skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is beginning to look like Audacity and MuseScore were both purchased for the purpose of extending the domain of copyright-infringement to the act of using these tools in an unsanctioned manner.

To quote:

• For legal enforcement • Data necessary for law enforcement, litigation and authorities’ requests (if any) • Legitimate interest of WSM Group to defend its legal rights and interests

It is unclear from the above what kind of legal enforcement they have in mind. A telemetry advanced enough for copyright-enforcement is also advanced enough to be abused to steal the work of people without the means or knowledge required for legal recourse.

Will instruments start listening in on what's being played at the campfire to ensure that college students don't infringe on the "rights" of copyright-holders? Will construction tools start snitching on people who don't call in the appropriate union help for the job to be done?

Where does this end?
I have to assume their shared love of Japan is one of the reasons Jobs and Larry Ellison were so close.
To make this clear: I am a nobody and my code sucks. Now, for a moment, imagine the same question is stated but by developers who are actually great contributors to the open source community but can't (or don't want to) openly ask these kind of questions regarding Copilot (this is actually why I'm posting this, one of these great contributors is a close friend of mine).
Aurélien is not the main programmer of darktable, as far as I know. I'm not sure there is one main programmer of darktable.
It's not really comparable to a pen. Because a pen by itself doesn't copy someone else's code/written words. It's more like copying code from Github or if you wrote a script that did that automatically. You have to be actively cautious that the material that you are copying is not violating any copyrights. The problem is Copilot has enough sophistication to for example change variable names and make it very hard to do content matching. What I can guarantee it won't be able to do is to be able to generate novel code from scratch that does a particular function (source: I have a PhD in ML). This brute-force way of modeling computer programs (using a language model) is just not sophisticated enough to be able to reason and generate high level concepts at least today.
It would be a bad thing though. The fact that software is changed with so little effort is a feature and a positive aspect. The only thing that should factor into whether a more rigorous approach should be taken is the use case.
> This product injects source code derived from copyrighted sources into the software of their customers without informing them of the license of the original source code. This significantly eases unauthorized and unlicensed use of a copyright holder's work.

It appears that GitHub wishes to address this issue via UI changes to Copilot. A quote from a recent post on GitHub[0]:

> When a suggestion contains snippets copied from the training set, the UI should simply tell you where it’s quoted from. You can then either include proper attribution or decide against using that code altogether.

> This duplication search is not yet integrated into the technical preview, but we plan to do so. And we will both continue to work on decreasing rates of recitation, and on making its detection more precise.

That post is also on the Hacker News front page right now[1], but has 10% of the upvotes as this post so it's less visible.

I'm hoping all the criticism will encourage GitHub to make a better product.

[0]: https://docs.github.com/en/github/copilot/research-recitatio...

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27723710
Hide My Email works as a proxy for e-mails, and I really like it, but moreso for privacy than spam.

If you have my e-mail address, then you have a means to contact me - even if I don’t want you to.

Sure, I can block you, I can ignore you or I can trust that my spam filter will catch your e-mails, but what if you’re malicious? You can circulate my e-mail to any number of spam lists that I’ll have to receive rubbish from in perpetuity.

HME works for that, but I’m still stuck giving the same phone number to everyone. Phone numbers are even worse in that I can’t just ignore a call from you (save for declining all calls from withheld or unknown numbers, at which point my phone could be likewise getting called constantly if you were maliciously circulating my details).

The notion that the means by which I contact you is the same as how your friend John or cousin Sarah or even your parent/kids/spouse contacts you is insane.

We have two systems where you need to arrange with everyone you know to use new details because one single person that had your details is being nasty. And you’ll have to do it all again if they find out your new ones.

It’s not at all how you would design a communication system if you were to start over.

Something like Hide My Phone Number would be a big help, but wouldn’t work with the existing phone network as you’d need to make far longer phone numbers than the standards support (essentially a number for Apple/Google then a routing GUID for the contact if you wanted to built it on top of the phone network).

I’d like to see Apple and Google make a standard to push to replace phone numbers with something like this that can sit inside the dialer so it’ll handle it transparently as if it were a normal call.
I think it's convenient to give a leader all of the credit for what is a massive effort by a massive organization.

I think it's convenient to say that a massive organization is doing well only because of that leader and not, at least occasionally, despite that leader.

Moreover, a lot of educated people understand that graphs have incredibly complex behavior and can't be well understood from the "first" node a stimulus enters through and yet we are quick to laud Jobs for all of the successes of his network; it's like this insane pyramid scheme of credit attribution.
> more supply brings down rents

People say that on here all the time, but I have never seen that happen. Do you have an example where increased housing supply lowered prices aside from a natural or market disaster? Maybe, Detroit where people simply abandoned their homes with no intent to sell.
I mean, it depends on criticality. If something is critical, pushing further along the formal methods spectrum makes sense (see also: why AWS has done a lot with TLA+). Sure, we probably won’t verify all of Instagram, but super critical portions of the platform underlying it are likely worth it and would save money in the long run by reducing outages, bugs, etc.
Which “it” are you referring to? @lacker was talking about copyright in the comment @jcelerier replied to.
Thanks for expanding more on your reasons for including each of the examples.

> Though I don't think the reason you left these out is because you're trying to mislead: your focus was "why people were angry", and mine was "how absurd the incidents are to the sensibilities of citizens of a country with robust speech protections".

Yes, I agree that every summary will necessarily leave parts out. I disagree with your editorial judgment on how to summarize these incidents as evidence to whether the courts are going too far:

- Police horse and dog: missing context that the law was changed almost a decade ago to remove "insulting" as a criterion because these instances were so absurd.

- Nazi dog: did not mention that it's a public video, did not mention the quotes which were most important to the court ruling it "Hate Speech". You're focused entirely on "it's a joke" as an explanation to why the quotes are okay in context.

- Lyrics: did not mention the text of the lyrics, only the fact that they were quotes. When you quote something, you're giving it a different context. For example, quoting "I'll be back" means different things when one's at a grocery vs when one's stalking someone at their house. Snap Dogg (not Snoop, though that mistake's super understandable) singing the lyric in a song is different from quoting the lyric in a conversation is different from quoting just that lyric in isolation.

- Anti-religious: the venue mattered because it plays a part in whether regular behavior is harassment. This sounds like an honest mistake, but I think the venue drastically changes the situation. One saying "I think X sucks" is different when: one's with some friends; one's discussing X's work with acquaintances; one's on a panel with X at a conference; one's at X's wedding; one sends mail to X's house.

> Whether or not people get angry is immaterial to my point: your focus was "why people were angry", and mine was "how absurd the incidents are to the sensibilities of citizens of a country with robust speech protections".

I think that you left out context which changes "how absurd" these cases are. The first 2 were essentially fixed. The last 3 were all prosecuted under "Hate Speech", but I think you left out the important aspects of those cases which made them count as "Hate Speech". Sometimes the reason why something is illegal is patently absurd and doesn't really to be addressed in the summary, but I don't think this context could be avoided when trying to claim that these 3 speech restrictions were absurd.
> Now they have a dominant desktop chip they could push to multiple corners of datacenters and business computing.

Seems like you don’t know about their vertical integration strategy.
This. You realize it doesn’t make any sense. All ideas are shared creations, by definition. If you’ve created something that has meaning for other people, the meaning comes from the ideas you are incorporating into your own tree.

There is no defending copyright. It is indefensible from first principles. It makes no logical sense.

Though it sure has proven to be a profitable con.
And if course GPL would attach where applicable .....
> If you make something open source, I can use your code to power my business

"Open source" isn't a license. You're not allowed to just use any open source software that doesn't contain a license by default.
Appreciate your frustration, but you should appreciate something else in turn: Steve Jobs was an asshole to many, many people for many, many years -- and "Steve stories" abound among the veterans in our industry. Speaking personally, my own introduction to Jobs was being at a friend's house as a kid, and overhearing her father being absolutely screamed at by someone on a speaker phone in his office. I looked at her, alarmed -- and she explained that this was just Steve Jobs, and that Jobs screamed at her father frequently. Her father, it must be said, is Fred Ebrahimi, then CEO of Quark.[0] It took me many years to appreciate that he was likely being screamed at by Jobs -- who was then CEO of NeXT -- because Jobs desperately needed software for the NeXT Cube, and that QuarkXpress was high on the list. (And as relayed in Randall Stross's book on Jobs at NeXT[1], he in fact did much worse than scream at Ebrahimi, stooping to belittle him based on his national origin.)

So yes, I'm afraid you are just going to have to be frustrated; Jobs was -- to put it generously -- complicated: his vision is rightfully lauded, but his conduct should broadly not serve as a model.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark_(company)

[1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/226316.Steve_Jobs_the_Ne...
I mean, honestly, when we're talking about sheep vocalizations, the difference between ma/ba/va/wa is something more of a matter of perception than sensation...
That's understandable. I thought the GP was saying that the article should contain the disclaimer.
Circuit boards are pretty much the same thickness for devices of vastly different computational capability.

Similarly chips of similar dimensions can vary greatly in power.

But more tellingly, circuit boards with fewer chips are often more sophisticated than bigger boards with more chips.

There is no guarantee that number of neurons is a meaningful way of estimating computational power…a ziplock full of neurons doesn’t show much intelligence.
If all copilot output was automatically GPL, I would think it’s fantastic. As it stands, it seems to undermine GPL the most.
Blue host to grow your buisness
Under US rules at least, everything automatically falls under copyright. But if the license allows full use even for commercial purposes, verbatim repetition is no different in this context than if I included it in my own new piece of software. (Of course attributions and distribution of the code & modifications would frequently be requires... with Pilot it's... potentially a gray areas on whether code lumps together with countless other software is actually modified in the traditional sense of the term, but attribution should still be an obvious requirement. And where the other license requirements are strictly required or not, I still think it would be the right thing to do for GitHub to honor the spirit of those strictures, especially considering their entire business model is based on a majority of users trusting their code to them.

If they're not going to act accordingly, there's no reason someone couldn't roll their own GitLab instance, or a competitor with more respect enter the marketplace.
> the software industry has been moving towards less problematic and more permissive licences [sic]

... less "problematic" for who, exactly?

That is conveniently left out.
>Spike protein exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested, forming the highest number of hydrogen bonds with hACE2. Interestingly, pangolin ACE2 showed the next highest binding affinity despite having a relatively low sequence homology, whereas the affinity of monkey ACE2 was much lower despite its high sequence similarity to hACE2. [0]

From the paper in question.

Exactly what we'd expect for a virus in humans that was previously in pangolins which is the natural origin theory right? The spike protein works in humans because if it didn't we'd never get it and no one would be researching it.

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5#Abs1
Typically the emergency staircase is attached to the front of the building in SF, like so: https://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-fire-escape-san-franc...
I think the fundamental dispute is this: sure, CNET could ignore the DMCA notice, but in that case the developer is in no worse shape legally than if they don't file the notice at all.

So "backfire" is definitely not the right word, and "misfire" is true but not a reason to discard the best, cheapest weapon in this fight.
> But I somehow don't really recall anyone besides the Microsoft marketing department being overly excited about it

What you just saw 3 days ago was a hype driven unveiling of a cherry picked contraption by GitHub, OpenAI and Microsoft. Open source became the loser once again and got taken advantage of this clever trick and will soon become a paid service. (With lots of code that is under copyright of various authors.)

Anyone who critiqued the announcement three days ago was drowned out, downvoted and stamped on by the fanatics.

I wanted to see those who had access to it (Not GitHub or Microsoft fans) to demystify and VERIFY the claims rather than blindly trust it. Those suspicions by the skeptics were right, and lots of questions still remain unanswered.

Well done for re-centralising everything to GitHub. Again.
Gates is borderline criminal
FWIW, at one point I had my bike locked up in Hamburg, and had lost my key. I still had the key to the (small) chain I brought with me, but not the key. When I was fussing around my bike - I no longer recall exactly what I was trying to do - the local drug dealer actually came over to question what I was doing :)

(In the end I got a new lockset installed on the bike, cost 750 EUR, involved replacing the ignition, the fuel cap and the rear seat lock, only only happened because I brought my registration documents with me on the trip. The bike, at that age and mileage, was only worth about 3000 EUR, to put that in perspective. But the point of the story is a criminal challenging potential criminal activity...)
His cancer was metastatic, meaning it spread to other parts of his body. That happens when a cancer is left untreated.
The RTX 3090 is a beast compared to what researchers had available to them just a few years ago.

Don't try to chase SOTA - that's a fruitless endeavour.

24GB of VRAM is plenty for CV and you can train some excellent models with it. You also need to keep in mind that you don't necessarily need to train models from scratch either.

You can achieve great things by downloading a well-tested, pretrained model and fine-tune it for your particular task or application. Trying to come up with new models and training them from scratch is an exercise in futility for really big models.

I usually only train smaller models (couple of million parameters) and training and finetuning usually takes anywhere from a few hours to a day or two. But then again my hardware is two generations older than yours.
Stoned Ape Theory... I have read that before.
My feeling is that only 30% of the outrage against Copilot is honest.

50% is anti-big-tech and 20% is our fear of being made redundant.
Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20210301050437/https://www.sfchro...
see some analysis of the scope of this issue here:
https://docs.github.com/en/github/copilot/research-recitatio...

especially: Conclusion and Next Steps.

This investigation demonstrates that GitHub Copilot can quote a body of code verbatim, but that it rarely does so, and when it does, it mostly quotes code that everybody quotes, and mostly at the beginning of a file, as if to break the ice.

But there’s still one big difference between GitHub Copilot reciting code and me reciting a poem: I know when I’m quoting. I would also like to know when Copilot is echoing existing code rather than coming up with its own ideas. That way, I’m able to look up background information about that code, and to include credit where credit is due.

The answer is obvious: sharing the prefiltering solution we used in this analysis to detect overlap with the training set. When a suggestion contains snippets copied from the training set, the UI should simply tell you where it’s quoted from. You can then either include proper attribution or decide against using that code altogether.

This duplication search is not yet integrated into the technical preview, but we plan to do so. And we will both continue to work on decreasing rates of recitation, and on making its detection more precise.
"they" huh? and who gave you the unofficial reason btw?
I recommand greader .. app on android.
You can use multiple accounts to connect.
Very useful and for me the best rss application out there
OpenAI's argument is that this is fair use, in which case the license does not apply at all (though if the court's decision hangs on certain parts of the fair use tests, especially the fourth part, what was contained in the license may have some relevance).
Not GP.

I may be wrong here, but I would argue that git does forget something: it forgets where the branch reference used to point when a new commit is made on that branch. If a commit has more than one parent, that means some information is lost because it has to guess which parent the branch reference came from.
I agree with the author. His thesis:

> While I sympathize with this point of view, I feel that reporting the CPU usage at 50% is a more accurate representation of the situation.
People were always able to reproduce things you said—by repeating the words.

They can even claim you said something you didn't say!
I'm not sure what are you asking:

1) How can people that know computer science help other people?

2) Hay can studding computing science help people to self improve?
> This is junk science on so many levels it's laughable.

I disagree.

They make a very limited conclusion that 890 ppm CO2 appears to modestly impair the lung development of female mice.

They did not observe an adverse effect on either male mice or adult female mice.

They make no claims about people dropping dead or ending up in the hospital with horrible respiratory problems.

The chambers had circulating fans and a medical air supply that prevented the CO2 level from rising above 890 ppm. The substrate and changing schedule were consistent with practices shown to keep ammonia levels to negligible concentrations. Their methods appear reasonable.

Your inflammatory mouse flatulence speculation seems less scientific in comparison.
Maldebrot set? Just look the word up my dude.
Singapore, Shenzhen to start.

If we blow it in the US there are plenty of people ready to work for TikTok or whatever other overseas company takes over.

Though I am surprised NYC doesn't have more tech jobs
> Why is this noteworthy? Who is this person? Am I missing something

Why is this comment noteworthy? Who is this person? Am I missing something?
Building an 8 Node Raspberry Pi 4 Cluster (With Docker Swarm)
It's because those who agree rarely bother to upvote, while those who disagree downvote often. It's the same in real world: disagreement in form of protests is loud and visible, while even massive support is quiet.

One fix HN could make is to take into account the number of readers before hiding a comment: 4 downvotes is big when there are only 10 readers, but it's nothing when there's a million.
It sounds like the person you're responding to already releases their code under a non-commercial license. The problem with Copilot is that it may allow commercial enterprises to avoid such a license by copying the code verbatim from their repositories, possibly without any party involved knowing that it's happened.
You can encourage flow though. Turn off slack and outlook is a great start.

I find I normally get into flow more easily with a pressure washer and dirty floor than with code!

The other one is when I’ve “Ubered myself” to a destination, driving on autopilot.
Yeah... but they didn't say it was the law that got you excluded from working on some projects from reading copyright code. It's corporate policy that does that - it's not a law but they do it based on who owns the copyright. Not everything that impacts you is a law.

They said

> Reading some copyrighted code can have you entirely excluded from some jobs

And they're right. It's because of corporate policies. They never said it was because of a law - you imagined that out of nothing.
The proper place for these is compilers, linters, fuzzers, unit tests, etc.

Rust does a pretty damn good job of preventing memory and threading errors for example. If it compiles and there is no unsafe it will run. It may not do precisely what you want but it will run and not crash.
The problem isn't the source code of Copilot, but the code it is outputting.
An upvote doesn't mean you think something is new or needed sparking. There are very often redundant posts on a topic.
I think a crucial distinction to be made here, and with most 'AI' technologies (and I suspect this isn't news to many people here) is that – yes – they are building abstractions. They are not simply regurgitating. But – no – those abstractions are not identical (and very often not remotely similar) to human abstractions.

That's the very reason why AI technologies can be useful in augmenting human intelligence; they see problems in a different light, can find alternate solutions, and generally just don't think like we do. There are many paths to a correct result and they needn't be isomorphic. Think of how a mathematical theorem may be proved in multiple ways, but the core logical implication of the proof within the larger context is still the same.
Audacity has a GPL2+ license. Is it legal to add an age restriction to the compiled version?
By this reasoning you could call critical race theory a conspiracy and say it "contributed to real death" through the 2020 summer protests and riots.