Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | molf's commentslogin

> HOAs don't make neighbors co-owners of your own property, do they?

Home-owner associations in Europe are frequently set up for apartment buildings, in which case, yes, the roof, foundation, hallways, stairwells, main piping, electricity, etc are all legally co-owned. Primary purpose of HOAs is to save for & plan long-term maintenance on the entire building.

HOAs for neighbourhoods, or blocks with single-family homes or terraced houses are pretty rare in Europe.


What will hit you before that here in Switzerland is the local authorities which have in front of their eyes a certain plan for your building, and anything not on the plan (in this case the AC unit) will need a permit. It's not an easy task, I would say impossible actually, to get such a permit, unless you find a way to redesign the whole facade in a acceptable way (units poking out doesn't count as acceptable).


Why would you tell people that the correct order is to build foundational knowledge before exploring a subject? For some (many?) people, a 'proper' understanding develops _after_ the exploration.


> Why would you tell people that the correct order

Because I can?. JK. Because that was my experience, of someone who is 2.5 older than 17?

> For some (many?) people, a 'proper' understanding develops _after_ the exploration.

I am afraid you have a too confrontational attitude here, but I'll answer anyway: because I do not believe you can simply "explore" such complex topics like building an LLMs. You'd simply be unable to build LLM drom scratch, unless you'd call cargo-cult chaining magic numpy incantations you've taken from Karpathy's tutorials "exploring".

If I were in "exploratory" state of mins, I'd rather go from entirely different side - I'd try playing with LoRA-ing existing small LLMs, such as venerable 2 y.o. Mistral Nemo, to get "feeling" for what training is and how hyperameters influence the process.


> unless you'd call cargo-cult chaining magic numpy incantations you've taken from Karpathy's tutorials "exploring"

That's what I would call exploring.

I too started exploring programming as a teen by cargo culting. Fooling around and getting results is what made it fun. Understanding came later.


> That's what I would call exploring.

Then it is not "building llm from scratch" in my book. Just mindlees following instructions. Could be educational yes, but only trivially useful, if you have no bloody idea what you are doing.

> Fooling around and getting results is what made it fun. Understanding came later.

It is not how LLMs are "built from scratch".


No it's not useful, no you don't know what you're doing, and no it is not 'proper'.

But you're learning.

Maybe just accept that not everyone starts from fundamental theory, and there are lots of people who start learning by fooling around.


> No it's not useful, no you don't know what you're doing, and no it is not 'proper'. But you're learning.

It is sold by PG as something special though.

> Maybe just accept that not everyone starts from fundamental theory, and there are lots of people who start learning by fooling around.

Even then LLMs are strange thing to advice to play with, when there are so much more interesting and theoretically accesible for a 17 y.o. so I wonder why would you'd particularly single it out.


So according to the regulator Uber automatically suspended driver accounts that were flagged in decision of fraud or due to low ratings. They also failed to inform drivers about the automated decision making.

Here is the statement from the Dutch data protection authority:

   Uber made fully automated decisions regarding drivers. In cases of suspected fraud or excessively low customer ratings, driver accounts were automatically temporarily deactivated or, in the case of persistently low ratings, permanently deactivated. As a result, their income from Uber ceased during the deactivation period.
 
   Uber thereby violated the ban on fully automated decision-making under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The AP also found that Uber failed to adequately inform drivers about the automated decision-making. Uber has since ceased the violations.
Reference to the law that was broken (GDPR): [2][3]

   Article 22.1: The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.

   Article 13.2f: In addition to the information referred to in paragraph 1, the controller shall, at the time when personal data are obtained, provide the data subject with the following further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing: [...] the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of such processing for the data subject.

[1]: https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/actueel/uber-krijg...

[2]: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/


I agree.

But wouldn't you want a human to be involved in this process?

Let's say you run a legitimate SaaS company, and a cloud provider suspends your account due to an allegation of fraud. Wouldn't you prefer a human is involved?

To me that seems pretty reasonable when people's livelihood is at stake.


> But wouldn't you want a human to be involved in this process?

The article says human review was used for the final decisions. The accounts were temporarily suspended during the investigation.

Investigations take time because you need to allow time for the person to respond with their side of the story and then to have human reviewers investigate, which can take multiple rounds.

Having human review is as simple as having one person watch a dashboard of accounts flagged for fraud and then press the suspend-account button after skimming it. I fully expect that’s what they switched to after getting hit with this.

> To me that seems pretty reasonable when people's livelihood is at stake.

What about the riders who are on the receiving end of fraudulent drivers in the best case, abusive or dangerous drivers in the worst case? It is possible to go to far in trying to protect workers for things that impact paying customers. Thinking of it only as big bad companies versus innocent workers misses the real problems.


> What about the riders who are on the receiving end of fraudulent drivers in the best case, abusive or dangerous drivers in the worst case? It is possible to go to far in trying to protect workers for things that impact paying customers.

Not saying they shouldn't be banned. But a human should look into it. Seems reasonable?


You’re still missing it

Humans did do the review.

They paused their ability to take new rides until the human review was complete.


I don’t think Uber or any other platform would automatically suspend the account based on one incident. It would have been multiple people complaining about a driver and then got suspended.

Drivers should be able to appeal and in that case a human should manually review before making the suspension permanent. Most probably that’s how it happens right now, but article doesn’t say anything about how the appeals are processed.


Depends how pervasive the issue. I agree a human in the loop for reasonable redress is appropriate


That's irrelevant.

   The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.
Nowhere in article 22 [1] does it restrict the scope to employees.

If Uber processes data, and makes decisions based on that data in a purely automated way that significantly affects people, it is not allowed. That's all there is to it.

[1]: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/


This is a better citation than the original one.


But it's not enterprise SaaS, is it? It's just a time tracking and invoicing tool. And it's not the only SaaS they will need?

Companies with 25 employees generally don't have money to pay a dozen SaaS vendors $2k each every month.

Maybe certain niche products that are critical to the business might be worth that much. But a time tracking & invoicing tool? Definitely not. Source: am actively moving away from Harvest due to this ridiculous price hike.


I don't think the point is that PostgreSQL is great for everything. But you may get by with a single piece of infrastructure instead of 7.

In most of the applications we build or maintain we use PostgreSQL + cloud storage. That's it. And it works very well, also for: storing JSON, full text search, as a queue, as a vector database. Other software may be better at providing those features, but I'm extremely happy we only need to understand & manage PostgreSQL.


The article says verbatim “PostgreSQL Replaces Clickhouse”.

Coming from storing billions of rows in Clickhouse and performing dozens of materialized operations I shudder to think about what that would look like in a DB that doesn’t even support declarative IVM.


The article suggested using TimescaleDB which has its own concept of IVM: continuos aggregates. And compared to the approach by ClickHouse it can also update the materialized views when you update/delete old raw data

https://sqlfordevs.com/books+courses/timescale/05-continuous...


Yes but that is just one use case. Columnar OLAP engines operating on object storage can do all kinds of stuff so much better than Postgres that it may as well be a completely different capability. That said - the point is that you can get a lot further with just Postgres than many people think, and now we also have options like pg_lake. But I wish I'd changed analytics platforms A LOT sooner than I did.


I've been working on that in Postgres for the past...way too long now: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6305/

Still not totally declarative, but it at least gets IVM into core in a way people can make use of.


They're called Antilopen in Dutch too, so I think most people would just associate it with the animal?


I believe such organisations tend to do such things very intentionally :-)

About ESO [1]

> We are an intergovernmental organisation established in 1962 supported by 16 Member States (Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom), our host country Chile and strategic partners.

So Chile has a distinct status, hence the margin...?

[1]: https://www.eso.org/public/about-eso/


Obviously, how else would you do it rather than the standard left-margin notation for the host country :)


Exactly. Chile has a special status as host country of the observatory!


More than a special status as a host country, as far as I understand it is explicitly not a member state, hence it's separated from the rest of the flags (Which is curious because despite being the host country, it doesn't guarantee you being a member state of ESO).


Granted, makes sense...


Double? Rookie numbers.

We went from $1k to $21k per year.

A few emails later and we have a hefty discount, but we will still move away.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: