skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How wide do you think the spectrum is between political dissident and average Joe ?

How would for instance, Women in the USA having to remove period tracking app because they are afraid it could be used by the government against them, fit in your thought ?

It’s neither black or white, privacy nuthead or political activist. There is a wide spectrum.
To take one single simple example, the mRNA vaccines that saved tens of millions of lives during the Covid pandemic (earning a lot of money for the companies that produced them), and are one of the most promising technologies for many other vaccines, cancer treatments, etc. would have been completely impossible without decades of NIH funding.

Bayer might find individual academic studies to be poor basis for starting new drug development trials, or whatever, but they certainly wouldn't pretend that they can independently replace the entirety of American academic biomedical research, which is substantially dependent on public funding. It's much too large and expensive a task for industry to take on, especially since industry would have to pay much higher salaries to attract the same talent.

You'll see similar in most fields: basic research into interesting curiosities in academic labs does not instantly and immediately lead to new commercial products. But immediate productization is neither the purpose nor motivation of scientific research, and effectively all new product development is completely dependent on having open research as a part of the same global social system: non-commercial labs, substantially funded by public money, find and explore most of the novel phenomena, train nearly all of the researchers including the ones who end up in industry, provide the structure for knowledge sharing like journals and conferences, and so on.

Funding scientific research is among the highest leverage things the US government can do. While many research grants go to projects that fail or don't lead anywhere promising (which is why they rarely get funded by industry), occasionally one of those projects ends up creating huge (sometimes literally trillions of dollars) benefits down the line, with little if any reward accruing to the researcher who did the work, but massive improvement for the whole society.
Because there are two Suns and we actually live on Tattooine and George Lucas was right all along and it’s Elon Musk and Lee Harvey Oswald what tried to keep the Truth from coming out but Birds Arent Real and the Area 58 chemtrails prove there’s your Face on Mars, sheeple!!1
Historically on HN, booklists that feel like they were built for Amazon affiliate linking tend to get flagged by HN’ers.
So what are the sources for people driven insane by it?

(I have no opinion, but find it mildly suspicious given that I happen to sometimes drive through Germany, and the country seems to be currently less insane than, say, US)
The New Conservatism (1956)
I’ve been using your app for years, you’ve done a great job with it! Thank you!
For context: a VecDeque is a ring buffer backed by an array.
Cash transactions are vital under authoritarian regimes that would otherwise have potentially total surveillance and control over financial transactions, or for people who may be unable to open a bank account for whatever reason.
At a quick glance, couldn’t find any information about their LUT/slice/whatever they call their primitive.

1) Is it flash or ram based? Flash based LUTs are still a huge differentiator for Microsemi in aerospace due to SEU immunity, and they pay lip service to aerospace.

2) Assuming it’s RAM based, what access to that RAM do they provide? Do they allow using LUT (clusters) as micro-RAMs like Xilinx etc do? Port count?

3) 4-LUT vs 5-LUT vs 6-LUT? Two output support? Carry chains? Flexibility of carry chains? Flip-flops per LUT? Latch support for flip-flops?
It’s not “just like”, because humans can be held accountable. Also, I suspect that the distribution of failure modes is actually substantially different between LLMs and humans.
Everyone on a programming team knows who the good and not-so-good programmers are.
> Competition and the value of a dollar are not related.

Precisely. Being able to more easily produce and consume just means more production and consumption. The "rat race" competition will continue. No one will work less.
A different way of thinking on business(es):

> Most modern businessmen agree with Crown Zellerbach President J. D. Zellerbach: “The majority of Americans support private enterprise, not as a God-given right but as the best practical means of conducting business in a free society. They regard business management as a stewardship, and they expect it to operate the economy as a public trust for the benefit of all the people.”
Industry’s emphasis on human values has also been prompted by self-interest. Says Banker Smith: “In the 1925 most business leaders stubbornly refused to recognize the nature of the consumer function in the economy. Then the emphasis was: ‘Sales means jobs.’ Today the situation is reversed.”

> Though businessmen fought a long delaying action against the growth of labor unions, against Government intervention in economic affairs, against social legislation, the majority now realize that welfare programs help store up purchasing power in the hands of the consumer. Says Gaylord A. Freeman Jr., vice president of the First National Bank of Chicago: “I think social security is good. I think unions are good. Unemployment compensation is desirable. Social legislation can add to the totality of freedom, increase the dignity of the individual.”

> In a complex, fast-moving technology, the businessman can no longer afford the classic conservative’s wait-and-see attitude, or his desire to build a fence around his markets and corporate position. Industry today must keep spending and keep growing. The U.S. is pouring $5 billion a year into research whose outcome, years distant, can seldom be gauged in terms of dollar returns. More than ever, the businessman must rely on scientists and economists and be ready to gamble on their projections. Says Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. Vice President Leland Hazard: “Too many people and facilities are at stake for management to be timid, cautious, slow, antiquated.” General Electric Co. President Ralph Cordiner estimates that up to 90% of his time is spent on projects that will not come to fruition until after he has retired.

Oh how things have changed since the 1970s:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine
Where does your knowledge come from? With respect, how do we know you're right and they're wrong and not vice-versa? They spent a lot of time on it, went to Southeast Asia to see it for themselves, have editors, etc. That doesn't mean they get it right always, but neither do people on HN.
Does it have to move or resize when one of the sides reaches the end of the array? I presume that would be slower than a ring buffer that only grows when it's completely filled?
Sounds very cool! How do you implement efficient random deletes?
> The idea of measuring individual developer productivity is kind of absurd to me.

It is absurd to do in a lot of settings. The other day we had a similar story with the measurement of "value" just the other day[0]. I think there's been a big bureaucratic takeover where people are measuring for the sake of measuring rather than recognizing that these things are proxies and you need to be careful to ensure your proxy is properly aligned with the actual thing you want to measure.

You see this in research and academia by trying to measure by number of papers/citations/venue/novelty. You see this in the workforce with things like lines of code, story points, and any of that other bullshit. You see this with how people think about money. Like just think what a million dollars a month would mean what you __*couldn't*__ do wit that money.

The problem is that we've created scoring systems and people see the ultimate goal as maximizing their scores. This doesn't matter if the score is actually meaningful or not, but we'll sure as hell passionately argue that they do. I'll refer to my comment to [0] for more[1].

I've been calling this concept: Goodhart's Hell

The truth is that every system has noise in it. I completely understand wanting to remove all possible noise from the system, but after a certain point, attempts to remove noise are actually ignoring noise. Maybe the problem is that people don't recognize that randomness is itself a measurement of uncertainty. There is no measuring device that is without uncertainty. Embrace the noise. Remove as much as you can, but you need to embrace what is impossible to remove. You create more noise by ignoring the noise.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43447616

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43448860
Interesting! This is the kind of thing I like.

I'm having a hard time understanding the description.
If I understand right, it's kind of like an inside-out gap buffer, or a hybrid of a gap buffer and a ring buffer? Is the free space in the array always contiguous? If not, is the non-free space? How is it different from ExpandingRingBuffer?
A couple notes looking at the c++ implementation

- this is going to have problems with non-trivial types. (Think about destructors or move constructors like std::unique_ptr). If you don't want to deal with them, at least add a static_assert(std::is_trivially_copyable<T>::value == true);

- front() doesn't return a reference and it doesn't even return the front

- adding iterators (begin()/end()) will let it play nice with for( : ) loops and <algorithms>, etc.
Terrifying!

* Duh, you don't stop belaying mid-climb.

* And why? Was it because something was uncomfortable (and somehow they thought fixing that was more important than your safety?) or because they suddenly thought the belay device was...not clipped into the harness right to begin with or something? Was it right when you cross-checked them prior to climbing?

* And in saying "one sec" rather than a clear "belay off", they were minimizing the event at additional risk to you. No integrity there.

I guess the only good thing I can say is that even if the belay device wasn't clipped into the harness, as long as the rope was wound through it properly, someone could still yank on the brake side and stop you. But obviously not take slack as you continued to climb, and from what you're describing I doubt they had their hand on the brake side as they futzed with the harness or whatever. So pretty weak comfort overall.

I had the opposite experience once: while climbing in a park, my belayer sung a song that went something like "you're off belay, you're off belay, if you fall and die it's not my fault because you're off belay". I was pissed but what you're describing is a million times worse. My belayer was clearly being a dick but not so much that he actually stopped belaying and risked my life. Lyrics aside, he always used correct technique from pre checks through the whole climb, had practiced stopping someone from the ground if they lost their grip while repelling, came with a thoughtfully stocked first-aid kit, set up the climb properly with redundant webbing at the top, etc.
Much earlier. Ever since Google, I’ve been 'vibe' coding—just a different buzzword, I guess.
Taking an initial look at the OpenSSL documentation it does seem like there is room for improvement in how the code is communicated. Given that OpenSSL is a security-critical library, I find contributing a bit intimidating, especially when it comes to documentation. However, I believe that with careful implementation and community engagement, I can make a positive impact.

I’m considering the possibility of creating a second documentation page to address specific use cases or common questions without disrupting the existing structure. I want to ensure that experienced developers who rely on the current documentation are not confused by any changes.

I plan to reach out to the OpenSSL community this week to gather more insights and feedback. Thank you for pointing me in this direction!
How does this compare to boost::devector?

https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/develop/doc/html/container/no...
Yeah I knew about flatpak but it also has its downside.

When I used it, it break many things. Some app would have weird behavior, theming would break, app wouldn’t open.

Then you get, for those peasant like me who have very slow internet, a 1 hour to download a app that would otherwise take 30 seconds because flatpak download lots of other stuff.

I get why flatpak is great, it’s like docker or python environment, but as usual with Linux it’s more like a developer thing and a recipe for headache and frustration to the average computer user.
Here's how to access your Android phone's files from the new Linux Terminal
Without your production Python library, we would have to roll our own production Python library to consume for our production Python app.

If you wrapped stdlib exceptions into a set of narrow, domain-specific ones, thank-you.
Vouchers were common under communist rule in periods of scarcity.

I can imagine 1949 East Germany to not have overabundance of shoes maybe.
The paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092702482...

I think these problems are easily solved. Put it inside the orbit of the earth instead, so you need far less material, and have the panels fold their wings when they would transit the sun from the viewpoint of any planet. Silicon won't work at higher temperatures, but plenty of other semiconductors are available, including many that are good insulators at Earth room temperature. The paper erroneously assumes that semiconductor bandgaps don't vary with temperature, but in fact they vary dramatically, permitting efficient photovoltaic energy conversion with exotic materials even at much higher temperatures than ours.
> President Donald Trump appears set to broaden his attack on global economic integration by imposing new multimillion-dollar fees on the Chinese container ships that bring many foreign goods to the United States’ shores.

> By charging Chinese-owned or -built vessels each time they dock at a U.S. port, the administration hopes to discourage ocean carriers from buying more ships from China

> U.S. exporters also would be required to meet targets for shipping their goods on U.S.-flagged vessels, rising from almost nothing to 15 percent of the total in seven years.

In addition to all the tariffs?

I feel like the USA is going to instead be isolated from global trade as countries work overtime to remove trade barriers between each other and source their stuff from Not-America. Isn't this kind of what happened in the run up to the great depression?
But the code runs great, over a hundred transactions per minute! All on just a $750 a day AWS instance! Saved so much money on those expensive developers! /s

Math left as an exercise for the reader.
Agree (though that's perhaps not a charitable interpretation of TBL). Prematurely articulated principles can do a lot of damage.

Btw I found the blog post to be one of the lowest quality one in terms of information content posted on HN - almost like it was written by chatgpt or something.
Sorry, my lens is that I was an ag research at the USDA through he Farm Bill. A healthy nation does not put all its eggs in one basket, so to speak.

The person you replied to said, "I think GP is saying, the point is that the biosecurity controls are to protect local agriculture in the sense of ensuring availability. If there's no availability due to cartel practices anyway then spending effort enforcing biosecurity controls is pointless."

I generally agree with this. People don't import eggs when they have access to affordable eggs, implying that importers of unlikely diseased eggs or no are not likely to be proximal to farms. (And more importantly, why take imported eggs to a farm? Are producers importing? Doubtful.)

So, how'd we get here?

The recent consolidation and prevalence of factory farms, in addition to introducing food supply fragility by forcing smaller producers to exit the market, has created the most adversarial conditions for hens. Shrinking factory farms and bolstering more and smaller producers will reduce the incidence of outbreaks and limit the amount of culling needed.

I'm also contending that humans also suffer because of this, and while it's noble to consider the chickens, doing so in our current state does not decrease either their vulnerability or the harm to vulnerable human populations. When you play with food prices and availability, there are real effects to development and educational performance in children that are not quick or simple to quantify. I think both deserve to be healthy.
See also: https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1jhqoz7/heres_how_to... (old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1jhqoz7/heres_how_to_access_your_android_phones_files/)
It's cool. But it's missing the 411/305Hz sawtooth. Last year I tried to setup my vim to play these beeps in normal/edit modes and on some key presses. It was quite fun but I wasn't able to play a long lasting sound like in the demo.
Of course they count, but they never reached Zig's expressivity/simplicity ratio. For example, Oberon doesn't have generics. You could argue that Zig doesn't have dynamic dispatch as part of the language, but it's expressive enough for that to be done in a library (https://github.com/alexnask/interface.zig). Put simply, Zig can do pretty much anything C++ can with the same expressivity (by programming languages X and Y having the same expressivity I mean that there is some small constant C such that any program in X could be written in Y in a number of lines that is within a factor of C compared to X).
That's why companies have leetcode interviews.
> The market for climbing is built through reputation, tradition, & thus a visceral rejection of new ideas & methods. This is very interesting, since many climbers work in forward-thinking tech companies.

Maybe moving fast and breaking things is not always appropriate.
Or more saves and thumbs up on signs resulting from a search is because users are desperate to save a song they like because they have no faith that they'll be able to find it again with search.

The only way is to use the product yourself and honestly engage with it. Stats can't answer this question.
tenPlusTwentyIsThirty() for the win. No need to name the test article in the test method because you build that into the name of the test class.
Title needs correcting from "US" to "us"

As is, it implies there is a concerted effort by the United States to
help people in North Korea.

The "us" in question is Human Rights Foundation which happens to be in
the United States, but under the current regime is probably faring as
well as if it were based in North Korea. Maybe the North Koreans can
later return the USB sticks with something to help Americans.
GitHub Action to summarize last diff with OpenAI
Perhaps there's a restart button?
Both are O(1) datastructures, but indexing a ring buffer is slightly more costly compared to this and insertion is slightly more costly for this than a ring. Probably usually works out in favor of this design though for net performance usually?
If we were to do this, we wouldn't just pick someone so out of the range of what's needed. So basically, if you reframe your question, would I hire a 70 average student on a team of 90 average students? Yes. We would not pick the 50 average students. This is all possible within reason, the kind of stuff being discussed in this thread is to purge people who are 80 average students (free riders in a 95 average class).

Will we need to tutor and support the 70 average student? Yes. Why would we do this? It's good for the soul. The stuff I'm talking about has no place in business, as far as we care to understand as a society at the moment.
It’s not dead as such but it looks like OP may have left over some links they intended to add.

That one and at least one other simply links to #, which means same page no anchor. And this is commonly done as a placeholder link before you have the link in place you intended to put there.

Whereas a dead link for me would be one that leads elsewhere and results in 404 (page moved, file not yet created, etc) or an expired or not yet registered domain.

But I get what you mean, and I agree OP should update those links to point somewhere :)
> If the conflicted institution hasn't published the opinion or the measurements then it doesn't exist. Don't believe your lying eyes or ears. If you notice somethingnot published, you are automatically wrong. All whistleblowers must be discredited.

It’s striking how many wrong things are packed into that paragraph. Science isn’t trustworthy because of the institution, but because it challenges its theories and anyone can review and repeat it. In contrast, the claims being made here started from someone’s belief that they have a financial benefit to not having windmills nearby and work backwards to construct a supporting narrative.

> If the conflicted institution hasn't published the opinion or the measurements then it doesn't exist.

More accurately, we’re asking for those measurements so anyone else can review them. We’re asking for the methodology so anyone else can review or replicate it. Emotional reactions like yours tend to be a great sign that someone has a strong interest in a particular outcome and humans are notoriously bad at critically evaluating things they want to be true. Scientists are no different, which is why they put so much effort into looking for ways to test their work.

A great similar example are the “electromagnetic hypersensitive” people who claim to have all kinds of health problems caused by wifi or cellular signals. They’ll claim that they’re not being taken seriously because they’re starting backwards from the position that their health issues are caused by EMF and anyone who disagrees is “suppressing” them. The problem isn’t “lying eyes and ears” — their headaches or sleep problems are real - but that they have made a wrong explanation part of their self-identity and are unwilling to reconsider that. Repeated double-blind studies have shown that these people can’t identify EMF at better than chance, and that they’ll report health issues caused by EMF which never existed, and that’s a tragedy because there is a real cause they’d likely be able to find if they were willing to give up on that theory. Many of the wind power opponents are arguing in bad faith trying to make their aesthetic tastes sound scientific but I’m certain that some of these people have real, non-psychosomatic medical issues which are not caused by turbines but could be localized if they put their effort into broader investigations.
In my experience, "the bitter lesson" is just wrong. Yes, a hypothetical AI model that has a suitable architecture so that it can memorize your handcrafted features can improve upon them, if it is perfectly trained. But that's a huge if. There's a reason that large AI models only work with some architectures and you need to randomly initialize tens to hundreds of times and you need exactly the right optimizer with the right hyperparameters and then the right training data in the right order... and the reason is that generic function approximators get stuck in a local minima incredibly easy.

People used to write handcrafted features to limit the optimization base area. Now people use specific pretraining data and initialization functions to do the same. It's just a different way to express the same constraints.

In short, the "bitter lesson" assumes a change that did not happen yet.
Sometimes you enter a codebase and it looks like there's some obscure attempt to summon a Lovecraftian entity made of spaghetti and duct tape. Those codebases are both the shitiest and most complex stuff I've ever seen. They sure don't work well and I'm not even sure do a good job at summoning the old ones. I don't find LLM code significantly differing from that kind of monstrosity. It sure is complex.
> if all I want to do is use UNIX domain sockets

I routinely --unshare-net with UDS ro-binds.

You may be using abstract sockets (@/path/uds.sock) and those do require the same netns I think.