skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Presumably autonamous cars would maintain proper separation - I try to maintain a three to five second gap between myself and the next card, but drivers in my area tend to be quite aggresive and will force their way into the gap - I have nearly been hit or run off the road multiple times.

I think the benefits are more that the car strictly obeys road rules, as opposed to humans being unaware, ignoring, or straight up willfully breaking (e.g. speeding) the rules.

<rant>

On my path to and from work there is a "trouble nexus" - you have a few main roads intersecting, a relatively short stretch of road with a couple of entrance/exits towards a public transit hub (trains, buses, and a large carpark converging - so there's a lot of road traffic), then a bridge, then another major intersection and exits onto a highway.

People are always slowing down to create a gap in the traffic flow and let vehicles from the transit hub onto the road leading up to the bridge, in an effort to be kind towards other drivers, but this has disastrous effects on the traffic behind it - interrupting the traffic flow of the major roads.

If people did not make space for vehicles from the side roads, the main flow of traffic would pass fairly quickly and then the sideroad traffic would be able to get on noramlly.

</rant>

The point I am trying to make is that autonamous cars would let traffic planners adjust e.g. road speeds, traffic light timings, etc. closer to a global optimum without having to account for human selfishness.
Would you mind sharing the code you're using for that?
Unfortunately you have no way of determining if a machine or animal have this particular experience qualia. You cant even determine of other people beside yourself have it, which gives rise to solipsism.

It like saying that red-headed people doesn't have a soul - there is no way to disprove that assertion.
I never understood the obsession with the graphical display of execution plans (neither in Postgres nor in Oracle).

I find the text output much more useful and detailed then any graphical display. Especially when generated with "explain (analyze, buffers, timing) ..." and "track_io_timing" turned on.
One line, not completable:

/\/\/\/\

Also, I don't believe it doesn't depend on width. I think with constant height, the probability of completable one should increase with width, and become almost 1 for very large widths.
You'll understand when we derive schadenfreude from the slow implosion of the hegemon.
It's poor form to reply to comments like these, but I just had to mention that one of the members of the team was a woman: https://www.team6502.org/sydney-anne-holt.html
Have you been on the Airbnb site? It’s possible to browse properties without specific dates so it’s not possible to display the full price. The number of nights that one-time fees (or long stay discounts) will be amortized over is not known on the listings page.

So your “it’s not allowed” is just internet lawyering. Even the quote you have indicates that they are exempt if the calculation can’t be made for the listings page.

This isn’t some special case of Airbnb trying to screw people. It’s common across any industry where there are one time costs amortized over quantities.
Self consciousness is required for understanding and intelligence
FavoriteKeys- Fastest way to bookmark & Manage your URLs
Gregory Chaitin discusses elegance of programs in his book The limits of mathematics, which is a very good read. I wrote a review almost ten years ago here: https://p4bl0.net/shebang/the-limits-of-mathematics.html
No, Americans call bourbon whiskey. More to the point, something being common doesn't make it correct.
> Knowing that Monty could not have revealed the car (vs happened not to) has an impact.

Nope, it does not. The fact that he revealed a dud is what matters. The notion of him maybe revealing a car is senseless anyway because you would just then pick the car or the game would be over.
> Unix (...) first source license was sold in 1975.

> VMS was released in 1977 as VAX/VMS on the VAX series of computers. Before VMS the DEC hardware ran various other operating systems such as RTX-11, TOPS-10, and optionally AT&T Unix

Before VMS there was RSX-11 (note RSX not RTX):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX-11

"From 1971[5] to 1976 the RSX-11M project was spearheaded by noted operating system designer Dave Cutler, then at his first project.[5] Principles first tried in RSX-11M appear also in later designs led by Cutler, DEC's VMS and Microsoft's Windows NT.[6][7][8]"

In Dave's words:

https://tech-insider.org/windows/research/1992/11.html

"RSX-11M was introduced in 1973, 18 months after we started building"

Note Dave Cutler and note the years. I'd say the history is comparable.
Being in the public domain doesn’t automatically mean material is published, promoted and distributed. Those activities take a lot of effort, they are full time jobs for an entire industry, and they are the only way martial gets to be widely read.

I love project Gutenberg, I have several of its books on my iPad right now, but a single book shop selling copyright works probably does more in a week to promote actually reading stuff than Gutenberg does in a year.
Serious question. Why?
Or point to the wrong thing, or point to unmapped memory, or be const, or…there's a lot of things that can go wrong with this function.
The 70s called. They want their joke back.
Ya, but the snark at the time was that Jobs was such a great salesman he sold a dead OS to those dumb suckers at Apple for $400M. (Of course they were really buying Jobs & team.) Still took about 6-8 years for that OS to get good.
Could you recommend some resources to get skilled with such suff? Also what tech stack you are using? (both hardware and software)
Do Observables Replace Promises?
You do know chemicals occur in nature, right? Have you signed the petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide, which has killed millions of people?
Imagine getting an implanted ethanol fuel cell, inducing ABS in yourself, and having a permanent source of power to charge your phone (ideally wirelessly through a subdermal Qi charger, as the alternative would be both unpleasant and unhygienic). Presumably if the fuel cell was consuming ethanol fast enough your body wouldn't take any damage from the ABS either.
Do you have color, sound, taste experiences? Do you experience pain? Do you dream or imagine? Then you have quaila. If you don’t like the philosophical connotations of that term, then call it subjective experience.
The "standard" is unfortunately (as far as I can determine) not open source, but it is an "open" standard. The REX2 file format from Propellerhead is documented somewhere at https://www.reasonstudios.com/developers but you will need to sign up for a developer account. I'm pretty sure it's free to use, and it's supported by most serious DAWs.

>"REX2 is a proprietary type of audio sample loop file format developed by Propellerhead, a Swedish music software company.

It is one of the most popular and widely supported loop file formats for sequencer and digital audio workstation software. It is supported by PreSonus Studio One, Propellerhead Reason, Steinberg Cubase, Steinberg Nuendo, Cockos REAPER, Apple Logic, Digidesign Pro Tools, Ableton Live, Cakewalk Project5, Cakewalk Sonar, Image-Line FL Studio, MOTU Digital Performer, MOTU Mach 5 (software sampler), and Synapse Audio Orion Platinum, among others."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REX2
From the Reddit thread [1], StartMail is a separate company and wasn't part of the acquisition.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/di5rn3/startpage_i...
Ktor for Fast Server Prototyping
Lots of controversy on the topic, and I don't know where the truth lies. The following article offers an analysis of the Indian suicide case and makes a reasonable case a myth has been created:

https://issues.org/keith/
A better analogy is shooting a hostage to make your captors know you're serious.
Are they F1 sterile?

If not, then I would encourage developing countries to just igonore the IP rights and/or in the case that they are sterile to develop a generic.
Dangerous? Only as much as you want to swim in nihilism. Someone who claims you have qualia, a soul and a psychic commitment to astrology or whatever is more dangerous because that person has an affirmative commitment to maintaining that belief.

Qualia is generally argued by Sam Harris to be simple or reductionist elements of our human experience we can all agree humans share. Burning your finger on a hot stove and recoiling is a conscious experience every human shares.

The soul includes way more ideas and depends on who you talk to. The word has been overloaded a bunch, but generally can be said to include a higher spiritual aspect.
Hm, good points, looks like I need more sleep. Looking at the video again, a path is valid if two slashes follow each other, with the same pattern shifted by 1 the line below.

But I wasn't treating /\ as an invalid on the first line. Eg thinking of:

/\/\/\/\
\\//////
/\\\\\\\ … and so on

(Using the /\ pattern, paths can go back up and come back down, so this requires a lot more thought than I instinctively put into it)
How to Code? – 9
I have a straightforward definition of "understand". To understand means to be able to give a (representative) example of the (intensionally) given set. Though it is harder than it seems, as it usually means solving the constraint satisfaction problem.

For example, take the classical AI knowledgebase fragment, "bird is animal that flies". If I ask example of bird, it can say "eagle", and exhibit some understanding. We can then probe further and ask for a bird which is not an eagle. If it says "bat" or "balloon", it exhibits that it still doesn't understand birds quite right.

In particular, if the description is nonsensical and thus impossible to understand, we cannot give any examples.

This idea was really inspired by the study, where they asked people to recognize nonsensical and profound sentences, describing certain situation. The profound are the ones where you can create a concrete instance of the situation.
That example seems pretty unrelated to what I would think of as “understanding.” That’s more just a feature request for Siri.

It’s like saying “my calculator lets me type ’1 + 2 =’ and gives me the answer ‘3,’ so it seems to understand that question, but when I look at the calculator I see there’s no ‘sqrt’ button that would show me the square root of 3.”

The fact that my basic calculator doesn’t have a “sqrt” button is pretty irrelevant to how well it “understands” how to add two numbers together.
Ideally I'd be able to play this on an iPod :(
Model Elsie Hewitt aexy topless photo gallery
Stripe India is now in preview
That link basically just simulates recursion by defining a stack in the function. It recognizes that in the recursive version among the stack variables only the two indexes need to be stored so it stores them. It is even less space efficient than the recursive version because it always allocates O(n) space.
TiDB is Apache 2.0 licensed, but it is MySQL compatible and features horizontal scalability. https://github.com/pingcap/tidb
Once you've seen this one, it's difficult not to rank it first :)
Pick a random line from a file / stream without knowing how many lines there are to choose from in one pass without storing the lines that have been seen.

perl -e 'while(<>){$x=$_ if rand()<=(1/$.)}print $x'

For each line, pick that line as your random line if a random number (0<=n<1) is less than the reciprocal of the number of lines read so far ($.).

It hits my elegant bone. Only one line... rand < 1/1, pick it. Two lines, same as one, but the second line has a 1/2 change of replacing line one. Third line same as before but gets a 1/3 chance of taking the place of whichever line has survived the first two picks. At the end... you have your random line.
Self consciousness can be equally stratified and broken down functionally. It's not a boolean either.
[citation needed]

Somewhat tongue in cheek, but the point remains. What leads you to believe this? As another reply touches on, there's a straightforward way to verify whether that is the case (for oneself, and not an external observer): Given a perfect clone, uploaded copy, etc, are you as aware of the clone's experience as you are of your own?

If the answer is no, why would that change if the original ceases to exist?

If the answer is yes, the first thing I'd want to know is _how_ exactly the information (of awareness) is possibly synchronized between hosts (presumably in realtime, at that!).
There is a big difference between people trying to do good, fucking up, and getting trapped by their fuckups and people who only care about themselves.

It's easy to confuse the two groups and think a distinction doesn't exist.

It's not at all complicated to get smart idealistic people who fuck up whether in Wall St or SV, to doubt themselves, get defensive and then cynical. There are lots of idealists who have turned cynical over their careers. And it's very beneficial for all kinds of parties, to strip that idealism away and just harvest the smarts using guilt and shame, fear and doubt.

And it works very well on those who aren't clear about their Values and Needs, or those who don't have experience with failure.

Yet even after all that, you will find two different groups. Why? Because there will always be idealists who don't turn cynics, even after fucking up.

There is nothing straight forward about recovering from fuckups. For some it takes time to see their mistakes. Some are able to openly process or talk about their mistakes (which society loves to then exploit or pass judgement on). And others get highly defensive and come across or get painted as oblivious to their mistakes. These different routes add to the impression of hypocrisy (that everyone likes to take a dig at and laugh about).
Also see:
http://infinitejukebox.playlistmachinery.com/ https://eternalbox.dev/jukebox_index.html
I propose moral autonomy as a more interesting phenomena to distinguish.
See my other comment in this discussion. What you experience as "understanding" is that a particular constraint satisfaction problem (roughly, the logical fragment that is supposed to be understood) has a solution and you are able to construct it.

I have also somewhat responded before to Chinese room argument with this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20864005
I hope the parent doesn't get "tone policed". The message is spot on.
There Is No Algorithm for Truth [Video]
Do you have a link to the mentioned study?

Edit: nvm, I think I found it : http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf
Even if you manage to digitise yourself (which seems to be the fantasy of many posters here) you're still limited by the ultimate end of the universe.
Take away all the frills and you’re just a contractor. The past two organizations I’ve worked at forked the open source libraries we modified. If upstream didn’t want our changes, so be it. That said, we generally tried to communicate with the maintainers/community to better ensure the change was accepted.

What sets you apart from any other contractor?
Does AlphaGo 'understand' go?

I think the key ingredient is 'being in the game', that means, having a body, being in an environment with a purpose. Humans are by default playing this game called 'life', we have to understand otherwise we perish, or our genes perish.

It's not about symbolic vs connectionist, or qualia, or self consciousness. It's about being in the world, acting and observing the effects of actions, and having something to win or lose as a consequence of acting. This doesn't happen when training a neural net to recognise objects in images or doing translation. It's just a static dataset, a 'dead' world.

AI until now has had a hard time simulating agents or creating real robotic bodies - it's expensive, and the system learns slowly, and it's unstable. But progress happens. Until our AI agents get real hands and feet and a purpose they can't be in the world and develop true understanding, they are more like subsystems of the brain than the whole brain. We need to close the loop with the environment for true understanding.
The issue is that we’re using a word based on human mental activity and social agreement and then applying that to a computational process in a machine, which likely leaves out part of the human experience which makes up the word understand.

It’s more accurate to say the Chinese room computes results which humans recognize as successful translation from English to Chinese. The understanding is all on the side interpreting the output.
Not author but I found scrapping super easy with jsdom in node.
This is really not a big deal to the point "you should worry." The binaries Microsoft distributes are under a different license than the source (which is MIT).

The binaries contain telemetry, and it's definitely a bit suspicious-looking they don't want that disassembled but I'd guess that's a standard boilerplate license clause rather than deliberate. Questionable legal protection isn't going to do anything to stop someone from looking, so unless they've also put in effort to protect the telemetry mechanism and/or its payload through some technical means - which the article doesn't claim - it's hard to see a nefarious intent here.

On the plus side, I did learn about VSCodium [1] which I wasn't aware of before.

[1] https://github.com/VSCodium/vscodium
I use mpv commandline tool to play music in a loop, seamlessly. You open an audio file, press “l” (lowercase L) at the starting point, then use arrow keys to go to the and point and press “l” again. That’s it. The only problem is to press the keys precisely at a music bar boundary, but with enough practice you can get pretty close so the seam is barely noticeable or not noticeable at all.
You can use an IOMMU to isolate DMA to a separate security domain. This is how Qubes OS works.
Yes. So are the rich in the two countries and the US is very prone to designing a world that only works for the upper classes.

If money alone were all that mattered, you would think a country like the US wouldn't have thousands of homeless, etc.
I've seen quite a few tv shows of bhopal, and none mentioned sabotage. All of them mentioned that the plant controls, gauges and alarms were so unreliable they had nothing to do with reality. Alarms went of for no reason at all while major problems went unnoticed.

So 'maybe it was sabotage' seems corporate blame shifting. It was somewhat unclear exactly how anything in there happened. That was their problem. It was only a matter of time before an accident happened.
For what it’s worth, one of the clowns who coauthored that Ultramicroscopy paper is credited with the first observation of the build-up of the interference pattern from individual electron detections in 1974 (using an electron biprism, not slits in a plate).
Answering Complex Open-Domain Questions at Scale
it's the antithesis of maintainable code. But given that one is unlikely to want to change from calculating the inverse square root to inverse cube root or any other variation....
This is a promo piece for Ed Regis' new book, right? Doesn't matter what the science is, as long as we buy the book in the end.

<wit>
If you study hunger, you find that the root causes tend to be uncontrollable forces of nature like greed, corruption, and politics. Not that we _can't solve problems like this with frankenrice, but it may be more straightforward to help those who find themselves oppressed into poverty, be slightly less oppressed. </wit>
> just two years ago, a decisive majority of Chilean voters (55-45) voted in the center-right, pro-market party and Presidential candidate

Sounds similar to Frances Emmanuel Macron. Yellow vests are still at it, almost full year of riots in the heart of Europe and nothing changed.
Convert Consumer Leads to Sales Tips
Puppeteer is way better for scraping.
This is a good balanced article that gets a lot of things right. We should take a forgiving approach when we talk about AI systems. And as the author points out the problem is not that AI systems dont have understanding yet. The problem is with the hype which leads many to believe that we are close to building systems which can understand us.

That said, I have a small problem with the examples presented to say that already machines understand us :)

The article says 'For example, when I tell Siri “Call Carol” and it dials the correct number, you will have a hard time convincing me that Siri did not understand my request"

Let me try to take a shot at trying to explain that Siri did not "understand" your request.

Siri was waiting for a command and executed the best command that matched. Which is, make a phone call.

It did not understand what you meant because it did not take the whole environment into consideration. What if Carol was just in the other room. A human would maybe just shout "hey Carol, Thomas is asking you to come", instead of making a phone call.

If listening to a request and executing a command is understanding, then computers have been understanding us for a long time. Even without the latest advances in AI.
It was on HN before: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17764348

But perhaps I wasn't clear, the study doesn't say this, but it was rather my own experience with the BS sentences in that study that led me to the observation that they have an empty set of examples if we take them as a constraint satisfaction problem of sorts.
I don't think it's possible for machines to understand. Numbers are meaningless, our human actions give them a useful function. All of the meaning a computer appears to provide is the preassigned values of layers and layers of programming work done by humans. Even today AI has a lot of human tagging and categorization that makes it useful.

The idea that a new self- sustaining meaning generation can arise out of the interlocking mechanisms of a computer is an interesting one. As we see self driven car CEOs describe some of the most advanced systems we have, requiring to be run in controlled environments and balking at the infinite complexity of real life, are we really building computer systems that are anything more than an incredibly sophisticated loop?
Too poor to even afford a simple chlorine bleach solution to rinse syringes (at minimum!) is very poor indeed.
It certainly doesn’t understand Go as a board game humans invented as a stimulating mental exercise that became competitive enough to see whether human programmers could come up with a program that could beat any human. And whatever cultural history went along with playing Go. Certainly chess playing has been used as an analogy in the west for many activities involving strategy. This is something no computer currently understands.
There is a nonzero chance that we're wrong about that and manage to escape the universe.
Oh what an amazing game. I vaguely remember, playing all night once, until I started to hallucinate in the early hours of the morning, and decided to put myself to bed. To be honest I'm not sure whether I ever finished it.

I recently reread Magician, and it was just as good as I remembered it.