skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hence my use of the word “most.”

Investors do hold some cash, but they generally prefer not to hold a lot of it because inflation reduces its value. $44B sounds like a lot of money, and it is, but it’s only around 8% of the $632B of assets they hold. (Not sure where you got your much bigger figure; mine is from their consolidated balance sheet reported in their 10-K report for Dec 31, 2024.)
I assume that airplanes would have to offer much more value for that to be accepted, but they are mostly a luxury while cars are a necessity - life as we know it in much of the Western world would come to a screeching halt without cars, but it continues mostly unchanged without planes.

I don't think I agree that workplace accidents are that different. It's not primarily the workers who die who benefit from those machines that kill them - I'd say the workers _are_ someone else.

It's just that we've gotten used to that, and we feel like the number is steady and low enough that it's easily outweighed by the gigantic benefits we get from industrialization. My assumption is that it's the same way for cars and car-related deaths, but we haven't extended it to self-driving cars yet.

Individually, everybody sees the benefit, but once integration of FSD hits the commercial side and consumer prices are being reduced as a direct consequence, deaths become work-place accidents. Like a truck with a human driver killing an "innocent" pedestrian - it's accepted because we really want the trucks.
An intelligent or competent leader probably wouldn’t be in power in a situation like this. This is a situation that arises when the partisans have chosen blind allegiance to a cult of personality over the kind of messy politics you get when you have to try to win the allegiance of a party by proposing policy that a majority can get behind.
> It notes that interactions with enemies need to be improved, since they will often appear fuzzy, and that because its current context length is 0.9 seconds of gameplay (9 frames at 10fps), it will forget about objects that go out of view for longer than this.

Checking out the actual video in the tweet was more impressive than this description setup for me. Definitely more “tech demo” than “game”, but pretty impressive.

Side note —- what an irritating way to put an article together:
- Don’t actually embed the tweet in question that contains the demo video, or even mention there’s a video
- Focus on a few negative replies to the tweet from random people
- The biggest piece of media on the page is a screenshot of a tweet from Tim Sweeney without any context of who he is, or that it’s a reply to the tech demo…

But I guess I clicked on the link, read the article, and gave a bunch of ad impressions, so I’m part of the problem!

Link to video of demo: https://x.com/geoffkeighley/status/1908593030141202635?s=46&...

Link to the demo to try yourself: https://copilot.microsoft.com/wham?features=labs-wham-enable...
I fully agree on this.

Computer Vision has turned out to be a very tough nut to crack and that should have been visible from anyone doing serious work in the field since at least 15 years ago.

In any case, any safety critical system should be build with redundancy in mind, with several sub systems working independently.

Using more and better sensors is only a problem when building a cost sensitive system, not a safety critical one, and very often those sensors are expensive because they are niche, that can be mediated with mass scale.
SF Mayor Lurie to tech CEOs: 'How can we get you back?'
The NTATV Project: Bringing Windows NT (Windows XP, Windows 2003, ReactOS) to the original Apple TV. Created by DistroHopper39B with help from several ReactOS devs
Human eyes are in many ways far superior to reasonably priced vision sensors. This isn't giving humans superhuman vision, it's changing the tradeoffs human vision has (without changing the cognitive process that it coevolved with to begin, and which is the most important part of why we get into accidents).

There is no affordable vision system that's as good as human vision in key situations. LiDAR+vision is the only way to actually get superhuman vision. The issue isn't the choice of vision system, it's to choose vision itself, and besides the lesson from the human sensory system is to have sensors that go well with your processing system, which again would mean LiDAR.

If humans could integrate a LiDAR-like system where we could be warned of approaching objects from any angle and accurately gauge the speed and distance of multiple objects simultaneously, we would surely be better drivers.
This is like blaming scientists for global warming because there are a small group of scientists willing to sell their credibility to justify not taking action against climate change.
I would expect you to use your judgment on whether the instructions are reasonable. But the person I was replying to posited that this is an easy binary choice that can be addressed with some tech distinction between code and data.
At around age 12 took an after school class in programming BASIC on TRS-80 computers. My dad let me use his dial up account at the university where he worked. 300 baud with an acoustic coupler modem and an ADM 3a terminal (one of the first “work from home” setups; certainly none of my friends had anything like that at their houses). Found the colossal cave game and started digging in to how it was programmed.

Later in early high school used paper route money to buy a TI-99/4a. Learned more BASIC and then assembly language on that.
Again: war plans should be on high side systems NOT Signal.
I see the current situation as essentially the best ad for “Congress” (however slow or ineffectual) that one could write.
Currently this is a fever dream of non-Euclidean space - but the fact that it can reliably do this at all is extremely impressive.
It almost belies a need for some sort of standardized testing as well. Self-reporting seems like a weak point that can be gamed.

To your point about luddites, that’s why I think it’s erroneous to use “as good as a human” as the metric. It will need to be much better than a human but those people reluctantly trust it enough to hand over control.
Genie was generating platform games based on a sketch in Feb 24..

https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/02/29/1089317/google-d...
That’s the intention with developer messages from o1. It’s trained on a 3-tier system of messages.

1) system, messages from the model creator that must always be obeyed
2) dev, messages from programmers that must be obeyed unless the conflict with #1
3) user, messages from users that are only to be obeyed if they don’t contradict #1 or #2

Then, the model is trained heavily on adversarial scenarios with conflicting instructions, such that it is intended to develop a resistance to this sort of thing as long as your developer message is thorough enough.

This is a start, but it’s certainly not deterministic or reliable enough for something with a serious security risk.

The biggest problems being that even with training, I’d expect dev messages to be disobeyed some fraction of the time. And it requires an ironclad dev message in the first place.
I'm guessing they changed the laws?

I remember being, like, "WTF" when I had to present a vaccination card to attend community college back in '92. Luckily I was just out of the army and had been vaccinated to pretty much everything known to mankind as part of the US's rapid deployment force (aka, the 82nd Airborne) so it wasn't an issue.

Don't even get me started on being forced to be vaccinated for smallpox a second time as an adult... not quite as bad as the Black Death vaccine but it definitely sucked.
Discussion (54 points, 32 days ago, 38 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43261218
Blaming the degree is the Trump narrative for damage control that Elon is floating. Navarro is the candidate for scapegoat. This is a dude who went to jail for Trump’s coup by the way — now he’s gonna be the poster child for woke ivory tower academia.

Tariffs as a tool to pivot towards an export focused economy isn’t a bad thing necessarily. But tools only help build things with a plan to guide them. Cooking up some formula with ChatGPT, printing a chart and taking a sweeping action is just dumb. It’s bad policy, bad implementation, bad leadership.

A smart leader would approach Canada and say “your tariffs and subsidy of onions are hurting our farmers”. A tariff is a tool that could neutralize that issue. The problem is, you need a smart leader and articulated vision.
The whole point of the Senate testimony from the DNI was that Signal was an approved application that comes pre installed on Government issued devices - and yes indeed, for secure comms.

Even Teams flags external participants to a chat. How was a phone number not known to be within the government perimeter allowed to be added with no alarm to a chat thread in an app pre installed and approved by the agency ?

There are more questions than answers here and its clearly suspicious to say the least that a prominent threat vector such as a mistaken phone number could go unnoticed and not trip a single flag. We're not talking about compromised sim cards or anything, a simple fat finger could expose a secure messaging app thread to an external participant and this is approved by the department for years? How many "Mistakes" over the years have gone unreported ?

Waltz or anyone on that thread isn't responsible for IT, so who ultimately didn't secure this vector?
You can't use an appeal to tradition as the argument for revision.

I don't see why anyone should care that publishers have edited in the past anyway, even in this particular discussion where my own argument is for conservation. Publishers have done all kinds of things that this very project itself criticises and pointedly set themselves apart by doing differently. So, it's a weak argument for them.

Aside from that, what any other publishers do, even if it's totally common and even universal, doesn't change the argument that they were making that they wish to suggest that those edits cross a line that fixing typos doesn't cross.
Sure? And a shockingly high percentage of women have been raped. How does that impact how common it is for adults to consensually play rough?
You can use kepubify to convert epubs to kepubs (and calibre will do this as well)

https://pgaskin.net/kepubify/
> But at some point a line is crossed: Painting “Read the New York Times” on the side of a barn you own is bread & butter freedom of expression.

Okay, then don't make that illegal.

I don't understand this mentality of "everything is the same as everything else so we can't do anything".

Sure, it's all just scale. But scale matters. Scale is why I can do a science experiment at home and it's cool, but I can't make a nuclear warhead. Seems for just about everything we've been able to find that line and work around it. This "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" approach to society is toxic, and we need to stop.
Haha exactly. Except when it agrees with my political preferences on something. In that case, the LLM is just betraying its deep internal consistency and lack of hypocrisy.
iptables uses first-wins.

https://serverfault.com/questions/367085/iptables-first-matc...
Being called normal is hardly a slur.
The more distance along your 4th dimension you allow, the more strange geometric effects you will observe. If you let a 4th dimension be very, very, very small (imagine a 2d universe that actually has a third dimension, it's just subatomic in scale) the geometric effects are negligible.A 3d volume can exist in that 2d + 1 tiny dimension, in the technical sense, but not in any macroscopic sense. Your 3rd dimension curls around to where it started nearly immediately.
> modern economics that has got us into an exponential multi-deca-trillion dollar debt

Are you referring to MMT [1]?

Because it’s not mainstream economics. And it never said you can run deficits without consequence, just that inflation is the limiting result. Which is technically true. But practically useless given the short-term interests of politicians.

Mainstream economics has cautioned against the national debt for decades. Idiots got pitched that economists don’t know what they’re talking about, meanwhile, and so that advice was ignored. Now we’ve gone full circle to blaming the field for the outcome it predicted.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_monetary_theory
Agreed. Yes, a bit roundabout, but it's pretty wild that we live in a spot in the universe where the distance we need to travel to "confirm plausibility" of a "deep truth of the universe we just heard about" is just to type a few glyphs into a magic box and decide if the person speaking the purported truth has a reputation in the relevant human thought-stuffs.

The world we live in is crazy. To know such a thing so easily at an earlier time, would be unfathomable :)
You can skip all this nonsense with

-fsanitize=undefined
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Navarro#Views:

> Navarro's views on trade are considered outside the mainstream of economic thought. ... According to Politico, Navarro's economic theories are "considered fringe" by his fellow economists. A New Yorker reporter described Navarro's views on trade and China as so radical "that, even with his assistance, I was unable to find another economist who fully agrees with them."

> According to Lee Branstetter, economics professor at Carnegie Mellon University and trade expert with the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Navarro "was never a part of the group of economists who ever studied the global free-trade system... He doesn't publish in journals. What he's writing and saying right now has nothing to do with what he got his Harvard Ph.D. in... He doesn't do research that would meet the scientific standards of that community." Marcus Noland, an economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, described a tax and trade paper written by Navarro and Wilbur Ross for Trump as "a complete misunderstanding of international trade, on their part."
Creative AIML Datasets
I just read about how, to train AIML to do sentiment analysis, some projects use Amazon reviews for data.

See, every Amazon review has to be accompanied by a star rating. if the star rating is poor, then the accompanying text is likely to be negative. And vice versa.

Blew my mind.

It's totally self-contained. No need to hire humans in Kenya or India to rate a piece of text to determine and label its sentiment.

I thought this was a highly creative way to approach the "data problem".

I want to learn more about such creative solutions to the "data problem".

Please share what you know about such creative solutions (or your ideas on creative solutions to the "data problem") on this page so we can have a resource to reference.

Thank you.
What if I don't care about security because I understand what a threat model is?
> Wait until you realize that the EU tariff on American cars has been 4x the US tariff in EU cars for awhile.

That's a simplification beyond what's truthful. Import taxes are different on different types of cars, both in the EU and the US. There's certainly some type of car where the above is true, maybe some type of gas guzzling pickup truck or something, but over the total amount of sold cars it is not. Trade-weighted differences simply aren't that great, which is not a coincidence because a) both the US and the EU are developed economies which are likely to benefit from free trade, b) taxation works in nudging the market what to buy which evens out the differences further, and c) we have had trade agreements where this was an explicit goal.
France suggests targeting Big Tech's data use in response to US tariffs
All of your pro-tariff points are ludicrous in the context of what actually happened, and do not reflect reality.

This is not some negotiation tactic. We know it's not a negotiation tactic, because: there are no stated goals for negotiations; there has been no attempt at negotiating; it would be impossible to negotiate with this many other countries at the same time; each target country feels only a little pain from the tariffs, US feels all of it, so US actually has the least leverage in any hypothetical negotiations. If this was about getting leverage for negotiations, it would be the stupidest imaginable way to go about it.

Tariffs would also be a very peculiar way of trying to do currency manipulation, because the first order effects will have the opposite direction of what you suggest. Import tariffs to reduce imports, which decreases the supply of the currency, which means the currency will appreciate. The USD weakening in response to these tariffs is more about second order effects around political risk (they demonstrate that not only is the leadership unstable and incompetent, but it also has near-dictatorial powers with no functioning checks and balances remaining). This makes US assets less appealing, especially for foreigners, who seriously need to start pricing in the risk of asset seizures. This leads to capital outflows, weakening the currency. If you just wanted those second order effects, there would be much more direct and less damaging ways of achieving it.

Your third point is just utterly irrelevant, because the tariffs do not further that goal. It's like saying that another goal is to turn the moon into cheese.

And as for China, that explanation would have made sense if the tariffs were applied only on China. But they weren't. Clearly that was not the actual goal. In fact, by announcing tariffs on the entire world, your leadership achieved the opposite of driving the rest of the world to cooperate more with China. (See the accelerated talks of a free trade agreement between China, Japan and Korea.)

And these were the best talking points you could find to defend the tariffs?
> Advertising puts a price on the scarce commodity of attention

Why should I be allowed to sell my attention any more than I can sell my own kidneys? It's even worse because I let other people sell my attention for me and get nothing back. What point are you trying to make? The market for manipulating my behaviour shouldn't exist at all so I really don't care how efficient it is

> the highest value messages for both the audience..

Obviously not. If this was true then people would pay to see more ads and everyone knows that doesn't happen
It’s moot because the consumer never sees these IDs. But you can’t with a straight face say there is as much potential liability for someone watching “teen” porn from a legit company that includes 2257 statements as there is from watching torrented, unsourced, amateur “teen” content. It’s a huge difference in intent.
They usually have a corporate employee write the law but a federal code that has been researched is the problem?
Did you ever consider making them public domain but still offering to charge optional $10 donation for download?

I’m interested in a similar approach for a rare book library, but funding for staff is a really challenge so we want to make some kind of revenue stream.
https://theoldnet.com, scroll down.
A lot of the Supreme Courts decisions on commercial speech are obviously wrong and will be overturned sooner or later.
Blockades are an act of war.

How expensive does a tariff have to be before it is a de facto blockade?

I think that comparison is much more apt than it first appears.
Came to see this and was checking if someone else mentioned it.

"Models like [..], GPT, Cursor"?

That use of emojis on headings very distinctly reminds me of AI writing.

Superficially lists issue but doesn't feel like the author has explored it?
In case of self-drive malfunction you still have a gas pedal under a human's foot
Amazing how not mentioning such important detail is even possible.
> There's no clearer lack of consent than attempts by advertisers to circumvent, block, or ban ad-blockers.

There is consent (otherwise you wouldn't visit the website in the first place), users with adblock are just trying to minimize their exposure. Totally reasonable (I do it too), but nobody is forcing them.

That may be true for e.g. a malicious software on your computer that force-redirects your regular browsing activity to some evil site, but that's not what we're discussing.
Any form of protectionism in the long run affects the efficiency of companies and the quality of products. Even Reagan understood this. The response of nations to US tariffs should be to try to eliminate even more tariffs towards other nations and create new free trade zones.
Is "as" an uneccesary footgun?
OK so he and his cronies intentionally crash global economy to buy cheaply. How come absolutely nobody stands to them?

If he would be dictator in 3rd world country, half of his military or personal guard would want to kill him. Then you have lone lunatics or just very motivated people with a good rifle and scope and skill to actually use it for a precise 1km shot. I bet he already pissed off few thousands of those since he very intentionally harms USA as a country and its citizens. Yes millions in gun community, nra etc would eat their shoes before thinking negatively of him, but that's not whole armed community in USA.
https://corticallabs.com/cl1.html

https://corticallabs.com/cloud.html
https://www.endorlabs.com/learn/critical-rce-vulnerability-i...

> Any application or service using Apache Parquet Java library versions 1.15.0 or earlier is believed to be vulnerable (our own data indicates that this was introduced in version 1.8.0; however, current guidance is to review all historical versions). This includes systems that read or import Parquet files using popular big-data frameworks (e.g. Hadoop, Spark, Flink) or custom applications that incorporate the Parquet Java code. If you are unsure whether your software stack uses Parquet, check with your vendors or developers – many data analytics and storage solutions include this library.

Seems safe to assume yes, pandas is probably affected by using this library.
Yes I will work on that today. I appreciate the feedback.
>Human vision isn't good enough, though.

Maybe if your standard is "scheduled commercial passenger flights" level of safety.

>Otherwise why not just drive the car yourself?

There's plenty of reasons why humans can be more dangerous outside of vision quality. For instance, being distracted, poor reaction times, or not being able to monitor all angles simultaneously.
Title is slightly misleading but the content is good. It's the "Safe Rust" in the title that's weird to me. These apply to Rust altogether, you don't avoid them by writing unsafe Rust code. They also aren't unique to Rust.

A less baity title might be "Rust pitfalls: Runtime correctness beyond memory safety."
When I got the opportunity to build out an office for my own startup, I had it designed with different environments: an open office in the front, a big conference room, a few medium size rooms (for solo focus, meetings, or temporary workgroups), a café/meeting area in the back, and a nap room in the quietest corner (with a couch). All the meeting rooms had a big screen TV to connect to meeting rooms in our other office.

So on any given day, you could pick the appropriate environment to work in, while still being within casual reach of everybody else for those impromptu conversations. and of course people could have lunch together in the café.

I thought the temporary workgroup offices were a great idea. A few people working on a new feature could move in there for a couple of weeks to get focused time together, and have daylong conversations without bugging everybody else.
A cult problem. But cult problems can be solved too.
Trumpism might be cult-lite but it’s not something people cannot be led to see as harmful. Find what hooked them. Show that the outcome isn’t as Trump implied. Frame the failure as intentional rather than unintentional — Trumps usual approach to avoiding responsibility. Allow them to save face.
I guess a lot of people do their regular 9-5 through week and play with new stuff on the weekends. But also yes, it is truly that heated