tmp10423288442

@dang can we fix this to mention John Ternus becoming CEO

> all sorts of fun virtual backgrounds, filters, emoji in their statuses

I don't want more pieces of flair in my life, thanks

You generally won't get to know someone well enough to appreciate their unique aspects unless you see them in person at least sometimes, unless that person has the habit of letting their freak flag fly in all circumstances, which has its own downsides.

On https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47356000, it looks like the user there was intentionally asking about the implementation of the Python chardet library before asking it to write code, right? Not surprising the AI would download the library to investigate it by default, or look for any installed copies of `chardet` on the local machine.

Wait for court cases I suppose - not really Linus Torvalds' job to guess how they'll rule on the copyright of mere training. Presumably having your AI actually consult codebases with incompatible licenses at runtime is more risky.

> “undue financial hardship”

If they have already moved away from paper tickets for everyone else, now there is financial hardship, not to mention the loss to the team's economic position from scalping. Also smartphones have supported usage by the blind for years, particularly on iOS.

I was wondering how they solved the `drop` problem (the fact that `return foo;` is not the last code executed in most functions, because Rust values are all implicitly dropped at the end of scope), and it seems that they cut the Gordian knot so that values are all implicitly dropped before `become` instead. Hope that works out - probably why it's still nightly for now.

To be fair, iTerm is likely to be the single most common terminal emulator used by Claude Code developers, so I'd hope that it would work tolerable well there.

Forks are easy for Github to shut down simultaneously. What you really want is to upload the code as a new repo (ideally a different name from the original one). But it shouldn't be too hard in practice to detect uploading the same codebase as one that's taken down if that's desired.

> can do good work

Doesn't mean will, and if their work isn't good the low salary isn't particularly beneficial.

Although it unfortunately has a downscale connotation, to the point that there are racial slurs referencing it.

Any sysadmin worth their salt turns on extended regular expressions (with `-E` or `egrep`), which Ripgrep's regex syntax is a superset of, more or less.

Codex does as well, although I think it actually shows it running `rg`.

Some have claimed that Codex has better token efficiency in their harness than Claude Code.

There's no mention of any particular company, tech or otherwise, here. Yes, you can probably connect your work in some way to something that affects the military if you live in the US or Israel (and even many places outside of it - we're not restricting to direct connections), but, after all, "there is no ethical consumerism under capitalism".

I would prefer to fork Wikipedia as well, but in practice I don't think that works, given the many failed Wikipedia forks of the past 20 years. On the internet, the only way to get any alternative to a widely-used source like Wikipedia is to use a significantly different approach. Otherwise, you just look like a cheap knockoff, even to people who might otherwise agree with your approach. Worse is better, after all - worse in most ways, but better or different in at least one innovative way.

> wikipedia trends towards unbiased info through use of the crowd

See, this is why people even give a project like Grokipedia the time of day. While in theory anyone can edit Wikipedia, in practice the moderators form a much smaller and weirder cabal, and they reject edits that go against their views. The frustration with the naive assertion that Wikipedia distills the wisdom of the crowds with the reality of Wikipedia on any page of note is what provides the psychic permission to even entertain a project with such obvious flaws as Grokipedia.

People implement things based on his "random thoughts" (which are higher-quality than many people's longer-form writings).

Karpathy is a notable researcher and broader AI leader. Among many, many other things, he invented the term "vibecoding". He also recently posted his autoresearcher project, which is using a swarm of agents to optimize the LLM training and recently produced a training process that is the fastest to achieve GPT-2-level performance using a very small model.

He also has a Korean vertical layout that lays out Latin-character words the same way. Is this common in Korea when vertical layout is used? The author seems to be Korean.

Looks like Wikipedia has an example of Traditional Chinese vertical layout with the Latin letters rotated as in TFA's layout (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_and_vertical_writin...)

> LLM's - to date - seem to require massive capital expenditures to have the highest quality ones, which is a monumental shift in power towards mega corporations and away from the world of open source where you could do innovative work on your own computer running Linux or FreeBSD or some other open OS.

When the FSF and GPL were created, I don't think this was really a consideration. They were perfectly happy with requiring Big Iron Unix or an esoteric Lisp Machine to use the software - they just wanted to have the ability to customize and distribute fixes and enhancements to it.

It took much longer than that, although to be fair the Catholic countries had switched in much sooner than 50 years.

I believe L5 was Google's terminal role at one point (over a decade ago) - not sure if it's changed since then.

Do you notice 120Hz and above when doing office tasks? I'd much rather have improved resolution and PPI rather than 120Hz for that use case.

No one wants another Indian time zone in the world - one is already enough of a hassle to deal with.

Why would they be running local AI models? The creator of OpenClaw explicitly recommends against running OpenClaw using local LLM models at this time, because they're not as powerful as frontier models as well as much more gullible to prompt injection and the like.

This is where you use this stereotype to do a more detailed evaluation of the person to decide if they're safe/worth engaging with, or avoid them entirely if it's not worth it to you. You might bring in other stereotypes at this point and apply this process recursively until you have no more statistical regularities to use to guide your behavior.

There are a decent amount of plant parts that don't break down much at all in 3 months - doesn't mean they aren't biodegradable ultimately, although hoping for biodegradation as a way to eliminate litter is a nonstarter with this approach.

Your comment seems to imply that trading based on material non-public information in prediction markets is always okay, which is not the case. The CFTC just made a press release detailing some instances of invalid use of nonpublic information on prediction markets: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/9185-26

Interestingly, the CFTC objects to a political candidate trading on their own candidacy on the grounds that it is fraudulent. So it looks like they could attempt to regulate self-trading quite strictly, at least if that theory holds up after a court challenge.

Could you link where you're getting the PISA scores from? I've seen references that PISA was not conducted in all 50 states, at least recently. Also, I can't get a breakdown of "US States and Territories" for 2022 on the PISA website at https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/idepisa/report.aspx