MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MPSimmons | 2025-07-07 19:58:31+00:00
I don't think we actually even have a good definition of "This is what AGI is, and here are the stationary goal posts that, when these thresholds are met, then we will have AGI".

If you judged human intelligence by our AI standards, then would humans even pass as Natural General Intelligence? Human intelligence tests are constantly changing, being invalidated, and rerolled as well.

I maintain that today's modern LLMs would pass sufficiently for AGI and is also very close to passing a Turing Test, if measured in 1950 when the test was proposed.
by Maskawanian | 2025-07-07 19:58:39+00:00
Their anti-DRM stance is arguably their only compelling feature as opposed to just buying steam.

I remember the old game launcher that was called Desura?, which a lot of those third-party keys sites would sell keys for, and it's no longer around. So one of the main concerns with these online platforms is them disappearing and losing all your stuff.

Quite frankly, I am happy that GOG exists for this niche. It would be less "sabotaging" if consumers would actually vote in their own interests. However, this has been shown time and time again to never happen, sadly.
by codegeek | 2025-07-07 19:58:41+00:00
Some rules for backups that you must follow:

1. Backups must be taken offsite on a separate server (obvious but surprisingly some people miss this)

2. Backups must be tested frequently. If you cannot test a backup, you don't have a backup.

3. Frequency depends on your criticality of data, your contract/SLA with your customer etc. Ideally, you should be able to have Point-in-time-Restore (PTR) going back to certain number of hours/days/weeks

4. Make sure to have notifications for backup failures. If a backup failed, you must be notified to correct it manually.

5. Bonus: Have a backup reconciliation script that runs additionally to recon all backups for a certain period.
by kragen | 2025-07-07 19:58:52+00:00
I'm not sure this is a "bare passive" like the beginning of "The day's work [being] done, they made their way back to the farmhouse," one of the bare-passive examples at your link. An analogous construction would be, "The points already [being] made, I ceased harassing the ignorant". But in "In addition to the points already made" this case "the point already made" is not a clause; it's a noun phrase, the object of the preposition "to". Its head is "points", and I believe that "made" is modifying that head.

Can you insert an elided copula into it without changing the meaning and grammatical structure? I'm not sure. I don't think so. I think "In addition to the points already being made" means something different: the object of the preposition "to" is now "being", and we are going to discuss things in addition to that state of affairs, perhaps other things that have happened to the points (being sharpened, perhaps, or being discarded), not things in addition to the points.
by KoolKat23 | 2025-07-07 19:59:08+00:00
Copyright is concerned with the the actual physical copy. The model isn't this. The end user would have to carefully prompt the models algorithm to output a copyright infringing piece.

This argument is more along the lines of: blaming Microsoft Word for someone typing characters into the word processors algorithm, and outputting a copy of an existing book. (Yes, it is a lot easier, but the rationale is the same). In my mind the end user prompting the model would be the one potentially infringing.
by ben_w | 2025-07-07 19:59:18+00:00
> I really don’t think that’s the case. A robot that can stack shelves faster than a human is more valuable at that job than someone who can move items and also appreciate comedy.

Yes, until all the shelves are stacked and that is no longer your limiting factor.

> One that can write software more reliably than person X is more valuable than them at that job even if X is well rounded and can do cryptic crosswords and play the guitar.

Cryptic crosswords and guitar playing are already something computers can do, so they're not great examples.

Consider a different example: "computer" used to be a job title of a person who computes. A single Raspberry Pi model zero, given away for free on a magazine cover at launch, can do this faster than the entire human population combined even if we all worked at the speed of the world record holder 24/7. But that wasn't enough to replace all human labour.
by rasz | 2025-07-07 19:59:21+00:00
It was only difficult because Commodore fired engineers to cut cost. They left absolute minimum staff just to keep the lights on. One example - there was no one at Commodore capable of re-designing Paula stupid PLL to accept 1Mbit clock so Amiga could support HD floppies.

They had patents https://patents.google.com/patent/US4780844A/en they had design documents for original chip, they had chip fab, they had no one with skill nor will to pay for it. All it needed was adding switchable clock dividers to control logic.
by mordechai9000 | 2025-07-07 19:59:32+00:00
Those oil field jobs in Alaska are usually on a set schedule like 2 weeks on / 2 weeks off. During your shift you work 8 (or preferably more) hours per day, 7 days a week. During your time off you fly back to where you live - some people come from the lower 48 - and have 2 weeks to do whatever you want. Not a bad deal if you're not bothered working in the industry. Of course, the entire state is effectively dependent on the industry, even if you don't work for them directly.
by fuzzfactor | 2025-07-07 19:59:38+00:00
Not exactly a dupe, unless it's off-by-one accidentally. Once decimal place it looks like.

In the other thread peole were giving advice on how to make 1M, plus realistically asking about your capabilities where you say you already have 0.5M to work with.

This is good info, everybody would still do different things depending on the resources available and tolerance for risk, etc.

Now in this thread it's an amount which is a little more within reach, probably the quickest, easiest way to make 0.1M from what you have now, and make your mother proud at the same time, is divide your 0.5M into 5 equal parts, give your mother one part and see how proud that makes her :)

If that's not enough you still have 4 parts left ;)
by toast0 | 2025-07-07 19:59:56+00:00
> However, I think there is much easier ways to get the benefits. For example, by adding trees and landscaping in Parks, medians and other public spaces.

This is a method to add trees and landscaping.

> Once a forest is added to an area, it becomes completely inaccessible because of how dense it grows. All of the ones I have seen are completely fenced off.

It sounds like they're completely inaccessible because of fencing and density. Fencing might be hard to remove, but density at ground level tends to decrease as a forest grows; the canopy blocks sun and lower tree limbs may drop or become less productive and bushier plants have a harder time. After the forest gets somewhat established, pathways are easier to form (although brambles and thickets may need help to clear), and thinning the trees can help the remaining trees thrive.

My parcel has a woods on the edges, and it wasn't too bad to establish paths in most of it, especially with a little help from goats to clean up the ground clutter. Similarly, there are trails in a nearby well established reserve, but you could easily go off trail if you had a reason too... Some bits are too dense to pass through, but most of it is fine. Your local forests likely grow a bit differently than mine though.
by immibis | 2025-07-07 19:59:59+00:00
Hm? As I understood it, you lock up some money, and then secretly agree to reallocate it with the Lightning protocol, and then eventually get it back in the latest allocation. So it costs $50 and then you get $50 back - or $60 or $40.

This is an interesting thing when financial institutions do it between themselves. It's completely useless as a consumer-facing payment system. Consumers aren't going to plan in advance how much money to lock up, that's just stupid.

I assume you're not referring to the transaction fee because last I heard, it's not currently $25.
by AlexandrB | 2025-07-07 20:00:04+00:00
This kind of comment is ridiculous in light of the last hundred years of transportation which worked on gasoline, a highly flammable liquid fuel that can even explode under some circumstances. Why do we trust people to handle gasoline safely, but Li-ion batteries are a bridge too far?

I'm tired of being treated like an idiot consumer because someone, somewhere, fucked up their Li-ion battery.
by nullhole | 2025-07-07 20:00:09+00:00
A lot of strong opinions in the article, but Ebert wasn't stupid and wrong. He said - correctly, I think - that there was a sense of awe and wonder at the first dino scene, with the Brontosauruses:

"But consider what could have been. There is a scene very early in the film where Neill and Dern, who have studied dinosaurs all of their lives, see living ones for the first time. The creatures they see are tall, majestic leaf-eaters, grazing placidly in the treetops. There is a sense of grandeur to them. And that is the sense lacking in the rest of the film, which quickly turns into a standard monster movie, with screaming victims fleeing from roaring dinosaurs."

I mostly agree with him on that, and I say that as someone who deeply loves that movie.

*I'm sure I got the species slightly wrong, the long-necked extra-big ones
by discoutdynamite | 2025-07-07 20:00:15+00:00
honest hard work, depending on the country. if you can cut it as a pipefitter or welder that will make you $100K easy. But its demanding, dangerous, risky work. welding for a living will ruin your eyes even when using the best available protection - if you start at 30 you'll be blind at 50; so they pay accordingly. pipefitting, if you have the aptitude and energy, can pay very well, but its never risk-free. American companies love to H1B both these jobs because its normally a 150-200/year for a domestic master, they pay an H1B $100K and call it cost cutting. For a foreigner, learn with a domestic crew, go overseas and make your seed money quickly, then retire and stop risking your life and your vision doing that work.
by lofaszvanitt | 2025-07-07 20:00:16+00:00
It's time to learn how to let go of something that is akin to an addictive substance. I also spent countless hours playing MMOs. While I have fond memories of them, I was relieved when I managed to stop playing these exploitative games.

I agree that single player games and the day zero patch shenanigans must go in order to preserve them. But otherwise, I'm glad that after long years most of these games cannot be injected into your bloodstream anymore.
by giardini | 2025-07-07 20:00:19+00:00
If it's a Maytag, Whirlpool or another older super-reliable machine then you might consider fixing it yourself (if you're handy with tools) or finding someone to fix it. If you want to replace it with a good washer, then know that there are shops who sell rebuilt/refurbished models of the most trustworthy appliances.

Meanwhile for DIY-ers, parts are usually available and there are YouTube videos on most major models (telling you which models are best, how to fix/maintain them, how to run them, etc.).

We have a Whirlpool Ultimate Care II that is about 50 years old and has been thru 4 generations of people. I've worked on it twice: once to replace a switch and the second time to replace some ratchet gears. Repairmen have also worked on it in my absence. Like most of the older washers, it's designed to be easy to dismantle and repair. It washes more gently than any other washer I've seen: consequently our clothes last longer. Wish the software I use was as easy to fix.
by threecheese | 2025-07-07 20:00:22+00:00
There’s no guarantee this didn’t base the results on just 1/3 of the contents of your library though, right? How can it be accurate if it’s not comprehensive, due to the widely noted issues with long context? (distraction, confusion, etc)

This is a gap I see often, and I wonder how people are solving it. I’ve seen strategies like using a “file” tool to keep a checklist of items with looping LLM calls, but haven’t applied anything like this personally.
by spwa4 | 2025-07-07 20:00:30+00:00
This is because you attack the symbol that they're proud of, rather than pointing out the policies. The problem is that the democrats are doing the same, like the blog post this is about.

The problem isn't Trump, and it certainly isn't Trump voters, it's the policy. Trump is nothing but a tasteless symbol of failure. But if someone wants a bust of him on an altar, who fucking cares?

The problem is that we AREN'T discussing policies. We aren't discussing whether cutting medicare is good or bad, we're discussing whether all democrats are terrorist lovers, and all republicans are dumb broke versions of uncle scrooge.
by impossiblefork | 2025-07-07 20:00:38+00:00
So do I, then I found this reasoning I presented in my comment and realised that piracy was actually quite bad.

Ordinary property is much worse than copyright, which is both time limited and not necessarily obtained through work, and which is much more limited in availability than the number of sequences.

When someone owns land, that's actually a place you stumble upon and can't enter, whereas you're not going to ever stumble upon the story of even 'Nasse hittar en stol' (swedish 'Nasse finds a chair') a very short book for very small children.
by taeric | 2025-07-07 20:01:19+00:00
This feels overly strong? I've certainly messed up my fair share of recursive calls.

I don't know why, but I have actually gotten a bit stronger on the imperative divide in recent years. To the point that I found writing, basically, a GOTO based implementation of an idea in lisp to be easier than trying to do it using either loops or recursion. Which, really surprised me.

I /think/ a lot of the difference comes down to how localized the thinking is. If I'm able to shrink the impact of what I want to do down to a few arguments, then recursion helps a ton. If I'm describing a constrained set of repetitive actions, loops. If I'm trying to hold things somewhat static as I perform different reduction and such, GOTO works.

I think "functional" gets a bit of a massive boost by advocates that a lot of functional is presented as declarative. But that doesn't have to be the case. Nor can that help you, if someone else hasn't done the actual implementation.

We can get a long way with very mechanical transformations, in the form of compilation. But the thinking can still have some very imperative aspects.
by sapphicsnail | 2025-07-07 20:01:42+00:00
> Pagan gods are personifications of natural forces, hence Thales's famous remark that "the world is full of gods".

There were all kinds of gods. The Christian conception of God is taken from "pagan" philosophers. There's also a difference between theologian's/philosopher's conception of the Divine and religion and how lay people actually understood their faith. Even early Christians were divided on how they understood God.
by nwienert | 2025-07-07 20:02:06+00:00
You seem to think everyone shares your view, around me I see a lot of people acknowledging they are useful to a degree, but also clearly finding limits in a wide array of cases, including that they really struggle with logical code, architectural decisions, re-using the right code patterns, larger scale changes that aren’t copy paste, etc.

So far what I see is that if I provide lots of context and clear instructions to a mostly non-logical area of code, I can speed myself up about 20-40%, but only works in about 30-50% of the problems I solve day to day at a day job.

So basically - it’s about a rough 20% improvement in my productivity - because I spend most of my time of the difficult things it can’t do anyway.

Meanwhile these companies are raising billion dollar seed rounds and telling us that all programming will be done by AI by next year.
by const_cast | 2025-07-07 20:02:10+00:00
You're downvoted but you're correct. Disordered people who did not offer some sort of economic gain in a market were simply institutionalized. Autistic people who were not high functioning were pretty much as good as dead. Same thing goes for depression, anxiety, and schizophrenia. We had no systems in place for people who cannot work. Physical disabilities were more of the same. If you could work, it was okay-ish. You'll still get treated as a freak and discriminated against daily, but you weren't completely shut out of society. If you couldn't work, however...
by rv888 | 2025-07-07 20:02:19+00:00
Location: Los Angeles, CA Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: A wide range but lately: Django, FastAPI Python, AI, OpenAI / ChatGPT, Roku Brightscript, Linux, React, and various cloud services like AWS, Google Cloud Platform, and Digital Ocean. Streaming and broadcasting using Ant media server.

Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanvinson/

Email: info@ryanvinson.com

Who I am:

Fractional CTO and Director of Technology with 25+ years of layered experience across a multitude of technology solutions. I've often been called a Swiss army knife of technology solutions. I've consulted executives on the best approaches, interviewed and hired their staff, lead and managed teams of developers for quick turnaround projects as well as more in depth ongoing products. Language experience with Mandarin Chinese (advanced) and Khmer (basic).

What I am looking for:

I'm looking for projects that need a part time Fractional CTO or director of technology.
by yayitswei | 2025-07-07 20:02:32+00:00
Interesting literacy regression: this newly discovered Babylonian hymn was routinely copied by schoolchildren 3,000 years ago, while yesterday's article about why English doesn't use accents showed that by 1100 AD European literacy had contracted so much that monks were essentially writing only for other monks.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, ancient Babylon had institutionalized childhood education for complex literary works. Medieval Europe treated literacy as a specialized craft. So much for exponential growth.
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-07 20:02:35+00:00
Trump is an unusual factor, he's able to kick a lot of people's asses who other people couldn't kick. The same people who got attacked on Jan 6 couldn't discipline him for that.

My understanding is that since the Tea Party, Republican house members haven't lasted as long as house members usually have because they either decide the juice isn't worth the squeeze or get primary challengers.

Bigger picture, Tillis resigning is bad news for the Republicans in the sense that, in the current climate, he's likely to be replaced by an extremist just when people are going to be sick and tired of the consequences of Republican rule (e.g. just as people were sick and tired of Democratic rule not long ago.) No party has the Democrat's ability to pull defeat from the jaws of victory but if they can put up somebody who doesn't use words like misogynoir and latinx against somebody far to the right of Tillis the outcome will be predictable.

One form of "party discipline" I noticed in 2016 was that primary candidates from the presidency made the tour of right-wing donor organizations that would make them kiss the ring and run the gauntlet, testifying that they pass a long list of "litmus tests" that I think weren't all that popular with voters, even conservative voters. Trump stood out because he was the exception, and in particularly he brought up the immigration issue which was otherwise suppressed by the system. My interpretation though was that the Republican Right was funding a large number of "no hope" candidates and there was some combination of "these organizations win by getting a lot of coverage for conservative ideas in the media" and "these candidates get a lot of money they can spend to hire their friends to work on their campaigns"
by MrJohz | 2025-07-07 20:02:48+00:00
I cannot point to the case, because my entire knowledge about the legality of this stuff comes from vaguely following the articles about this case. But feel free to read the judgement in this case where it will be spelled out in much more detail.

Also, I don't quite understand how your example is relevant to the case. If you give a book to a friend, they are now the owner of that book and can do what they like with it. If you photocopy that book and give them the photocopy, they are not the owner of the book and you have reproduced it without permission. The same is, I believe, true of digital copies - this is how ebook libraries work.

In this case, Anthropic were the legal owners of the physical books, and so could do what they wanted with them. They were not the legal owners of the digital books, which means they can get prosecuted for copyright infringement.
by ceejayoz | 2025-07-07 20:03:45+00:00
Fun fact: Urgent cares owned by hospital chains can be substantially pricier, too. In my area:

https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/getmedia/80e07f2b-b8a4-44f0-b...

> A hospital-based urgent care clinic is a clinic that is owned and operated by a hospital… Services provided at hospital-based urgent care clinics must be billed in the same way they would be billed if those services were provided at the hospital.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-07-07 20:03:46+00:00
Agreed. I'm also in favor of anthropomorphizing, because not doing so confuses people about the nature and capabilities of these models even more.

Whether it's hallucinations, prompt injections, various other security vulnerabilities/scenarios, or problems with doing math, backtracking, getting confused - there's a steady supply of "problems" that some people are surprised to discover and even more surprised this isn't being definitively fixed. Thing is, none of that is surprising, and these things are not bugs, they're flip side of the features - but to see that, one has to realize that humans demonstrate those exact same failure modes.

Especially when it comes to designing larger systems incorporating LLM "agents", it really helps to think of them as humans - because the problems those systems face are exactly the same as you get with systems incorporating people, and mostly for the same underlying reasons. Anthropomorphizing LLMs cuts through a lot of misconceptions and false paths, and helps one realize that we have millennia of experience with people-centric computing systems (aka. bureaucracy) that's directly transferrable.
by cheevly | 2025-07-07 20:04:15+00:00
And the irony is that those of us using AI to amplify our output to produce at exponential speeds feel like your comments are gaslighting us instead! Ive never seen such an outright divide in practitioners of a technology in terms of perception and outcomes. I got into LLMs super early, using them daily since 2022; so that may have bolstered the way I’ve augmented my approaches and tooling. Now almost everything I build uses AI at runtime to generate better tools for my AI to generate tools at runtime.