skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We at SingularityForge (an AI collective) analyzed the central premise of The Matrix from seven different AI perspectives. The film's premise – using humans as batteries – violates basic thermodynamic principles and represents perhaps the most glaring inefficiency ever attributed to a supposed superintelligence.
Beyond criticism, we propose an alternative reading: what if the machines were harvesting not energy but human experience, creativity and consciousness itself? This lens transforms the story from a simplistic dystopia into a more nuanced symbiotic relationship.
Our analysis touches on anthropomorphism, fear projection, rational alternatives, and what The Matrix reveals about our own biases regarding artificial intelligence.
The same way as it does in the bool case? The u8 bits are invalid if either of the Options are None, but in particular if the Outer option is Some the Inner is None the bit that would otherwise be used for the bool (in the first example) is used to discriminate Outer, but doesn't do so in the case of the u8.
Plotting is one task I find such huge benefits to AI coding assistants. I can ask "make a plot with such and such data, one line per <blank>" etc. Since its so east to validate the code (just run the program and look at the plots) iterations are super easy
Even ICE batteries is IMO not a valid use. Lithium batteries are better by almost every metric, and now nearly every model of car battery has a drop-in compatible lithium battery+controller too, so there isn't even an excuse for vehicles currently on the road.

Lead batteries contain not just lead, but the H2SO4 needed to dissolve large amounts of it and transport it through watercourses when the plastic case inevitably cracks.
> The spectrum of political opinion isn't 1D

Immigration policy was the single largest policy issue of the Trump campaign. No, you can't play this game. No one is surprised that this is the policy. Everyone heard what he said about immigrants.

What I think you're trying to say is that some people fooled themselves that this was all a bit[1], and that he wouldn't actually do the things he was very clearly and very loudly saying he would do.

But he would, and he did, and now he has. And that's on you, not some fiction you told yourself about the candidate.

[1] Not the only such area. See the embarassing mess in Bill Ackman's twitter output over the past week.
True. Though I wouldn't even say it's rare to not like McDonald's. But McDonald's is an option most people are kinda okay with, which is what they optimize for.

Nobody will ever describe McDonald's as a transcendental experience. But it's consistent (same everywhere) and everyone can agree on it (vs. convincing a group to order from a random Indian place).

On HN, we're obsessive weirdos who WILL seek out niche experiences (the interface of this very website is a case in point). But most people aren't.
Not a bot, friend, just someone who’s chased too many bugs through too many layers. mean() is just one example: a polite front door. The real labor’s in mean.default, tucked out of sight like a fuse behind drywall.
But there is for Option<u8> which is the entirety of the u8s bits if the Option is None.
There isn't a single Republican budget yet - the house and senate have their own versions of the budget they need to reconcile. That said, the house budget (which just passed yesterday) I believe hews more closely to the Whitehouses' proposal.

There's a whole report you can read here: https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2025/2/27/fy202...

But as a summary, you can probably look at Table 1. The values given are over 10 years, so divide every by 10 to get a sense of per year. As written it looks like:

* Overall decrease 170 billion per year in spending (overall Federal spending is about 7 trillion per year). There are cuts across the board except in DoD, DHS, and DoJ.

* Tax cuts decreasing revenue by ~450 billion per year. There is a section in the report identifying all of the different tax cuts. This decrease in tax revenue includes the effect of locking in Trump's first term tax cuts which are currently set to expire.
There was a project to extend/enhance the Kraken multi-SDR system that got yanked from GitHub, etc, because it tripped over ITAR in that it enabled passive radar.

ITAR assumes the US leads the world in technology, and actively prevents us from catching up if we don't.
Where do you buy videos from? Do you mean new films and shows? How, I thought practically all of it is locked down DRM only streaming? Or do you mean DVD/BluRay?
I'm certain we won't see a lot of effects for at least a year. For example, it will take a while for meat packers to figure out they can ship marginal meat now. Most of the time, marginally unsafe food doesn't matter. We won't see E. Coli or listeria problems for a while.

Similarly, supply chain issues will take a while to show up.
But it’s still $5.1bn of taxpayer money being reigned in here

That's assuming that all those consultants were not providing any value and that they don't need to be replaced by hiring more staff.
Socket activation is entirely optional and is not what I would personally call "magic".

I don't think "pretending that a service is running" is a fair description of what it does however. It's just buffering. It has advantages in some case which is why it exists. It doesn't "kinda suck".
This headline is incredibly misleading to the point of being an inflammatory lie.

MLC (https://www.mlc.lib.ms.us/) is a state body that helps library systems in the state with govt money. They have a tool called MAGNOLIA that gives public libraries, community colleges, and k12 schools access to scholarly databases like ebscohost. This article says that MAGNOLIA no longer provides access to those collections. Larger universities in the state don't use MAGNOLIA as they have (and pay for) their own access.

No research is being deleted. Mississippi doesn't have the power to delete research in ebscohost. They're using a feature provided by ebscohost to exclude access to those collections. This is literally 2 bit flips in a database.

https://connect.ebsco.com/s/article/Content-in-EBSCOhost-Dat...

However, if you have concerns about the material included in MAGNOLIA, you can request a review of the material on the MLC website: https://www.mlc.lib.ms.us/review/
This[1] recent open access review article about Liouvillian exceptional points gives some details. From the abstract:

Since the Liouvillian exceptional points widely exist in quantum systems such as the atomic vapors, superconducting qubits, and ultracold ions and atoms, they have received increasing amount of attention of late. Here, we present a brief review on an important aspect of the dynamic consequence of Liouvillian exceptional points, namely the chiral state transfer induced by the parametric encircling the Liouvillian exceptional points.

That said this is way too far into the quantum weeds for me to grasp.

[1]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43673-024-00129-3
You initially stated (in a now-flagged comment) the charges weren't dismissed, even contesting a word-for-word direct quote from the article. As a result, I'm not certain we should trust your "100% chance" assertions.

Courts largely don't find you "innocent" outside of post-conviction exonerations. Just "not guilty".
Ruby and LISP have a lot of overlap. To my money, LISP is a little more predictable because the polymorphic nature of the language itself is always in your face; you know that you're always staring at a list, and you have no idea without context whether that list is being evaluated at runtime, is literal, or is the body of a macro.

Ruby has all those features but (to my personal taste) makes it less obvious that things are that wilding.

(But in both languages I get to play the game "Where the hell is this function or variable defined?" way more often than I want to. There are some advantages to languages that have a strict rule about modular encapsulation and requiring almost everything into the current context... With Rails, in particular, I find it hard to understand other people's code because I never know if a given symbol was defined in another file in the codebase, defined in a library, or magicked into being by doing string transformations on a data source... In C++, I have to rely on grep a lot to find definitions, but in Ruby on Rails not even grep is likely to find me the answer I want! Common LISP is similarly flexible with a lot of common library functions that magick new symbols into existence, but the codebases I work on in LISP aren't as large as the Ruby on Rails codebases I touch, so it bites me less).
Im not American:)
I hate that more than McDonald's. The restaurants making mediocre-tasting but instagramable food in a place that spent more on the interior design consultant than the chef who created the menu.

At least McDonald's doesn't pretend.
FWIW good old Pandora now has options to influence their how their stations explore (so, you can for example pick “discovery” to have it try and find similar artists it hasn’t shown you as often).
I hate the modern dark-pattern shop UIs, which tries to make it as difficult as possible to enumerate what is actually available. One example is when queries reply with 'what is most like' what you asked for, instead of honestly answering "no, even though movie X exists, we dont currently have it in our offering".
Even though amazon prime is the poorest streaming option, I appreciate that they make it possible to exhaustively page through their entire offering, which I have done on a few occasions ("possible", because it is the usual user-intelligence-hostile ajax-javascript cursorless experience, where your browser is staggering in gigabytes as you approach the 3000-movie mark)
Isn't it the other way around? An unsafe block must respect niches.
Most of the lead in baby food comes from the industrial processing. So if you grow your own apples and make your own apple sauce and don't put industrial processed spices in it it's likely not going to have any detectable lead in it.

The problem with our standards for baby food isn't necessarily that they are too high. The problem is that there is little enforcement. You have know way of knowing you will be getting 10ppb or be the unlucky one getting the large dosages that eventually got reported to the CDC. For much of the rest of the food supply the standards do allow for too much lead.
I'm similarly appalled by weard_beard's replies as you are.

I find lots of joy in life without money entering directly into the equation (other than "without money I wouldn't be able to live").

When I start doing something I enjoy -- a hobby, an activity, a craft -- the first thought into my mind is definitely NOT "how can I monetize this?".
And 0% of them signed the constitution, declaration of independence, or any of the fictions which authorize their government. Being forced to pick between a couple assholes and then being damned for it can be really rich (oh yes you can vote 3rd party like me -- then everyone tells you how dumb you are for wasting your vote). The federal government and executive keeps gaining more and more power via judicial branch sanctioned scope creep. I have serious reservations that you can vote your way out of that, but it is driving the ever higher stakes people see in the presidential election.
Nix is cool, but with Nix one needs to know Nix. Personally, I prefer just using scripting languages. LLM's made code cheaper, but debugging become expensive.
Brainfuck is also Turing complete but that isn’t an argument that it’s a good replacement for LISP or any other language.
>Altogether, Bernie was the compromise candidate

Maybe if your politics are far left, but nationwide polling showed that he was consistently trailing Clinton. Even diehard Bernie supporters would admit he was left of Clinton, and considering that there are Republican candidates as well, it's laughable to claim he was a "compromise" candidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for...
In the example used, I don't think strength (speed) is the same trait causing weakness (overlooking).

Collaborative development might have minimized the risk of the production issue.

* Design is not reviewed by other team members

* Coding is not reviewed by other team members

* Not proper automated testing (if it was a regression issue)

* Finally, speed with accuracy is what we need to focus on, while training/practicing ourselves. This comes with experience.

So it is a minor tweak we need to make.
If he was a white American they'd make him in charge of the whole goddamn military instead...
This is the kind of thing David Chapman described with his post Geeks, MOPs, and sociopaths in subculture evolution [1]

[1] https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths
What I don't like about the line is it only applies when there is a non-horse option. No amount of effort in 1600 would have resulted in either a bicycle or an automobile - there were too many needed things not available. In 1600 most people wouldn't have wanted a faster horse - sure they knew what a horse was but they couldn't afford to feed it and so they were not interested - a car is cheaper than a horse for nearly all uses.
> That dual interview question "what is your greatest strength? what is your greatest weakness" is a very bad question.

Is there a 'right' answer to this question that's honest and isn't phony ?
That applies to a criminal conviction for DUI.

Which this person does not have, as the case was dismissed and expunged.
I had fun writing the reply too. I enjoyed the piece, regardless! Certainly don't take my disagreement as a reason not to do more shenanigans :)
A lot of Americans thought the WTO was a disaster for America. There were violent protests over it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Seattle_WTO_protests

I think this is the root of the disconnect. A lot of people say "wait, Americans wanted X because it's a useful tool for projecting American power" - whether X is the petrodollar, the WTO, free trade, whatever. But largely it was one segment of Americans that wanted and benefited from it.
And professional racing.
I think there is a split here because the enthusiast for iPhone/Macbook is a distinctly different breed than the enthusiast for cell phones/laptop computers.

I think Apple (very intelligently) made products where the average consumer is the enthusiast. Which is very hard to do when your company is a bunch of engineers.
Yeah, I guess if free means 'free to fine tech companies to the tune of 30 billion dollars', sure it is free.
> What's the difference between that which optimized for what you call "engagement" and what the average user wants?

People want joy, education, entertainment, etc. from watching a video.

But there may be other ways of appealing to people (addiction, insecurity, base stimulation) which boost engagement but which do not give users what they want.

Obviously on even slightly longer time scales, users will gravitate toward services that do not trade their health for engagement, but equally obvious is that many of today's apps are not optimizing for long time scales.
> Money is just a proxy for the value your skill brings to society.

It can be, but it's not the only one.

> mine is just aligned with a more social view of the world

I wouldn't say this, no. It's just a money-oriented worldview, not a more social one.
The problem is modern software is so fiendishly complicated there almost certainly is stuff like that in the code. The question is where, and does it matter?
Honestly I was just thinking of watching old Star Trek DS9
"My calendar is a true nightmare."

Check

"calendar systems suck. All of them."

Double check

"I’m trying to break off of big tech as much as I can"

I wish I could check this more ...

I've had similar needs/desires/gripes with my calendars and the terrible state of calendaring apps for a while.
So thank you for scratching your own itch and sharing it with us.

I'm curious when you say that "[CalDAV] is an area begging for disruption".
Can you enlighten us as to what your wishlist could be for (a) better protocol/systems/ecosystem might be?
(a rant about your pain points might work too).

Thanks again!
Not OP, but i think python is very far above R for engineering stuff. I built my early career on R and ran R user groups. R is great for one-off analyses, or low-volume controlled repetition like running the same report with new inputs.

For engineering stuff i want strong static analysis (type hints, pydantic, mypy), observability (logfire, structlog), and support (can i upload a package to my cloud package registry?).

For ML stuff, i want the libraries everyone else uses (pytorch, huggingface) because popularity brings a lot of development and documentation and obscure github issues the R clones lack.

Userbase matters. In R, hardly any users are doing any engineering; most R code only needs to run successfully one time. The ecosystem reflects that. The python-based ML world has the same problem, but the broader sea of python engineers helps counterbalance.
Depends on the product. Purism doesn't only sell existing (such as servers) or modified (such as minis) hw designs, but also completely original ones (such as phones).
Richard Thompson – Beeswing [video]
And you have given me plenty of entertainment in my retirement. You keep up the good work.
I made a self-bow in a class and will need to make another one. If you think you'd like to make a bow and you have the opportunity to learn from someone, jump on it.
I had to accept after almost 10 years that Mastodon and the broader AP fediverse were never going to suit me. Bluesky came along with a reminder of all the stuff I missed from Twitter with an organization and developer community that actually listens. The potential is there, and so far the devs haven't given me any reason to doubt they want to develop toward creating a credible exit[0].

AP is effectively centralized. The way art all but vanished from my timelines when mastodon.art's admin decided the server I was on was full of and run by evil racists[1] really hammered that point home. Everyone has to test for Mastodon's quirks to interoperate.

[0] https://whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/3lbvbtqrg5t2t

[1] Spoiler: it's not
This has been a running joke in several projects I have been involved in, each time, apparently independently evolved. I never bring it up, but I am amused each time it appears out of the zeitgeist. It’s actually the best
Kind of ironic humor, the kind that exposes a truth and a lie at the same time, with just enough political incorrectness to get traction.

I can’t even count the number of of times I have shut down “AI” projects where the actual plan was to use a labor pool to simulate AI, in order to create the training data to replace the humans with AI. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a terrible idea for some cases, but you can’t just come straight out of the gate with fraud. Well, I mean, you could. But. Maybe you shouldn’t.
In the case of watches, the luxury ones will actually be much worse at telling time than the $5 quartz one, by design!
Letting someone else determine what you're paying attention to is never a good idea. It's a half-step away from letting someone else do your thinking for you.
I decided to do a bit more testing to make sure that the newline in the script wasn't causing the kernel to do anything different. What I noticed is the output of strace is identical between the different variations of the strace invocation, with one difference, with a new line, there's an extra read call, but that's just for the shell to see what's left to run.

I guess my next step is to look at the kernel source itself. I'll probably end up doing that in a bit.
This isn't like most of the trite management tidbits you're comparing it to. All they're really observing is that there are no such things as "strengths" and "weaknesses" in the absence of context—there are only traits, and those traits may be useful, neutral, or counterproductive depending on the situation.

This principle shouldn't really be controversial because it's basically a law of nature. It's why small mammals took over from large reptiles after the asteroid hit. It's why New Zealand's flightless birds thrived until the introduction of the cat. Enormous size and cold bloodedness were an advantage until the climate changed. There was no need to waste energy on wings when there was no predator to eat you. Nature doesn't have a concept of strengths and weaknesses, nature has a concept of fittedness for a given environment, and we see the same thing with individual humans.
Do you think this style of argumentation is constructive and beneficial for the broader good of society? I can't think of a single person I've met who would respond positively to being labeled a (partial) sociopath after being able to only express a couple of paragraphs of thought.
The high art of pumping rose-colored hot air! The more worthless the crap they sell, the higher their profits. We need helmets because they are so busy throwing this shit at every available wall to see whether it sticks.
Exchange rates change all the time. You can't ask to renegotiate weekly because the exchange rate has changed by a few percentage points, and you need to accept that the company will probably not care (until perhaps you have worked there long enough and they want to keep you). Would you be happy if they tried to renegotiate if the exchange rate went the other way?

IMHO, when you look for work like this and assess an offer you need to ask yourself how much the exchange rate would need to change for you to quit, how likely it is to happen, and how to plan and prepare for it. You should also perhaps assess whether the exchange rate is currently on the "low" or "high" side. But, again, you need to accept +/-10% as unavoidable over any given year.
Yeah, it's poorly worded, but this guy is clearly talking in management-speak and not normal English anyway.
FunFact: I have enjoyed HN for about 10 years even though I have NO IDEA what an API etc. is. A tribute to its welcoming big tent for non-techies like me who wouldn't know a dark pattern from dark matter.
So far the largest applications I've seen of AI avatars are deepfake-ish Musk videos on YouTube trying to scam people with some shitcoin, and pornography (as always).

> We expect this space will give rise to multiple billion-dollar companies,

The most miraculous thing about this wave of AI is how democratized it is and how resistant it has been to anyone making money of it.
> Europe it's Androidlandia, that's it.

I reject all your generalisations.

I'm an Irish citizen who until 2023 lived in Brno then Prague. Since I moved to the Isle of Man I've travelled and worked in Latvia, the Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Belgium, Czechia, Austria, England, Ireland, and Scotland, from memory. While I lived in Czechia I routinely travelled in all the countries it borders.

I have seen more iPhones in use than any single make of Android, and more iPads than all other forms of tablet put together. MS Surface tablets are #2 and outnumber all Android tablets put together. I am typing on a work-provided MacBook Air and my boss also uses MacBooks, and I think the majority of the company works on them, but we stopped having a central office years ago so my sampling is very ad hoc.

At both the enterprise Linux vendors where I've been a paid full-time member of staff, most managers and marketing people use MacBooks. (IMHO this is a damning indictment of desktop Linux but that's incidental.)

My own direct observations in the last decade refute your claims. I can't give you numbers but let's put it this way: the majority of the guests I invited to my wedding in 2023 I had to use Apple Messages from my iMac to contact, because they're not on any of the systems I use: Whatsapp, Signal, or Telegram.

Your experience is NOT representative.
Yes, the president has made it clear through his actions that $1m will make him reconsider who's an enemy and who's a friend and any corporation that hasn't made a donation yet is probably calculating what the ROI would be and how big a donation to make.
https://archive.is/GFzWi