Unlurker|Replay|About
Introducing Kagi Assistants (blog.kagi.com)
•
As a Kagi subscriber, I find this to be mostly useful. I'd say I do about 50% standard Kagi searches, 50% Kagi assistant searches/conversations. This new ability to change the level of "research" performed can be genuinely useful in certain contexts. That said, I probably expect to use this new "research assistant" once or twice a month.
•
I'd say the most useful part for me is appending ? / !quick / !research directly from the browser search bar to a query
•
I'm seeing a lot of investment in these things that have a short shelf life. Agents/assistants but nothing more.
•
I really wish Kagi would focus on search and not waste time and money on slop.
•
If you look at my post history, I’m the last person to defend LLMs. That being said, I think LLMs are the next evolution in search. Not what OpenAI and Anthropic and xAI are working on - I think all the major models are moving further and further away from that with the “AI” stuff. But the core technology is an amazing way to search. So I actually find it the perfect thing for Kagi to work with. If they can leverage LLMs to improve search, without getting distracted by the “AI” stuff, there’s tons of potential value, Not saying that’s what this is… but if there’s any company I’d want playing with LLMs it’s probably Kagi
•
What they saying in this post is that they are designing these LLM-based features to support search. The post describes how their use-case is finding high quality sources relevant to a query and providing summaries with references/links to the user (not generating long-form "research reports") FWIW, this aligns with what I've found ChatGPT useful for: a better Google, rather than a robotic writer.
•
I'm sure Google also says they built "AI mode" to "support search". Their search is still trash.
•
Except the AI mode filters out the bad results for you :)
•
It's not -- this was posted literally yesterday as a position statement on the matter (see early paragraphs in OP): https://blog.kagi.com/llms Kagi is treating LLMs as potentially useful tools to be used with their deficiencies in mind, and with respect of user choices.
•
This is building on top of the existing core product, so the output is directly tied to the quality of their core search results being fed into the assistants. I overall really enjoy all of their A.I products, using their prompt assistant frequently for quick research tasks. It does miss occasionally, or I feel like "that was a waste of tokens" due to a bad response or something, but overall I like supporting Kagi's current mission in the market of AI tools.
•
Not for nothing, but I wish there was an anonymized ai built into a kagi that was able to have normal conversation discussion about sexual topics or search for pornographic topics like a safe search off function. I understand the safety needs around things LLM should not build nuclear weapons, but it would be nice to have a frontier model that could write or find porn.
•
You'll want de-censored models like cydonia for that -- can be found on openrouter, or through something like msty
•
I think there's a very important nugget here unrelated to agents: Kagi as a search engine is a higher signal source of information than Google page rank and ad sense funded model. Primarily because google as it is today includes a massive amount of noise and suffered from blowback/cross-contamination as more LLM generated content pollute information truth. > We found many, many examples of benchmark tasks where the same model using Kagi Search as a backend outperformed other search engines, simply because Kagi Search either returned the relevant Wikipedia page higher, or because the other results were not polluting the model’s context window with more irrelevant data. > This benchmark unwittingly showed us that Kagi Search is a better backend for LLM-based search than Google/Bing because we filter out the noise that confuses other models.
•
> Primarily because google as it is today includes a massive amount of noise and suffered from blowback/cross-contamination as more LLM generated content pollute information truth. I'm not convinced about this. If the strategy is "lets return wikipedia.org as the most relevant result", that's not sophisticated at all. Infact, it only worked for a very narrow subset of queries. If I search for 'top luggages for solo travel', I dont want to see wikipedia and I dont know how kagi will be any better.
•
(Kagi staff here) Generally we do particularly better on product research queries [1] than other categories, because most poor review sites are full of trackers and other stuff we downrank. However there aren't public benchmarks for us to brag about on product search, and frankly the simpleQA digression in this post made it long enough it was almost cut. 1. (Except hyper local search like local restaurants)
We are replacing OOP with something worse (blog.jsbarretto.com)
•
> At around the same time, some bright spark realised that programmers - a population of people not known for good hygiene [ ... ] OK, I'm out.
•
The idea of "we are replacing <thing> with microservices, which is much worse" is true for almost any <thing>, OOP or not.
•
There is a kernel of insight here that is pretty valuable. Interfaces are a form of security and is a result of a loss of trust. It's interesting to think about how far trust can be extended before it breaks down.
•
Many great design patterns have come from OOP and have found their home in functional languages or libraries. Dependency injection has to be the most successful one, but there's at least another dozen good ideas that came from OO world and has been found to be solid. What has rarely proven to be a good idea instead is inheritance at behavior level. It's fine for interfaces, but that's it. Same for stateful classes, beyond simple data containers like refs. You can even have classes in functional programming word, it's irrelevant, it's an implementation detail, what matters is that your computations are pure, and side effects are implemented in an encoded form that can be combined in a pure way (an IO or Effect data type works, but so can a simple thunk encoding).
•
Microservices are a bad pattern. Function as a service is better, because that architecture tends to assume vertical integration within the function and you can leverage a shared business logic library across an organization. Having service-to-service communication is the thing that makes microservices suck, if you can give people autonomy while having a shared systems language and keeping computation on one system it works ok.
•
Micro services are neither bad or good, they are simply misunderstood. They are a solution to communication and organizational challenges, not a technical one. As every other solution they have cons, some of which you have outlined.
•
I had a job interview where the guy asked me something along the lines of do I have experience with OOP or Microservices，or both. So I answered how I like both and feel that MS are Objects at the network layer, the dude cut me off and told me to stick to the question. Absolutely gut wrenching, I was being evaluated by who knows who, in a slot of 30 minutes, maybe his entire job was repeating the same set of questions 16 times per day and he was unironically writing down yes/no next to "Microservices?" "OOP"?
•
I'm not really qualified to talk about either topic at length, but my impression is that the Microservice crowd is kind of a different group than the anti-OOP crowd. As a total beginner to the functional programming world, something I've never seen mentioned at length is that OOP actually makes a ton of sense for CRUD and database operations. I get not wanting crazy multi tier class inheritance, that seems like a disaster. In my case, I wanted to do CRUD endpoints which were programmatically generated based on database schema. Turns out - it's super hard without an ORM or at least some kind of object layer. I got halfway through it before I realized what I was making was actually an ORM. Please feel free to let me know why this is all an awful idea, or why I'm doing it wrong, I genuinely am just winging it.
•
Almost all languages have some sort of object representation, right? Classes with their own behavior, DTOs, records, structs, etc.,. What language are you working in? If you're coupled to a specific database provider anyway there's usually a system table you can query to get your list of tables, column names, etc., so you could almost just use one data source and only need to deal with its structure to provide all your endpoints (not really recommending this approach).
•
"OOP actually makes a ton of sense for CRUD and database operations." Not at all OOP is great at simulations, videogames, emergent behaviour in general. If you do crud with oop you will complain about overengineering.
•
Even in video games, I avoid inheritance, I always much prefer composition. Build a complex object from many small objects, then vary behavior with parameters rather than deriving a child class and overriding methods.
•
TL;DR: OOP is being replaced by microservices (and even more extreme ideas), which is much worse. Yeah, I have to agree with this author. I will say that service-oriented architecture does have some advantages, and thus sometimes it's the right choice. Parallelism is pretty free and natural, you can run services on different machines, and that can also give you scalability if you need it. However, in my experience that architecture tends to be used in myriad situations where it clearly isn't needed and is a net negative. I have seen it happen.
•
Nonsense. Network service layer separation solves a different problem than OOP. It doesn't replace it. Services and containers bring features and capabilities that OOP doesn't provide. It's orthogonal.
•
But I think that's really the point: it gets applied to problems it was clearly not meant to solve. The article doesn't really get into that, but that's how I'm reading it because I've seen it happen. To some programmers, every component of a program is its own service, even when there's no need to have multiple processes. The only tool they have is that hammer, so everything has to be a nail.
•
Someone is bound to quote Dijkstra here: > To put it quite bluntly: as long as there were no machines, programming was no problem at all; when we had a few weak computers, programming became a mild problem, and now we have gigantic computers, programming has become an equally gigantic problem.
> Other bright sparks jumped in on the action: what if this separation did not rely on the personal hygiene of the programmers - something that should always be called into question for public health reasons - and was instead enforced by the language? Components might hide their implementation by default and communicate only though a set of public functions, and the language might reject programs that tried to skip around these barricades. How quaint. Sounds like C. When was the last time you did OO against a .h file without even needing access to the .c file? > And so, the process/network boundary naturally became that highest and thickest wall I've had it both ways. Probably everyone here has. It's difficult to make changes with microservices. You gotta open new routes, and wait for people to start using those routes before you close the old ones. But it's impossible to make changes to a monolith: other teams aren't using your routes, they're using your services and database tables.
•
> Sounds like C. Data hiding is just one of the concepts of OOP. Polymorphism is another one. How that's implemented is another question. You can do OOP in plain C, several libraries kinda did that, like GTK. Other languages tried to support these concepts with less boilerplate, giving rise to classes and such. But OOP is not about language features, it's fundamentally a way of designing software.
•
Polymorphism is trivial in C and even less restrictive than in other OOP-first languages. The reason why GTK (actually GObject) is so overengineered is not due to classes, but because it allows to create classes and types at runtime.
[dead]
•
Another one, apparently: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=Jeff-Collins https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=alan-jordan13 I wonder what asshole thinks this is a good idea.
This is so much nonsense. Contracts and interfaces have little to do with OOP. If you don't like inheritance, then talk about OOP. It's fine. Many people, including myself, don't like inheritance. On the other hand, if it's interfaces and contracts that have you bothered, parse-dont-validate to your heart's content. If the domain allows it. Just don't drag unrelated concepts into this particular discussion.
•
OOP is about messages according to the inventor - messages are about the interface. People get confused with objects which languages without messages don't have (you can get them, but they are not first class in the language) Even plain objects though, the point isn't the inheritance! The point is to put an interface on the data. Inheritance is sometimes useful because, but there is a reason we keep screaming "prefer composition to inheritance" (even though few listen)
I think this is some combination of strawman, and subset of all cases. You can lament complications of OOP. You can also lament the complications of docker, kubernetes, HTTP APIs etc. These aren't mutually exclusive, and they don't span the breadth of programming techniques. I prefer avoiding all of these. Anecdotally, I've replaced OOP with plain data structures and functions.
•
It is somewhat interesting to realize micro services are conceptually solving the same problem that OOP despite working in such different areas. Though OOP is just one step - structured programming works on the same problem.
•
>> _Anecdotally, I've replaced OOP with plain data structures and functions._ I think this is why FP is becoming more popular these days but I'm not sure some people get why. The problem with OOP is you take a data set and spread it all over a 'system' of stateful (mutable) objects and wonder why it doesn't/can't all fit back into place when you need it to. OOP looks great on paper and I love the premise but... With FP you take a data set and pass it through a pipeline of functions that give back the same dataset or you take a part of that data out, work on it and put it straight back. All your state lives in one place, mutable changes are performed at the edges, not internally somewhere in a mass of 'instances'. I think micro services et al try to alleviate this by spreading the OO system's instances into silos but that just moves the problems elsewhere.
I think that "OOP" is an incredibly overloaded term which makes it difficult to speak about intelligibly or usefully at this point. Are we talking about using classes at all? Are we arguing about Monoliths vs [Micro]services? I don't really think about "OOP" very often. I also don't think about microservices. What some people seem to be talking about when they say they use "OOP" seems strange and foreign to me, and I agree we shouldn't do it like that. But what _other_ people mean by "OOP" when they say they don't use it seems entirely reasonable and sane to me.
•
> overloaded I see what you did there
•
"I don't really think about "OOP" very often. I also don't think about microservices." Why even comment in an article about those topics then?
•
Primarily poor wording on my part. I think in terms of language features and patterns which actually mean something. OOP doesn't really mean anything to me, given that it doesn't seem to mean anything consistent in the industry. Of course I work with classes, inheritance, interfaces, overloading, whatever quite frequently. Sometimes, I eschew their usage because the situation doesn't call for it or because I am working in something which also eschews such things. What I don't do is care about "OOP" is a concept in and of itself.
CBP is monitoring US drivers and detaining those with suspicious travel patterns (apnews.com)
•
Canada has been authoritarian for awhile, while trying to claim to be 'nice'. The protestors during Covid got de-banked, fired, and arrested. Democracies with Liberal leaders can quite literally get away with murder.
•
It's germane to point out the War on Drugs™ is a war on the people and has never been about "keeping people safe". I know that a lot of people say that cannabis is ok but hard drugs should not be legal to keep people safe. Look at how well that's worked out, as well as how the people involved with those drugs are treated (users are treated like dangerous criminals rather than with substance abuse issues). This war along with the War on Terror™ give pretense to all of these abuses of power and need to be undone. The problems they profess to address can be addressed in much simpler, cheaper, and humane ways.
•
just saw this [1] today where the police chief was using license plate readers to stalk and harass "multiple victims". This is why you don't collect the information in the first place. I am sure the lawyers are one step ahead, but I think Flock should pay these victims directly (in addition to the PD) for failing to stop the misuse of their technology. https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/braselton-police-chief-arrested-hours-after-announcing-retirement
•
Modern cars log their GPS coordinates about every 60 seconds and maintain weeks of records at minimum. Police regularly obtain search warrants to view weeks of GPS logs from your infotainment system.
Over the past decade we've seen large numbers of Trump and MAGA supporters on HN. Has their life improved because of ICE and CBP crackdowns? Are they happier now that all those undocumented immigrants have had their lives ruined? Are they proud of the destruction of our democratic norms and the attack on our civil liberties? Do they enjoy watching the rights of American citizens being trampled on a daily basis by a wannabe dictator? They've been very vocal and aggressive here in the past, where are they now? Will they continue to spout misinformation, disinformation and whataboutism with unprecedented presidential power grabs, the economy faltering and the Constitution being ignored? I wonder how they feel now that literally every fear that progressives warned about are coming true? Are they willing to accept that they are and always have been completely wrong? Please feel free to reply and show your full throated support for this administration. I'd like to see how many HNers are so stubborn as to ignore reality.
•
Of course we support this, but it hasn't gone far enough yet. Housing costs, crime rates, healthcare costs, insurance rates, and in general political outcomes will be improved by deporting million of illegal aliens. Competition for resources, territory, and political power are zero sum. Why would we support a mass importation of millions of foreigners? Trump ran on "mass deportations". He hasn't really gotten close to that yet, but he's a massive improvement over the previous admin who increased illegal immigration by millions. The interests of foreigners mean nothing in comparison with the interests of the nation and it's own citizens. You live in an ahistorical fantasy world where the entire globe can just coexist in one place without conflict and consequence and citizens and their political leaders should serve these people at the expense of their own. It's insane, and it's not good for the country or Americans.
•
Aren't your healthcare costs going to rapidly increase soon? Also with an approval rating so low, most Americans seem not to agree.
•
I don't support any politicians. Trump may be more blatant about things, but nothing has fundamentally changed. Civil liberty was aspirational at the start of the USA, was once almost real, and then immediately began reversing. A person in the USA has approximately zero of the rights guaranteed in the Bill of the Rights. The average person is relatively free, but the government can change that at will and the target of government power has little recourse.
Iryna Zarutska's life was ruined. When liberals downplay events like these, it pushes people to the other side, even if the other side has issues. It's not hateful to want less crime.
•
Sure, and Charlie Kirk was murdered by a US citizen. It's okay for us to correlate a rising trend in political violence with something other than immigration. It's not as pleasant or vindictive as saying "the nonwhites did it" but it certainly seems to hold true when the political pot boils over. It's rarely the immigrants taking potshots at the president or storming the capitol, but instead deluded ideologues who are naturalized Americans.
This is what the world's most perfect democracy looks like. Peak Freedom.
•
To be fair, we are also free to own guns and defend ourselves against illegal acts. Too bad people just want freedom when its easy, not when its hard
According to Pew Research, more foreigners make up the US population today than ever recorded. People here are allowed to question who is coming.
•
I will always find it weird that people who think the fact their consciousness randomly popped into existence through pure luck in a privileged country means that they deserve it more than someone who popped into existence somewhere else. Even that aside, how does that give them the right to infringe on the rights and privacy of citizens?
•
What even is a foreigner in a place like the USA?
License plate scanners are one of the most under-appreciated violations of personal privacy that exist today. It's not just government use either. There are private companies that scan vast numbers of license plates (sometimes by driving around parking lots with a camera), build a database of what plate was seen where at what time, then sell access to both law enforcement and I believe private investigators. Want to know if your spouse is having an affair? Those databases may well have the answer. Here is a Wired story from 2014 about Vigilant Solutions, founded in 2009: https://www.wired.com/2014/05/license-plate-tracking/ I believe Vigilant only provide access to law enforcement, but Digital Recognition Network sell access to others as well: https://drndata.com/about/ Good Vice story about that: https://www.vice.com/en/article/i-tracked-someone-with-license-plate-readers-drn/
•
[delayed]
•
> It's not just government use either. There are private companies that scan vast numbers of license plates Welcome to capitalism. It is very hard, in EU and US, to tell where the government ends and the private companies begin.
•
Don't new cars just directly record your location as you drive them?
•
They do, but it is relatively easy to nuke the onboard modem to permanently disconnect your car. Unfortunately, most people don't know or don't care that their cars are actively spying on them.
•
Do you think that corporate erosion of (or outright hostility to) privacy is somehow a compelling reason to deny rights to those of us who make different choices in an attempt to protect them? Just because some people decided to buy a smartphone on wheels, do I have to suffer and have my freedom of movement narrowed and protection from arbitrary inspection by government agents denied?
•
One wonders if any given tesla is harvesting the plates the other cars it see in traffic as well.
•
I mean, its possible to subpoena cellphone records and geographically track your movement based on which cell towers you connect to. But regardless, I always find it funny that most of the rhetoric for personal liberties revolves around being able to do illegal things.
•
That is exactly my point: no subpoena or warrant is required for access to license plate scan databases.
Hey look! The tools of oppression that all of you AI sycophants have been helping to perfect!
•
I guarantee someone here worked on this system and is very proud of their work.
•
they're the same ones who vote for big government, and come from blue states. so it's no surprise
"Suddenly, drivers find themselves pulled over — often for reasons cited such as speeding, failure to signal, the wrong window tint or even a dangling air freshener blocking the view. They are then aggressively questioned and searched, with no inkling that the roads they drove put them on law enforcement’s radar." Wow, this is incredibly concerning. So they can pull me over, lie about why and then try to manufacture something ?
•
>Wow, this is incredibly concerning. Well, maybe now you understand that when people were saying Trump is an actual fascist, it wasn't just memes. Its only gonna get worse. At some point, CBP is gonna shoot someone, nothing is gonna happen, and that will be the turning point of when they can just arbitrarily start shooting citizens with no repercussion. If you don't have a plan to GTFO the country by now, you are behind.
It should be illegal for law enforcement not currently participating in a proper sting operation to lie to the person they wish to investigate. But it's not.
•
It is in some jurisdictions. In Illinois and Oregon, laws have been passed that prohibit law enforcement officers from using deception when dealing with suspects under the age of 18. Other states, such as Washington, Connecticut, Delaware, and New York, are considering similar legislation that may extend these prohibitions to all individuals being interrogated. https://www.timesleaderonline.com/uncategorized/2022/11/police-are-allowed-to-legally-lie-to-you-in-some-states/
It's been fascinating watching the party of "small government" turn into one that supports ever expanding powers of a three letter agency whose job is supposed to be patrolling the border. It's like a new 9/11 Patriot act moment, except it's only one side supporting it this time.
•
An interesting fact is that "the border" technically extends 100 miles from any actual border. Guess how many major metros are in that area. https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
•
Meh. I think political parties in the states are really there just to make money. Why else would the dems keep pelting you with adds for $5? I think both parties are saying whatever they need to say to convince people to give them cash. The number of people who care about privacy seems smaller than the number of people who want to be entertained by politicians, so it's unlikely to change anytime soon.
•
To be fair, the current Republican Party bears almost no resemblance to the "classic" Republican Party of....10 years ago. The Newt and the Tea Party started the slide, normalizing hatred and bombast and FU-politics, and MAGA perfected it. Whether you love it, hate it, or are indifferent, what you are dealing with now are not really Republicans. They are MAGA-folks. They should really rename themselves the Solipism Party. Nothing matters but the current state of your own head. And yes, I know parties change and evolve with the times, but I would argue this time is very different.
•
The "old" GOP also loved 3 letter agencies, unitary executive theory, and mass surveillance. They did the Patriot Act. And Scalia hated the 5th Amendment, was weird on the 4th, and dramatically increased police powers.
•
It's not like those Tea Party folk appeared out of the blue. They grew , but the core constituency has been pandered to by mainstream Republican leadership since at least Nixon.
•
> To be fair, the current Republican Party bears almost no resemblance to the "classic" Republican Party of....10 years ago. In other aspects, perhaps. But the "small government" or "pro-economy" branding of the Republican Party has been an absurdity for more like 75 years. Democratic administrations have performed better on virtually any conceivable economic metric with very few minor exceptions.
•
.. 10 years ago. Yes it fucking does, it's just become more brazen. Those are the motherfuckers that passed the patriot act and then reupped it over and over.
•
The current Republican Party is the exact same as 10 years ago, just further along. 10 years ago was basically Trump 1. And 10 years before that was GWB starting the endless wars with an admin outright denying reality. Which Reagan also did. And of course Nixon literally broke into the opposition party’s.
•
We've had a generation of leaders allowing in tens of millions of people to flood into the country, the American people have voted against it every time they are given the chance and still nothing is ever done about it. The right wing voting base doesn't care about small government, we care about stopping the flood and undoing the damage that decades of these policies have caused. Look at polling data, especially among young people, border enforcement and deportations are what we want. Look at the recent actions in Charlotte: ICE raids started and 25% of the school kids didn't show up to school. Which indicates that likely 25% of the population is illegal. It is a massive problem.
•
> except it's only one side supporting it this time. I wish. Very early on in this Trump admin there was a bipartisan bill passed which greatly expanded the capabilities of ICE to deport [1]. Democrats have been well aligned with the republicans when it comes to immigration policy. You'll find few that will actually criticize the actions of ICE/DHS. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laken_Riley_Act
•
156 Democratic congressmen voted no on that bill.
•
46 voted yes. And just a few months prior democrats tried to pass this [1] [2]. Which only failed because Trump didn't want Biden to be able to show a "tough on the border" stance. Again, you'll find few democrats that have a stance on the border that contradicts the Republican stance. There are a few, but most are just staying silent. The only reason they vote against these sorts of bills is because of pure partisanship, not out of some ideology alignment. [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/4361/text?s=3&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22S.+4361%22%7D [2] https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-hold-election-year-showdown-vote-immigration-border/story?id=110469665
•
Well at least post 9/11 unconstitutional escalation required legislation and the creation of agencies like the DHS and TSA. Now, a political culture that is willing to break norms and abuse technicalities is silently expanding powers to the max, and that’s far more insidious. But maybe it’ll result in a strengthened democracy in the long term if new laws or amendments are passed to contain this problem.
•
The logical conclusion of all this oppression is that everyone will just stay home, and go out no more than necessary, and spend no money that isn't absolutely necessary. Is that a win for the oligarchs?
•
If you're interested in some reflection on that, What's the Matter with Kansas? (2004) by Thomas Frank explores some of this, but centered around Kansas. Pretty interesting (and frustrating) stuff.
•
Hard to blame this squarely on the Republicans. Access to private license plate readers was granted under the Biden admin, and no doubt each of the last four administrations played some part. To me, the CPB and ICE are looking more and more like an American Gestapo.
•
> Access to private license plate readers was granted under the Biden admin, Nope. Nice try tho. The "both sides bad" argument used to work, not anymore.
The same party that gave us the Patriot Act? They've not been "small government" since forever.
•
They have been the party of small government when the democrats are in power since forever. When they have power though...
Small government without control of who comes in is borderline anarchy, and they never claimed to be for anarchy. Small government internally requires border controls, and if the border controls failed in the past do you expect them to just shrug? I can see disagreeing with them, easily, I just don’t see obvious hypocrisy like you are suggesting.
•
We're literally discussing a mass surveillance dragnet throughout the country (not just at the border) here; the kind of stuff that is normally reserved for dystopias in fiction. To argue that it is somehow okay because it enables "small government" to exist is very much in the spirit of "war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength". When thugs in uniform stop and interrogate Americans on the roads because their movement patterns are "suspicious", there's nothing small about it.
•
Its been proven many times over that the majority of "illegal" immigrants, whether they come US and either overstay their allowance, or manage to skirt by on refugee status, are all predominately doing it for financial reasons, willing to work jobs for lower pay that Americans will never do, which is a huge benefit for economy. This idea that border control somehow failed is a lie sold to you by republicans. Also Trump killed the CBP funding bill in early 2024 that would have addressed a lot of issues.
Pretty sure Republicans always supported defending the border from drug trafficking and illegal immigration.
•
Ah yes, illegal immigration is like the new "terrorism"... everything must be done to stop it which includes giving CBP and ICE unchecked power.
•
why not legally migrate, millions have done it in the past.
•
In reality, CBP and ICE have very little power.
•
ICE has very little legal authority and is yet the current president’s ground troops to lock up everyone who looks foreign. I’d say they have all the power they need.
Gary, Indiana does not have a border with a foreign country so why do CBP need to monitor drivers there?
•
Airplanes exist
It’s a logistics chokepoint for drugs coming across the southwest border into the Chicago area.
•
> It’s a logistics chokepoint for drugs coming across the southwest border into the Chicago area The ? You mean to say you're supporting a checkpoint in Indiana to catch drugs that came from Mexico? Fix the checkpoint in Texas then if it's leaking drugs to Indiana ...
•
It's not a checkpoint, it's surveillance. Presumably CBP is not stupid and that surveillance is providing value they can not otherwise get only in Texas.
•
They've been at these programs for decades; if they were effective we wouldn't be in a drug epidemic At some point you have to cut your losses and accept that the only benefits were the politicians Flock donated to. I'm not saying you have to abolish CBP. I'm saying they should be protecting the border and this ain't it.
This notion of 'opening the border' is a political myth conservatives have been using to justify their increasingly extreme positions for years, much like their inflammatory use of the word 'invasion'.
•
The border was de facto open since there was no serious enforcement. Because there was no space to detain millions of people, the majority were processed and then simply let go into the U.S. with a "Notice to Appear" set for 2030. Basically a free pass to stay for years. On top of that, they had parole loopholes (like the CBP One app and CHNV) to legally admit millions more people.
"essentially opening the border and failing to enforce the law" this did not happen is the issue with your statement
•
It wasn't 100% open, but it was open enough to let in several millions of people who should not have been allowed in.
Agreed. I think it's important to remember the lack of real "mass deportations now" when you see two things: 1) low Trump approval rating. Likely due to lack of following through on these promises (rather than disapproval of the promises themselves) 2) protests against deportations. Why do dems simultaneously crow about their superior deportation numbers while condemning current efforts as heavy handed and cruel?
•
> Likely due to lack of following through on these promises (rather than disapproval of the promises themselves) No. Most of it has to do with the fact that masked, unidentified ICE agents are abducting and disappearing people with no due process. American citizens are being taken away. People who are here legally are being abducted and sent to countries they aren't from. Of the deportations, Trump said they would be targeted toward violent criminals. Over 90% of those who have been rounded up have no criminal history. Masked men with weapons who refuse to identify themselves are shooting people and lying about it, directly refuted by video others took of the event. This isn't some case where "Americans are upset Trump isn't doing what he said!". This is a case where Americans are finally seeing the reality of what he is doing and are sickened by it.
It's the untrained masked men with guns dragging people away because the computer said to, that's the new heavy-handed method that America has not seen before except in WW2 Germany and the Soviet Union.
•
Everything about this is stupid and wrong or irrelevant >It's the untrained You made this up >masked men oh no masks! >with guns dragging people away so just normal law enforcement arresting people >because the computer said to you made this up >except in WW2 Germany and the Soviet Union Oh no everyone its WWII Germany oh no I mean it's my political opponents governing
Very similar feeling to watching the liberal/progressive party fangirl the FBI and the intel community edit: in reality the times have changed and so has the country and the parties. All of these pre-2008 stereotypes are stupid and not useful anymore.
•
Yeah the emerging 'The Bullwark' wing of the democrat party. Never trumper republicans trying as hard as they can to move the right flank of the democrat party into the bush era republican gradient so that they can pretend that they didn't lose their own party.
The problem is that the "both sides are bad" people just uniformly vote Republican. Its the cope of understanding that your side is batshit insane, so you have to pretend that the current state of affairs doesn't actually matter, and the problem goes deeper in the goal of normalizing your party. The truth is, the only reason not to trust the intel community is because of some fringe bullshit you heard on Joe Rogan.
•
I've been voting third party for a long time. When both sides are bad (in different ways) it is the only choice left. (The third party isn't all that great either, but they are better and hopefully they send a message that people care)
•
Bad reading comprehension. This isn't a "both sides are bad" thing. Both sides are different than they were from 1980 - 2008.
•
This is your cope to justify your side's righteousness. Many people recognize how awful both parties are and do not vote republican. Every socialist/leftist/communist falls into this category. Wait, are you saying mass surveillance is a good thing?
We have a lower case conservative, pro-status-quo party. The Democrats. Even now all they can talk about is returning to normal (where normal describes the conditions that led to the current state).
•
They talk about increasing minimum salaries for exempt workers, paid sick and family leave, infrastructure funding, expanding access to healthcare, etc. How is that lower case conservative, or pro status quo?
•
And then there is all the woke stuff, that is unfortunately what the Democrats have been associated with lately.
•
If implemented with a modicum of competence (which is admittedly not a foregone conclusion) and over a sufficiently long period (probably at least longer than one or two 4-year terms), all of those things would almost certainly have positive effects on the economy.
•
Infrastructure funding is a pro-business position. At this point, most of the infrastructure that the Democrats are seeking funding for is maintenance, the definition of "status quo". So is minimum wage, despite all of the screaming. Minimum wages ensure the existence of a working class. When the minimum wage drops below subsistence, there are civil disruptions that are bas for business. When the Democrats expanded health care, they did so using a plan devised by the Heritage Foundation. It works on free-market principles, of consumers purchasing insurance from private enterprise. It is also very pro-business, creating a larger class of potential employees who can be hired without employer-sponsored benefits. Many democrats would indeed like a government-run universal health care plan. But it's not a majority of the party, which is indeed (as the OP said) dominated by the center-right.
•
None of that is conservative or liberal or leftist its common sense that both parties should be able to agree on. There are policies that are logically the right thing to do.
•
You'll notice that, except for paid sick leave, all these things are simply "keep the lights on" policies. That is conservatism. You might be confusing conservatism with libertarianism. Up until about Reagan, all these policies were considered conservative. Progressive policies aren't just about tweaking existing policy, it's about building new social structures. We've not seen anything really close to that in the US since roughly LBJ.
•
They notably do not talk about modifying the systems of governance that have prevented us from accomplishing those goals, which they have been "talking about" nearly the entire 40 years I've been alive. If I were to ignore their talk and judge purely based on action, it certainly seems like Democrats effect less change than Republicans. (to be clear about where I stand, when given a choice between a conservative party and a regressive party, I have always begrudgingly chosen the conservatives)
•
They directly increased access to healthcare and infrastructure funding in the last 15 years, and both were very obvious, big bills. Perhaps it would behoove you to actually pay attention, instead of memeing online about things you don't actually know anything about?
•
Those are pretty standard policies of center-right / conservative parties in Europe. (Plus the fact that Dems talk about some of these doesn't mean they think they're going to happen .)
•
That's definitely left wing in the United States.
•
There's a big difference between "actually left wing" and "leftwards of 50% of a particular population". The US has very little actual big-L Left (ahem) left in it.
•
Can you name an example?
•
Sure; the UK's Tories.
•
Seems irrelevant to a discussion comparing US parties. >Plus the fact that Dems talk about some of these doesn't mean they think they're going to happen They literally got ACA passed by a hair, and were just shy of 2 Senate votes needed to enact all those policies I discussed in Biden's original BBB.
•
We're talking about a need for a party that no longer exists in the US. Why would we not look to similar examples out there in actual practice?
that party would be a pressure-valve mechanism and I would rather prefer the boiler to explode and to start anew.
•
>I would rather prefer the boiler to explode Just to be clear, you really would prefer to live in crumbling infrastructure, with plenty of violence, martial law, and constant worry of whether you are going to get shot or not trying to get basic supplies? Because boiler exploding isn't romantic or cool like you think it is. Imagine the worst possible riot, except country wide.
People fantasize about revolution, but the reality would mostly be huge amounts of suffering and death. And there's near-zero chance that the outcome would be the 'high-tech fully-automated luxury communism' that people dream of. There's many much-more-likely outcome that are worse than what exists now.
•
> the reality would mostly be huge amounts of suffering and death. I think many of the people fantasizing about revolution are aware.
None of this is new. The article states that CBP got authorization to track license plates in 2017 and concerns about law enforcement use of ALPR date back to at least 2010. The ACLU sued the LAPD in 2013 on ALPR.
•
The part that's new is people being detained for "suspicious" traffic patterns.
Sure, but the OP was specifically referring to party politics and this is a bipartisan issue.
•
> this is a bipartisan issue Where the instance upthread and your instance both occurred under the same president? lol
65% of the US population, 200 million Americans, live within the 100-Mile "Constitution-Free Zone". Supreme Court has established that some established constitutional provisions do not apply at the U.S. border, and protections against governmental privacy incursions are significantly reduced. The border search exception applies within 100 miles (160 km) of the border of the United States, including borders with Mexico and Canada but also coastlines.
•
Border Patrol is doing an operation in Charlotte, NC right now. That is well over 100 miles from any border or coast. So 100 miles itself is fiction, they can just do whatever they want. Who’s gonna stop them?
•
International airports count.
I had an acquaintance who was a county constable. He once told me, "Let me watch you drive down the road, any road, for 30 seconds and I will be able to find a valid reason to pull you over." He implied that some part of their training was focused on exactly that. One data point, and a highly regional one at that, I know.
•
Any given american citizen is certainly breaking, at minimum, dozens of laws even while asleep in their own bed. If they want to pick you up and they are diligent enough they certainly can. They might be laughed out of court, but they also might not be.
•
Law enforcement has enormous discretion for probable cause and can give straight up contradictory reasons for different cases, it is what officers are taught to do (i.e. something like driving too fast, driving too slow, driving too rigidly at the speed limit). This allows individual bias to overwhelm any attempt at equal enforcement. It's pretty well documented in both The New Jim Crow and Usual Cruelty, the Supreme Court has made it difficult to gather data in the last couple decades.
It's borderline impossible to drive from one location to another and not break a law. Some argue that this is by design.
•
How? I've never been arrested in my life because I follow laws, so I'm unfamiliar how you can just accidentally break a law. Is this an American thing?
"Sometimes" "Tend to" Do you have any citeable evidence of this being an actual thing, or is it just vibes?
•
Almost every small business carries insurance.
LP are compelled search of your papers by police without RAS nor PC.
•
A license plate seems as much of a "paper" as the house numbers on my mailbox.
We already know they're doing it with phones too, laws don't apply to them.
•
Nonsense, I have it on good authority that Privacy Is A Human Right or somesuch.
Drive a rental car with California plates through Arizona on eastward and you're likely to find this out first hand. They'll of course pretend that they just saw you commit a minor infraction and that's why you were pulled over.
•
This makes me want to do this just to jam up the system
Drove a new Hyundai with dealer plates from AZ to Minnesota and got pulled over by Bethany, MO city police on I-35 in northern MO with no probable cause other than window tint being too dark. They tore the car apart certain that I was muling drugs (removed seats, body panels, etc). Took 6 hours. Never found anything and left me with "we know you have committed a crime, we just cannot find it, but you will get caught". I had to put the car back together myself in the dark. Retired age men driving dealer plate cars eastbound onto I-80 in Nebraska out of Colorado from I-76 get stopped ALL THE TIME as potential drug mules.
•
The more this flyover-state mentality policing continues (obvious civil asset forfeiture fishing - dealers might be carrying cash from a previous sale, etc), the less people are going to drive through them, further depriving these states of a revenue source. Of course, this mentality could be voted out by the residents of these states, but I'm not optimistic.
•
This happened to me, in East Germany. I'm sorry it happens now in the Land of the Free.
•
Free? What a funny joke...
Yes that is what I am saying. Most cops carry a multi tool at the minimum (with Phillips screwdriver). They also had a standard 10mm socket (carried by MANY cops and all that is required to dismantle much of any Hyundai). Using their multi tool, they removed the fender liners (wheel well liners) from all 4 wheels, the trunk side trim (luggage compartment side trim) from both sides - all of which just has plastic push-pin scrivets (retainer clips). They broke 5 of them. They folded down my back seats (after removing all my personal items out to the shoulder in the rain), then unbolted and removed the back seat. I do a LOT of interstate driving, and it is not at all uncommon to see this happen. This is not the only time I have been in situations where authority has been exceeded. My attitude is to generally be cooperative (without giving consent) as my experience has taught me that is the most painless way to go.
•
Just adding some perspective from someone who has been inside the trunk of a lot of cop cars over the years[1]: A good many cops (maybe not >50%, but a very significant percentage) carry a pretty decent ad-hoc toolkit in their vehicles. There's often a toolbox with screwdrivers, socketry, pliers, some wrenches, maybe a hammer and/or other basic handtools. It's pretty common for folks who know how to use tools to keep some on-hand, and cops are not an exception. [1]: Yeah, so... I should probably explain that part. Some of my work involves 2-way radios, and some of that 2-way radio business has lead to me putting radios and stuff into things like cop cars. I've emptied out hundreds of cop cars to get access to what I need, and have certainly climbed into the trunk of dozens of them to be where I need to be. (Someone has to do it, and sometimes that person is me.)
•
Driving on I-70 or I-80/81 through Ohio definitely gets you noticed. There's a lot of meth in Ohio...
Did you ever ask for a supervisor/sergeant to be called? If they are in on it to then you're no worse off, but if they can come out and rein in an out of control patrol then so much the better.
•
One of them WAS a sergeant. My hope was that a State Trooper would stop and reign things in a bit. Just lots of semis thundering by. Otherwise, it can get pretty quiet on rural interstates at night.
If it’s so good that it sees everything, and they just haven’t seen anything of interest enough to stop you yet isn’t that scary?
•
what
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Show HN: A game where you invest into startups from history (startupgambit.com)
•
I need to be able to type faster, just got done chatting with Mark and I completely missed the opportunity to invest in Quibi.
•
nice game - but you need a UX designer. Almost abandoned it since I thought it was broken... I just didnt know what I was waiting for or didnt know where to click.
•
Damn. Now I understand VC's a little better. Some deals I saw "damn the traction is off the chart" and I didn't even care to ask any question I just threw money at them. I saw one startup named Salesforce, a CRM. I guess hindsight is 20/20 on that one lol. Didn't even read the pitch. This game is awesome
•
This is pretty fun!
•
very cool game! needs some juice. https://garden.bradwoods.io/notes/design/juice also, add a leaderboard
•
This is a genuinely great use of LLMs/related technology. Dynamic characters you can have conversations with to make game choices more informed is a really cool idea, actually feels original and clever. I really enjoyed playing it.
Fun game! My investing strategy is to flush out quickly who's the team, what's the traction, what's unique insight into the market. Bullshitters have trash or no answers. Killer companies have one of those 3 that is usually very compelling.
•
i've asked who's the team 3 times and always got "can't disclose." i figured this was a limitation of the game. do some answer?
Data-at-Rest Encryption in DuckDB (duckdb.org)
•
AES-GCM sensitivity to nonce reuse is a tricky implementation detail. Here they acknowledge it but then don’t share their solution - and in fact the header contains 16 bytes for the nonce instead of the expected 12 bytes and they do not share what bytes are random. Did I miss something, anyone know?
•
"Sqlite [...] encryption extension is a $2000 add-on". SqliteMultipleCiphers has been around for ages and is free https://utelle.github.io/SQLite3MultipleCiphers/ And Turso Database supports encryption out of the box: https://docs.turso.tech/tursodb/encryption
Other than motherduck, is anyone aware of any good models for running multi-user cloud-based duckdb? ie. Running it like a normal database, and getting to take advantage of all of its goodies
•
https://github.com/gizmodata/gizmosql
•
For pure duckdb, you can put an Arrow Flight server in front of duckdb[0] or use the httpserver extension[1]. Where you store the .duckdb file will make a big difference in performance (e.g. S3 vs. Elastic File System). But I'd take a good look at ducklake as a better multiplayer option. If you store `.parquet` files in blob storage, it will be slower than `.duckdb` on EFS, but if you have largish data, EFS gets expensive. We[2] use DuckLake in our product and we've found a few ways to mitigate the performance hit. For example, we write all data into ducklake in blog storage, then create analytics tables and store them on faster storage (e.g. GCP Filestore). You can have multiple storage methods in the same DuckLake catalog, so this works nicely. 0 - https://www.definite.app/blog/duck-takes-flight 1 - https://github.com/Query-farm/httpserver 2 - https://www.definite.app/
Why not just LUKS ? Kernel level, leverages acceleration, transparent to anything you run on top of it. DB encryption is useful if you have multiple things that need separate ACL and encryption keys but if it is one app one DB there is no need for it
•
From the article: > This allows for some interesting new deployment models for DuckDB, for example, we could now put an encrypted DuckDB database file on a Content Delivery Network (CDN). A fleet of DuckDB instances could attach to this file read-only using the decryption key. This elegantly allows efficient distribution of private background data in a similar way like encrypted Parquet files, but of course with many more features like multi-table storage. When using DuckDB with encrypted storage, we can also simplify threat modeling when – for example – using DuckDB on cloud providers. While in the past access to DuckDB storage would have been enough to leak data, we can now relax paranoia regarding storage a little, especially since temporary files and WAL are also encrypted.
•
I believe it's also to protect against the occasionally "lost" DB file.
Mozilla Says It's Finally Done with Two-Faced Onerep (krebsonsecurity.com)
•
> Onerep’s founder had created dozens of people-search services How in the world was this not considered fraud, or in the very least - breach of contract?
It's perfectly legal under US law to donate to a for-profit corporation. The donor just can't take a tax deduction for it.
•
Right. It is legal. But in the tax code it's called a "gift", rather than a "donation".
>Good. I really wish Mozilla would rely less on these shady backroom deals and open up to direct user funding. The Mozilla Foundation accepts donations, but they don't go toward funding Firefox; instead, they fund advocacy campaigns. Yes, charitable donations go to charitable causes, not development of a browser which produces profits for a for-profit entity. There's no legal way to channel charitable donations back into a business. To do otherwise would be tax fraud. This is not a "gotcha", this is a persistent misunderstanding of what is and is not possible in tax law.
•
sell $50 keychains. done.
•
The corporation already sells user-facing products: Mozilla VPN, MDN Plus, Firefox Relay, Pocket (previously). Feel free to subscribe to them to give money directly to the Mozilla Corporation, it's already possible.
There are however two options available: * Make the browser development the charitable work, or * accept funding to non-charitable company However Mozilla earns "enough" from Google, so they don't have to try to make either work.
•
> Make the browser development the charitable work They probably cannot do this. The IRS generally does not consider writing open source software to meet the requirements of a 501c3, for example [1]. They aren't super consistent about it so some groups have gotten 501c3 exemption in the past, but for the most part there is a reason that 501c3 open source foundations focus on support activities, conferences, and not software development. > accept funding to non-charitable company They could do this, just like they did for Thunderbird, and I wish they would. [1] https://www.mill.law/blog/more-501c3-rejections-open-source-software-edition
•
Then they wouldn't be able to pay their CEO $7 million a year...
Show HN: Supabase-Test – Fast Isolated Postgres DBs for Testing Supabase RLS (npmjs.com)
•
Love this
•
Super cool!!! Congrats
•
thank you! much appreciated ;) hope it helps you guys ship secure supabase projects!
RFK Jr.'s loathesome edits: CDC website now falsely links vaccines and autism (arstechnica.com)
Doesn’t the new CDC site say something like “the autism connection has not yet been ruled out”? Why is everyone so intensely upset about this? What’s so bad about further investigation and science being done? The opposition to science here is so odd. Imagine if any other topic were treated like this. “Nah no need to investigate any more, enough people have said they’re satisfied.” Such a person would rightly be scoffed at.
•
Because they aren't doing science. Science involves keeping an open mind to try to figure out what the evidence is telling you. The telltale signs that they aren't doing science are especially evident when you listen to the kinds of things they present as evidence. A propagandist says: autism surged so we must fix our society. A scientist says "did autism increase, or just how often autism is diagnosed?" I don't have to study a lot of data to see that they're purposefully not asking themselves that question. Instead they seem to hope their listener is not aware that medical criteria in diagnosing autism loosened vastly over the period of time. By ignoring the big change in the word, they can instead sell you the idea of a big change in the world. Again it happens with Tylenol. There's a question of cause and effect. They see this number that says that there's correlation between Tylenol use and autism. But Tylenol use also correlates very highly to being in awful pain, so it turns out that being in awful pain "causes" Autism to the exact same degree that Tylenol does. But RFK isn't interested in this distinction, immediately pointed out by anyone whose goal is actually to determine what the evidence we see might be telling us about reality.
•
> “Nah no need to investigate any more, enough people have said they’re satisfied.” Such a person would rightly be scoffed at. The thing is, you need a new angle for an investigation to be justified. There have been thousands on studies on vaccines and their long term side-effects. You can't be saying "what if they cause autism" at this point and expect people to drop everything and take you serious. You need to be showing some evidence first because all the low hanging and even high hanging fruit has been picked. It's like if you were going "wheels don't roll". Sure, maybe they don't and reality spins around them. But there's a gazillion studies about tire composition and their effectiveness so if you want somebody to take you seriously you need to show some work first.
What gets lost in this debate, which to me seems settled in favor of the actual science done over the last several decades, is how insulting and dehumanizing it is to use autism spectrum disorder as the boogeyman for vaccines, to the point people are passing on treatment for completely preventable, horrible diseases on the belief there is a small chance their kid could come out gasp "autistic." Up to 70% of people on the autism spectrum are considered high functioning, requiring minimal to moderate support. That's the other insulting thing about it - the fact that the worst autistic outcomes (nonverbal, low IQ, etc.) are used to represent the whole of the population. The whole thing is gross. Say somehow you could eliminate autism spectrum disorder - there goes half your IT staff.
•
I don't agree with all of her book's arguments and associations but Naomi Klein has a compelling explanation for how this happened in her book Doppleganger.
[dead]
•
I literally did not say this. Go back and read it.
•
>Say somehow you could eliminate autism spectrum disorder - there goes half your IT staff. If they didn’t have autism, they wouldn’t be in IT
I think the issue is that autism is not necessarily a disorder. I'm mildly autistic and I like the way I am. Really. I don't consider it a disability at all; it's got pros and cons, but for every thing that I'm worse at than a "normal" person, I feel there's something else equally valuable I'm better at, so it balances out as a slight positive for me and a big positive for humanity because, as the OP alluded to, diversity enables specialisation. The issue is of course some people genuinely experience autism as a disability, and the more severe it is, the more likely that is to be the case. But you can make a solid argument that autism is not necessarily disability: like height, gigantism is unhealthy, but being tall can be adaptive!
•
To be clear, me too. I wouldn’t change how I am at all even if it sometimes causes challenges. There is a movement in neurodivergence trying to define autism as a different human experience, rather than in the framing of a disability, but this is still controversial within autism advocate circles.
Does there become a point where reporting on this kind of stuff is just feeding the trolls? Ars is both giving them the reaction they want and platforming their nonsense. The government put up a poster that says vaccines bad very autism and maybe the right response is to just ignore it. This admin seems to be fueled by outrage and very loud showy public displays of basically nothing when you get down to it. Cool story RFK, anyway moving on.
•
Consider how strange this would be for a non American to watch this change go through and no one to bat at eye. This shit is crazy and it needs to be said.
NTSB Preliminary Report – UPS Boeing MD-11F Crash [pdf] (ntsb.gov)
•
Link to page that links to the report, as of now: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA26MA024.aspx
I found a link to the PDF that seems to work https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/201958/pdf Also in case that link stops working I got it from this page https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA26MA024.aspx EDIT: nevermind immediately after posting this comment it is now giving a 403 error
•
Your first link is working fine
•
Yeah working again for me too, they're probably having some sort of server problems
Grounding all MD-11s and DC-10s is a major move. I guess it makes sense as a big factor was the fatigue cracks on the pylon (lugs), despite the pylon not being behind on inspections. I am wondering what the inspections of pylons in other planes will yield, likely that will determine whether the grounding will continue. But beyond figuring out why the engine mount failed, I am very interested in what caused the actual crash. "Just" losing thrust in a single engine is usually not enough to cause a crash, the remaining engine(s) have enough margin to get the plane airborne. Of course this was a major structural failure and might have caused additional damage. EDIT: It seems there was damage to the engine in the tail, even though this was not specified in the preliminary report, likely because it has not been sufficiently confirmed yet.
•
It wasn't just one engine off, aside from possibly damaging tail engine you also have damage to the wings and control surfaces that might've just not got enough lift because of that.
Airlines operate to a much stricter standard than one in a million. If one in a million flights ended in a fatal crash, the US alone would see about 3 airline passenger deaths per day on average. The actual average over the past 10 years is under 0.02 deaths per day. It's true that you can never get to zero. There's always a chance of some catastrophic failure. The lesson of modern airline safety is that you can get extremely close to zero by carefully analyzing and learning from the failures, which is exactly why these thorough investigations are done. The lesson from UA232 was to make sure one failure can't take out all of the hydraulic systems. In this specific instance, "the engine fell off and took out another engine, leaving the aircraft with insufficient power to climb" is definitely not in the realm of "probabilities will get you eventually." It's very much in the realm of a mechanical failure that should not happen, combined with a bad design flaw that turns that failure from a mere emergency into pretty much guaranteed death. Cargo is held to a lower standard than passenger service, but I suspect this will still spell the end of the DC-10 and MD-11, at least in the US. Engines will fail, and for an aircraft of this size, that needs to be survivable in all phases of flight just for the safety of people on the ground.
•
> Airlines operate to a much stricter standard than one in a million. If one in a million flights ended in a fatal crash, the US alone would see about 3 airline passenger deaths per day on average. I think you conflated flights (several 10Ks per day) with passengers (several million per day). One in a million flights is one accident every few decades. > at least in the US. Engines will fail As per the report, this appears to be a structural failure, not an engine failure.
surprised to see typos in aviation terms and acronyms: ADS-8 (page 3) and 747-BF (page 5)
•
Reminds me of xerox scanner fun, maybe someone scanned it to pdf to publicise? Nontheless the pdfs have been replaced and the newer ones don't seem contain these errors anymore.
•
With many eyes, all typos are embarrassing. The new document is an image.
it would seem so. so the question is why they would maintain an air gap for a safety report
•
It's a good policy. Document formats like to include lots of random junk, better to be safe.
I was under the impression that a plane could deal with an engine failure at any point in flight - including during takeoff. Dropping an engine entirely is a similar situation to a failure - with the benefit that you now have a substantially lighter if imbalanced aircraft. Should this plane have been able to fly by design even with an engine fallen off?
•
This engine didn’t just fail, it failed catastrophically and took out another engine with it.
The video of the aircraft crossing the road wings level (well after #1 separated) and maintaining relatively controlled flight until too much energy bled off suggests to me the aircraft was likely to be controllable to a landing if sufficient thrust was available.
•
..for a moment. If there was sufficient hydraulics damage it might've stopped being controllable. And even if they worked the fire might've damaged the plane enough. For example https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/N1819U when they lost tail engine, all of the hydraulics went down
> The referenced AA Flight 191 is shockingly similar. It makes me wonder if aviation really is back sliding into a dangerous place. I think it's cut throat capitalism at its best. Surely it was much too safe before, let's see how far back we can scale maintenance on the operations front but also how far back can you scale cost during development and production and then see where it takes us. If that changes the risk for population from 0.005 to 0.010, the shareholders won't care and it's great for profits. I think we can see both but especially the latter with Boeing.
•
The entire MD-11 project was a budget-limited rush-job to try to capture some market share before the A340 and 777 came into service. It produced an aircraft that failed to meet its performance targets, was a brute to fly and was obsolete the moment its rivals flew. Douglas* by the early 1990s was a basket-case of warmed-over 1960s designs without the managerial courage to launch the clean-sheet project they needed to survive. * as a division of MDC
Aside from the engine detaching, it doesn't appear that this incident is in any way similar to the previous incident.
•
How do you figure? They're very similar planes. The left engine and its pylon detached in both cases during takeoff rotation. Both incident reports stated that proper maintenance would have prevented the detachment. The way the situation played out is different but the failure mode seems to be very similar if not the same.
"Your IP address 104.28.103.15 has been used for unauthorized accesses and is therefore blocked! Your IP address belongs to Cloudflare and is being used by many users, some of which are hackers and hide behind the cloud/proxy to avoid being tracked down. Hence the automatic defense closed access from that IP address. "Make sure to not use a proxy/cloud service for visiting AVH (e.g. Apple Users turn off your private relay) but your native IP address, then access should be possible without a problem again." No thank you, AV Herald.
•
That's a pretty nice message. Most sites that filter VPNs and proxies just kill the connection, give a generic error, or subject you to endless captchas.
•
I block all traffic from Cloudflare outright on my servers. Every so often they sneak in new blocks of IP addresses though so you're playing whack-a-mole with a particularly scummy opponent.
The Lions Operating System (lionsos.org)
•
> To be successful, many more components are needed. What is the purpose of this OS ? Can it mint Bitcoin ? Can it do fluid dynamics simulation ? Can it act as an interface to a database ? Can it host a database ? Is it interactive ? What kind of interface it presents to the user ?
•
That’s a rather luridly practical view that’s entirely out of sync with academia and basic research that provides tangible benefits much further down the line.
Very cool! I’m a huge fan of Genode, another OS that runs on SeL4. Does anyone here know how they compare?
•
Genode is a framework that can run on many places and on higher level has its own abstractions. Lion OS is based on Microkit the framework developed by the seL4 people that will also be verified. So Lion OS/Microkit is basically the outgrowth of the original seL4 research.
•
Unequal
Presumably named after Associate Professor John Lions[0], of A Commentary on the UNIX Operating System [1] fame. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lions [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Commentary_on_the_UNIX_Operating_System
•
The mascot it super cute lion too. How can a project do everything so right? I was browsing some popular python libraries and they just slapped on the first image they got out of ChatGPT. It's nice to see care in the craft.
Microsoft makes Zork open-source (opensource.microsoft.com)
•
Can ZILF just compile this? https://zilf.io/
•
Waiting impatiently for World of Warcraft to be Open Sourced.
•
The thing I want is probably very stupid - I'd like Zork I through III ported to Inform 6... I don't specifically know why that appeals to me. I guess it's because I'd like to tinker with it and understand it better. And if I were going to write Zork I from scratch today, I'd want to use the most modern tools available. [checks notes] Okay, but not Inform 7. I have an aversion to Inform 7. I want my code to look more like code, and less like an LLM prompt.
If I'm reading this right, the source code has been available for all the Infocom games in https://github.com/historicalsource for at least six years, but what's changed today is the license?
•
https://github.com/historicalsource/zork1/pull/3
When I was 14 or so, in the early 1980s, a friend and I who had been playing Zork thought it would be fun to design a game ourselves. We actually wrote to Infocom with a proposal that we write a new game for them and they let us use ZIL and the Z-machine to implement it. Surprisingly, they actually wrote back to us and politely declined our offer. In hindsight, while we knew how to program in BASIC and assembly language on our Apple IIs, we would have been lost making a game with ZIL. That’s to say that Infocom made the right call. Still, it said something about the company that they treated a couple kids with respect and didn’t laugh in our faces. I wish I still had the letter.
•
In the 1980s, I was interested in text adventure games, and had a kind of book/magazine on the topic of how to write them. In BASIC, obviously (groan) because that's what was easily accessible back then. I remember figuring out the mechanisms that the book introduced: what kind of rudimentary data structures to use to represent the state of the world, the locations of objects, etc. I got some simple stuff to work, you could navigate the world, pick up and drop objects, etc. but then my motivation gradually ran out because I didn't have a clearly defined design for the game I was going to build. I had a few pirated games (C64, Amiga): "Death in the Caribbean", "The Pawn", etc but never had the motivation to stick with them past the first or second puzzle. The puzzles seemed like if the answer didn't arrive via a flash of divine inspiration, there was no way to figure it out based on logical reasoning. Maybe that part of my brain wasn't developed back then.
My goodness, I could have written this word-for-word. Similar age, same Apple II BASIC and 6502 upbringing (roll sleeves and call -151 ) and also wrote to Infocom. We were in the UK so even more surprised to get a reply similar to yours several weeks later. Sadly my letter is also lost to various house moves. Or eaten by a grue.
•
Me too, except my letter was to Sierra On-Line and my experience was on TRS-80 6809. Really classy reply asking me to write back when I finished school.
bummer > The code relies on old internal Infocom toolchains (ZILCH compiler, WATFOR, > mainframe environment) that are not open and likely not preserved.
•
There's this: https://www.ifwiki.org/ZILF https://zilf.io/ Although I haven't played with it and can't tell you whether it can compile the open source Zork.
Yup, they will care when a huge % of people start doing it.
•
Not really, no. No-one buys Windows. No-one buys Office. It's a thing that comes bundled with a computer, or that you "acquire" if you need it. It's only interesting if Barclays are pirating Windows on a massive scale. Oh shit did I say the name out loud?
•
Do companies really not buy licenses?
•
Reputable ones do.
This is about the fourth article I've read that mentions Lisp today on here. Okay, I get it. Lisp is great. Where should I start? It wasn't like I was planning on doing anything else at work next week...
•
I suggest: A Gentle Introduction to Symbolic Computation https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/LispBook/book.pdf
You're kind of in luck. For a while, it was trendy (because MIT was doing it) to teach Intro to Programming with Lisps, especially Scheme. Because of this, there are quite a few "learn programming with Lisp" books and resources. The famous "SICP" book was the textbook for the MIT course and all of the examples were Lisp (there's a newer version that uses JavaScript, I think). There are loads of fine online books and guides. Here's a random online book: https://gigamonkeys.com/book/ In no time you'll be putting up "my other car is a cdr" bumper stickers!
•
> In no time you'll be putting up "my other car is a cdr" bumper stickers! Yeah but then learning Lisp is going to get in the way of welding up new bumper brackets, and the bumper will still be lying in the pile of things beside the shed waiting to be reattached... ;-)
And Sierra. It would be amazing if MS released the source code to some of Sierra classic Hi-Res/AGI/SCI games, or the engines themselves. IIRC, Al Lowe had retained copies of source code from the early Sierra days, and was planning to release some of it publicly a few years ago, but Activision shut him down. Maybe MS would be willing to reconsider that now that they're pursuing historical preservation.
•
Space Quest IV!!!
You're one of today's lucky 10,000. It was huge news at the time. The FTC considered not allowing it and the acquisition got delayed for months while back and forth public debate raged.
•
Massive media/telecom/tech companies get passed around between other massive media/telecom/tech companies so much that regardless of how much you saw the news at the time, a couple of years later it's tough to remember "Now who is it that owns Warner Bros. currently? AOL? AT&T? Netflix? The sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia?"
Android and iPhone users can now share files, starting with the Pixel 10 (blog.google)
•
This sounds great but I can’t even get Airdrop to work reliably between my Apple devices, let alone Android.
>> this was prompted by the EU Digital Markets Act > But muh straws and bottle caps. EU – cracking Apple’s ass one finger at a time. The only ray of sanity left in the world.
•
Apple is going to leave the EU market anytime now, and US is even a bigger market, they didn't leave EU and will for sure not leave US, they could be a positive force for the world instead of just saying "noooo but the rich will leave uuuus"
•
Apple will never leave the EU market, that would be a stupid decision. EU is barely smaller than the US market if looking at GDP per capita, it's only a difference of ~$16,000. If looking at population, EU is larger than the US. Hopefully they keep cracking open the walls of Apple's garden and Apple stops region locking the changes to just those markets.
Is replying not enough? I always feel like react is a lazy way to avoid replying
•
reactions are richer than a word
How long until Apple disables it outside of the EU?
•
They won't, they'll just do another Green-Bubble/Blue-Bubble shenanigan to signal when Apple royalty is transferring a file with an unwashed Android peasant with a gimped experience.
You realize that doesn’t say what you think it says in your own quote of the citation ? Apple has to allow alternate solutions on the iPhone - not that they have to allow AirDrop interoperability.
•
Feel free to click on a PDF directly below that quote, I don't have to serve you everything on a silver platter. I promise you you will find what you're looking for right there.
Whatsapp doesn't insist anything. You just send the photos as files
•
You can indeed! For some reason, I'm having trouble teaching various relatives how to do that
> We used to be able to send files over Bluetooth before the iPhone came out. Cross platforms, really? So for example between a Blackberry and a Windows CE phone?
•
Not just phones, the Mac as well. So it’s not like Apple doesn’t know about this feature of Bluetooth. They just chose not to do it on the iPhone.
While I bet there’s some technicality I’ll get gotcha’d on, iOS apps do the exact same nowadays.
•
iOS apps didn't , for the majority of the iPhone's lifespan. I explained this "technicality" upthread: > There was almost a whole decade there where Apple pretended that the feature just didn't need to exist.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Okta's NextJS-0auth troubles (joshua.hu)
FWIW, the employee reply (who the author is putting on blast) seems like it was written by a human, not an AI. "You're absolutely right!" is the Claude cliche (not a ChatGPT one) - "You are absolutely correct." is not that.
•
Directly from the okta employee (tusharpandey13) in the github PR: > Yeah, i had to manually stop it and delete the ai-generated comment.
I think it is distasteful and disrespectful to call out an employee by name in this way, regardless of the merit of the rest of the OP's post.
•
I don't think it is distasteful or disrespectful, he's just explaining what happened and why, and he's obviously unhappy with the whole ordeal.
Running your own local AuthN/AuthZ is more than just 'install it on a box in the closet'. I don't blame anyone for letting one of the giants do this on their behalf -- they have the expertise, though I agree I wouldn't touch Okta.
•
For your average enterprise it really is that simple. Register some IDPs. Connect a backend. Add some clients over time. Yes, you need someone to wear the IAM admin hat. But once you get it configured and running it requires 0.1 FTE or less (likely identical to whatever your Okta admin would be). Not worth 6+ figures a year and exposure to Okta breach risk.
thats not the confusing part, its rather confusing to threaten to sue for copyright because of mistaken attirbution
•
He even asked them to force-push a new history because they got the name wrong! Mistakes happen, I guess this hurts his 'commits in a public repo' cv score.
I think GitHub should allow disabling PRs. I don't believe most big corporations are interested in dealing with fly-by contributions because it might make them look bad or be riddled with quality issues. Also some projects like the Linux kernel are just mirrors and would be better off with that functionality disabled.
•
Maybe the community should use less of github if github doesn't provide features the community finds useful.
> I was pretty appalled to see such a basic mistake from a security company, but then again it is Okta. Oh. Em. Gee. Is this a common take on Okta? The article and comments suggest...maybe? That is frightening considering how many customers depend on Okta and Auth0.
•
We've recently moved to Auth0. I'm no security expert. Whats the recommended alternative that provides the same features and price, but without the risks suggested here?
•
Yeah, I have the misfortune of inheriting a SaaS that built on auth0, and the whole stack is rather clownish. But they tick all the regulatory boxes, so we're probably stuck with them (until they suffer a newsworthy breach, at any rate...)
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Ask HN: How are Markov chains so different from tiny LLMs?
•
What's a tiny LLM, given that the first L stands for "large"?
As someone who developed chatbots with HMM's and the Transformers algorithms, this is a great and succinct answer. The paper, Attention Is All You Need, solved this drawback.
•
Markov Random Fields also do that.
Here's how I see it, but I'm not sure how valid my mental model is. Imagine a source corpus that consists of: Cows are big. Big animals are happy. Some other big animals include pigs, horses, and whales. A Markov chain can only return verbatim combinations. So it might return "Cows are big animals" or "Are big animals happy". An LLM can get a sense of meaning in these words and can return ideas expressed in the input corpus. So in this case it might say "Pigs and horses are happy". It's not limited to responding with verbatim sequences. It can be seen as a bit more creative. However, LLMs will not be able to represent ideas that it has not encountered before. It won't be able to come up with truly novel concepts, or even ask questions about them. Humans (some at least) have that unbounded creativity that LLMs do not.
•
> However, LLMs will not be able to represent ideas that it has not encountered before. Sure they do. We call them hallucinations and complain that they're not true, however.
The Banished Bottom of the Housing Market (ryanpuzycki.com)
That is strong towns's position, but it never checks out - towns have mostly been doing that for decades now. there is a lot of room for variation in quality of service and towns don't have a way of taxing those who want the town snow service more than those who don't.
•
Most of the suburbs where I live aren’t old enough to need sewer/storm and street replacement yet. It can take 60+ years for major infrastructure projects to become necessary, I expect to see municipalities fail as the infrastructure burden cripples their budgets. Suburbs that had the foresight to develop commercial and industrial areas won’t suffer as much, but bedroom communities that aren’t wealthy will suffer once their infrastructure starts aging. There’s a massive deferred maintenance backlog pretty much everywhere.
•
The first suburbs were built in the 1880s (the streetcar enabled them). They have a long history of adding and replacing infrastructure as needed. It takes 60+ years, but not everything comes due at once and so it isn't a sudden bill all at once, it is spread out over decades. Roads tend to need significant work after 15-20 years.
>If it were tenants rights, you'd expect SROs to go away in the parts of the country with the strongest tenants rights Tenants rights can make existing SROs harder to get rid of since evicting everyone so you can refurb into apartments or whatever is too costly. >As an aside I've known several smallish residential landlords (20-50 units) and they are, in general, strongly biased towards higher-income tenants That's every landlord. Higher income tenants tend to bring less problems overall.
•
> That's every landlord. Higher income tenants tend to bring less problems overall. Even moreso in states with expansive eviction protections. High-income tenants rarely squat. But at least for bigger landlords squatting isn't an existential risk.
Are you thinking of making a stew at home, or warming up a pre-made can of stew?
•
Making a stew at home. Canned stew would be a few dollars a can in my area.
> she told me the simplest option was to evict him and then if he refused to leave to call them back and they could help enforce the order. Right, so you didn't have to follow the eviction process. This is a key distinction. If you tell someone they're no longer welcome and they have to move out immediately, you're not technically following the eviction process. If the person had refused to leave, you'd have to follow the eviction process which can require some evidentiary collection, such as being able to prove that the person was notified that they were being evicted on a certain date. In extreme cases (not like your ex-roommate) squatters will go so far to game the system that they only come and go in the middle of the night to avoid being officially served the eviction notice.
•
I was told that becase of the shared living situation, it became a safety issue. That my right to safety trumped the roommate's right to live in my house. Of course, the cop may well not had a complete understanding of the law either.
> There's a type of person who just has this image in mind that everyone struggling is a drugged up loser who refuses to get a job and lives on benefits, I wasn’t talking about people struggling. I was talking about the actual, visible drug users on the streets. The struggling people looking for temporary housing would be intermingled with these people and suffer the most.
•
Those people are also struggling. The fact that you refuse to empathize with them doesn't change that.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Two recently found works of J.S. Bach presented in Leipzig [video] (youtube.com)
That’s debatable. Mozart was good too. But my real OG is Camille Saint-Saens. You want dark and moody? Light and fluffy? Dazzles and sparkles? He’s your man.
•
I think from a technical perspective, this is basically still true about Bach. It's not to say he has the most enjoyable music to listen to, but rather his music is built in a way that shows he was basically metagaming his music harder than anyone else ever has.
I cut my teeth on Bach on Cello when I was 7. By the time I was in high school I could play all the instruments. I still don’t consider Bach to be the genius everyone says he was. He was a nepo baby with a big purse. His brothers, his family, all musicians of note for prominent figures of society. However, his leaning on his long history of music within the family helped polish his work as structured which helped sell it. Now, Jean-Babtiste Lully was a character…
•
If you don't like it, that's fine, I won't argue over taste. But your other descriptions of Bach's life deserve to be fact-checked. > He was a nepo baby with a big purse. His brothers, his family, all musicians of note for prominent figures of society. However, his leaning on his long history of music within the family helped polish his work as structured which helped sell it. This interpretation is not particularly historically accurate. Let's investigate: > He was a nepo baby with a big purse. Musicians of the baroque era weren't particularly wealthy or notable. Musical fame wouldn't come until the Classical era. And yes, music was his family trade, but that's how most trades went in that time. His parents both died before he turned ten, so he was mostly raised by his older brother. By all accounts they were not wealthy. So I think the term "nepo baby" is misleading, and "and "with a big purse" is simply incorrect. > His brothers, his family, all musicians of note for prominent figures of society. This is highly overexaggerated. JS Bach had two brothers who survived childhood, and neither was particularly "prominent." Most of his "notable family" were his children, especially CPE Bach. > However, his leaning on his long history of music within the family helped polish his work as structured which helped sell it. Bach's career was one of slow and steady growth. It doesn't appear that he leaned on his connections or family name much. Bach did get some widespread acclaim by the end of his life, but mostly as an organist, not as a composer. His compositions were mostly discarded and ignored for a whole century until Felix Mendelssohn revived interest in his compositions. The cello suites, for example, were lost for nearly two hundred years, and only re-discovered in the 1920's.
•
> He was a nepo baby with a big purse. Interesting interpretation of "he was orphaned at 10 and left with nothing and had to go and live with his brother".
Nano Banana Pro (blog.google)
•
One of the things I've always been curious about is how effective diffusion models can be for web and app design. They're generally trained on more organic photos, but post-training on SDXL and Flux have given me good results here in the past (with the exception of text). It's been interesting seeing the results of Nano Banana Pro in this domain. Here are a few examples: Prompt: "A travel planner for an elegant Swiss website for luxury hiking tours. An interactive map with trail difficulty and booking management. Should have a theme that is alpine green, granite grey, glacier white" Flux output: https://fal.media/files/rabbit/uPiqDsARrFhUJV01XADLw_11cb4d2afc6d488ab5c7c233fb25d0ca.jpg NBP output: https://v3b.fal.media/files/b/panda/h9auGbrvUkW4Zpav1CnBy.png --- Prompt: "a landing page for a saas crypto website, purple gradient dark theme. Include multiple sections, including one for coin prices, and some graphs of value over time for coins, plus a footer" Flux output: https://fal.media/files/elephant/zSirai8mvJxTM7uNfU8CJ_109b06b0bde84a49a21816c0c2348487.png NBP output: https://v3b.fal.media/files/b/rabbit/1f3jHbxo4BwU6nL1-w6RI.png --- Prompt: "product launch website for a development tool, dark background with aqua blue and neon gold highlights, gradients" Flux output: https://fal.media/files/zebra/aXg29QaVRbXe391pPBmLQ_4bfa61cc10fc43ddba7102581f799b36.png NBP output: https://v3b.fal.media/files/b/lion/Rj48BxO2Hg2IoxRrnSs0r.png --- Note that this is with a lora I built for flux specifically for website generation. Overall, nbp seems to have less creative / inspired outputs, but the text is FAR better than the fever dream Flux is producing. I'm really excited to see how this changes design. At the very least it proved it can get close to a production quality for output, now it's just about tuning it.
•
I feel like I am going crazy or missed something simple but when I use the Gemini app and I ask it to edit a photo that I upload, 2.5 flash works really well but 2.5 pro or 3.0 pro do a very poor job. I uploaded an image of me and asked it to make me bald and flash did a great job of just changing me in the photo but 3.0 pro took me out of the photo completely and just created a headshot of a bald man that only sort of resembled me. Am I missing something or does paying for the pro version not give you anything over the 2.5 flash model?
•
The code name “nano banana” model is based on the Flash 2.5 foundation. Until today it was the “latest and greatest”.
Google has been stomping around like Godzilla this week, and this is the first time I decided to link my card to their AI studio. I had seen people saying that they gave up and went to another platform because it was "impossible to pay". I thought this was strange, but after trying to get a working API key for the past half hour, I see what they mean. Everything is set up, I see a message that says "You're using Paid API key [NanoBanano] as part of [NanoBanano]. All requests sent in this session will be charged." Go to prompt, and I get a "permission denied" error. There is no point in having impressive models if you make it a chore for me to -give you my money-
•
First off, apologies for the bad first impression, the team is pushing super hard to make sure it is easy to access these models. - On permission issue, not sure I follow the flow that got you there, pls email me more details if you are able too and happy to debug: Lkilpatrick@google.com - On overall friction for billing: we are working on a new billing experience built right into AI Studio that will make it super easy to add a CC and go build. This will also come along with things like hard billing caps and such. The expected ETA for global rollout is January!
•
Just a note that your HN bio says "Developer Relations @OpenAI"
•
Please make sure that the new billing experience has support for billing limits and prepaid balance (to avoid unexpected charges)!
In general a better option, in the early days of AI video I tried to generate a video of a golden retriever using Google's AI Studio. It generated 4 in the highest quality and charged me 36 bucks. Not a crazy amount but definitely an unwelcome suprise. Fal.ai is pay as you go and has the cost right upfront.
•
Vertex AI Studio setting a default of 4 videos where each video is several dollars to generate is a very funny footgun.
What determines which “average” AI models latch onto? At a pixel level, the average of every image is a grayish rectangle; that's obviously not what we mean and AI does not produce that. At a slightly higher level, the average of every image is the average of every subject every photographed or drawn (human, tree, house, plate of food, ...) in concept space; but AI still doesn't generate a human with branches or a house with spaghetti on it. At a still higher level there are things we recognize as sensible scenes, e.g., barista pouring a cup of coffee, anime scene of a guy fighting a robot, watercolor of a boat on a lake, which AI still does not (by default) average into, say, an equal parts watercolor/anime/photorealistic image of a barista fighting a robot on a boat while pouring a cup of coffee. But it is undeniable that AI images do have an “average” feel to them. What causes this? What is the space over which AI is taking an average to produce its output? One possible answer is that a finite model size means that the model can only explore image space with a limited resolution, and as models get bigger/better they can average over a smaller and smaller portion of this space, but it is always limited. But that raises the question of why models don't just naturally land on a point in image space. Is this just a limitation of training, which punishes big failures more strongly than it rewards perfection? Or is there something else at play here that's preventing models from landing directly on a “real” image?
•
Isn't the space you're talking about the input images that are close to the textual prompt? These models are trained on image+text pairs. So if you prompt something like "an apple" you get a conceptual average of all images containing apples. Depending on your dataset, it's likely going to be a photograph of an apple in the center.
•
> At a pixel level, the average of every image is a grayish rectangle; that's obviously not what we mean and AI does not produce that. That isn't correct since images in the real world aren't uniformly distributed from [0, 255] color-wise. Take, for example, the famous ImageNet normalization magic numbers: normalize = transforms.Normalize(mean=[0.485, 0.456, 0.406], std=[0.229, 0.224, 0.225]) If it were actually uniformly distributed, the mean for each channel would be 0.5 and the standard deviation would be 0.289. Also due to z-normalization, the "image" most image models see is not how humans typically see images.
None of it was accurate. But boy was it beautiful.
•
Funny thing to say considering the author of Datasette himself says it's accurate.
I've tried to repaint the exterior of my house. More than 20 times with very detailed prompts. I even tried to optimize it with Claude. No matter what, every time it added one, two or three extra windows to the same wall.
•
I have this problem selecting Pro, but if I use 2.5 Flash it does a great job at these things. I am not sure why Pro does not work as well.
https://gemini.google.com/share/79fe1a38e440
•
https://gemini.google.com/share/3b4d2cd55778
210 IQ Is Not Enough (taylor.town)
My son started walking at 8.5 months. He's got a 3.5 month head start on those 12 month walking late bloomers. I have very high expectations. I wonder where his walking skills are going to take him one day, but this comment worries me because he has so far not shown any interest in the Korean alphabet.
•
Wow that is quite a feat! All of my kids started walking between 13-14 months. I heard that walking that early is actually not good because bones are not prepared but still kudos to your kid.
Ok, but then... what does any of that have to do with "conflict resolution is not usually a function of intelligence"?
•
What you need for conflict resolution is usually a willingness to try to resolve the conflict. In rare situations, where communication and time is limited, you can actually run into the issue where you have to be smart enough to figure out what the other person wants (and see if you can come up with a mutually beneficial offer), but often in real life you can just spend more time thinking and ask them what they want.
It somewhat indicates better pattern recognition so I might give them advantage on predicting things in general. Not that it will make them prophets or oracles. But Prediction from higher IQ person is more likely to be correct. Not that world cannot be illogical and go against those predictions.
•
Pattern matching is completely irrelevant when dealing with something that doesn’t follow patterns, such as stock prices
 Top