skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Apparently via Google you found a good explanation of the Dev Kit. Gee, maybe the Microsoft Web pages should have given the links you found!

It's literally the same link as the very first one in the body of article this comment thread is about.

> The Microsoft Web pages kept promising to tell me what was in the kit, product, offering, box, unit, device, whatever. Sooo, I kept clicking, thinking that maybe I just missed the Web page that actually explained what the Dev Kit was.

As ripley12 says, there's a 'Tech Specs' tab (I realize that 'tab' might be a new concept for you, but if you'll go to that page and scroll down a little bit you'll see a section that looks like |Overview | Tech Specs | FAQ| and each of those is a 'tab')

> for most of this still I have no actual source and am just guessing. NONE of that was at all clear

In addition to the 'Tech Specs' tab there is a 'FAQ' tab. As you might know, this stands for 'Frequently Asked Questions' ('frequently' means 'often'). In there you will see a list of questions with ">" symbols next to them (this ">" does not mean that they are less than some value, it's just a typographical symbol).

The first of those (when read from top to bottom) is "What are some of the specific challenges Windows Dev Kit 2023 will help solve for developers? "

If you 'click', with your 'mouse', on that it will reveal (which means 'to show which was hidden'), and the revealed text reads:

Today, if a developer wants to build an app that targets Arm, they generally write their code and build the app binaries on a x64 Windows PC, and then copy the built binaries over to an Arm device upon which to run or test the app. If they need to debug the app, they have to hookup a remote debugging session from their x64 PC.

Windows Dev Kit 2023, as an Arm-powered device powered by the Snapdragon® 8cx Gen 3 compute platform, will enable Windows developers to build, test and debug Arm-native apps alongside all their favorite productivity tools, including Visual Studio, Windows Terminal, WSL, VSCode, Microsoft Office and Teams.

I realize there are a lot of words there, but sometimes in this industry we have to read them.
I had been a Firefox user since 2009 but over the last few years general sites like news and blogs slowly started breaking layouts and events, with JavaScript heavy sites sometimes crashing, esp on m1 air. I found toggling JavaScript and installing extensions is too tedious, esp on iOS devices so I had to move to safari as my primary with brave as a backup.

I still have Firefox on all my devices and seriously hope they focus on engineering instead of playing ideology when their revenue stream is shaky at best. I’d honestly pay for tab continuity and other UX improvements as a feature if they improve their css and js engines. I know that chromium has now become what IE was at one point but if Firefox can’t render properly and provide consistent js performance I find it harder and harder to recommend to non technical users.

This is from someone who evangelized FF in the 2010s and got many friends on board.
Here's the thing - the US has well-established laws around copyright that don't consider learning from books a violation of those copyrights. This lawsuit is intended to challenge Copilot as a violation of licensing and isn't a litigation of "how people learn." Your program stole my code in violation of my license - there's a clear legal issue here.

I'd pose a question to you - would it be okay for me to copy/paste your code verbatim into my paid product in violation of your license and claim that I'm just using it for "learning"?
Does everybody credit the author when using Stack Overflow code? I have, but don't always. Not that I'm trying to steal, I just don't take the time, especially in personal projects.

This isn't exactly the same thing, but it seems to me that three of the biggest differences are:

1. Stack Overflow code is posted for people to use it (fair enough, but they do have a license that requires attribution anyway, so that's not an escape)

2. Scale (true; but is it a fundamental difference?)

3. People are paying attention in this case. Nobody is scanning my old code, or yours, but if they did, would they have a case?

I dunno. I'm more sympathetic to visual artists who have their work slurped up to be recapitulated as someone else's work via text to image models. Code, especially if it is posted publicly, doesn't feel like it needs to be guarded. I'm not saying this is correct, just saying that's my reaction, and I wonder why it's wrong.
This is already possible with cell connectivity. Many cars have this now, for instance. Nothing is stopping the telcos from offering something to compete with this other than in remote tower-free locations.
Ask HN: License to prohibit training of systems like Microsoft Copilot
We want to modify the BSD 2-Clause Open Source License to explicitly prohibit the use of the licensed software in the training of systems like Microsoft's Copilot. We also want to prohibit use during inference.

Question: How should the third clause be worded, below?

The No-AI 3-Clause Open Source Software License

Copyright (C) <YEAR> <COPYRIGHT HOLDER>

All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:

1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
distribution.

3. Use in source or binary forms for the construction or operation
of predictive software generation systems is prohibited.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
(INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

The above is a verbatim (word-for-word) copy of the BSD 2-Clause Open Source License, except for its title and the addition of a third clause:

3. Use in source or binary forms for the construction or operation
of predictive software generation systems is prohibited.

Thanks!
Unlimited PTO sucks for employees. It isn't the case in every state but some states, including mine, require employers to pay out PTO upon separation. So having unlimited automatically means you get paid out nothing on separation, a bad deal for employees. If you're allowed to take time off, then you have earned it but because of the policy, you don't get to realize the benefit of having earned it upon separation.

Unlimited PTO also discourages using PTO because nobody wants to be seen as the person taking the most vacation. And there are therefore no useful guidelines about how much is reasonable or allowed. A written or de facto company policy of "if you take more than 2 weeks of PTO per year, you'll be seen as abusing the system" is not unlimited PTO, it's an excuse to not pay people.
GPT-3 and Stable Diffusion might not copy things exactly - but they certainly do copy "style" There are many articles likes this:

https://hyperallergic.com/766241/hes-bigger-than-picasso-on-...

The interesting thing is that the names get explicitly attached to these styles. It isn't exactly a copyright issue, but I'm sure it will get litigated regardless.
AI are not humans, no human can read _all_ the code on Github. They certainly can't read _all_ the code on Github at the scale that MS can, and are unlikely to be able to extract profits directly from that code, in violation of the licensing.
Also for EU people?
I'm wanting to do this but always worry about finding a spot to park during the night. Is that difficult?
Hmm. Probably because I don't know where to put it.

I put something on gitbook.com but pretty much stopped posting because the latest software became closed source.

I would want something with built-in network effects, but... I don't like Medium or Twitter logs. Is Instagram good for posting text?

Maybe I could try posting markdown directly in Github without a static site generator, and instead only generate the recent or tag-post lists.

I'd also want a place to post random, non-technical, unprofessional content.
Full paper:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abq3356 ("Recursive sequence generation in crows")
This makes sense, it produces chunks not the whole source where a search engine would also give you the license.
I think the prompt "GPT-3, tell me what the lyrics for the song Stan by Eminem is" is very likely to output copyrighted material. The same copyrighted material is, of course, already republished without permission on google.com.
it's a real shame. There are a few brands who do try natural stuff, including some pea protein vegan powders. But they kinda taste nasty if im being honest. There just isn't a market that's distinctly anti-artificial sugar yet, besides for the vegan crowd.

But I hope the trend of companies like spindrift keeps increasing. low sugar, no articicial sweetners.
You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is released under this License and any conditions added under section 7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to “keep intact all notices”.
c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7 additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts, regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.

——

I don’t see how one could argue that training on GPL code is not “based on” GPL code.
Difference between INT 0x20 and INT 0x21 (0x4C)?
I never saw Rust as political. It's maybe socially progressive in the sense that it's community shuns abusive behaviour towards minorities, but every community should strive for that, IMO.

Also, while I agree there are some horrible people who were associated with the CoC movement early on, I think it's unfair to judge the whole idea/project by those people. Also, I'm aware there are some poor CoCs that maintainers abuse, but that's true of any system!

Also, there's nothing wrong with being either leftist or rightist, as long as both sides can have a civil conversation!

And there's nothing wrong with empowerment! As an example, you're clearly confident enough to be able to voice your opinions, but some people still aren't, and some who are now but weren't before were empowered to be more confident. So there's nothing wrong with empowering people.
In the US, where Twitter & Facebook are dominant, the current consensus in the public mind is that political polarization and radicalization are driven by the social media algorithms. However, I have always felt that this explanation was lacking. Here in Brazil we have many of the same problems but the dominant social media are Whatsapp group chats, which have no algorithms whatsoever (other than invisible spam filters). I think Yishan is hitting the nail on the head by focusing the discussion on user behavior instead of on the content itself.
Why make the right choice when you can simply make the popular choice and then print more money to paper over the cost?
I've got one already.

Here are real-life / practical numbers so you will know what to expect.

Compiling Sciter (https://sciter.com) full rebuild (C++):

i7/32GB - just 64 seconds.

That ARM (WDK)/32GB machine - 2 minutes 6 seconds.

And for the comparison, same Sciter sources, full rebuild

Mac (Mini) M1 machine - 8 minutes 33 seconds (XCode/LLVM, but it builds universal binaries).

And yet, the same Sciter, Linux on MacMini/Intel, GCC

i7/32GB - 9 minutes 45 seconds.

So, when we speak about hardware it is not enough to compare pure synthetic benchmarks but real life scenarios.

Really, Microsoft Windows is the most developer friendly platform. De facto.
It looks like you're missing the entire purpose of copyleft vs public domain.

The point is that copyleft source code cannot be used to improve proprietary software. That limitation is enforced with copyright.

Proprietary software is closed source. You can't train your NN on it, because you can't read it in the first place.

If someone takes your open source code and incorporates it into their proprietary software, then they are effectively using your work for their private gain. The entire purpose of copyleft is to compel that person to "pay it forward", by publishing their code as copyleft. This is why Stallman is a proponent of copyright law. Without copyright, there is no copyleft.
I find it interesting that dang’s post about not just HN rules but also his personal feelings about yishan’s thread:
* appear in the same post—- there clearly is no personal boundary with dang
* direct replies to dang’s post, now the top of the comments section, are disabled

whenever dang tries to “correct the record” or otherwise engage in frivolous squabbles with other HN commenters, I really hope this article pops up in the linked material. some may argue that yishan here is doing inapropriate self-promotion and that might undermine trust in his message. i hope HN readers notice how partial dang is, how he’s used HN technical features ti give his own personal feelings privilege, and the financial conflicts of interest here.
No, people do not "virtue signal" about things they care about. Perhaps they used to in the past, but language has moved on. The phrase is now understood to carry with it an accusation of insincerity. Therefore virtue signaling and actually caring are contradictory.

This is how language works. Usage is meaning. A change in usage is a change in meaning. Language doesn't care about your opinions on the matter, it simply is. The phrase "virtue signaling" now carries with it an accusation of insincerity. If you don't mean to level such an accusation, you're going to need to find a way to communicate what you do mean that isn't encumbered by connotations that have recently become standard.
I'm not sure this is true. Proprietary source code gets leaked and that can be used to train a NN. I find it likely that Copilot was trained against at least one non-OSS code base hosted on GitHub.

Second, if copyright is being laundered away we can get increasingly clever with how we liberate proprietary software. Today, decompiling and reverse engineering is a labor intensive process. That's the whole point of "open source" - that working in source is easier than working in bytecode. Given the hockey-stick of innovation happening in AI right now, I'd be surprised if we don't see AI assisted disassembly happening in the next decade. If you can go from bytecode to source code, that unlocks a lot. Even more so if you can go from bytecode to source code and feed that into a NN to liberate the code from its original license.
^ Please downvote my comment, the XOR bit (pun intended) was garbage.
Google search is an example of ude of site reputation (search ranking) driven by where backlinks and various other site quality metrics.

I would also say the Facebook feed also ranks based on the reputation and relevance of the poster of the content.
Mozilla Corporation is owned by Mozilla Foundation. Mozilla Foundation also owns the Firefox trademark, and has the Corporation pay the Foundation for the right to use that trademark. $16.3 million in 2020 alone.

https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2020/mozilla-fdn-202...
I stand corrected! For whatever reason I remember seeing a lot of blanked-out flagged posts when kiwifarms went down, but I could be remembering things wrong.
I remember seeing the COGS for Xbox One and it was the same as retail prices. There was no profit from COGS and then you have shipping and associated costs to get the consoles out. So there is an inherent loss. it’s likely too that advertising comes under this cost per unit too.

Xbox games take 10 to 15 USD per title sold, so there is a big push for games to sell. Xbox 360 had the highest at the time games sold at console sale it was like 2.5 or 3.5 games per console sold and I think that is likely still a record.

Consoles take time to make a profit, but subscription models with multiplayer really help. Honestly I think this is how it should remain, at least with lowering the cost of entry to home consoles vs desktop computers.
Yep. There's a saying in photojournalism -- "f/8 and be there."
This is why a lot of people buy empty Sprinters and install internals themselves, basically to save on paying premium for interior installation.

Now it will be possible also to buy quite capable Ford, which is a big plus for this market. After all, it's way easier to maintain Ford in US than Mercedes.
The tech industry needs more investigative coverage, not less. The reason disasters like Theranos or Nikola were able to waste as much time and money as they did is because most of the tech press is focused on regurgitating press releases and hyping up the next big thing.
>mostly it kind of understand you so well that it put you right in the middle of like minded people

Doesn't this build echo chambers where beliefs get more and more extreme? Good from a business perspective (nobody gets pissed off and leaves because they don't see much that they object to). But perhaps bad from a maintaining-democracy perspective?
Perhaps the lawsuit contends that Copilot isn't in fact learning how to code, but is rather regurgitating information it has managed to glean and statistically categorize, without any real understanding as to what it was doing?
Hasn't this been how Xbox has operated for 2 decades now?
The interest rate in Hungary is 13%.
I think that the work of this employee was to bite this hand. A company can have good reasons to allow it internally as a social control measure.

Kings used jesters as a way out to break tense moments and fights between their subjects; also to read the social undercurrents and detect hits against them.

The jester was also uniquely allowed a free card pass to transgress and jump over the rules. The fool jumping over the rules and providing comical relief reduces the desire to the rest of employees to break the same rules. They can fantasize about doing it, without actually doing it or suffering consequences. They can be also educated about the consequences as a moral of the history.

The cons of the job is that if the king is demoted, the king's personal buffon became useless, and first candidate to exemplary beheading or, in this case, being fired.
I just got the batteries replaced in my iPhone X for about $45, and I was without the phone for less than an hour. I am amazed, and very happy not having to shell out $1000 for a new phone that would just have been a marginal upgrade to my current one.
My opinion would be at the point when a reasonable person would fear for their life.

For instance, if I own a vehicle and it is my primary method of escape, and someone starts fucking with critical systems like say the exhaust with a sawzall, I woud definitely start fearing for my life and the life of my family. Particularly when automobile is absolutely critical for survival, access to grocery/medical care etc, escape from say criminals in your yard operating sawzalls in commission of felonies, in much of America. If someone is in my yard fucking with my way to get away in danger, and they're physically tearing it apart with a sawzall, then I think it would be reasonable to allow defense of my family.

If someone is just stealing a hood ornament with their hands, then no maybe it's unreasonable to fear for your life.

With a phone I think it would depend more on context. Intentionally and without consent stealing / disabling someone's method of calling for help and emergency could make a reasonable person fear for their life if that person was also in the process of commission of felonies in your immediate proximity with a dangerous sawzall.
Yeah, lol. New rule: code may be used for autocomplete, but only by a push down automata.
Should have used snake case. Would have avoided legal hot water and established precedent.
Money likely isn't the main goal (maybe it is for the lawyers), these are open source repos. Maybe they didn't consent to have their code used as training and that seems like the kind of thing consent should be needed for. Maybe this the AI spitting out copied snippets is a violation of open source licensing without attribution.
You buy something online and pay with Zelle. Seller never ships it. You have zero recourse, there’s no chargebacks or anything like that, your money is gone. It’s the same as cash, and you should only use it with people you know. Same with Venmo, and cashapp
That's not the same point. Again, I have no problem believing that what you say happens, even often. Even still, some topics may really be censored. They may even be the same topics; just because there's an angry mob on one side of a topic doesn't mean that everyone on that side of the topic is wrong, and that's the hardest situation to moderate dispassionately. Maybe even impossible. Which is when I can imagine platforms getting frustrated and resorting to topic censorship.
I don't think these describe qualities of great photographs.

What is an interesting place? Or the perfect moment? Or great light? These are all pretty subjective.

What defines a 'great photo' is so subjective and loaded, that it's basically pointless to discuss in the abstract.
Do you have any arguments addressing what he actually said, or is this just a reverse argument to authority?
I care about precisely none of twitters walls, and will in all likelihood continue to misname and disregard them at my leisure.

> since you don't have to pay anything

Rule #1 of Web 2.0: if you aren’t paying, you’re the product. Time, attention, data collection.

So sure, I don’t pay for Twitter.

And cattle don’t pay for pasture.
Really, it's "<animal> Found to be Smarter Than We Think" - humans are quite arrogant thinking we're the only smart animals.
On the other hand, it seems like technical proficiency might be going down with newer generations. Many were raised on smartphones and tablets where you just tap something and it does the thing. Devices nowadays abstract a lot of the underlying system away from the users, even to the point where apparently the newer generation struggles with the concept of files and directories.
Next years S&P earnings around 200, with a 13x multiple at a bear market panic sell off bottom would put us at 2600. 15x at 3000

Pretty realistic if the recession gets bad.

Current estimates for the S&P predict earnings growth even though there’s a very clear recession on the horizon, likely deep.

Anyway, lots of cheap stocks out there now if you avoid the index. Still too many absurdly overvalued constituents like Chipotle and Costco (40-50x trailing PE, just why)
How about gaming? Nintendo 64 > power on > play Mario Kart within 10 seconds. The experience as a kid was truly magical, and in a sense it still is.