skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Why should understanding entirely depend on being 'embodied'?"

By asking such a question you are still considering understanding as an epistemic term and not an ontological category. The example given by Ms. Matherne suffers from the same ontic reduction. I will not even try to give an example of "understanding as ontological category", taking the James Cameron way: the (language) technology is not ready yet, maybe never will; perhaps to give such an example we would require a memory transfer technology [1].

"insisting that by definition only humans can do it"

Yes, this is the entire Heideggerian project: humans as Dasein. Beyond tongue-in-cheek, Heidegger is concerned with the history of Beyng (notice capital B and unusual y, in German he spells it as "Seyn", as opposed to "Sein", the Germans capitalize all nouns by default) in which there is a "first beginning", during the Ancient Greek resolvement of metaphysics (even the word, μετά, beyond, φυσικά, physics, that which grows, is used initially only to group some texts by Aristotle written after Physics), and his search for "the other beginning". This is all very obscure. And Heidegger doesn't help it by literally inventing a language without providing a Rosetta stone. In The Event [2] he has quotes like "'Technology' as the basic truth of history qua happenstance" under the title "163. The Saying", make of it what you will. However, just above "162. The demise of metaphysics", he says "[i]f thinking has passed over into erudition [...] [e]ven those who are thoughtless will then recognize how inessential it is". So he can write clearly also. But again, to quote Edward Feigenbaum, "What does he offer us? Phenomenology! That ball of fluff. That cotton candy!" [3].

Again, this all was to give an example of a thinking with no overlap with GPT. As I see it now, departed from Heidegger's view, the problem is how we continue Galileo's project, "measure what can be measured, and make measurable what cannot be", with or without ontological categories.

[1] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsys.2013.0012...

[2] Perhaps his most beautiful book, to be read from the end to the beginning, https://iupress.org/9780253006868/the-event

[3] Feigenbaum was criticizing Hubert Dreyfus, but the reprimand applies to Heidegger as well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Dreyfus%27s_views_on_ar...
Maybe, but also think about the prompts. Google might be able to infer far more about your intentions from a fully formed question rather than a search query. Which will allow them to target you more precisely, allow them to sell data to product companies. Prompts are more personal and revealing, even the language you use.

You could also imagine inserting adverts into the generated response.
Chrome is the iPhone of the browser world - there are probably things in other browsers that work better, or that you could customize to fit your needs, but instead of spending the time to optimize those you can just choose chrome and you'd be pretty satisfied overall.
I'll argue for it not being cheating in this case. Consider this C quine:

#include <stdio.h>
int main(int c,char** v){char*s="#include <stdio.h>%cint main(int c,char** v){char*s=%c%s%c;printf(s,10,34,s,34,10);}%c";printf(s,10,34,s,34,10);}

Surely this should count as a non-cheated quine? Still, parts of the code (namely, the contents of string s) are embedded directly in the binary:

% clang -std=c99 -pedantic quine.c -o quine; strings quine | grep include
#include <stdio.h>%cint main(int c,char** v){char*s=%c%s%c;printf(s,10,34,s,34,10);}%c

Even though parts of the original source survive in the binary and are passed as pointers to a print function, the source code itself doesn't get read at compile or runtime (aside from being read once into the compiler).

If it's OK to read parts of the loaded binary to use as strings, I don't see why it wouldn't be OK to read the whole loaded binary, as long as you touch the source code file. I'd simply accept that the platform allows for some fairly trivial quines.
Probably going to be an unpopular opinion in this thread, but I am involved in a couple of medium sized (100-200 active members) gaming communities which have to deal with cheaters sometimes, one of which is fairly expert—many members are Global Elite (top Competitive rank) in CSGO, with many of the top players being ex minor league esports people(they all LAN fairly regularly so I can say confidently they aren’t cheaters), and I have never heard (as in someone knows someone) of anyone in over a decade in both communities getting unfairly banned from a AAA title or any title for that matter. And if they did it would definitely be the talk of the Discord/forums, getting called a cheater is pretty much the norm for these folks, so getting a ban would be something between hilarious and a slap in the face. So this is likely exceedingly rare, and many of these people are cheating, and consider their cheats benign and are just in denial that their macros are actually getting detected and earning them bans. Perhaps not OP, and perhaps not the sibling comments, but in my experience cheaters are typically pathological about not cheating.

Cheating of that type is so easy and common in many multiplayer games, and it really sucks the fun out of multiplayer when someone isn’t following the rules.
Autonomous driving is in "principally works but lawsuits haven't started yet" phase.
The Pragmatic Programmer (Hunt)

Refactoring (Folwer)
doesn't that still depend on the length of the input string? If I feed it a billion 9s it still has to look at all of them. Am I missing an obvious shortcut?
"And there was extra jeopardy involved. Since we were using our regular house telephone line to connect, the odds that my mom would pick up and try to dial out—thus ruining the transfer process—remained very high. "

I can relate to this! It seems like no matter how much you explained to your mother that if she heard buzzing sounds, she needed to urgently hang up the phone. Instead - each time - she would go "Hello? Hello? What's going on?". Ah, mothers :-)
>During the 2020/2021 bubble, our seed investors were very angry at us for being profitable. (Angry isn’t an exaggeration)

That's nuts. Interested to hear more.
> The American university thrived historically on the marrying of teaching and research

You had me up to here. If there's anything I detested about the 2 years I spent at public university it's that I was taught constantly by inexperienced graduate students and barely got a second with any professor due to their heavy publishing schedule.

I was much happier at a school which had the audacious concept of paying the teachers first and foremost to teach students.
> Human societies and civilizations are incredibly complex and don't just pop out of nowhere and then disappear without a trace.

But they absolutely do. "Traces" of ancient societies are incredibly sparse, very little other than stone can survive for thousands of years. And what we call "civilization" rests on resource availability; when people only have enough resources for bare subsistence, social collapse is inevitable.
The emissions weren't the issue; they just kept replacing the engine with newer ones - the Ford one they were using at the end had a Euro VI version so they could have kept using that.

The issues were more around safety (both passenger and pedestrian) and not being able to sell it in many countries because it can't have an airbag fitted (I think there was an ergonomics reason it wasn't possible).
Given that this comes down to badly-worded laws that allow for a lot of interpretation, essentially would double the land-owner's exclusively-usable land if corner-cutting was forbidden, and there is apparently no precedence set, this is not a de-minimis-case.
Honestly the only use case I see for this is to write more tests because testing is very time and code intensive which means most tests are just simple canaries and not capable of actually verifying the software because nobody is going to write 10000 lines of test code to test a 500 line file.
Enough of the "hard problems" are solved where it's expected that developers use off-the-shelf type solutions. As a result, they're not getting hands on experience solving hard problems, or challenging each other to think more deeply about solutions.
> I’d imagine the folks they’ve got working on these systems are paid an order of magnitude more than myself.

I wouldn't assume that. Game companies are notorious for pinching pennies. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if these systems were outsourced completely.
Hope this helps;

Dead Ringer (disambiguation) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Ringer_(disambiguation)

Wringer (disambiguation) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wringer_(disambiguation)
I think we’ll go back to things like webrings and personal blogs and stuff, once it gets really bad. Some people may not care that anything is human made someday. Perhaps AI will do all our reading and writing eventually. Things change, though, and it’s not always bad. Used to be that no human wrote text, everything was oral. Maybe our technology can help us surpass the written word while still maintaining its benefits, someday.
I don’t know, isn’t the safer bet is that scaling will eventually reach a dead end? I honestly fail to see how a language model could “execute” a sequence of reasoning steps, as it doesn’t think in a symbolic way. Do correct me if I’m wrong but it would require a complex rearchitecture, so not sure we are any closer, we just have a very impressive, smart search engine now.
Maybe a controller that reads muscle contraction from the wrist. It could read position like you were using a ghost mouse, and much more.
I'm always interested in discussions about this topic on HN. I will toss this out there in hopes of fostering discussion of how to actually solve this problem:

I think we would do well to develop some systems for helping people monetize their thing if it gets popular. But we could also work on the cultural side of this and help people understand that you need to think about how much you are willing to give and that if your thing gets popular, making money with it is an additional job to do, not an entitlement.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17824166

I say that as someone who does a lot of stuff "for free" and hopes it will pay off because I'm handicapped and can't work on a schedule and can't do a normal job and blah blah blah. I keep hoping that if I deliver value, someday that will somehow lead to sufficient money for my needs.

So I am not attacking people who feel they add value and should get money for it. I'm on their side.

But the reality seems to be that extracting money from people is additional work on top of providing them with something of value, like it or not. I really wish we would get better about finding ways to uncouple certain things and help people who provide value to live comfortably. I recently left a comment on HN suggesting a lot of really aggravating products that cause problems are likely due to the fact "people gotta eat."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33827984

I would really love to live in a world where people doing genuinely valuable things and not great at selling get comfortable lives and people great at selling and happy to make the world worse by it would get actively encouraged to find a better way to live their lives. I just don't know how to get there from here.
> filing reports with the Better Business Bureau (BBB)

good luck with that, the BBB is basically Yelp for Boomers.
I think you can make a good copy of the 74181 with just a eprom.
While the article has a US focus, the most common measurement globally is L/100km.
The sensible efficiency measurement is consumption per distance, like L/100km. The electric switchover is This is an opportunity for places like the US to switch its measurement of choice too. I don't expect it to become a metric one, but at least one that works numerically (e.g. for fleet averages).
> Why not use a cookie? Because then they can't advertise that they don't use cookies.

Oh, so they can be craven motherfuckers who abuse protocols for the sake of web analytics. With you so far.

> The laws don't care about cookies or other technical implementations, they care about tracking.

This is flat-out wrong. The law cares about any cookies that aren't strictly necessary for the site's operation. This very well might qualify as a cookie that isn't strictly necessary for the site's operation. It's not implemented as a cookie, but what you say is half right; "the laws don't care about... technical implementations". A judge might not care that you've come up with a clever way of storing your cookie with a different header. It's the same thing as a cookie, and it's not necessary for the site's operation.
Effectively doubling his exclusive use of land ... it's something worth investing some money to.
The problem is theft of a product that has been purchased. For example, say Tesla were to say we’ll just take back the car without permission if someone complains about it online, that’s a crime: theft. The reason for the crime is irrelevant, if someone has paid for a product you don’t get to retroactively say “nah we’re taking back the thing you paid for, and we aren’t going to return your money”. If you’re offering a contractual service you can halt, but generally have to return at least the prorated amount you have received for services you are no longer offering.

A game company can always just block the credit card details (not just the number) from buying the game again, there’s a limit to the number of CCs that a person is going to be able to use.

Of course the reality is, cheaters are paying to buy the game again when they get caught, so there’s no actual incentive for activision to actually stop cheaters, just to make them pay again. Which is why they ban the single player mode as well - it’s in their interests to encourage repurchasing.
I have 2 gift cards and one additional "LunchPass" card issued this year in Poland, all three are magstrip only.

The magstrip readers are not removed from the terminals, even the newest smartphone-like have them, you just don't know where to look. Of course, sometimes cashiers are surprised that my card is magstrip-only and they are double-surprised when I show them where is the magstrip reader on the terminal they use :)
Whatever "TMI retrofits" which you keep referring to (yet never actually backing it up with a source) are likely not necessary: 3 mile island's secondary containment worked and prevented any significant amount of radiation release.

Estimates you're giving for renewables are excluding the cost of storage, or using fanciful figures of 4 hours worth of storage, as well as excluding costs of transmission and load shifting.

> In the hypothetical where this is in some way related to somethint that could happen now this is $3600/kW vs a renewable blend in germany of $3400/kW. If we take the last few from each manufacturer that opened before 1979 and don't add retrofit costs it's about the same.

No, it doesn't. It comes out to $1600/kW. Average capacity factor of nuclear power is over 90%, not the 50% you claimed earlier. And again, your "renewable blend" omits the cost of storage, which will be immense if we're even able to build storage at the scale required at all.
That’s why many institutions are focused on extra-academic investment: better amenities, better campuses, better sports teams, better housing, better “neighborhood outreach”, better marketing, etc.

A school’s academics are, in a way, secondary to the school’s brand/influence (with built in networking effects in the alumni base)

Imagine some crazy world where education-level is a protected class for employment and degree/school can’t be considered or explicitly asked about in job applications. The credential monopoly would be no more. Yet you would likely still see top colleges thrive for the same reason top fashion houses do: status signaling, brand loyalty, and a sense of belonging with patrons who subscribe to the same values
kWh
That is (or can be) what's called bus rapid transit - basically build a train line but use busses.

They could probably be significantly automated, but I don't know that the cost would be worth it, as even the best ones still interact with normal traffic at times.
i got an exercise bike. good well with long booring meetings and controller based pc games
>I'm using the X1 Carbon Gen 9 with openSUSE Tumbleweed (Plasma) ... Kinetic scroll works. Pinch to zoom works (at long last!! I think it started working a year ago or something)

May I please ask, are you on Wayland or X11?

In my experience that variable makes the biggest difference in touchpad behavior on Linux.
Yeah this is a much better introduction to the big deals in DMR.

If any of you folks want something that uses a free codec instead of DVSI's proprietary AMBE2, there's the M17 project[1] that uses the free open source codec2 voice codec.

There's also the Opulent voice project[2], which in turn uses Opus, but it does not fit as narrow channels as M17 or DMR does.

1. https://m17project.org/
2. https://www.openresearch.institute/2022/07/30/opulent-voice-...
> I don’t eat meat, I’ve never driven a car, I don’t fly in airplanes, I don’t have kids, and I live in a tiny apartment. How many of those are true for you?

as an earth-noid I appreciate the service you're doing for us here, we need more like you; but weaponizing those points makes the endeavor feel like a big exercise in virtue signaling -- I very-much hope you chose to live your life that way for a greater reason than one-upping someone on the internet.
> Conspiratorial thinking is so popular now

Maybe there are societal cycles. I read that witch trials were gripping the public attention a couple centuries ago.
Finding novel relationships gives us news places to look to try to understand how things are. I didn't know you you could tell gender from retina. If indeed we can, that leaves room to then all why is that biologically happening. We don't be the black box AI to explain. If it read a signal there, it's up to use user other methods to figure why that signal exists and what the implications are to our current understanding
A lot of other companies cancel things, but until Stadia was killed Google did cancelations that would shock and anger consumers. Why?

1. They don’t tell people that it’s an experiment like Amazon.

2. The experiments feel short. This makes people anxious and hesitant about buying into a Google experiment

3. For paid products, they don’t offer refunds like Amazon. This makes people feel annoyed.

4. In some cases like with Nest Secure, Google had a fire sale BEFORE they made a cancellation announcement. This makes people angry.

The end result is that consumers now feel that it is a risk to buy products from Google. It’s great that Google is finally acknowledging this problem with the Stadia cancellation. Many people were pleasantly surprised that they were getting refunds on the hardware, though I’m sure anyone who bought a game outright instead of just subscribing isn’t too happy right now

Going on a tangent, Chromecast is one of the worse streamer boxes because for whatever strange reason, Google does not realize that multiple people will use the same streaming box and each of these people will want personalized recommendations. Does it have an “add another account” feature? Sure, but unlike every other streaming box it doesn’t just work. You have to make multiple attempts just to add another Google account.
There's a reason it's called the aDNA revolution. Archaeogenetics has transformed our understanding of the past on every level and opened up entirely new types of research.

The kinds of stuff Hancock advocates like globespanning ancient civilizations obviously don't show up in the genetic record, but some ideas that used to be pretty far out like "widespread admixture between AMH and neanderthals" are widely accepted today on the strength of the genetic evidence and other research that was done to back them up.
It's not even doing that - we're just gasping at straws here. For example, I asked for an explanation of the nuclear lightbulb reactor, which I've ranted about many, many times on HN [1][2][3][4][5]

> Describe the nuclear lightbulb reactor

The nuclear lightbulb reactor is a theoretical concept for a lightbulb that uses nuclear fission to generate light. In this design, a small amount of nuclear fuel, such as uranium or thorium, is sealed inside the lightbulb and used to generate heat through a controlled nuclear reaction. This heat is then converted into light through a heat-to-light conversion process. The reactor is designed to be safe and efficient, with the potential to provide a long-lasting and sustainable source of light. However, it should be noted that this concept is purely theoretical and has not yet been demonstrated to work in practice.

---

> Describe the nuclear lightbulb reactor in the style of Hacker News user akiselev

The nuclear lightbulb reactor is a compact and efficient way to harness the power of nuclear fission to provide light. It uses a small amount of nuclear fuel, such as uranium or thorium, to generate heat that is then converted into light. The reactor is sealed inside the lightbulb, so there is no risk of radiation leakage. It's a game-changing technology that could revolutionize the way we think about lighting our homes and buildings.

---

Just look at how it picks up on the word "lightbulb" and goes crazy with it ("theoretical concept for a lightbulb that uses nuclear fission" / "reactor is sealed inside the lightbulb"). That's complete nonsense: It's called a nuclear lihtbulb because the fisile material is a black body radiator that emits most of its energy as visible light and UV from inside a transparent chamber, sort of like the filament inside of a real lightbulb.

Edit: not even the sentence structure makes sense because I communicate almost exclusively in run-on sentences.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6162326

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26354871

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876841

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23600296

[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14623051
What if AI starts voting all the answers randomly?
We're about to have rail strikes in the UK. I asked a taxi driver in London whether he gets more trips/surge, and he said it gets more than negated by the added traffic.

And that really brought home how a public transport infrastructure also massively benefits drivers. Cities without it (I'm thinking of LA specifically) are gridlocked.
Especially that our field foundations wasn’t shaken to the core in the last 70 years, when around the century there was a huge change in understanding.. everything. Gödel, Turing machines, Chomsky, Halting theorem, etc. That we no longer has to fit into 3 megabytes and thus can write some monster abstractions is not fundamentally different at all.
counter-question : do you only place value on things that are human-centric?

there is a lot about Earth that makes it unique outside of humanity.
If it was an AGI it would have told you it doesn't have internet access.
Fun fact: the 1200ns cycle time DataGeneral Nova 1200 system used a 4 bit CPU that ran the 16 bit DG operating system.

The system was slower than others in the line, but was also the cheapest.
No idea why you’d include health premiums in that figure.

Remove that and I just don’t believe you, outside of the most bureaucratic and exceptional companies (eg Google, where the money printing machine has led the company to insane levels of “overhead”).

I’ve worked plenty in the private sector and it’s nonsense to suggest overheads are similar In general.