skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Can't you host code on GitHub that is not "free" for commercial use? If GitHub scraped these projects then it's a problem.

It did. It's spitting up the AGPL in empty files, and AGPL'd code isn't free for commercial use. It requires people who use it to make changes available under the same license.
Also worth keeping tabs @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconducto...
Copyright doesn't just benefit huge corporations. For instance, without it, independent artists who rely on copying for distribution (authors, musicians, etc.) would find it much more difficult to make money off their work, mostly (IMO) because large corporate entities with large investments made in publication and distribution systems could simply take content and sell it themselves with zero obligation to the original creator(s). This process could be highly automated at scale, giving creators essentially zero chance to compete in the market.

It's a bad idea.

The thing about copyright law that needs reform is its bias toward the benefit of large corporate entities. Platforms' implementations of DMCA compliance allow "rights holders" to spam perjurious takedown requests en masse, garnishing the earnings of creators and legitimate rights holders in what can only be called (in addition to perjury) outright fraud. Companies like Github scrape the web for content, most of it copyrighted, and use it to construct new products for their own profit. Rare recitation events aside, I think their use case is legitimate fair use in the eyes of the law (and if you look at my comment history you'll see me vehemently arguing to that effect), but should it be? We don't seem to be asking that question, which is really disappointing--we're either complaining loudly and without substance, or blithely accepting the might-makes-right ethic as the central pillar of our IP law.
So your preferred solution is to restrict the allowed travel radius of people, a bit like with medieval serfs?
I was also thinking about a drone view or simply scaling the walls or trees nearby to try to get a full view of all 15 stones.
Unfortunately the Google Maps image is quite low resolution and I can't achieve enlightenment.
The EfficientNet paper has some good things to say on this.

If you're working at a place with giant datacenters full of (T/G)PUs, you can train one giant model a few times, or train smaller models hundreds of times. Without hyperparameter search, there's a really high chance that you're just looking in the wrong region and wind up with something gigantic but kinda meh.

So, the simple strategy is to use the smaller models to find a great mix of hyperparameters, and then scale up to a gigantic model. The EfficientNet paper demonstrates some fairly reliable ways to scale up the model, changing width and depth together according to a scaling factor.

But yeah, even for smaller model footprints, the ability to run tens of experiments in parallel goes a very long way. If you've got a single GPU to play with, I would instead try to focus on a well-scoped interesting question that you can answer without having to demonstrate SOTA-ness, as it will be an uphill climb.

Also remember that it's good to lean heavily on pre-trained models to save time. Anything you can do to iterate faster, really.
What's your favorite? I think blackberry is mine.
That Supreme Court ruling doesn't appear to address the claims of actual copied code (the rangeCheck function), only the more nebulous API copyright claims.
The US military industrial complex never has to justify spending more. They have a guaranteed infinite blank check until the heat death of the universe, no matter what party is in power.
It was mostly a quip that the first two anti-optimizations result in distributing the application across tons of machines. Since this is only the basis of the entirety of distributed computing, I thought it was only fair to include an instance where distributed computing patterns win out (fault tolerance and parallelization).
I may be wrong but I don't think that HN deifies Steve Jobs. He has a reputation as a visionary but also as an asshole. He also is the anti-hacker and this is a website with "hacker" in its name. Apple makes perfect products, don't dare touch anything was the name of the game.
Slightly off topic: Is the git frontend [1] open source? If not, are there some very light self hosting ones like it?

[1] https://thelig.ht/code/
I don't understand what you are (rhetorically) advocating for?
Ask HN: Best way to read HN on MacBook Air?
May I know which is the best way or app to read HN on Macbook Air? I found an app called "Octal for Hacker News" on App store but it only works with M1 chipset.
We would, if they weren't required to pay for potatoes.

Are you making a claim that Netflix shouldn't be required to pay for individual movies because they sell a collection of movies?
On their website they say that "GitHub Copilot is a code synthesizer, not a search engine: the vast majority of the code that it suggests is uniquely generated and has never been seen before. We found that about 0.1% of the time, the suggestion may contain some snippets that are verbatim from the training set."

So it won't copypaste your code. It had just read code from open sources and learned from it - similar to what humans do. So I don't see any problem with this.
Imagine if these companies did their best to hide the existence of secret military bases. They would need the location of secret military bases otherwise they cannot censor their public maps. The secret nature of the bases makes them impossible to not reveal.
> I don't think that you are allowed to just go download any old image and train on it.

My understanding as a two-year student of ML is that you are allowed in the US to go download any old image, train on it, and then release the model as long as the outputs are "sufficiently transformative."

That last phrase is the key part, and has never been tested in court. It's entirely possible that either I'm mistaken here, or that the courts will soon say that I am mistaken here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FA_gt9w28o&ab_channel=guava...
Absolutely, it was a very solid post overall, including the nits I picked.
A normal human bean would read that as, American ancestors had pies too so Americans didn't invent pies. lol

You're just being pedantic because you think native americans were left out but that's not the point of this weirdo thread.
TLDR by definition is incomplete. I think your expectations are a bit off.
Social media also has tremendous potebtial for manipulation. If Fox News or New York Times prints false allegations, they and their brand are on the hook.

But Facebook can just boost someome who holds that opinion, you would have the inpression that millions of independant people are thinking that, and would never know who is pulling the strings.
You trust the New York Times quote of a Walgreens PR guy at face value with no fact checking and no analysis over "some random blogger" who does fact checking and analysis for a living.
This is why I think AGPL is a reasonable default for personal projects where the dev doesn't want to fuss over licenses or sue anyone, but would be uncomfortable with $BigCorp exploiting their work. Even though it doesn't explicity prohibit them from using it, it tends (or tended) to have that effect.
Nobody in this thread has suggested that.
I was also wondering this. I'm unfamiliar with linux kernel development but this reminds me of that.
Microbes in cow stomachs can break down plastic
nope, those lines were specifically excluded from the prior judgment - and SC did not cast another judgment on them:

> With respect to Oracle’s claim for relief for copyright infringement, judgment is entered in favor of Google and against Oracle except as follows: the rangeCheck code in TimSort.java and ComparableTimSort.java, and the eight decompiled files (seven “Impl.java” files and one“ACL” file), as to which judgment for Oracle and against Google is entered in the amount of zero dollars (as per the parties’ stipulation).
Well, in a plane trip you have 3 lost hours before it starts and after it ends, so a normal train, running at 130km/h will be faster than a plane at 850km/h for any trip of less than ~460km.

If you make it a fast train, at 350km/h, it will beat the plane on any trip up to 1700km.

Most trips are short, so no, most trips can be done by train and people still spend less time on them than by plane.
The ocean is literally on fire, maybe they don’t know what they are doing.
Unfortunately, just because code is open source doesn't mean that there aren't terms of use attached with it. One of the simplest and most widely used terms is attribution.

This means that if Copilot does not attribute code when it copies and modifies it, then it is violating most open source licenses. Full stop.
That would make it the only language in the world to be passed down unmodified, which seems... unlikely.
No you are not, guaranteed (I think, not a lawyer).

At least from a copyright point of few.

TL;DR: Having right, and having a easy defense in a law suite are not the same.

BUT separating it makes defending any law-suite against them because of copyright and patent law much easier. It also prevents any employee from "copying GPL(or similar) code verbatim from memory"(1) (or even worse the clipboard) sure the employee "should" not do it but by separating them you can be more sure they don't, and in turn makes it easier to defent in curt especially wrt. "independent creation".

There is also patent law shenanigans.

(1): Which is what GitHub Copilot is sometimes doing IMHO.
I want to point out some evidence for the theory can be found in Vancouver where the entire city was rezoned for fourplexes (a duplex where each side has a rental unit.)

It has added barely any new supply at all.

I think it didn't go far enough. Rezone for 4-10 story apartment buildings, and now you're getting somewhere.

This single family home thing just doesn't work in cities with as much demand as San Francisco and Vancouver.

If you want to tackle the problem from the supply side, you need to be more aggressive about it. You need for the potential profit to be great enough to justify buying multiple adjacent homes, tearing them down, and combining the lots.

Even then, it might not be enough to solve the problem, but it's a start.
One of the problem of such networks is permanency of something that we still treat as spoken word. If posts were ephemeral, they would present much less of an attack surface for various digital mobs.

Maybe there should be an option for users to limit their comment lifetime to N minutes. With N starting somewhere around 5. Of course, you can do this manually, but a semiautomatic mechanism would work better.
Europe banned continental supersonic flights too which is why only the Atlantic route to NYC was an option you couldn’t do flights eastward.
Does it substitute variables correctly? E.g. if I define max(a,b) or max(x,y) does it complete the definition with the right variable names?
So, to verify, your claim is that GPT-3, when trained on a corpus of human text, isn't merely managing to string together a bunch of high-probability sequences of symbol constructs--which is how every article I have ever read on how it functions describes the technology--but is instead managing to build a model of the human world and the mechanism of narration required to describe it, with which it uses to write new prose... a claim you must make in order to then argue that GPT-3 works like a human engineer learning a model of computers, libraries, and engineering principals from which it can then write code, instead of merely using pattern recognition as I stated? As someone who spent years studying graduate linguistics and cognitive science (though admittedly 15-20 years ago, so I certainly haven't studied this model: I have only read about it occasionally in passing) I frankly think you are just trying to conflate levels of understanding, in order to make GPT-3 sound more magical than it is :/.
Forgot about 10 goto 10 eh?
I absolutely despise these lot of super entitle people that have absolutely amazing free services provided by companies like GitHub and Google/Youtube and they get all agro because they dared try to monetized or impose some basic rules that don't really affect them at all in any meaningful way.
Depends on when the poetry was written. Classical Chinese was in use for over two thousand years, with the written Mandarin-based vernacular Chinese only replacing it in the last century. So later poetry (e.g. during the Qing) may not have been written with Middle Chinese pronunciation in mind. For example, the somewhat (in)famous poem, 'Lion-Eating Poet in the Stone Den' consisting entirely of homophones in modern standard Mandarin was written in the 1930s, so the poem was certainly written with Mandarin pronunciation in mind.
Couldn't you get this with squash and merge, along with not deleting merged branches? The main branch would have the story, and you could go into the actual squashed branch to get the actual commit history?
Another functional language with effects: https://www.unisonweb.org/
To be totally honest, I too had completely forgotten about IBM. In my mind, they are synonymous with processes and bureaucracy. No idea if that's fair; they are big nowadays, they must be doing something right (other than paying $20M to get rid of Ginni Rometty after she showed one mediocre year after another).
Got the same message. Also thought it was a developer testing :-), but a few minutes later a message about security issues was pushed...

Love it ...
I want to know how to benchmark a search engine.
Interestingly enough only announced copilot as extension this became a problematic while the model generated code since was launched.
I suppose it’s difficult to prepare billions of line codes or data points and everyone to be happy.
@rijnard (the blog post author) is awesome, and all of the code changes he talks about in the blog post are public. You can see all of his recent changes to search code in https://sourcegraph.com/search?q=context:global+repo:%5Egith... in case you want to follow along by just reading the code (that query shows all of his diffs that touch paths containing `search`).
The question is: who is the consumer? The idea that Facebook users == consumers might not be right. Perhaps the real consumers are the corporations that pay for ads. In that case, some price fixing might be out there. I doubt that Facebook does its best to keep the ad price on the level of a perfectly competitive market.
> Words and sentences aren’t copy written, books are, so when exactly are a collection of words a book?

If that were true, then 20 people could each steal a single chapter from a book, and one of the people could combine those 20 chapters into a new copyright-free book. That's clearly false.
Seems like the startups that focus on this eventually just switch to pot. Pays a lot better.
> Copyright has concluded that reading by robots doesn’t count. Infringement is for humans only; when computers do it, it’s fair use.

This is silly. Co pilot is not reading by itself, someone pushed buttons telling it to read and write. If I clone the entire github without the licenses I am telling a robot to do it, doesn't make it right.
Hi,

Use your browser :)
> I think everyone loses.

only people who have released their code publicly under a (mostly) open license

so, not Microsoft
People insulting others as hypocritical for critizing something needs to stop.
Most travel is business. Business events mostly don't require travel as we saw this year.
This is not the first person I've seen that ditches GitHub in favor of some other front-end... and it's not uncommon that they look like this which is often baffling to me.

Say what you want about GitHub's almost monopoly position, but the UX is really great and accessible even to non-technical people. Maybe you don't need that, maybe you don't want the issue-trackers, but it's worth thinking about who you're excluding with these kind front-ends.
Accurate human throwing requires a timing accuracy of 1 ms.
How does IRC's federation model compare to ActivityPub?
> It was mostly a complaint about tone, not content.

You say that as if you think that makes it better.
To what extent are these expressions driven by a genuine allegiance to strict copyright laws?

As opposed to an anxiety that a machine might be able to do some of our jobs better than we can?
This is exactly why people have issue with Github's Copilot.

It's not the technology, but the fact that any code you pushed to GitHub in the past 13 years is now 'accessible' to anyone.

Private repo?
Paid account?
Deleted repo five years ago?
Deleted repo today?
Proprietary code?
Embarassing commits?
Accidental API keys or passwords in commits?

All 'available'.

It feels like the entirety of GitHub was just 'leaked', and converted into a marketable product.

Would you push your code to a service if you knew it could be read by anyone one to ten years from now? Even if you paid to keep it a secret?
GitHub has 56 million users as of September 2020 (according to Wikipedia). Let's assume that only 1 million of them use Copilot at an average of once a week.

That means that every week, there will be 1000 verbatim copypaste of code by Copilot. Then multiply that by a year or more as Copilot gets older.

0.1% may not seem like a lot, but at the scale of Internet companies, it always is.
A corporation deciding not to run ads on videos of a crank promoting snake oil is not a First Amendment issue. It is barely even a censorship issue in the broadest sense of the term. Very sad to see Taibbi reduced to this kind of totally empty hysteria.
I don't care about attribution.

The only reason I use MIT, is so some knucklehead doesn't try to sue me, because they cheezed up my code.
Open source code still has a license. That license may or may not require distributing the license along with the code. MIT may allow distribution without a license unless the code share is significant, but reusing GPL3 is a no-go for commercial companies.

The Apache 2 license allows for commercial use, but has implications for the way you can enforce your software patents. It also requires distributing the license file along with your application.

Complaining that companies use the software you told the world was free to use without restriction is dumb. However, not everyone gives away their software for free without restrictions. The fact that Github isn't respecting those licenses is a much bigger problem.

The tool autocompleting some random guy's personal information because he uploaded his blog to Github is highly problematic. The idea of using permissively licensed code to train an AI is not bad, but some human with knowledge of software licenses would need to pre-select those projects.

If all code came from one of those "do whatever the fuck you want" licenses, then there wouldn't be a problem. I'd consider it to be a great product and have no issue paying a fee. There's a huge market for a Copilot product, but this iteration just.. isn't it.
I understand it comes across as jingoistic, but truly Sanskrit grammar and pronunciation hasn’t changed since Pānini. The word Sanskrit itself means “constructed” and there was a rigorous effort to prevent ambiguity.
70% of San Francisco residents say quality of life has declined: poll
Because it's not meant as a criticism of FP, or a list of FP things, in fact I actually really like FP. It's just that if you anti-optimize for bloat and slowness, you coincidentally end up with a lot of features that FP has.

Centralized state, immutability, wrapping, indirection, and nested data structures with garbage collection are very FP things. They are also almost always slower than mutate-everything imperative style, and require a lot more under the hood to make them performant. You basically need a clever compiler to really reap the benefits. Contrast with C with a dumb compiler, easy to get a fast, albeit buggy, program.

IO, bad caching, etc are very much not in the spirit of FP. The other points are just other bad things that I've seen a lot of apps do.

> Anyway, most of both lists apply perfectly to the modern "mandated microservices" architecture some place use, that I think was your point.

That was exactly my main point.
I like this. It's a fun thought
Ctrl-c is a robot, so copyright doesn't apply to it
> [Mercurial]...includes no unnecessary concepts/models (read: git's index)

As someone who stubbornly uses mercurial for all his code, git's index is the single greatest feature that git has over mercurial (not counting the Magit interface). The index allows me to _incrementally_ build up a commit. I can go back and fix things, add and remove things from the index, and only when I'm ready, commit. In mercurial, I have to hold so much more state in my head about what is ready to commit, what needs to be fixed, and what is code that needs to be reverted.

And `hg commit -i` is nice, but is not a replacement for the index. Git's index allows me to add hunks, then stop, go to lunch, review the status, remove some bits, add more, then commit.

I'm told that Mercurial's queues feature would support this, but I find it incredibly non-ergonomic, and I can't quite figure out how to use it as an index replacement.
Disapproval and shaming are very strong and potentially dangerous tools, but they are not the same as censorship, even though they overlap to some degree. (But what doesn't?)

The worst kind of censorship is probably the emotionless, impersonal, mechanical sort done on a large scale either by specialized professionals or by robots.
We can argue that point, but it seems githib in no way is even aware of how substantial their copying is
I was more thinking of having written the whole verifier to fit/please z3. It can be hard/daunting to move to more 'generic' SMT drivers if done late in a project.
The problem here is that a person using this automated tool is not being given the required information in order to decide whether the code they are re-using is a "substantial portion" of the software it's taken from; in fact, they aren't even being told they're re-using existing code at all.

This does not relieve the person using the code of the responsibility to make that determination, so anyone who is re-using code shown to them by this automated tool is doing it without having fulfilled their responsibility under the license. The fact that they don't know they are doing this, because the tool is not telling them, doesn't change that.

> People who publish MIT software know they're basically giving their code out with basically no strings attached.

No, they aren't. The license has terms. Using an automated tool that doesn't tell you when you are re-using existing licensed code, or whether your re-use is within the terms of the license, doesn't mean you can just ignore the license. It means you're re-using code without knowing whether or not you're violating a license.
Github should list all the projects they scrapped the code from to make copilot.
The point is that many of the examples you see are intentional, through prompt engineering. The pilot asked the copilot to violate copyright, the copilot complied. Don't blame the copilot.

There also are cases where this happens unintentionally, but those are not the norm.
Through in practice they can't really do so.

Or they already would have done it years ago.

What is holding them back is regulatory oversight, and the fear of it.

So if they ever do so, it's not a fault of "secure boot" and similar, but 100% the fault of politicians seriously messing up their job.

EDIT: You can also blame Apple, for constantly pushing in a direction where such regulatory oversight is removed. (END EDIT)

IMHO Secure Boot and TPM are features I want in my system if properly implemented. A laptop not supporting some form of secure boot and TPM would be for me a reason for not buying it. (Through being able to use custom platform keys is also a must have for me.)
We deify any rich asshole who says anything, see also Musk, Trump, Reagan…