skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I call that the stackoverflow effect, where once a topical community reaches a certain information density anything that does not go neatly on the very top of the current pile is mercilessly destroyed.

It's akin to the concept of "climbing a ladder to the top and then pulling the ladder up behind you", and imho it's the alarm bell that indicates that a community has died, even if the community itself does not know it yet.
> Dude, Marissa Mayer hasn't been at Google for well over a decade. Weird callout.

So? It's not a weird callout, it's an example where the whole arc is well known.
Up in the Air was another great depiction of the most cynical mode of doing layoffs. And, of course, Office Space.
Anatomy of a Market Crisis: Tariffs, Markets and the Economy
My understanding for Meilisearch is that you need enough RAM to keep everything in memory...but you're (probably) not keeping full-text in memory for millions of articles.

Is it just searching metadata, or do you just have a setup that's beefy enough to support that level of memory?

Or am I just wrong? :D
Clearly you need to make some slight spelling changes to your contacts... ;)
I think a database of "most effective ways to communicate with various LLMs" would be helpful. Not all instruction tuning is created equal.
Which many countries?
Coming from the "Scandanavian Architect" rather than the "Racoon on Meth" side of the argument, I try to load the dishwasher to make it easy to unload (eg knives, forks spoons all sorted in the cutlery tray as I load it). So when someone (no names!) just throws things in randomly, 'it's annoying because it makes extra sorting work for me as I unload it.
Enforcing the use of AI in engineering teams – good or bad thing?
Target's foot traffic keeps falling amid boycotts and slashed DEI efforts
Tell me about the supremacy of science after the government restores the NIH, NOAA, etc. In fact most people in the world believe in the supremacy of their religious faiths.
I am well aware that "code is law" has no weight in actual law. The point I tried to raise was, given the following sequence of events:

1. You deploy a smart contract to the ethereum blockchain

2. I interact with your smart contract in some manner

how do we define whether the manner of interaction in step 2 is fradulent or not?

"Code is law" is one interpretation by crypto enthusiasts to define under what conditions interacting with the blockchain is fraud; in their definition, it's never fradulent.

Let's assume "code is law" is nonsense, as many comments here say. Then, under what conditions do we define interacting with the blockchain as fradulent? What is fraud and what is not fraud?

Edit: In the blockchain we can even formalize this. The ethereum blockchain at block K has a certain state S_K. I submit a certain transaction/set of instructions T to the blockchain which is mined as block K+1. How do we define a function isIllegal(S_K, T)? (Assuming block K+1 contains EVM instructions from my transaction T only)
U.S. Argues Meta Built a Social Media Monopoly
Amateur speculation, but informed by professionals: I think this tendency toward complexity is situational, not fundamental. Specifically, it's a product of this stage of the universe having lots of available energy. More complex structures are favored when/because they can consume more energy and increase entropy more effectively. The complexity will probably start fading when the hydrogen-fusion party dies. The second law will continue on its way.
Hard to tell if you’re a GPT account. Obviously you can care about all people; it’s not a zero-sum emotion. Your time is zero sum though, and you seem to be spending a lot of it just hating on people. And there’s many other loser accounts like you on here, moreso than I remember.
Bukele, Abrego Garcia, and Red Lines
My opinion on this is that as a generic business it's better to just stay out of politics and not pander to specific groups. You may score some short-term wins but if you fail any purity test from that point onwards, or pull back at all, that group will feel jilted and retaliate. Then, you're worse off than if you had just remained neutral.
clawbacks are not common, and no one should ever accept such a package. (maybe executives, since they may have other golden parachute provisions.)

repurchase rights are exceedingly common.
IME drivers are by far the biggest danger on the road.
> Google is just really bad at this, but seems to think it's not bad at this

The BigTech firms have been doing this intentionally for a very long time. I started hearing about Microsoft doing the security-escorts-you-straight-out-the-door all the way back in 2012.

It's not that they are bad at this, it's that they think the trade-off works out in their favour. And it probably does - what's a few but-hurt former employees, versus one disgruntled former employee who had enough warning to snag critical data on their way out the door?

Though it's probably our fault, since we're all so trusting of our mega corp employers, and/or so optimistic about our chances of surviving layoffs, that no one is stashing the incriminating data ahead of time.
Getting laid off sucks, but this comment isn't about that. What I noticed when I read the post is that the website isn't very good. It's laggy, as in slow to load, scroll, and for the mouse-hover stuff to respond, and this is on a fancy modern macbook. It seems to focus on pretty modern web aesthetic over presenting content. This is exactly the kind of website that makes me bemoan the tendency to prioritize looking better than a simple website when comparing 2 static images, and not prioritizing the experience of actually using the website.

I find these things have a real "well it works on my machine" about them. Whereas sites that stick to simple tech (ex. HN) are far more likely to work well on all machines.
I think you are describing more of an edge case than you might think for a vertebrate, mammal, social, warm blooded, air breathing, earth living, pack hunter.
Yeah, my experience with making mistakes on my taxes was that they sent me a bill for the difference, I paid the bill, and that was it. There wasn't even a fine beyond that I had to pay interest on the money I owed.
It's an exercise. I would have much preferred using the 20k most common words or something like that. The first thing that came to mind is "elevator" which is where the equivalence eureka comes from. It can be done in British English as "lift" but difficult otherwise.

Elevators are cool like telephone booths. I've wondered what a dog thinks using them for the first time, then accepting what they do and how much they understand its geometries.
"In addition, S3 Express One Zone has reduced the per-GB charges for data uploads and retrievals by 60 percent, and these charges now apply to all bytes transferred rather than just portions of requests greater than 512 KB"

It's not clear but are there cases where this could be a significant price rise? If you exclusively had small objects (<512kb) being written and read then this could add up quickly.
I mentioned Costco when I first wrote it and then edited it about 20 seconds later, so no, you aren't tripping. :)
This post from Steph Ango (CEO of Obsidian) shares the same sentiment

https://stephango.com/file-over-app
C lacks sympathy with nearly all additions to hardware capabilities since the late 80s. And it's only with the addition of atomics that it earns the qualification of "nearly". The only thing that makes it appear as lower level than other languages is the lack of high-level abstraction capabilities, not any special affinity for the hardware.

For one, would expect that a low level language wouldn't be so completely worthless at bit twiddling. Another thing, if C is so low level, why can't I define a new calling convention optimized for my use case? Why doesn't C have a rich library for working with SIMD types that has been ubiquitous in processors for 25 years?
I don't buy it.

If they had an API Booking would not likely return their data to you, they would almost certainly have an API that you would search and which would then return the same result you get on their website. Probably with some nice JSON or XML formatting.

Booking makes a small amount of ads, but they are paid by the hotels that you book with. And yes, today they already have to compete with people who go there see a hotel listing and go find the actual hotel off-site. That would not really change if they create an MCP.

It might make it marginally more easy to do, especially automatically. But I suspect the real benefits of booking.com is: A) that you are perceived to get some form of discount and B) you get stamps toward the free stay. And of course the third part which is you trust Booking more than some random hotel.

I actually think it would be a good idea for Booking to have an API. What is the alternative?

I can right now run a Deep search for great hotels in Tokyo - that will probably go through substantially all hotels in Tokyo. Go to the hotel's website and find the information, then search through and find exactly what I want.

Booking.com might prefer I go go to their website, but I am sure they would prefer above all that you book through them.

In fact I think the idea of advertisement is given above impact here, possibly because its a popular way for the places that employ the kind of people who post here to make money, but substantially all businesses that are not web-based and that do not sell web-based services for free don't make their money through ads (at least not directly). For all those places ads are an expense and they would much prefer your AI search their (comparably cheap to serve) websites.

Basically, the only website owners who should object to you going to their website through an AI agent are those who are in the publishing industry and who primarily make money through ads. That is a small number of all possible businesses.
It's a question of what kind of business Google is/wants-to-be.

The one it claimed to be, in the past, with a broader holistic mission, claiming to attract the world's brightest to make information accessible? Using its hoard of cash to do a bunch of neat stuff and hire really smart people do it?

Or is it what we always suspected all along, a cynical money printing machine that turns ad impressions into shareholder value and nothing else?

It's always been a mix of both. Those of us who worked there certainly saw in the inside the gradual transition of the internal discourse from "justifying B to support A" to "who cares about A."

They can do whatever they want, they're a private business. But they still trade on a certain reputation, and have the advantage of a quasi-monopoly status in many things.

I would hope that advancing them any kind of good will as any kind of "special" company (which our profession tended to do, before) and muting criticisms is just over now.

They built their money printing machine in part by swallowing competition and exterminating it.
Awful experience.

What is interesting is our denial, as (ex-)corporate employees, that the corporation is NOT FAMILY...even though we may feel it is.

> Big companies are soulless.

"And God created the C Corporation" -nowhere in the Bible / Koran / Hinduism / Buddhism / Torah

I feel this lesson keeps being re-learned by us people / workers ...
I hope they also improve their JSONSchema support for structured output and tool calling. Currently it has many limitations compared to OpenAI’s, for example it doesn’t support “additionalProperties” which eliminates an entire class of use cases and makes it immediately incompatible with many MCP servers.

Marketing the API as OpenAI-compatible and then me getting 400s when I switch to Gemini leaves a sour taste in the mouth, and doesn’t make me confident about their MCP support.
Yeah except the tones and walk messages still play, it just doesn't spam wait over and over at a red. Do you think because it's playing a satirical message blind people will ignore the tones and just start running into traffic?
that good eh
Yeah I think people understate how large of an impact this had.

My immediate reaction to that was the "jig is up"--I argued with friends that Twitters functionality would remain intact, there'd be no major outages, etc and they couldn't understand how that'd be possible.
Same is true with people - repeat attempts at social engineering will eventually succeed. We deal with that by a combination of training, segregating responsibilities, involving multiple people in critical decisions, and ultimately, by treating malicious attempts at fooling people as felonies. Same is needed with LLMs.

In context of security, it's actually helpful to anthropomorphize LLMs! They are nowhere near human, but they are fundamentally similar enough to have the same risks and failure modes.
Reminds me of Guy Steele making the point about big languages and small ones in his talk about Scheme. Started the whole lecture using only one-syllable words then gradually defined two-syllable words using only single syllables and so on.
For things like remote heating or auto trunk operation, the cost I’d be willing to bear is gated mostly by how much the delta to just buying a new car would be. Especially since having kids, a lot of this stuff makes my life a lot easier. If I’m trying to carry a crying toddler and a large bag of groceries into the house, I don’t want to be struggling to try to get the trunk closed. Being able to completely de-ice the car from inside while I’m getting kids dressed for school instead of needing to spend an extra five minutes doing it manually is likewise huge.

The Tesla (like any EV I’ve driven) is also fun to drive, but I’d trade away the instant torque for the other features if you made me choose.
I've been using Math Academy for a couple of months now seriously (~3.5k XP). Initially I was reviewing topics / concepts that I already had an intuitive understanding of from college courses, and I believe for those it has helped take me to the next level in that I now can, 99% of the time, solve problems in those topics. As I start to approach topics that I haven't fully covered in college or have some intuitive understanding for I do find that I can mechanically carry out the operations, but I lack an understanding of "why" I'm doing this.

I think the author of this makes some good points to this effect. I believe that the best approach is a bit inverse of what the author is saying however. I think that Math Academy should be the base, where 80-90% of your time is spent. The remaining 10-20% should be used to supplement this. Either with lectures, textbook / edutainment reading or other ways to develop more of that intuition.
I have used Replicate Cog, built on docker, fairly heavily and and find it is a decent compromise of features. Docker taking this use case more seriously is quite welcome, though surprisingly late. Local metal GPU support (where available to the containerized application APIs), not currently available in Cog, is attractive though it would require generalization of application code to support containers executable via Cuda and Metal etc.
efficiency of plants - 1%

efficiency of photovoltaic - 20%

so photovoltaic is 15 times more land efficient then burning biomass. so we absolutely need trees to provide ecological functions. but in era of 5kwp PV array paying itself in 5-6 years(and still working afterwards), to heat water... its is ridiculous to cut trees and burn them to have hot water. 80% of time Canadian citizen can have 100% solar hot water (PV), less then 100% rest of the year.
This is excellent and illustrates that unless you have access to the cap table, you have no idea what your options are worth. Sometimes you can at least get a founder to tell you what the preference stack looks like, and what multiples were given to investors, and that might be enough to kind of sort of work out what an exit looks like.
Thanks. I still don't understand where the bits live that tell you which type T is for a given node.

Is this something like "list starts with type A, and that will tell you if the next node is type A or B"?

Is there a way to stuff those bits in with the node somehow so you always know the type you expect back?
This comment is hilarious. Like someone was placed in a time machine and missed the last few months.
Is that good? Windows 11 officially supports computers from 2017 too, Linux way further. Ubuntu 24.04 will happily run on machines over a decade old with no problems.

And Apple has poor backwards compatibility. You can't run 32-bit Intel binaries on anything newer than 10.14. PPC has been out of the question for over 15 years. Meanwhile even on Windows on Arm you can run stuff made with XP or even Windows 98 in mind.
Meilisearch keeps all the data on disk. It uses memory-mapping for optimizing performance, by default everything is safe on disk and the OS cache the most needed pages in memory.

So it works on any machine, really. 2GiB is usually enough for most workloads, but the bigger the dataset, the faster it will be if you give it more memory!
Isn't that the case anyway? If someone else has control of your email account they could reset your password
Good point! We've adjusted the plan so that it's 100% of beta (starting today). Thanks.
WebSockets are often blocked by corporate firewalls/proxies, I don't think it's as simple as saying WebSocket > HTTP
In simple terms, I am talking about making kind human beings that are not fools. But that is a very generic description.

The idea of AI companions plays with the notion of the 2020s "incel". A sad boy who can't get a girlfriend and spend time with games and digital toys. There is no other possible audience for a product like this. My assessment is that this interpretation is wrong, and those kids are not sad and lonely.

That "personality" has been shaped and used online for all kinds of purposes. I think deep down they know that and will see the "digital girl" product as an insult.

The fact that this demography uses LLMs is not a tell that they need someone to chat. Those kids are using AI chatbot content on others, not themselves. What they want is an LLM thug or bully agent to retaliate who mocks them.

What they really need though is a friend, who can understand a little bit of what they went through, and that won't try to use them for some shady purpose or mock them.

They will eventually realize that tech is not that friend, and have been manipulating them all along.

Take some time to think about these issues before dismissing my point. I know you will dismiss my point, but take the time to do so. Thinking about humans as humans is important.
Game Developers Conference Classic Gaming Postmortem: Zork (2014)

"Dave Lebling, co-author of Zork and co-founder of Infocom, gives a postmortem talk on the classic text adventure. Lebling, who currently works as a senior principal software engineer at BAE Systems, created the "grue," co-authored Zork I-III and wrote seven other text adventures. He plans to give an hour-long talk explaining, among other things, the creation of both the mainframe and microcomputer versions of Zork, the trials and tribulations of coding a cutting-edge text parser, and what it was like to experiment with self-publishing at a time when most PC games were sold in hand-packed plastic bags.

https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1020612/Classic-Game-Postmorte...

https://archive.org/details/GDC2014Lebling
> I agree, I'm not saying it's perfect. Far from that.

> But removing the framework

Are you trying to convince me that this path is wrong? I never said or implied it was correct.

> What Jack and Elon are sustaining, when you read between the lines, is not reform to sustain the actual people that actually create the stuff.

I completely agree.
I've had the same issues of decay. I used to be able to say "call Mom" but now it will call some kid's mom who I have in Contacts as "[some kid's] mom". What is the underlying architecture that simple heuristic things like this can get worse? Are they gradually slipping in AI?
I'm deprecating the extension due to lack of interest. It's been 10 days with as much promotion as I could do and there have been 5 downloads. I can't see taking the trouble to support something with no users.
Given their anti-trust struggles, if Google for some reason dominates AI, they'd not want people to bring up anti-competitive behavior as a reason for that. Adopting open standards, especially open standards conceived outside Google is good for everyone including Google. They're well placed - from research to hardware to software and data.

They'll also want the industry to rapidly move forward and connect data to AI. MCP has momemtum.
Finding insider trading is not the difficult part, it's being able to prosecute it that is going to be a challenge.
> Predictable response: "But they can only occur in unsafe regions which you can grep for" and my response to that: "so?"

The situation is both worse than this and better than this. Consider the .set_len() method on Rust's Vec. It's unsafe, because you could just .set_len(1_000_000) and then the Vec would happily let you try to read the nonexistent millionth element and segfault. However, if you could edit the standard library sources, you could add this new method to Vec without touching any unsafe code:

pub fn set_len_totally_safe_i_promise(&mut self, new_len: usize) {
self.len = new_len;
}

This is exactly the same as the real set_len, except it's a "fn" instead of an "unsafe fn". Now the Vec API is totally broken, and safe callers can corrupt memory. Also critically, we didn't write any unsafe code in "set_len_totally_safe_i_promise". The key detail is that this new method has access to the private self.len field of Vec that unsafe blocks in the same module rely on.

In other words, grepping for all the unsafe blocks isn't sufficient for saying that a program is UB-free. You also have to make sure that none of the safe code ever violates an invariant that the unsafe blocks rely on. Read the comments, think really hard, etc.

So...what's the point of all this? The point is that it lets us define a notion of "soundness", such that if I only write safe code, and I only use libraries that are "sound", we can guarantee that my program is UB-free. In other words, any UB in my program would necessarily point to a bug in one of my dependencies, in the stdlib, or in the compiler. (Or you know, in the hardware, or in mathematics itself.) In other other words, instead of auditing my entire gigantic (safe) program for UB, we can reduce the problem to auditing my dependencies for soundness. Crucially, this decouples the difficulty of the problem from the size of my program. This wouldn't be very interesting if "safe code" was some impoverished subset, like "unsigned integer arithmetic only". But in fact safe code can use pointers, tagged unions, pointers into tagged unions, heap allocation/freeing, and multithreading. Lots of large, complicated, useful, real-world programs are written in 100% safe code. Here the version of this story with all the caveats and footnotes: https://jacko.io/safety_and_soundness.html
There's an interesting book[1] by Douglas Hofstadter about translation in general and also about translating his most famous book[2] (which by its nature was particularly difficult to translate) into many different languages.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Ton_beau_de_Marot [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del,_Escher,_Bach
Exactly. It's a new administration who has done some, shall we say, questionable things to the economy. That is going to have an impact on people. Which means they're going to spend less money in stores, especially those who have a more uncertain income.

What is more likely? That people care about some rather obscure policies or that they care if they are able to keep their job?
So in what scenario would one use S3 Express One zone rather than EB io2.
It is pretty subjective--I design the algorithm with myself in mind first, but I can definitely see a heavier bias toward exploration/variety being better for some others. Something to experiment with.

Thanks for the sampling ideas! Interesting stuff.