skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
THIS!!

Whenever this technology is used in an accuracy-critical setting, it is a recipe for disaster.

These "AI systems" produce the MOST PREDICTED output whenever there is any ambiguity, and this REPLACES the ACTUAL UNEXPECTED value/ITEM. In information system terms, they are literally stripping out content with the highest information value.

I saw this first hand giving a deposition that was supposedly transcribed by an "Artificial Intelligence" system. The output looked beautiful, until I started checking it for errors. Normally an errata sheet has a dozen lines for errors. Mine had pages. And they were substantial and very meaningful. The most obvious site was a specific name that sounded vaguely similar (started with a "J" and "K" sounds) was replaced by "Jack Kennedy". It also replaced "you have" with "I have" and omitted "not" several times, literally reversing the meaning of the statement. There were 85+ errors that I caught, over an order of magnitude more than normal.

These things are basically fine as glorified type-ahead systems where it doesn't matter much and a human is in the loop. But using them in any situation where the results are critical is, at this point, basically fraud. They do not do what the proponents claim.
If we’re confiscating from bigots we could begin with yourself.
They could do it like GCP or Scaleway - provide a managed Kubernetes service, and provide managed Knative on top for the Container as a Service service.
You can play around with the godbolt links:

Day 1: https://godbolt.org/z/WK4zdW5vK

Day 2: https://godbolt.org/z/cKef7jPWs

Day 3: https://godbolt.org/z/ezozv1jTT

Day 4: https://godbolt.org/z/8TP8zeeb1

Day 5: https://godbolt.org/z/M1bedjhEv
There's this magic phrase that makes all the difference: at scale.
In same vain we could ban ice hockey then :)
What was that experience like? Did it hurt? How did they treat it?
This is absolutely true. On the flip side, digital currency has also led to much more reliable disbursement of funds to the actual beneficiaries of those funds. This has been a dramatic change.

Western (and even a lot of Indian) media likes to paint a lot of Modi’s support based on his religious discrimination, but in reality that’s only a tiny fraction of the support he enjoys. Most of his support comes from the fact that, for example, even as demonetization has probably led to India’s GDP being far smaller than it would have been otherwise, many poor people are still better off because funds and services that would in the past have largely been eaten up by political and administrative intermediaries actually make it to the people.

And a large part of that is the result of some of the problematic measures like the central identification numbers and the digitization of money.
Who are these “experts” and what data from past downturns can they point to in which the color of your skin or who you are sexually attracted to determined your company’s ability to survive a market crash?
Ok, sure, when David Brooks, or the Freakonomics guys, or the Guns, Germs, Steel guy, claim they've nailed the causality of something, that's often facile gibberish.

All this does nothing to undercut the validity of causality itself. I hope that's obvious, despite the clickbait title of the OP.
Irish Post Office Issues Digital Stamp
In most cases, judging if something was created by GPT takes quite a long while. It's not a search result you can easily dismiss.
No they won't. You can argue they would do that for walking around everywhere but there's a cost/benefit ratio that's recommended by experts and backed by statistics. You can take anything to an extreme and I agree that some regulation does.
> not "artificial creativity" but a simple "statistical mean of everything uploaded

There is a metaphor I rarely see used. IMO it is way better: A deep learning based software is a complex system [1] (not a statistical one). It is tapping into very powerful natural processes: How (high degree) order emerges from randomness through complexity. There are many stunning examples [2] of this that can help us picture how AI does its magic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system

[2] https://global.oup.com/academic/product/complexity-978019979...
I used to feel the same way but I eventually came to realise that there’s tons of good music being created, it’s the social aspect of music that has been destroyed.

Individual algorithm recommendations have subsumed sub cultures. Music used to be part of both your individual and group identity, it would influence what your wore, what you read, what you thought, who you hanged out with and what bars you visited. Technology has eroded the music press and sky high rents and fitness culture (not as many people drinking) means lots of gig venues and bars have closed down. These were the glue that built the subcultures up. You used to have the mainstream plus a few sub cultures that would evolve each decade e.g mods, rockers, hippies, metal heads, punks, new wave, hair metal, brit pop, emos, indie rockers etc. All of these ended up getting absorbed into the long tail so you now have the main stream and then everything else, with nothing in the everything else category really able to attract enough people to it in order to form era defining subculture like the days of old.

Combined with the sheer amount of music being created, all of this makes it harder to find music you actually want to hear. Your friends are all listening to different stuff so you don’t get many good in person recommendations anymore and what’s left of the music media are struggling to stay afloat and resorting to all kinds of stuff like NME doing movie reviews. The algorithms are hit and miss and search engines are getting worse and worse. So you become more and more at the mercy of chance, hoping that somewhere you stumble upon a review or a blog post, a subreddit or a song that somehow leads you to some good new music. But the reward to effort ratio often makes it harder to justify the time investment. And however good the music is, it’s not as enjoyable when you don’t have a group of people to share it with.
It's more expensive to provide AWS-type "assume you can be trusted" service at a low-cost provider - and Hetzner is one of the lowest-cost big providers.

Low-cost attracts more fraudulent customers, using stolen credit card numbers. Hosting is particularly bad for this compared with other low-cost services, because of the community of people who want to use rented servers for DDOS and such, ideally without paying or being tied to a real identity.

It also attracts people who will do a card chargeback if the server isn't what they wanted or after they've used it for some temporary event. Some people don't appreciate that chargebacks are expensive for the low-cost supplier, and some people don't care.

Low-cost also means the penalty cost of credit card chargebacks is a higher proportion of income, even if the number of them was the same. It might be so much higher that the business couldn't be profitable at the prices it offers if it didn't aggressively filter which customers it takes on.
There is almost nothing that would make Windows desirable. It looks a bit different, but there is no compelling reason to switch, so far. Therefore I'm not surprised.
For the prosumer smart home, I highly recommend going with the low end industrial automation (ie https://automationdirect.com, https://findernet.com, etc) rather than “IoT” brands. Way more powerful, everything is interoperable, and the business model is much simpler. No phoning home.
After the Artemis I mission’s brilliant success, why is an encore 2 years away?
Oof, in the first sentence, too, that's embarrassing. Fixed, thanks!
> But a student which is supposed to learn something form that homework? We're missing the entire point of homework here.

They have to learn to verify it. I think you missed point of OPs idea.
Meredith Whittaker Shares What’s Next for Signal
This essence of the CVS misbehavior:

>According to the complaint, prior to the completion of a customer’s transaction, the checkout screen would prompt the customer with several boxes of pre-selected amounts (and an opt out option) to donate to the American Diabetes Association (ADA). The plaintiff alleges that CVS did not merely collect the customer’s donations and forward them to the ADA, but instead, counted the donations toward a legally binding obligation of $10 million that CVS had made to the ADA.

If the complaint is ultimately proven true, it contradicts a Lifehacker March 2021 story[1] saying that doesn't happen :

>Case in point: A tweet with erroneous information went viral last week, claiming that participating grocery stores have already handed out donations to nonprofit partners for a tax write off, and are merely collecting customer money as a reimbursement. The donation, according to the tweet, is merely a ruse for the sake of profiteering under the guise of charity.

(The LifeHacker article was before ChatGPT so we can't blame A.I. generated nonsense in this case.)

EDIT to replies about the sequence of donate-then-collect vs collect-then-donate:

I don't believe this is actually a big difference in terms of the spirit of the donation from the perspective of the consumer. If one reads the splashy PR releases from CVS about the $10 million donation :

- https://www.cvshealth.com/news-and-insights/press-releases/c...

- https://diabetes.org/newsroom/press-releases/2021/10-million...

... CVS wants the positive associations with that $10 million donation. The unstated implication is that CVS will pay $10 million out of their profits. Normal readers would not expect that self-congratulatory press release to mean they will actually add donation prompts at the checkout so it will be the customers paying that $10 million donation. The public would think it feels like the deception in the LifeHacker article even if the sequence actions of collect-then-donate is reversed.

[1] https://lifehacker.com/check-out-donations-arent-a-scam-actu...
The homework is originally: research this topic, write an essay about what you found. Now it's: here's an essay, research this topic to critique it
Well, they would need to know something about the topic. The easiest way for them to do this would be to read about it. When picking what to read they would need to be able to estimate if it contained valid information. The meta-skills that would be developed would be:

* Understanding the quality of sources

* Understanding the different between primary and secondary sources.

* Establishing chains of evidence and tracing them through large datasets.

* Integrating information from different sources and using correlation to establish validity.

Basically, it would be a crash course in how to do research, and the best possible preparation for living in a world where we drown in uncertain information and still have to make the best choices that we can.

For bonus points, at the end of the process they would have a better understanding of the subject matter than somebody who had only read about it.
>The jstat output also shows that CCS is at 99.21% usage, which could support this theory.

If code cache has run out, the process effectively runs in interpreted mode. I'd wonder however how they would have so much code.
Still, they should just run a profiler or any java monitoring tool.
From the article it seems the only remote hack was through a SiriusXM vulnerability. Everything else seems to involve a physical connection to the vehicle to pull the infotainment data which i'm assuming requires a court order.
> FX swap markets, where for example a Dutch pension fund or Japanese insurer borrows dollars and lends euro or yen in the “spot leg” before later repaying them, have a history of problems.

This sounds speculative / risky. Is it? If so, why would a pension fund be involved with something like that in the first place? Is it typical to have a portion of a pension fund allocated to highly speculative risk?
If you're cycling anywhere where you're depending on a painted line to keep you safe from tons of metal that's traveling much faster than you - then you'd better have a helmet on, at the minimum! I'd argue the same for stand-on electric scooters as well. Maybe what we need to normalize is always having a helmet with you.

It's sad we have to have laws to mandate such things, but here we are.
From 2014-2017, I used small Linux-capable SBCs running BSD as a "router on a stick" for my home network.

At first I was running FreeBSD on a Rasberry Pi 2 (not the Model B version). There was some bug at the time that made Vim unusable over a serial terminal, so in spite of it always working and never requiring a reboot, I decided to look for another solution.

The solution was OpenBSD running on a Beaglebone Green. It was actually easier to set up, just as stable, and the pf syntax was even simpler.

Were I to go with a similar setup today, I'd prefer something that:

- has multiple NICs

- can be tuned to boot very fast

- capable of rolling-back updates/changes

- runs NSH[0]

The 3rd point is something NSH could facilitate for the network configuration. For system-level changes, I suppose the best I could do on OpenBSD is use CARP between two OpenBSD systems, and switch between the two as I apply and test updates.

[0] https://www.nmedia.net/nsh/
As someone who lives in a country with socialised healthcare, who has occasionally done lightly reckless things in the past, I am happy to pay for other people's recklessness.

Or, rather, I am happy that if you end up in hospital for any reason at all, the only thing on everyone's mind is treating you as best they can, and helping you to get better. No matter how you ended up there, or whether it was your fault or not, or how much money you have - if you're hurt, people will take care of you.

It's what I'd want to happen to me, it's what I'd want to happen to my family, it's what I'd want to happen to some of my friends who have somewhat more reckless hobbies than I do. And so I'm happy to have my tax money do the same thing for complete strangers, because they're somebody else's family or good friends. (And even if they're not, being alone is not a reason to deny someone healthcare.)

I trust people not to "take advantage" of this and be stupidly reckless simply because the healthcare is there, because... even with great healthcare that's available for free at the point of use, serious injuries suck. Having great healthcare doesn't make pain less painful, or physiotherapy to come back from injury less time-consuming, or less of a crimp in your whole goddamn life.
Generative models do have a contribution - they adapt what is on the internet to a specific task or request. In the case of Copilot, it will use your variable names in the generated code. And not everything generated by a model should be saved. Some are just for one time use, for fun, therapy, brainstorming, etc.
> To sum up, we estimate India is set to drive a fifth of global growth in the coming decade. We think this offers a compelling opportunity for multinationals and global investors in a world starved of growth.

Looks like articles aren't safe from GPT anymore either
But if I have a conflict (ie one node changes a column datatype, another adds data to column) how do i know which one went first inside the same tick?

If I understand you, there will be a tick between 12.01 and 12.02, and node A gets token 1234, and node B gets 5678. Events are published p2p, and the ordering is 5678_+9seconds and 1234_+12seconds - node A (1234) admits it has done the action 3 seconds after B. But this still depends on synchronised clocks I think?

Also you still need to resolve each type of conflict (hence having CRDTs really helps) - we know there is a conflict between A and B changes, but how do we resolve them?

Maybe I dont get it :-)
> I didn't even consider that the store could be corrupt, reimbursing themselves for their own donation.

I would very much like to be wrong, but I’m pretty sure that’s what they’re all doing in some way. — Although, I really hope someone will prove me wrong in the comments.

AFAIK if you donate to a non-profit through the pos terminals, it counts as a tax deductible donation that the organization with the terminal can claim, not you. For example if you donate $10 to the ASPCA through a Petsmart terminal, thats a tax deductible contribution for Petsmart from money out of your pocket.
Even in the US you would be paying for the risktaking of others because their premiums depend on whether everyone in their insurance pool wears a seatbelt or not.
Duplicate? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33867168
It breaks down as soon as you have an offline scenario. You can only assume the server is authorative if there will not be network partitions or if writes are not accepted on the other side of the network partition (meaning on the client). As soon as the client accepts writes while offline those writes become authorative and will need to be merged with whatever changes the server saw.
Only because the people making the models don't want them to indignantly refuse silly requests. If they wanted the model to be more person-like I'm sure they could have built that in there.
Say there's an area that will have heavy demand soon but doesn't yet, maybe someplace with a lot of bars on a Friday night. Where do all those cars come from? There has to be a holding garage sort of nearby, but land nearby is expensive, and if there's competition for the faster service, you get a race-to-the-bottom.
Can we discuss teaching post ChatGPT+?

I'm considering giving my local high school system a call to raise awareness. When I was in college 10 years ago I abused Wolfram Alpha for some math work, but this is a whole different level and may require a new model of instruction.

Why give free response homework when an AI can just generate 80% of it?

This will radically alter homework as we know it :)
Duplicate? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33867039
Duplicate of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33867039
The new phrase is "acceptable losses". If some important social goal can be accomplished at the cost of some lives, that's acceptable. That reasoning has been applied to COVID.[1][2] A China-style lockdown reduces deaths to a very low level, but the impact on GDP is unacceptable to most of the rest of the world. Here, it's being applied to bicyclists. Because more people of color are cited for not wearing a helmet, it's more important to eliminate that discrimination than to save a few lives.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7255398/

[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/11/28/covid-who-i...
> Is there a even a remote chance that say bits of Mammalian dna ends up in a crop via natural selection?

Via natural selection alone? Probably not. Through horizontal gene transfer e.g. via viruses? Sure, can't see why not.
This is a super helpful starting point. Would love to see more examples that show a variety of use cases. I'm fairly new to GPT but learning about prompts that produce successful outcomes seems like a really quick way to learn the ins and outs.
Your example is spot on :)

I believe we shouldn't lock our richtext state to Prosemirror's specs. The state should better be modelled as a CRDT and ensuring correctness should be part of CRDT operations.
This way we unlock other possibilities like server-side merging and the editing library can be swapped (eg. lexical)

All this sounds right but it's lot of work.
People scale. There's billions of us. And we compete.
This is the boy who cried wolf. Hans lost his credibility by cheating multiple times. If he actually played that game fairly, it’s still on him for many people doubting him.
One does not simply destroy a nuclear weapon
You can also reduce the number of cycling injuries by banning cars
Or maybe we mandate real infrastructure to keep you safe from tons of metal traveling much faster than you?
It may be that the 21st century Turing test will be 'whether an AI can tell that content is AI generated". Otherwise it may be much harder to filter the AI-generated content.
Thankfully, no-one's attempted to actually enter my car in slow-moving traffic to date.
A donation banner today.
You can correct the bot.

If you tell it that a fact it has wrong is wrong, you can get it to change its answer.

Also, you can just make tweaks manually.

Seems super useful to me as long as you understand the limitations.

Trust it the right it amount - don't trust it too much, and you're golden.
Life is tough when you're an admitted and known cheater. I don't wish him luck in his lawsuit, but he's welcome to it.
Creationists will always find things to attach to their arguments. A discussion on HN will not change that.

As a community, HN tends to be a place where such discussion is encouraged and relished.

“Pedantry” here (I’m not convinced it’s pedantry) does not make “science lose”.

If anything, I appreciate the tendency to discuss the more intricate aspects of things. In a world that trends ever more towards oversimplification and binary thought, it’s encouraging to find folks willing to debate the details.

And details often matter.
Overwatch had a free weekend five years into it's life, and I decided to try it out for the first time. The matchmaking put together a clearly brand new set of players for a game, including me and my friends. It was payload, and I picked bastion (neat robot) and lead our team on basically all merits, including defense, but the other team was clearly better and we lost massively.

A teammate told everyone to report me for feeding.

Fuck overwatch, they get what they deserve.
It's really weird isn't it, how at some point Musk became the new focus of Two Minutes of Hate[1]?

Sure, there are plenty of valid and harsh criticisms to make about Musk. I'm sure he'd even agree with a lot of them. But the level of obsession people have with hating him is clearly irrational. There's more anti-Musk sentiment than anti-Putin sentiment!

It's as if people were left feeling empty by Trump's disappearance and then latched onto Musk as the new target for their manic vitriol.

It may be that once these people have become accustomed to hating a public figure in this way that they have trouble letting go of the addiction.

It seems a lot like what happened in ancient Athens when one public figure after another would become the target of a citizen mob and then be banished[2] or executed[3]. It also seemed like an addiction in their case.

Usually the mob would quickly come to regret their decision, which is likely what would happen if Musk went away. Many of these same people would come to realize the value of having Musk around, despite his flaws, to advance space exploration, pro-environment technology, brain injury technology, etc.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Minutes_Hate

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Socrates
Your question resonates with me.
The path, using your programming skills, that I believe has good chances of significantly & rapidly improving compensation is to uplevel your skills & attempt for the highest tier of compensation band by interviewing aggressively.

Checkout this article for details:
https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/software-engineering-sala...
Same for movie scripts, but sometimes they do fail and something original squeezes through. I'm saying this can't be the case with a pattern matching/combining algorithm.
Ah, damn. This sounds a lot like me except I haven't had my day of reckoning yet. I really don't stick 'em all that far in there, though...
AIs scale faster. Just one instance can do the work of billions of people, and have its owner profit off it.
An old Mercedes or Volvo is pretty safe.
> maybe the resulting animal lives longer.

Living longer is secondary to evolution. Producing more offspring, which can produce offspring itself is what matters.

If an animal becomes old and endangers the herd it is harm for selection. If it can't produce offspring anymore, but protects the youngers it can be useful for survival rate.