dependent crates) into a shared library, and then linking is very quick. For debug builds, this could speed up my development cycle quite a bit.
No, I get it.

My point is human advisor does not have enough time, to answer questions and correctly explain the subject. I may get like 4 hours a week, if lucky. Books are just a cheap substitute for real dialog and reasoning with a teacher.

Most ancient philosophy papers were in form of dialog. It is much faster to explain things.

AI is a game changer. It shortens feedback loop from a week to hour! It makes mistakes (as humans do), but it is faster to find them. And it also develops cognitive skills while finding them.

It is like programming in low level C in notepad 40 years ago. Versus high level language with IDE, VCS, unit tests...

Or like farming resources in Rust. Booring repetitive grind...
You don't accept a signup that isn't Google or Microsoft. So I guess I won't sign up...

You also don't tell me this until I've already written a prompt, which is frustrating.
>Now if they will have problems, they will depend on the Go team at Google to fix them.

MS literally already has a whole team around Go. And if they didn't, Go is completely open source.

C# is open-source in name only.
The correct number of slushies per day is zero.
Academics that decided they didn't really want to be academics, but instead switched to industry. Seems like a significant sample bias, no?
I don't have anything to say in regards to DuckDB or this UI. But, I do find it funny that their homepage animation causes google to index the description as:

DuckDB is a fast ana| database system.
Fastspring was amazing for exactly that. We loved em for most part.
The last model of ford ranger and Mazda B series light pickup trucks were mostly the same except for the badges.

The Toyota matrix and Pontiac vibe used a lot of the same parts shared an engine and drivetrains if I'm not mistaken.
As a consumer I don't have any great desire to see it broken up. Youtube has worked well for me for years. If they spun it off it would probably get way more aggressive in trying to extract money and sell data.
Names stick, it’s as simple as that. In most practical situations (such as this discussion), the distinction between Google and Alphabet doesn’t matter.

I once tried to rebrand an in-house, purely dev facing product. I failed.
Title misleading - not CODE, just python.