MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MrScruff | 2025-04-04 07:59:41+00:00
I kind of agree - since the Bostrom book there is a cottage industry of people with non-technical backgrounds writing papers about singularity thought experiments, and it does seem to be on the spectrum with hard sci-fi writing. A lot of these people are clearly intelligent, and it's not even that I think everything they say is wrong (I made similar assumptions long ago before I'd even heard of Ray Kurzweil and the Singularity, although at the time I would have guessed 2050). It's just that they seem to believe their thought process and Bayesian logic is more rigourous than it actually is.
by noduerme | 2025-04-04 08:00:35+00:00
I think it's an amazing tool as a starting point or a way to get ideas. Our small ad agency's policy has always been to research the hell out of something... like, if you're asked to do a logo for someone running for state Senate, go read the history of the state senate since 1846, and look up all the things everyone used, and start brainstorming art ideas that have multiple layers of meaning that work with your candidate's message. But AI makes it super easy to get a nice looking starting point and then use your ideas to iterate on top of that.

I'm a bit of a home moonshiner, too, so love that you're coming up with labels and using these tools to help out! If I could offer one piece of advice, whether for writing prompts or making your own final art, it would be: History is so rich with visual ideas you can riff from. The history of beer and wine bottles itself is unbelievable. If aliens came here a thousand years after we're gone, and all that was left were liquor labels, they could understand most of our culture. The LLMs always go to the most obvious thing, unless you tell them specifically otherwise. Use the tool but also get funky and mix up the ideas you love the most, adding your own flavor. Just like being a brewer or a chef. That's the essence of being an artist, and making something that at the end of the day is unique and new. Love it. Send me a beer please.
by xpe | 2025-04-04 08:01:08+00:00
> All of these companies are selling AI as a tool to do work for you, and the AI _sounds confident_ not matter what it spits out.

If your LLM + pre-prompt setup sounds confident with every response, something is probably wrong; it doesn't have to be that way. It isn't for me. I haven't collected statistics, but I often get decent nuance back from Claude.

Think more about what you're doing and experiment. Try different pre-prompts. Try different conversation styles.

This is not dismissing the tendency for overconfidence, sycophancy, and more. I'm just sharing some mitigations.
by johncoltrane | 2025-04-04 08:01:23+00:00
> Convoluted and unreasonable workarounds for a growing police state.

Well, those are _basic_ OPSEC for people whose life/safety/freedom would actually be threatened by a search ("good guys", "bad guys", it doesn't matter). If the only things threatened by a search are your pride/moral principles, then yeah, those might seem unreasonable.

> Please don't try to minimize the egregiousness of having your personal documents searched for the sake of security theater.

I don't know if that term has been coined before, but "privacy theater" is also a thing, and it is just as grotesque as the other theater.
by rekoil | 2025-04-04 08:01:57+00:00
> "The problem is now that our law enforcement, they have been losing ground on criminals because our police investigators, they don't have access to data," she added.

OK, I get this worry from a certain perspective, but you can't put the encryption genie back in the bottle, regardless what the EU thinks about encryption, I can just roll my own in one way or another, either on my own platform, or using steganography on another platform, and encrypt/decrypt manually.
by hellotheretoday | 2025-04-04 08:02:30+00:00
There are fields of study that agree with you. It is evidence based that treating your workers well, having reasonable quotas and expectations for work life balance, good wages and reinforcement for effort, etc creates conditions where workers perform more efficiently and last longer

But many organizations reject this. Why wouldn’t they? There is a surplus of workers and consumers accept substandard products. Skimp on training, put out crap. Throw workers into the fire, demand everything from them, get furious if they don’t prioritize the company above everything in their life, burn them out, cut them loose, pick another from the stack of resumes

I was talking to someone who works for a startup recently. A colleague died and it was announced on a Friday. They were expected to finish the day. On Monday their replacement started and the team was told to bring this person up to speed asap. No space to grieve, no time to process. Soulless and inhuman. Disgusting and sociopathic behavior
by tornikeo | 2025-04-04 08:02:47+00:00
Straight from FAQ [1]:

> Who can see my data? > Only you can see your data. Almost all of it stays on your computer and only a little bit goes to our safe helper. We also give you ways to make it even more private if you want.

So, am I correct to understand that the actual model backing this is on the server side?

[1] https://meeting-buddy.com/Faq
by solatic | 2025-04-04 08:02:56+00:00
The "move" from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy didn't end agriculture being a significant part of the national economy; agriculture just lost relative share of GDP. Similarly, the "move" to an information or services economy isn't necessarily going to eliminate either agricultural or industrial work. China, for example, has its tech giants (Tencent, Alibaba, etc.) but it also has vast industrial capacity (e.g. Shenzhen) and agricultural capacity (e.g. the largest pork production in the world). American education deciding to push children towards information-economy jobs that were a poor fit for their talents, neglecting classes like shop skills that were once common, was a mistake and certainly not inevitable.
by bob1029 | 2025-04-04 08:03:05+00:00
> Other deployment models, such as self-contained, ReadyToRun, and highly optimized Native AOT, are also supported out of the box.

The self contained deployment option seems hazardous to advertise here. You can dump this output to any cloud VM and it will just work. Combine with something like SQLite and there's nothing to orchestrate except for copying a folder and bouncing a process.
by mschuster91 | 2025-04-04 08:03:53+00:00
> And if your system has bash, it often has python as well, or at least it's easy to install.

The problem is, bash is a universal target. Every unixoid system has bash in one way or another, usually at /bin/bash or in a pinch /usr/bin/env bash. No matter if your target system is Debian oldoldstable or bleeding edge Gentoo, it will run.

Python however is a hot mess. Some operating systems are at `python` yielding v2, others v3. Others (Macports) have python2 and python3 binaries if the user doesn't also do a `port select` afterwards. The user may have overridden this with virtualenv's (that this exists at all is a disgrace in itself). And that all is before `pip` even has entered the stage, or before you try to figure out what whitespace format Python expects and what whitespace format you just used in the last YAML file you edited.

(The whitespace shit is what will keep me from using Python if at all possible.)
by TMWNN | 2025-04-04 08:04:38+00:00
>Writing a BASIC interpreter, with floating point, is much harder. Gates, Allen and other collaborators BASIC was pretty damned good.

The floating point routines are Monte Davidoff's work. But yes, Gates and Allen writing Altair BASIC on the Harvard PDP-10 without ever actually seeing a real Altair, then having it work on the first try after laboriously entering it with toggle switches at MITS in Albuquerque, was a remarkable achievement.
by mentalgear | 2025-04-04 08:06:12+00:00
Most importantly, the use of novel antibiotics must be strictly prohibited in the animal food industry.

This is crucial because the misuse of antibiotics in livestock farming has been a major driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a global health crisis. When antibiotics are overused or improperly applied in animals, bacteria can evolve to become resistant, rendering these life-saving drugs ineffective for treating infections in humans and animals alike.

It has always been a perversity that life-saving reserve antibiotics were ever permitted to prop up the grotesque machinery of the modern food industry—a system built on global-scale animal cruelty.
by Retric | 2025-04-04 08:06:14+00:00
> I have counterpoints to that

How? Efficiency of scale can never drive marginal coasts below 0.

> You look at present energy expenditure as waste, if the asset itself is not consumed for an equally arbitrary reason that you approve of, or generates an even more valuable asset or ongoing revenue stream.

I think you’re missing my point, a gold ring may be purely decorative but people actually want the ring. A gold bar sitting in a safety deposit box for decades is there purely an investment, the nature as a physical piece of gold is essentially irrelevant the person wants is a store of value not gold. At that point why not simply leave the gold unearth and use the potential location of a mine as a store of value?

IE, for a 50 gallon drum of oil to be sitting in my basement it must have already been extracted from the earth. We don’t extract oil as fast as possible and store it because the ground itself was already storing it instead people pump faster or slower in response to market conditions that’s efficient unlike silver, gold, etc sitting in a vault.

Thus using mined gold as an investment is simply inherently wasteful, a pure dead loss for humanity.
by solatic | 2025-04-04 08:07:51+00:00
Building out clean energy infrastructure provides value. That's perfectly fine. There is plenty of need for hands to maintain American road infrastructure that is falling apart and build new infrastructure like high-speed intercity rail and more subway lines to help support additional population growth.

The reference is to how a government can pay people to literally dig ditches then refill them. This nominally increases GDP (due to additional government expenditure) but it does not produce value and, more importantly, does not give people the dignity they would ordinarily achieve through their labor because they know such work is bullshit.
by mantas | 2025-04-04 08:08:26+00:00
> And what do you propose instead? I'm not seeing the EU doing any better than the US with their lowest socioeconomic class groups.

Key word „socioeconomic“ groups. It should not be racist policies based on skin color. Help poor people, help people growing up in shitty neighbourhods. True diversity is people with different life experiences. Sometimes it correlates with skin color, sometimes it doesn't. Just like poor economic situation and shitty upbringing.

> Bigotry exists. What are you going to do about it? It seems that the most popular answers right now vary from "Not a goddamn thing" to "Fuck those bastards."

Of course. Including among those so-called „anti racists“.

Slightly offtoic, but it's funny that modern „antifa“ is one of the most authoritarian-minded people I've met. While a good chunk of far-right people are full-on anarchistic-minded people. With about equal amount of bigotry on either side. People loooove abusing labels to further their agenda.

> (In reality, I'm pessimistic that there is much that can be actively done. The bigots who threw slurs at my immigrant ancestors didn't so much get better as much as just change epithets and targets. Sadly, so it goes.)

And then there're bigot immigrants who talk shit about locals. My country was a major source of migration two decades ago and it's horrible what our people would say about locals. Now tables switched and we got more incoming migration. And now we're on the other side of the same transaction guests not respecting our culture. Bigots are everywhere. But current policies tend to focus on one side of bigots which just breeds more resent on the other side.
by nottorp | 2025-04-04 08:08:31+00:00
Why OSINT? That goes for any domain.

Besides "OSINT" has been busy posting scareware for years, even before "AI".

There's so much spam that you can't figure out what the real security issues are. Every other "security article" is about "an attacker" that "could" obtain access if you were sitting at your keyboard and they were holding a gun to your head.
by fifilura | 2025-04-04 08:08:32+00:00
> There is generally a negative correlation between higher tax rates and GDP per capita

There are lots of reasons for high/low GDP per capita, but I would like to see proof of this to believe it.

Why is Denmark so high up for example, generally considered the country in the world with the highest tax pressure, and without any substantial natural resources. Cherry picking of course, but your claim is very sweeping, so I'd put the pressure on you to prove it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...
by theshrike79 | 2025-04-04 08:08:51+00:00
I'm on this boat. I can use LLMs to skip the boring bits like generating API glue classes or simple output functions.

Example:

I'm building a tool to grab my data from different sites like Steam, Imdb, Letterboxd and Goodreads.

I know perfectly well how to write a parser for the Goodreads CSV output, but it doesn't exactly tickle my brain. Cursor or Cline will do it in minutes.

Now I've got some data to work with, which is the fun bit.

Again if I want to format the output to markdown for Obsidian, the LLM can do it in a few minutes and maybe even add stuff I didn't think about at first.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-04-04 08:09:02+00:00
GP's not missing those edge cases; GP recognizes those edge cases are themselves a product of IP laws.

Those laws are effectively attempting to make information behave as physical objects, by giving them simulated "mass" through a rent-seeking structure. The case you describe is where this simulated physical substrate stops behaving like physical substrate, and choice was made to paper over that with extra rules, so that family can inherit and profit from IP of a dead creator, much like they would inherit physical products of a dead craftsman and profit from selling them.

It's a valid question whether or not this is taking things too far, just for the sake of making information conform to rules of markets for physical goods.
by tgv | 2025-04-04 08:09:21+00:00
The goal would be dismantling the state, and hence (national) tariffs, for good. The people behind it are quite well off, and can bear the tariffs for now. And it's not just capitalist-anarchists. This is a cabal of spiteful people with different goals, but some shared ideas about the scale of government, prepared to use as much force as necessary.

> Protectionism is a left-wing, big-government policy.

It isn't left-wing. Just check the US history of protectionism. Or Germany's. Or the France's. Even the UK's. Or even simpler: look at what happened just now. How can you call Trump left-wing?
by southernplaces7 | 2025-04-04 08:09:22+00:00
>I don't condone or endorse breaking any laws.

Really? Because there are a lot of very stupid laws out there that should absolutely be broken, regularly, flagrantly, by as many people as possible for the sake of making enforcement completely null and pointless. Why write in neutered corporate-speak while commenting on a casual comment thread while also (correctly) pointing out the absurdity of certain laws.
by kilolympus | 2025-04-04 08:09:54+00:00
It's a laptop GPU - there's the integrated Intel UHD Graphics 620 card and the dedicated NVIDIA GeForce MX150. Both are pretty old (6-7 years?) but are capable of running most 3D games so I was a bit surprised.

EDIT: P.S. What might help debug is that I have hardware acceleration enabled in the browser, but the GPU is not doing any work on the animejs homepage. For e.g. YouTube, the GPU does a lot of work so I've verified hardware accel works.
by jstimpfle | 2025-04-04 08:10:18+00:00
There is no spiral rule, that is a misconception. Look up how "declaration follows usage" in C. E.g. https://eigenstate.org/notes/c-decl

While this rule has become somewhat diluted when C developed and gradually took on features from C++ (like types in function parameters), it's still very helpful to understand the guiding principle. (But those inconsistencies that crept in over time are also the reason why newer languages don't do that anymore).
by popol12 | 2025-04-04 08:10:21+00:00
Gold was the reserve asset for most part of human history and was less spendable than bitcoins (harder to divide some gold than to send a fraction of a bitcoin).

Who keep it stable ? Well, who keeps gold stable ? Once an asset becomes the reserve asset, it becomes the standard and other things are priced in that unit, or in units derived from it (here's a kilogram of beef, I'll sell it to you for 2 British pounds which are worth x units of reserve asset)

But maybe you're talking about the stability of its inner properties (its supply, for instance). That for sure is not as stable as gold's. But is its distributed consensus stable enough ? That's a good question. So far, so good.
by aw1621107 | 2025-04-04 08:11:27+00:00
> You can not really write a formal spec without having prose first.

The WebAssembly folks might have done that? From the Wasm SpecTec blog post I linked in a sister comment (emphasis in original):

> In fact, the formal version [of the Wasm spec] was written long before the prose, which was then created by manually transliterating the formal rules into natural language (for some definition of “natural”).

To be fair, I'm sure there was a lot of non-formal discussion in the process of creating the formal spec but I'm not sure whether that counts as "prose" in this context.
by Rodeoclash | 2025-04-04 08:12:15+00:00
I worked in a digital technology company in Wellington in the 90s and one of our key technologies that we sold was a hosted form on a secure (remember, this is the era that https was not common) website to collect credit card payments. We were a proto Stripe in the year 1999 but totally in the wrong place in the world to take advantage of it.
by thorwebdev | 2025-04-04 08:12:18+00:00
Cool project by a friend in Taiwan:

KUBI employs a sophisticated multi-sensory architecture to simulate human-like interaction. The system hinges on a microservices architecture, where specialized services operate concurrently and communicate via a real-time event stream. These services manage various tasks, including facial and object recognition using real-time AI inference, cup detection and sanity checks via cameras, receipt printing, secure facial recognition for access control, and precise control of milk and bean dispensers.
by bayindirh | 2025-04-04 08:12:38+00:00
GRUB is too big? Maybe because it's 30 years old and can boot at least 11 architectures.

...and what systemd-boot is? A UEFI only boot menu which gets its data from UEFI only.

I mean comparing two different things and claiming the more featured one too big is mental gymnastics to put it politely.

GRUB having vulnerabilities is not surprising, esp. when the thing is written at an age where computers were completely different things, programming and requirements wise, but insinuating that systemd-boot is the ultimate replacement is, eh, a bit underhanded. Esp. when it comes from Lennart, whose systemd is too big and encompassing for an init system.

It's the pot calling the kettle black, heh.
by menziess | 2025-04-04 08:13:33+00:00
Compared to Bytewax, Slipstream puts the emphasis on freedom, at the cost of having to implement certain features yourself.

This freedom let's you do things that other libraries may not offer within the bounds of their API. For instance, I do see that joins and windows are supported in Bytewax, but is it possible to do more complex stateful joins based timestamps (temporal joins) or other arbitrary conditions?

If it does, then that's great. But I've had experiences where limitations became apparent during an end-phase of a project. When the API starts to reach its limits, but you're already invested in it quite deeply.
by vwolf | 2025-04-04 08:13:42+00:00
For your friends app, I had to go into the app store and then expand the description to view the key features, where it is mentioned that it uses AI similarly as Cal AI. Just based off the initial images of Eat compared to Cal AI, then it's much more clear what Cal AI does compared to yours (besides plastering AI everywhere).

Another thing I noticed is that I saw a random guy on instagram with a rather big following being sponsored by Cal AI. Maybe your friend was unsuccessful in getting his app out there? Although I agree that luck will always play a role, but if the public don't understand what your app immediately does and they believe AI to be pure magic, then sprinkling that everywhere will get something like Cal AI flying.

I still think it is shit from a technical perspective in terms of the validity of amount of calories from a single image and nothing else. But it seems like that's not what people want, inherently because they are lazy. Actually counting calories is much harder long term. If regular people now think that this is magically replacing this process by just snapping a picture of their processed meal, then I can see why it's successful. Although quite depressing...
by bigpeopleareold | 2025-04-04 08:14:38+00:00
The worst for me was also my first one, T570. Two motherboard changes because of a flex-y body that put too much pressure on the hard drive connector. I had to use it for a few months because my main computer had to be fixed. I thought I can get more time out of it - nope. That flex-y body probably put too much pressure on something else and after many attempts (for some reason) of resetting the CMOS battery and using it a little, the thing would go right into a boot loop. I bought a new T480 (can use the battery from the T570! :D ) and this is soo much sturdier. Also have a T470p -- besides my screen issue, that thing is a really sturdy.

I have a P14s Gen 3 (so basically a T14s with the power-hungry GPU :D ) from work. I don't think the fit and finish is great, but it properly feels sturdy at least.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-04-04 08:14:58+00:00
I thought we were talking about metrics of intelligence. Regardless, the terminology overlaps.

As far as metrics of intelligence go, the algorithm is a black box. We don't care how it works or how it was constructed. The only thing we care about is (something like) how well it performs across an array of varied tasks that it hasn't encountered before. That is to say, how general the black box is.

Notice that in the case of typical ML algorithms the two usages are equivalent. If the approach generalizes (from training) then the resulting black box would necessarily be assessed as similarly general.

So going back up the thread a ways. Someone quotes Chollet as saying that LLMs can't generalize. You object that he sets the bar too high - that, for example, they generalize just fine at Go. You can interpret that using either definition. The result is the same.

As far as measuring intelligence is concerned, how is "generalizes on the task of Go" meaningfully better than a procedural chess engine? If you reject the procedural chess engine as "not intelligent" then it seems to me that you must also reject an ML model that does nothing but play Go.

> An explicitly programmed chess engine does not generalize, by definition. It doesn't learn from data. It is an explicitly programmed algorithm.

Following from above, I don't see the purpose of drawing this distinction in context since the end result is the same. Sure, without a training task you can't compare performance between the training run and something else. You could use that as a basis to exclude entire classes of algorithms, but to what end?