If the AI is going to lie and cheat on the code it writes (this is the largest thing I bump into regularly and have to nudge it on), what makes the author think that the same AI won't cheat on the proof too?
There are various test procedures. For ESD, there are official tests like the Human Body Model, where a capacitor is charged to a specific voltage and discharged into the circuit. Similarly, for latchup, there are official tests that apply specific pulses. Metastability can be tested by applying asynchronous signals, but I'm not sure how that scales when the MTBF is very large.
Dude I think the whole "we're going to fire you" thing is weird on Apple's part. Look at how good the color picker became once it became yours. A bunch of resource string names should not be a big deal.
The problem is what can be done? The usual arrangement of letter writing or donating and voting is just more of the same cycle.
I'm not by any means in favor of what's going on, but some steam has to be let out of the system. And the real problem is trust in our institutions. What can be done about that?
My thoughts exactly. I certainly have throes of people on Facebook complaining about this, but what shall I, the individual, do about this?
I have my causes to which I devote great time and personal effort, but if I stopped my life for every minor disaster I would spend my life shaking my fist at my computer.
I quite like my life and I don’t intend to spend it getting rage baited by never-ending news cycles.
Give me an action to take, not an emotion to feel.
I'm nearly 50 and have watched politics swing back and forth all my life.
That's not what is currently happening. It's not a minor disaster. It's something we'll take generations to recover from, if ever.
We can't do much, individually. Find people in your community working on stuff you care about and get out there and pitch in. Get involved. Make sure your local school district isn't banning books or being cruel to trans kids. Make sure you have good city councilors.
How old are you? What is happening now at the NSF and NIH will knock the US off its technological perch in less than 15 to 20 years. We are already fighting to maintain an edge as it is.
What this means to you personally and other tech workers is that many of the well-paying tech jobs will be going elsewhere.
It's not a bad thing...for those other countries. As an American you're not going to be able to get those jobs. You think a Chinese company is going to want to hire a remote American worker, who is 10 time zones away, doesn't speak the language, doesn't know the culture, and who wants to work only 40 hours a week? Maybe not even if you're willing to work for $20/hour.
In addition i'd also suggest looking at deep roots of why half the country is cheering it up. They don't want their country to go down the drain. Then why? It was pretty illustrative how MAGA was cheering the stopping of condoms money to Kenya in the Trump's speech. It looked like a caricature example of the government waste. Well, condoms there is one of the most effective ways to slow down HIV spreading. I'd bet MAGA wouldn't want more people there to get HIV. I'd bet MAGA just didn't know it. To me the "[not]know" is the root keyword in all that destruction happening now.
If it were free, I guarantee every single maga republican I know would be ok with it.
It's an issue of tradeoffs, and the tradeoffs were never clearly articulated even to me the most staunch supporter of foreign aid. We've just accepted it and all such programs because we can see, because we trust, that the analysis was done and is valid.
Government does not currently have that level of trust with half the country, and worse has active distrust.
I think it’s less that they “WANT” more people to get HIV but instead they do know that doing this type of thing will cause more cases and they’re fine with it because “gods will” and a bigger plan and all that.
Even this is completely uncharitable. Every maga republican I know is just concerned with poorly articulated cost/benefits of such programs.
We the liberal elite grew up with institutions making these kinds of decisions and we trust it to a certain extent.
There's a trust gap. Even the staunchest republican I know will gladly volunteer to help their local community for the most part. That's their priority.
The institutions have lost trust by sneaking political decisions through under the guise of science. Science can tell you what will happen if you make a certain decision, but it can't tell you what decision to make because that is a fundamentally non scientific question. They can regain trust by acting in a trustworthy manner.
Yeah I agree with this. If these tradeoffs were articulated and then everyone was allowed to personally buy "foreign aid bonds" then people could put their money to work in what mattered to them.
Instead the whole country funds programs that half of them don't trust, regardless of who is in charge.
Chain yourself to a Tesla dealership. I'm serious. Getting Elon Musk to cry about how unfair he's being treated on TV amidst the damage he's doing will do more to hasten his departure than any letter or check you can write.
Sure, go back in time and talk to the Abolitionists or those who opposed Civil Rights. It's not gray, that's a big misconception. Dang is completely wrong about censoring and flagging discussion on a fucking coup in America. If the discussion devolves a million times, then let it devolve a million times. It's necessary.
Notice that your ability to label things with a strong moral charge refers to a handful of historical events from the past 200 years. Everything before that gets really fuzzy, is multi-faceted, and doesn’t evoke emotion.
Absolute monarchy was worse than systems that shared power with an aristocracy which in turn was worse than restricted democracy which was worse than universal suffrage.
Feudalism was worse than capitalism which in turn was worse than the results of the labor movement.
Forced conversion was worse than religious discrimination which in turn was worse than religious freedom.
> which in turn was worse than restricted democracy which
That’s not true. In aristotle’s politics he explores the major forms of government of which demagoguery is a corruption of democracy. And he gives examples.
and what do you mean by better? Do you claim that Every democracy that’s ever existed functions better than every aristocracy in fulfilling its governing role? Better for who in and what regard?
> capitalism and fuedalism
There are absolutely no tradeoffs between feudalism and capitalism? Capitalism is an absolute good in comparison?
And you’re only highlighting the major movements it the progressive narrative and ignored all the twists and turns. Was Catholicism better than Protestantism? What about agrarian hunter/gatherer vs capitalism?
Like what? Do you mean like should we or shouldn't we enslave people to build the Pyramids? Is that what you mean? Like, that's just how it was back then and so its like, okay? So like, that's just how it is now days, so like, whatever Dang is doing with this is like, morally alright?
1) I cannot use my sensibility to look at the last 200 years (huh? okay.)
2) I need to now make sense of geopolitical beef between England and France around 1300.
3) Then I need to tie this all back to how this all leads to not be being able to determine, morally, what's going on today.
Are these the rules to becoming the pokemon master in your gym? I'll continue if I have all the rules down. I'm excited to attend your world class mental gym and get the greatest of all mental gymnastics training.
People would struggle to answer because "which side do you support in the hundred years war" is the wrong question. A better question would be "do you support the social structures (e.g. nationalism, monarchy, etc.) that contributed to the hundred years war".
Or stated another way, the premise implied by your question is incorrect. Its perfectly possible that both England and France were on the wrong side of history.
No. because the issues that France and England fought over do not serve any modern day political purpose. Nobody can use them to fuel their cause. But the idea that it’s due to “nationalism” still does which is why you are able to confidently boil down a hundred years into one word.
And once again, not me the absence of emotion. Saying “they’re both right” or “they’re both wrong” elicits nothing.
Can you boil down the Inquisition into one word? I'm confused, so you found an example that works for you and then like, our examples are not workable I guess? I'm very open to you being brilliant with an incredible thesis at hand, but like, seriously give me your thesis - what the are you talking about?
Tech platforms censored a lot of right of center content, thinking it would mean those ideas would disappear.
Instead Musk took over Twitter, right leaning podcasts became far more popular than left leaning podcasts because they were willing to engage in controversial topics, and now Trump and Musk control everything.
But, you know, keep trying the same thing and hoping for different results.
A thought experiment for you: how do you think the audience of Hacker News compares to Joe Rogan? And your focus is seriously on censoring more content on Hacker News to move the needle in national politics?
You blame dang for flagging you, but based on your comments in this thread I'd say you're bringing it on yourself from other users. Liberal, moderate, or conservative, anyone on HN who's interested in having a reasonable conversation will flag your comments if you regularly talk like this.
(And to be clear I'm not talking about the swearing, I'm talking about the totally off base assumptions made about OP's political stance and the level of aggression you're showing. It's time to log off and touch grass, dude.)
No, I know how awful my comments are so I expect them to be flagged and downvoted (not really awful, I just can't help but say fuck you to the other side in the current climate). It's better to look at my submissions.
Here's a simple one that was just flagged recently:
So if it's not Dang that's doing this, then there is a MAGA contingent here as far as I'm concerned. Some of you don't have the appropriate level of vigor quite frankly and might need more of those T boost shots Rogan tells yall to always get.
> not really awful, I just can't help but say fuck you to the other side in the current climate
No, you're saying "fuck you" to anyone and everyone who isn't waving their "I hate Trump" card right out of the gate. Near as I can tell reading through past comments, OP is in the sizable contingent that thinks that recent US politics has resembled nothing so much as an all-out war between toddlers and that left-wing hatred and bile like what you are manifesting bears at least some responsibility for getting us Trump in the first place.
It's possible to hate Trump, hate MAGA, and also think that the actions of liberals through the last decade directly contributed to the environment that led to his rise. Apparently that position counts as "the other side" to you, which is exactly what led us here: if there are only two sides then it's too easy to be a Trump supporter.
if there are only two sides then it's too easy to be a Trump supporter.
I'll concede that, that's a great point. However, the key to maintaining a balanced diet is first you must get to a target weight you would like to balance from. You can't just be 300lbs and begin eating a balanced diet. There is no time to sit here and argue about anything you mentioned. We are simply in crisis and this involves wiping the slate clean of the mindshare that is sitting right before us. We can discuss our old hatreds afterwards, which pale in comparison. Basically, we need to restart the game from the last save point, as much is it sucks. We can't take the balanced diet of all sides bad because we're extremely obese at the moment.
Some disagree, to which I generally just leave a Fuck You.
> We are simply in crisis and this involves wiping the slate clean of the mindshare that is sitting right before us. We can discuss our old hatreds afterwards, which pale in comparison. Basically, we need to restart the game from the last save point, as much is it sucks. We can't take the balanced diet of all sides bad because we're extremely obese at the moment.
The only way that any of this makes any kind of sense is if you're proposing that we lean into the abolition of democracy, and if you were going to propose that then the time to do it was sometime before Jan 20 2025. The far right are the ones with the militias, so an armed revolt isn't going to go our way, and now that Trump is in office abolishing democracy from the top down would obviously not lead to the outcome you want.
Like it or not, we're stuck with white knuckling it and trying to persuade people to vote our way in the midterms, and this style of rhetoric is decidedly counterproductive towards that end.
Yes, we need a blowout midterms. I said this in another comment, and I'll paraphrase again. The Left does not need to win back a single Republican voter. We just need to clearly show their face, and I believe this will be enough to rally them to a blowout in 2025. When you see the rotten greedy values of the Right, it will immediately activate the larger Left demographic (which will dwarf anything you've ever seen). Many closet-maga came out of the woodwork just in this thread alone, with zero shame. So necessary to just see.
We don't need to dismantle democracy. That's their game.
I've noticed on HN that any post involving less wholesome takes on the US admin and/or doge leadership become brigaded quite heavily with more lower quality discourse than the normal fare.
It's a really interesting phenomenon. And I'm kind of surprised the community allows it.
TBH, politics is and should be taken elsewhere because it is much more important than most of what we discuss here and therefore could easily crowd out everything else.
But there's a strong intersection between STEM, policy, and downstream innovation/employment - not to mention any ethical dilemmas along the way.
Not discussing and/or allowing bots to overrun any such discussion and drown out dissent has never in the history of man left to immediately better times in STEM.
I'm not sure what the right answer is: if HN were to change its policy and focus on the authoritarian assault on the US in all its forms, it would easily crowd out everything else, and draw in a bunch of people interested in only politics.
It's sure hard to ignore. IDK, maybe some enterprising person should start a "hackers for democracy" web site where we can share ideas or something.
> draw in a bunch of people interested in only politics.
This is already happening. I'm finding myself visiting the site less and less and enjoying my time here less and less because every single thread is getting hijacked by people who just want to talk politics.
That I largely agree with the general mood is exactly the problem: I don't need HN to work me up into even greater despair, I come here to engage my mind on useful things and talk about complex ideas with interesting people. But the interesting people are increasingly retreating from the nonstop anger cycle that's been feeding this site's engagement this year.
Might I suggest this is a reflection of society as a whole? Politics is everywhere because nowhere is safe from politics, especially science these days.
We can't talk about science anymore because all the people working on it are worried about their jobs and lives instead of... well... doing science.
I appreciate wanting to come on HN and read about all the cool science-related articles without being troubled by politics too much. That stuff is weighty. It's nice to to just chill out and learn about cool things.
But we can't have those nice things anymore. Because faculty meetings are now spent talking about which words researchers have to avoid in our proposals because we don't want to be rejected by the government censors.
We used to talk about the cool things we would do for our students and our research plans. But now we are more worried about if we're even going to have jobs in 12 months. We are worried about our already-allocated funds being pulled.
We aren't talking about science anymore, because we have to talk about how to avoid being the next "transgender mice". We are dodging death threats if we trend on social media. We are losing our jobs. We are being detained at airports and denied entry to the US for holding anti Trump views. We are being deported from the country.
So I think your read on the situation is off; the interesting people are not retreating from nonstop anger cycles, they are under attack and not engaging in their typical behavior you find interesting. Instead of disengaging entirely, they need your support, so they can get back to doing cool things you find interesting.
I work in education. I'm in those meetings you're talking about that are wrestling with these topics. I also live in Trump country in the Midwest and am living here in large part specifically to be an ambassador to help in my own small way to reduce the hatred that's fueling the fires. I'm as in the thick of it as anyone here, but I still come here for a reprieve and as that reprieve disappears in favor of nonstop rage I need to retreat.
HN is dying, and it's not dying to Trump. It's dying to the undirected rage that has infused every subthread, and that is something that's within our control even if Trump and his actions aren't. It's not useful, it's just an emotional drain that serves to further exhaust those who are best positioned to help and further polarize an already dangerously polarized world.
When communities are under attack, there really isn't a break though. Why do you think this rage exists? The fact it's here is not an indictment of HN and this community, it's an indication the rage has gotten out of control, and maybe we have to finally face it instead of seeking reprieve.
Facing it in this way isn't helping, it's just cementing the battle lines that were already in place and furthering the polarization and hatred which got Trump elected in the first place. We're not getting anywhere by spiraling into despair and anger—the kind of discussion that's been HN's staple recently is just serving to persuade people that democracy was doomed to fail after all because 50% of people are ignorant and hateful.
I disagree -- it's more important than ever to talk about these topics in the few communities, like HN, where people on both sides of the battle lines actually intermingle.
They don't intermingle any more. HN used to be a place for that kind of discussion, but it hasn't been that way in recent months. Perspectives that even sort of smell like they're right leaning get downvoted or flagged very quickly, leaving the discussion to be entirely a bunch of terrified left wingers resonating off each other, building their mutual fear and anger.
Something has shifted dramatically in the discourse the last two months, and HN isn't working the way it used to.
That's not my experience. If you look at my post history you'll see I've recently engaged in several long-winded back-and-forths with people here that have stayed civil and substantive. I don't find that in many other places, yet I still find it here.
I think one thing that has shifted dramatically in the last two months is that it's become clear many people who had a more moderated outlook on the current administration have turned out to be flat wrong about who these people are and what their intended course of action is. A "mask drop" moment. That's going to cause people to disengage, stick their hands, and even become irrationally angry.
Nonetheless I find this is still a place where you can talk to people on the "other side" in a rational way.
No. Lines being drawn is fine. It's fine to see the faces painted exactly as they are. The Left actually doesn't need to win back any voter from the Right. They just need to passionately show the faces of those on the Right, and the larger demographic of the Left will emerge.
When you see the corruption allowing, greedy tax obsessed Republican, when you see their true face, it's the greatest rallying call for a blowout midterms.
Just cut the tall grass to see the critters in the field.
If things go for much longer it'll be too late. In many ways it already is. Scientists I know are changing careers. Thinking of moving. Other countries are thinking about how they can take advantage of the brain drain. Even if things turn around today so much damage has been done already that it'll be felt for a long time.
The only hope we have is that Trump is a true circus ring master. He cancels the previous admin things and reinstates them with his name and a republican spin.
>If you want to see the US rapidly lose its place in the tech world over the next decade, this is a great way to go about it.
Too late, unless DOGE is stopped now and Trump is impeached, the US will lose its lead in tech and health (pharma) and many other industries. Pure and simple. Already the smartest of the smart are leaving the US for Europe and probably China.
If this is allowed to continue, in 6 months to a year, the US will be isolated and a third rate economy. All it will have is a first class war machine, which will not bode well for the world.
And that won't last for much longer after losing those other sectors, either, as military dominance is a function of economic and technological superiority.
This whole topic has been done to death on HN, and this post doesn't contribute much that hasn't already been discussed extensively. Science underpins technology, but we've had 2-3 DOGE-related topics pinned to the front page at a time nonstop since the inauguration and the subject is bleeding incessantly into every other submission on the site.
Rest assured you'll have another 500+ comment rage fest in the near future, probably this week. This one just doesn't have enough going to feed the rage spiral—it's pretty blase compared to the dosage we've worked ourselves up to.
What's old is new again. Some of the same techniques used to keep pre-MacOS-X applications responsive, back when MacOS was cooperatively scheduled, show up here.
This begs the question of what is a reasonable programming model? In the MacOS case, the forcing function was buying NeXT, using their Unix kernel for MacOS, and literally firing the OS engineers who disagreed with preemptive multitasking.
For these browsers, is there a programming model that could be instituted where processing in these handlers didn't hold up the main UI thread?
The previous decade certainly feels like a big resurgence of cooperative multitasking, in the rise of JavaScript and the rise of async in all languages.
Making JavaScript (conceptually) runs in the UI thread was imho one of the mistakes owed to the extremely simple early versions of JavaScript. We would be better off if JavaScript was preemptively scheduled (whether by the browser or by the OS) with language primitives to lock the UI in specific execution sections.
Locking the UI while doing a lengthy operation is hardly an acceptable solution. A better solution would be to indicate to the user an async operation is in progress, and optionally provide a button for canceling the operation.
What I was thinking about is that you do need a way to lock the UI when running multiple statements that update the UI. Something like a lockUI{} block (conceptually a critical section holding a lock on UI updates). This would for example allow you to prevent a situation where you have to change two data attributes on a button and the user clicks the bottom between those two updates. It would be on the programmer to keep those lockUI{} sections as short as possible.
If JavaScript 1.0 had included such a primitive you could run all other JavaScript in the background. Alas, the JavaScript we have is essentially putting all code into such an lockUI block, and this assumption is baked in to a lot of code
If that language feature had been included, the early web would have been filled with tutorials that say: “Don’t forget to wrap all your code in lockUI{} because that guarantees it runs correctly and things don’t suddenly change behind your back!”
And then we’d have the popular web frameworks just taking the lock and running all user code inside it, and everything would be the same as today.
