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

https://github.com/microsoft/Procexp-Mac/issues/1

This repo is missing a LICENSE file #1

Open

Description @microsoft-github-policy-service bot opened on Jul 9


Since Copilot is listed as one of the contributors it is doubtful whether any human has the right to license the code.

It's still a good idea to add one if you want other people to use the software. With a licence you have the right to the minimum of (that licence | public domain), without one you have to risk it may be fully proprietary. We still don't have a good international agreement on the resulting LLM code rights.

They make money by authoring standards which force vendors to buy even more parts/licenses from them.


I'd prefer if dUT1 was restored to ±.9s after NTP rollover in 2036, Y2K38, and GPS week rollover in 2038. This way we now know precisely what the UTC times will be for those events and dUT1 probably will be <10s at that point. Software will need to deal with times like 23:59:63 properly by then (too much still can't handle 23:59:60 leap seconds yet). Maybe we could have dUT1 < ±9.9s going forward.

The problems with letting dUT1 > 1800 and above is that well before that it starts mattering for almost everything and then you have to consult the solution (here's just 2025's):

  https://crf.usno.navy.mil/quarterly-vlbi-solution
That's generated by the US Navy for all intents and is way more data than used now for leap seconds which are fine enough of a granularity for most things. Future timestamps in UT1 will get difficult to handle as well. Previously software could assume it knew to the closest second which was often good enough.


I'm not sure if I completely follow you, but I'd like to ask: Why is it a problem if there's a divergence between UT1 and UTC? Besides astronomers, who cares if the sun is directly overhead a few minutes later than it "should" be?


Everyone who paid for expensive equipment that gets UT1 time to a tenth of a second in a year or two.

https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/time-di...


Late night infomercials for get rich quick scams and spam fax machine ads were all over the place by the late '80s sadly.


Not in Australia at least. There were ads for flash in the pan fitness and weight loss devices and various other wastes of money, but outright scams and illegal devices would have their ads pulled real quick.

I think your answer gives us a clue about what went wrong and where.

The fact that internet advertising is run by the big US tech behemoths, makes them difficult to go after by countries that have previously had sane advertising standards. The lack of US regulation is the winning car in the race to the bottom.


The article links to the book „Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman which seems interesting. Anyone read it have thoughts?


That is amazingly useful tool I didn’t know about until now, thank you.


Sure thing; it’s a Brett Terpstra creation.

Textise is similar and also doubles as a poor man’s text-only browser. https://www.textise.net/referrer

Both Marky and Textise work in some places where the other doesn’t.

Obviously you (or your LLM) can throw together JavaScript bookmarklets to convert whatever page you’re on. The tools’ homepages might have premade ones, I forget.


Are the results compared across architectures?


The article covers 5 CPUs.


I mean the values of the computation not the runtime. I don’t know enough about ARM to say if doubles simply punt denormals to 0 for example.


IEEE 754 defines bit exact results for a lot of FP operations, including denormals.


And yet floating point math in general is non-deterministic across different CPUs. IEEE 754 was not good enough, so it's a valid question.


It is non-deterministic mainly due to compilers that generate different code or when there are concurrent computations that are executed in an unpredictable order.

A single sequence of floating-point operations executed on an IEEE 754 compliant CPU has always been perfectly deterministic since the first version of the standard.

Who wants a deterministic computation must use a single-threaded program or a multi-threaded program where the order of execution is deterministic, and one must be careful so that changes in compiler versions or compilation options will not affect the type and order of the operations that are executed.


CVE-2026-32746



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

Search: