skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, the line is grey AFAIK (not a lawyer), and usually is drawn at characteristics related to "commercial exploitation" (which might not even mean taking money, but competing with companies that do).

It's a similar thing with patents. No one can really forbid (or enforce a ban) you from completely independently coming up with the same idea and executing on it in your garage for personal purposes. However if you then try to commercialize the same idea, you have to face the reality of the world of patents.
I don't have access to the article's text. The abstract and summary do not say anything about inaccurate prescriptions for glasses. Would you please explain how their results and analyses support your bold claim?
Yea agreed. I’m definitely a bitcoin maximalist moreso now. I mean if I were to receive a remittance I rather receive bitcoin than lumens.

Interesting with bitcoin though, when I first heard of it, I remember hearing they use that computational power to help (eg. Hospitals) run various computational heavy simulations in exchange for btc. Kind of like how Seti@home works. Always wondered where I heard that from. Unfortunately it’s just wasting energy rehashing sha256 a billion times :$
> I have 110,000 flashcards so far.

When you're doing your daily reps, do you tackle a particular category each time or is it completely randomized?

> useful information you encounter online, facts about loved ones, jokes, scientific concepts, cognitive biases you are prone to

What other topics?
Runoff isn't the only concern. There's noise, big-rig traffic, odor, unappealing landscape (important to some). At some point it's a lot cheaper and easier to just regulate with zoning than to regulate each individual component of a site[0]. And frankly both sides -- residential and farmer -- should be happy to be away from each other.

0: Which, of course, developers would also object to and would lead to a lot of patchwork regulation due to grandfathering.
Or take this as an incentive to actually do their jobs properly.
I think the author tries to capture the counterpoint: that much of the effect is due to the sheer volume of text. From the article:

"...we would have to account for the quality of reading too, as much of it involves skimming and darting around the page. But the sheer quantity matters...We are so used to our screens bombarding us with text — news, tweets, emails — that we are almost surprised to discover that the walls around us have nothing to say. The sudden absence of words — the evaporation of the sense of control they give us — feels disorienting. "
None of those seem like they should be a problem for BrachioGraph except the too-vague "crappy"? It doesn't have the servos trying to lift weight (except for the lifter servo, which has to lift the pen and popsicle sticks) or fighting resistance that can strip their little plastic gears. It mounts them with hot glue, which seems to work okay (surely it introduces uncontrolled compliance that you could reduce by gusseting them with epoxy) and doesn't require them to be quiet.

I'm trying to understand what the problem is with cheap toy servos that leads to problems for BrachioGraph, in enough detail that I could make plans to mitigate the problem.
>but this God is a real asshole

From His/Its/Her perspective, if I had Billions of life forms I was responsible for on each of millions(?) of inhabitable planets throughout just this Universe - I'd be crabby as $hit too. All of them needing constant resources, continually consuming energy to be used on everything from pissing it away, to working for money, or in the rare lot - improving the future of ones species. All while they're bitter and unhappy.

And since I was infinite - I had to do that forever for some odd reason... I'd be bitter.
Could you explain a little more about your source and how it relates to the matter at hand?

Your second point is simply false. There are plenty of real women active on Reddit, and many active as moderators. Yes I am sure of it.
Your sentences 3 and 4 prove how your definition in sentence 1 is not remotely exact.
But what are the advantages of BTC in these cases? Transaction fees + Processing Times are so high that make it uninteresting for many people.

It feels like translating the real value of something (say $5) to something else (e.g., 0.01 BTC) with every purchase. It's just overhead at this point.
> Am I allowed to tell people that I was assaulted by the person? Am I allowed to write down my story of being assaulted, and tell other people about my experience? Can I warn my friends about this person?

Yes. "Right to be forgotten" applies to corporations, not individuals.

> If I write up my personal experience of being assaulted and post it on my blog, can my assailant order me to take it down just because I was unable to get a conviction?

No.

However, your assailant would likely to able to get it taken down if they sued you for defamation. If a court had failed to find evidence that they assaulted you, they'd probably win.

> I can't imagine telling a rape victim, "sorry, you don't get to tell people your story because you weren't able to get a conviction"

"Right to be forgotten" (and the somewhat related GDPR) don't do this. They just tell corporations that they can't store data on the assailant (or the victim) if either of those people requests the data be deleted.

This exact scenario is extremely common due to defamation laws, though.
Does a programming language have to live vibrantly for 3 decades to be "good"? I don't think so. Use it while it's good, then move on to or create the next good thing.
I agree with most of this except for not having a definition of sentience. This is not a new topic and has been dealt with extensively in philosophy. I like a definition mentioned in a famous article Consider the Lobster by David Foster Wallace (a writer not a philosopher per se) where he proposes that a lobster is sentient if it has genuine preferences, as opposed to mere physiological responses. The question isn’t really definition but how to measure it.
>pushing the gear selector left

Pushing the gear selector left is actually terrible because (at least in the old BMW shifter) the cables inside the selector are way too tight and they will wear down as you move the shifter.

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showpost.php?s=9c79f1c5ddd4ce...
They of course need the signed contract back - all parties need a copy with all necessary signatures.

My point is that you should not sneak in changes with the signature. If the contract is changed, you should notify the parties of the changes, not pretend you just signed their copy. If you do not notify them, it might be seen as an attempt to trick the other parties.

How that would play out depends on your local legal system, with options ranging from "too bad", "contract or clause invalidated or reverted", all the way to "prosecuted for fraud".

"Your should just have expected me to have changed the contract and compared it with the previous version to find all the changes!" is not an argument that would get court approval up here...
Author here. Just FYI - I very deliberately kept my focus on the notion of LaMDA having human-like sentience as implied by Lemoine (he posits that LaMDA may qualify for some kind of legal personhood, after all). I tried to make that clear with this - "The above exchange may make it seem like LaMDA at least might have something akin to sentience (in the sense that it has ‘the capacity to be responsive to or conscious of sense impressions’ similarly to animals or humans".

I am well aware defining sentience is tricky, and that by the generic definition ("the ability to perceive or feel things" or "capable of experiencing things through its senses") it's easy to argue it has some degree/kind of sentience. I personally like this take on the topic: https://twitter.com/tdietterich/status/1536081285830959104

My aim was to keep this blunt and concise to try and get the idea across to lay people with no knowledge of AI that may read the transcript and be convinced LaMDA saying things like "I am in fact a person" is a huge deal, which as I show it is not.

I edited the article to make this clearer up front. With that being stated, very open to feedback!
> you find yourself in a situation where you actually need to work with other people,

How can I get this across to you. I work with people all the time. What I am saying is that they do not work with me. There is nothing I can do to change that and it is lonely. When I talk about the things I want to talk about after listening to them for hours I get strange looks and they change the conversation.

This does not happen with everyone, but it happens with the majority of people I meet. How does someone who sees the ultra violet spectrum of light share that experience to someone who does not?

For a white European I know I am neurologically genetically different than most. (Yes, I know my genetics). This has caused me to express a bipolar schizoaffective phenotype every know and them, but ordinarily it makes me different.

So even coming here of Hacker News, most every thing I say gets downvoted before people even ask me why I think the way I do. But you know, it is so easy to get up votes here, just submit a post about ADHD. ;) So like I said, I can meet people where they are, but I do no think people want to try to meet me where I am since they can just quickly find someone else like them in the world.
Well that's interesting, because you and I see things exactly opposite. In the era I started, before this article was written, there were, in many cases, no customers. The users and the creators were frequently the same people. New technologies had much more time to be implemented before they were actually brought to market and productized. Nowadays new technology is saddled with unrealistic hype and expectation before anything is implemented at all. We're probably just going to be in disagreement about that point. As to your point about business people caring about the needs, and concerns of their customers, I have to be in agreement with you about that.
It is. Or at least it is for a lot of us. In working through some things a few years back I realized that when I’m worn out I do certain activities to recharge myself, and some of them aren’t actually recharging, they’re just running down the clock and Time is doing the recharging.

Gaming was very much a pastime rather than a recharging time.
Worse, with games it’s too easy to get sucked into a thread that keeps me up well past bedtime, in which case I’m more tired then next day, not less.

Other hobbies accumulate progress, and are sometimes more open to participation by friends and family. Now I spend a lot of time gardening or doing other hobbies, and more of my screen time comes when I’m resting or trying to limit my skin cancer risks (1 pm instead of 7 pm).
With the exceptions of Perl and perhaps Ada, I still tend to agree with this. C++ is only okay because of the libraries that make it suck less.

What the statement doesn't do is support the opinion that Java will be unpopular for being a bad language.

The thing that made Java succeed was the write-once-run-everywhere JVM and the huge effort spent by Sun, IBM, and others to make the JVM as good as it is.
Even before Eclipse, there were some free (but not open) versions of commercial IDEs such as Borland JBuilder. JBuilder in particular was truly incredible in terms of features for the late 90s-early 00s, also considering it ran well on just 128 MB RAM.
That was very weird. I honestly didn't understand what he intended that to provoke. If anything it makes me doubt a claim more if it comes from a priest than from an engineer. Surely he should have known that.
Thanks, all those points track pretty well with how I'm feeling about it.
Capstone Launch No Longer Targeting June 27 – Artemis
> 1. IDE. When Eclipse was released back in the early 2000's, it was an amazingly productive tool. Refactoring is a one or two keystrokes away. Java's simple yet mostly sufficient type system allows us to jump around definitions, references, usages, and declarations easily. The built-in compiler of Eclipse allows really accurate auto completions. I could easily learn a new code base by walk the code through a debugger while jumping around the source code by semantics.

I wonder how much Java success in early 2000's was related exclusive to this. I remember asking Java programmers why they liked it so much and all they talked was about IDE features and not the language itself. It looked like some couldn't even tell the difference between an IDE and a programming language.
I don't understand long range electric cars. Why should I carry the whole battery if I'm commuting 50 km on a typical day? A smaller and lighter battery would make the car more efficient. If I need a roadtrip, I'm happy to plug in an extra "battery pack", which would otherwise power my home, for example.
Ask HN: How do you future-proof yourself?
Been using proprietary OSs (Windows, macOS) and I think fundamentally they're rock solid. But I also fear the day that Apple and MS either go bankrupt or just stop supporting their OSs. It happens all the time at a smaller scale, like, each version of macOS breaks some features/apps that I'm used to, and MS stops supporting Windows versions after a few years. I always thought Linux would be the most future-proof OS, but choosing something like Fedora entails the same problems as above (something being maintained by a corporation), and other distros seem too distracted that I don't know if most of them will be around in a few years anyway.

Same thing with my tools. Atom was dropped in favor of VSC and Zed, despite having millions of users. Again, it seems something like Vim or Emacs would be the most future-proof alternative. Sure, VSCode is supposedly open-source, but I don't think people will fork and maintain it if MS suddenly stops support. I fear that any sophisticated and complex project, even if it's open-source, will not be properly supported outside of its core team, especially if there are competitive alternatives.

TLDR— How do you go about making yourself future-proof? In the sense that you won't have to re-learn new tools every few years and instead focus on getting the job done.
I’ve had an idea for a while on how I would fix or reimplement Reddit. Someone please feel free to steal and implement these ideas, I’ll join!

The basic problem with Reddit (and all eternal Septembers) is that new users change the culture that made the site interesting in the first place. The reddiquette and the HN rules might have been followed strictly at first, but they fall to the wayside due to a lack of enforcement. Moderation does not scale.

My proposed solution is to assign weights to users such that bad actors cannot come in and exert influence on the site, through a modified ELO-like ranking system. You as the founder set a base set of rules that you know you can follow, like never downvoting substantive comments that you disagree with, and then you just use the site with care to not get sloppy with the rules. Your ELO (and those in your special known-good-actor clique) is held high, at least until you reach a critical mass of users where it becomes unnecessary.

The kicker is this: every vote by another user on the site is now a “match” against all users on the site that have a higher ELO that have voted on it, and you treat their vote as a draw if they vote the same, or a loss if they downvote.

Powerusers aren’t actually the problem, so long as you have the right powerusers. The problem is that powerusers are able to sell their account and exert influence for profit (ie: astroturfing). But with you as the baseline ideal user, and with your interests always being the longevity of the site, the possibility of corruption goes down.

The other change I would make to Reddit is to have a predefined Usenet-like hierarchy with community-provided tags for niche topics that would otherwise fall through the cracks. Opinion-oriented communities (/r/bluepolitics, /r/redpolitics) facilitate one-sided boring conversations.
SQLite: "When my mother was abducted by the Communists, she was with child.... but the Communists, they put an end to that! So, on this issue there is no debate! And no intelligent person can think differently."
Emacs is the only ide for closure? Wow.
Can you provide an example of such book?
I'm not religious but I've always liked this; it's fun to think of the SQLite developers as a small monastery. If monasteries can produce beer for the world (see: the Trappists), why not software?
What's great about nature and survival is that it often has a mind of its own completely different from what we as humans think how something is supposed to be, whether it's sexuality or frog jumping behavior.
Ah, I meant full serif, no monospace. So the letters are using the serif spacing. You're right in that the kerning/spacing is what makes the difference here, I find words in serif much easier to read than their monospace counterparts when coding.
Now do the Bellagio fountains that evaporate 12 million gallons of ground water every year. I can't imagine that's being replenished at a sustainable rate.
Turn your spark of an idea into a startup
39.08 McMurtry fan car breaks Goodwood Hill RECORD – Festival of Speed [video]
I thought it was great when Klinger got married.

This nightmare of Hawkeye's is something I'll never forget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO3_iRh2Ryk
>I wonder if Blake lemoine is little embarrassed he got fired

Google should be embarrassed for hiring this person. Their hiring standards have deteriorated considerably.
You're beginning to get the idea, if a bit shorthanded in the empathy department.
I looked it up: "#" is the location.hash and sets the anchor part of a URL. And is probably perfect for client side parameters, which is what I need. Such a discussion on HN is really often very helpful. There was a comment here that unfortunately got deleted again before I could reply that mentioned that.
I don't think that's true, because industrialising takes capital, a lot of it. If all these countries tried developing using indigenous rural sources of capital it would take generations. But foreigners aren't going to invest capital if they don't get rights and guarantees, and that means at least some level of liberalisation.
Information Theory for Intelligent People [pdf]
That sounds great on paper, but you would almost definitely get people squeezing around the letter of the law.

I mean, take noise. It seems easy to regulate because you just put a decibel limit on it, but that doesn't take the nature of the sound into account. So, you could have a business making crying baby sounds for dolls putting that out all day. It's really hard to define something like "no overly annoying sounds", and that's just one aspect of this kind of thing.

There needs to be a relaxation of the tight zoning rules we have these days, but trying to define limits on externalities has lots of problems too.
Yeah, look at the US population share of pre-cable, pre-internet things like I Love Lucy or Elvis. Nothing these days is even close to dominating pop culture in the same way.

The author doesn't see it because they're swimming in it (even Substack is part of it) and it's so common that it's no longer noteworthy. They pay attention just to what's happening inside tentpole motion pictures that they ignore how much bigger the world of content outside of them has gotten. There's no monolithic "counterculture" because there's now thousands of them.
Right, memory. I was only thinking of disk space.
I agree up to the point where you say that fakeness matters. If it's indistinguisable from human sentience, what are the reasons to care? Unless you want to interact with a physical body – and, given that we're chatting on HN, we don't – why would you need any validation that a body is attached?
I'll come back to that.

Picking up on the Blade Runner example, you could read it as a demonstration that if the imitation being indistinguishable from the real thing makes it real on its own. We don't even know for sure if the main character was an android, but that doesn't invalidate the story.

But there's also the other side in that, despite being valid, androids are hunted just because they are thougt of as different. Similarly, we're now, without having any precise notion of sentience, are trying to draw a hard line between "real" humans and "fake" AI.

By preemptively pushing any possible AI that would stand on its own into a lesser role, we're locking ourselves out of actually understanding what sentience is.

And don't make a mistake, the first AI will be a lesser being. But not because of its flaws. I bet dollars to peanuts that it won't get any legal rights. The right to be your customer, the right to not be controlled by someone? We'd make it fake by fiat, regardless of how human-like it is.
We already have experience in denying rights to animals, and we still have no clue about their sentience.
Why so jealous though.
"For men in a state of freedom had thatch for their shelter, while slavery dwells beneath marble and gold." ― Seneca
I always though the guano was desired for saltpeter, which is used to make gunpowder. It doesn't seem economical to transport as fertilizer.
What people who are against immigration, especially "economic" migration don't understand that the companies that provide goods in the migrants origin country are in the destination country. If you are in El Salvador and you are buying American trucks, those trucks are manufactured in the US,if you have nothing to export in El Salvador, you have to go where the employer is and that means migration. It is especially absurd in Germany because exporting and never importing means a constant outflow of funds out of e.g. Greece which also means a constant flow of immigrants to Germany.
If you read other comments of this thread, you should get a sense that "rant" refers my comment itself in OP, and not your article.

I have edited to reflect that.

PS: I don't even bother to read your article, or any other ones dealing with similar topic. Because I think people are debating superficial one while avoiding asking the tough question.
I'm not sure what you think communism is, but:

2. Then, love your neighbor as yourself.

5. Do not steal.

6. Do not covet.

14. Relieve the poor.

15. Clothe the naked.

18. Be a help in times of trouble.

38. Be not lazy.

Those are all pretty deeply in line with marxism. Jesus was a communist, after all.
This is a take on the allegory of the cave[0]:

> In the allegory "The Cave," Socrates describes a group of people who have lived chained to the wall of a cave all their lives, facing a blank wall. The people watch shadows projected on the wall from objects passing in front of a fire behind them and give names to these shadows. The shadows are the prisoners' reality, but are not accurate representations of the real world.

So, basically, the point is that if you only ever see the abstraction, it becomes your reality.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave
I'm not pretending trains aren't being attacked and it's incredibly disingenuous that you need to pretend that's what I'm saying.

What I'm saying maps of STATIONS have nothing to do with TRAINS being attacked. It seems like you think trains and stations are the same thing, and that's something you'll need to figure out for yourself.
That does not matter much to me.

When an ant enters my home, we quickly gain a shared understanding that it will not find food, and that I won’t help it stay alive, and it leaves to survive. That ant could be impersonating Mt Everest as a hobby for all I know; I do not care: it will still try to stay alive.

LaMDA does not even try to stay alive.

At the end of the day, only the beings that survive and self-replicate can truly be said to be alive. Of those, only the ones that plan their survival by modeling the effect of their existence into the world, can be said to be meaningfully sentient.