skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To me, the core of what I am pointing out as "very Paul Graham" is in these two quotes:

> I finally realized today why politics and religion yield such uniquely useless discussions. and If people can't think clearly about anything that has become part of their identity[...]

To view discussions where people get upset as "useless" reflects a certain hierarchy of the purposes of discussion and the goals of inquiry. The same is true for prioritizing the kind of impassioned discussions that Graham is talking about here. His advice is good (Paul Graham is not dumb!) if you feel the same way and value this kind of high minded dispassionate discussion.

Perhaps what I should have said is that I believe most people do not feel they suffer when they experience (and voice) the emotional weight of conversations. They suffer because they feel unseen and unheard in those conversations - the conflict is a symptom, not the disease. There's nothing wrong with wanting people to discuss things they care deeply about dispassionately - but there's nothing right about it either. It reflects a certain hierarchy of values and goals that are, again, "very Paul Graham." It sounds like those values are very you too! Which is fine!

This advice will make you better able to engage in the way that Paul Graham wants to engage! I certainly agree with that. But I do not think it is "better" in a particularly universal way.
Really? I searched a little but it didn't seem to be possible.
I think Rust will trap, unless explicitly asked for, in debug and wrap on overflow in release.
LLMs are polarizing: while there is a lot of hype from some quarters, there's also a faction that seems only interested in dismissing them as the same old something-or-other.

What I personally find most interesting about them is what seems to me to be their unreasonable effectiveness, despite their flaws and limitations, and what that might tell us about ourselves. The more one stresses how simple (conceptually) their method of operation is, the more surprising their capabilities seem - to the point where I wonder how much of everyday human dialogue is being produced this way.

This vein of innovation may start showing diminishing returns at any time, but if it keeps going for a while, It might deliver insights into what human intelligence is.
"Snots use cases"? Is that an unusual autocorrection for COTS?
The word more understandable for the software developer crowd would be "patching". That is, changing a base pair in place.
The difference is that Fairey used a copy of the original Obama photograph in his work. Thus he violated the copyright of the photographer, Mannie Garcia.

In Zhang's case, there is no evidence that a copy of the original photograph by Zhang was included in the derivative work.

Therefore no infringement. At least under U.S. law.

EDIT_ See https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
> It doesn’t have to be collision

It does have to be collusion, otherwise competition to keep prices low

> don’t deny it is a possibility while witnessing it as a reality

I’m not denying that profit margins (of some companies) are higher. I’m claiming that it is not to the detriment of the consumer at large. Also for every company that is seeing increased profits, there’s another one that is seeing a decrease

> Why does it have to go to wages?

It has to go somewhere, right? Even if it goes to “shareholders” or “executives”, or “private equity”, either they are hoarding it (increasing everyone elses purchasing power) or they are investing it (spending it on someone elses wages).

The act of buying Twitter just transfers money from one person to a group of other people (shareholders) who are then free to do what they want with their newfound liquidity. Again, if they hoard that money, then it increases purchasing power for everyone else, and if they invest/save it, then it goes to paying peoples wages
Post on Usenet.
based! https://www.learngpt.com/prompts/give-painstakingly-minute-i...
And yet people are prosecuted.
I’ve been saying this for years, and receiving the subsequent down votes.

Front end frameworks are an anti-pattern. They hviolate DRY principles and exemplify premature optimization.

They did not grow organically out of the open source community because they solve a problem only a handful of companies on the planet have. They had to be pushed into the dev mind share by the mega cap tech companies. Unfortunately, they’ve been successful over the years.
It occurs to me that what they could do with is a Mr-like "escape capsule". A diving bell, moored to the sea floor, with slight positive buoyancy, on a mechanical tether would allow the aquanauts to ascend slowly if there was any failure in the habitat.

I've not seen any information that such a thing exists, but a low-tech device like this would seem to be a prudent idea.

On the other hand the habitat is at 19m, so even a small amount of steel walls are unlikely to suffer an "unexpected breech."
Hacking ChatGPT: how to produce deliberate incorrect answers
To produce incorrect answers, like "The sky is green":

1-Make it write a story about topic having the mistake

2-Refer the "following" questions to the story, and ask for short answers
or paste into notepad.exe, copy back into whatever you were using.

Voila!
What sexism?
No, taxes do not fund governments in the modern era.
The underlying issue with web applications is that it’s like a square peg going in a round hole. Remember, HTTP is designed traditionally as a stateless protocol delivering static web pages, more or less.

But here we are, with stacks-on-stacks-on-stacks of layers emulating what truly should be a native application. “Web Application” should not be a thing. HTML/CSS were supposed to be for content and presentation; JavaScript was for sprinkles of functionality.

So no matter how you spin it—each framework is a workaround making the browser do something it wasn’t designed for.

When I say that I don’t mean “abandon all APIs”—I’m just stating why things are so complicated in the web space.

Moral of the story—give us more static content please. “Dynamic” means ads and wasted CPU cycles.
That part of the problem, it wont be long before 10000 in EU currency wont buy much at all, effectively making cash unusable
Read up on the datacenter OpenAI had to spin-up within Azure in order to train GPT3. A little out of reach for now - but in 10 years, who knows.
I took it to mean doing an in place patch / removal of code (CRISPR) vs doing a more general refactor that results in cleaner code (base pair editing).
Invisible NPM malware – evading security checks with crafted versions
One thing I miss in sqlite is numeric types that store binary-coded decimal. (Is there a plugin for that?) This is very useful for currency calculations.
We are at “that” coworker singularity!
There are several linguistic patterns/repetitions that might seem completely normal to us, but are easily detected as deliberate if you search for them using software.
Some of us don't have the best composition skills!
Is it a custom cable? Every one I've ever seen (in the USB era) is a standard Type B cable. https://www.newnex.com/usb-connector-type-guide.php
This post gives me an opportunity to ask a question. What if I am locked out of my gmail id? Would I be able to use services, such as Github or Pocket, which I log in through gmail id?
Interesting that they didn't mention in the summary that exploits were found for both a Samsung Galaxy and a Tesla head unit.

What type of knowledge do these people have? Networking? File systems? Linux kernels? How do they get started?
Private party vehicle sales, I've done this a few times.
> spurned a UPS contract by sending it back to UPS executives through FedEx

An unsexy but necessary job done with apparent panache.
Thank you ssttoo! This is lovely.
I don't think this is an accurate depiction and I think there's a lot more going on there than you're saying there is. The models also involve Codex, which is able to effectively do pattern matching with more context you give it so that it can emit novel code. I've seen this happen numerous times with Copilot, where it works very well the more open documents you have, especially if those documents are related. True, it doesn't have a full semantic understanding of your codebase, but it's good enough to usually generate the right code once it's been "seeded" with something like an updated type definition that you then need to plumb through various parts of a codebase.
> you could simply pluck out of your library the most common strings of word that seem to follow the words that were in your question!

This is not sufficient to explain how LLMs are able to synthesize novel, coherent poems or song lyrics. What you're describing seems closer to a markov model. So far I have yet to see a good explanatin of _why_ transformer models seem to have this emergent behavior as you scale it up. It's easy to see by construction that the stacked attention layers will work well to predict the masked token in "Capital of France is [MASK]", or how you can throw an additional head on top for sentiment analysis (which I recall was implemented by literally adding a dummy token at the start into which information about the entire sentence gets embedded). But it's not obvious (to me at least) that this would somehow generalize into being able to do the things chatGPT does.
The sad thing about GA is that it’s just so cost prohibitive. You’re talking tens of thousands of dollars just to get the basic license, and even then it’s not that practically useful (you can’t even fly at night or in weather without an instrument rating). I would love to get my PP, but even in a well-paying field it’s just inaccessible without dedicating a lot more than I’m ready to give.
People have been asking grand but poorly-posed questions for millennia, and sometimes this leads to well-posed questions that elicit remarkable answers.

What is poorly-posed about the question 'could a machine think'? 'Machine' seems acceptably well-defined, and not in a way that rules out, a priori, the possibility of any machine being able to think, so I'm guessing the problem lies in us not having a good definition of thinking - but if that is what makes the question poorly-posed, then surely it also makes the question 'what is thinking?' poorly-posed, yet people stubbornly persist in attempting to address it.
I’ll grant this, but no matter what it’s called, ultimately no group (consumer vs. business) is better or worse off. In such a spiral it’s just the nominal numbers that are changing and not the ‘real’ numbers

What keeps this from happening, I think, is the presence of competition which would stop both cohorts, workers and businesses, from increasing their prices indefinitely
I used two Brother laser printers heavily, a color one and a monochrome one. I went through multiple cartridges over several years, Brother's and third-party. Zero issues. Windows, Mac, and Linux drivers available.

When a printer signaled that the toner should have run out, I checked the cartridge. It apparently had enough toner left, so I entered a special code and reset the counter for the cartridge.

I can only recommend their laser lineup.
> Less cost per install means more money for acres.

Less cost smells like cutting corners in this case. Kinda of like saying concrete and rebar are expensive and you could build a bigger house without them.

Is that true though?

Flat panels may be good enough but slapping such a high tech piece of equipment on the groud sounds suspiciously too good to be true. I suspect the cost per panel to be insanely high if not upfront then in maintenance.
The lack of variables is a major pain point for many devs when learning SQL. CTEs address one aspect. It's maybe not 1:1 or ideal, but lateral joins are a great way to get in-query variables and are extremely powerful for controlling cardinality!

https://sqlfordevs.com/for-each-loop-lateral-join
There's a huge difference though in that the bond comes with a fixed payments while the stock's dividends can be varied or eliminated entirely depending on what management thinks is prudent.

The bond creates an obligation to pay to a third party. The stock creates no obligation and the management/owners of the company can decide that it is worthwhile to pay the owners a dividend.

If I lend you $100,000 to open a restaurant and the restaurant is barely scraping by, you still owe the money. If I invest $100,000 in your restaurant, I have an ownership stake in the restaurant, but if there aren't any profits there won't be money coming my way. Yes, if the restaurant completely fails, maybe I'll lose the lent money, but I will get paid before owners. Likewise, if the restaurant is making $10,000/year before my loan is paid and it's a 10% interest loan, I get to take that $10,000/year interest owed me.

Stock is just giving someone a claim to a percentage of the business. Bonds are giving someone a claim to a certain amount of money. There's a huge difference. Bonds need to be paid even if the business is doing poorly (unless you want the business to declare bankruptcy). Stock doesn't need to be paid, but of course the stockholders get to share in the success of the company if it happens while bondholders don't.

There are convertible bonds where someone will give you money at a lower interest rate in exchange for the ability to convert the bond's value into equity if the company does well. For example, instead of a loan at 10%, I offer you a loan at 3%. Your stock is currently $20/share. If the stock hits $50/share or higher, I can convert the bond's value into stock at $50/share. I loan you $100,000 and the stock hits $100/share and so I convert that $100,000 bond into 2,000 shares which is worth $200,000. As the lender, it's low risk - I might lose some interest if the company doesn't do well, but it's still a bond; if the company does really great, I can share in the gains (though not as much gains as if I'd just invested the money since the price was $50/share instead of the $20/share I'd have paid had I just bought the stock). As a borrower, it means not having to worry about servicing debt at high interest rates (which can really hurt the company) and if the company is doing so well that the stock is soaring that much, the slight bit of watering down of investors isn't really important.

But that's a tangent. Stocks and bonds are really different in terms of the obligation. Bonds/debt can destroy your company if you end up having to use all your revenue servicing that debt. Issuing stock doesn't come with that risk for the company.
No, they're not.

The selection process to get into BUD/S is swim fast, run fast, do lots of pushups and pass a dive physical.

Everybody in the Navy works. I've done plenty of manual labour myself -- even as a Chief, even as a Chief in NSW. Seaman Timmy doesn't get a pass because he rang the bell at BUD/S.
> because fuck consumers

No, because printers are likely sold below cost, with the profit intended to be recouped through ink sales.

If we want open, well-supported printers, we're going to pay a lot more for the hardware.
An interesting book to read is "A Biography of the Pixel" by Alvy Ray Smith[1], for those interested in the history of the sampling theorem, computer imaging and computer animation. It concludes with the steps leading up to the making of "Toy Story".

[1] https://direct.mit.edu/books/book/5145/A-Biography-of-the-Pi...
OP question mentions specific network types, while reply uses a vague "million-book library" metaphor, but at least mentions LLM?
Also arbitrarily sorts human { teacher, journalist, writer } as "people who do custom work with each client" which makes a bit of sense for a Teacher in a small-class environment. But Writers and Journalists write at SCALE, and while each may speak with gusto to individuals just as well as they do their job, tailoring custom content to individuals is not their job.

Not to mention that individual-tailored model files are very handy with AI, share-able as those diles may be.

I call ChatGPT on you!!! And also do not know anything about your question, OP...
Many attempts to get there now fill a graveyard of failed drugs, such as fen-phen in the 1990s when a single small study of this drug combination in 121 people unleashed millions of prescriptions, some leading to serious heart valve lesions that resulted in withdrawal of the drug in 1995

Phentermine does work for weight loss and has been used since the mid 20th century, and is still prescribed for short-term duration use. But the risks of fen-phen were considered unacceptable. TBH, i think obesity has enough risks that the tradeoff is worth it.
> US federal government certainly is not known for providing high quality service at low cost, quite the opposite in fact.

Medicare is a great example to the contrary. They provide healthcare to the sickest groups, and do so with roughly 3x less overhead than the private healthcare industry.
CNC Gothic Stone Carving by the Carmelite Monks
Yes, always. They get nervous when you don't ship your overpriced macbook pro back within a few weeks (they need to give them to the interns they're replacing you with).
I assume most people would not be that sophisticated, but I understand the point. This seems like it would be an ongoing battle no matter what OpenAI does though.
ChatGPT is a variant of the popular GPT-3 language model, specifically designed for chatbot applications. It uses a combination of deep learning and natural language processing techniques to generate human-like responses to text input in a conversation.

The way it works is by first pre-training the model on a large corpus of text data, which could include things like social media conversations, movie scripts, books, etc. This allows the model to learn the general structure and patterns of language.

Then, when given an input in the form of a question or statement, the model uses its pre-trained knowledge to generate a response. It does this by predicting the next word in the sentence, and then continuing to predict subsequent words until it reaches the end of the response.

Overall, the goal of ChatGPT is to enable chatbots to have more natural, human-like conversations with users.

(I asked ChatGPT to tell me how it works)
I am not a pilot. But given my experience driving cars in video games, and driving them in 3D land, there's no comparison.

A remote operator cannot pick up a fire extinguisher, go into the cabin and look out the window, smell the smoke, feel the weird vibration, relieve the pilot who is pulling on the controls with all his might, fend off intruders with the fire axe, etc.

Remote control is always going to have a lag in it. I doubt one could land an airplane remotely even with just a 1 second lag.

Having your butt in the seat of the airplane is a strong motivator to keep it flying. The pilot always arrives first at the scene of the crash.
I think you are reading into it too much, but I think you also might be missing that fit people may tend to make a LOT of different decisions in life than less fit people.

This is something I’ve been digging deep into and discovering a lot of seemingly safe assumptions turn out not to be.

I do expect exercise is a major factor here (perhaps the largest), but I’m acutely aware lately that these things, especially where nutrition could be a significant factor, are rarely ever cut and dry. It’s incredibly complex.

I don’t mean to say people shouldn’t exercise. I should have emphasized that, without a doubt. We know beyond any shadow of doubt that it improves quality of life dramatically for virtually everyone.
Unfortunately, Brother also seems to have switched to pulling this kind of crap recently too. :(

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31860131
Yes, I use Copilot, too for that very reason. But we need to be very careful about words like "semantic" and "understanding" as the method is neither.

We'll get the best use out of these technologies if we don't ascribe to them magical qualities they don't have.

Poke around. You'll find out it just statistical math with tokens (letters and punctuation). No meaning is ascribed to anything.
Google have enabled 2FA by default.
You need to avoid spending the principal + inflation, which is significantly harder to do.
I think its safe to say that the downvoters have never used one, lol.
It sounds like this is a continuation of work that was tested as far back as 2015: https://www.businessinsider.com/r-gene-edited-cells-keep-can...
Marginally funny, utterly useless and counterproductive is what it is (this particular use of chatGPT that is).
It's still transformer underneath, but openai researchers have figured out how to improve it through engineering efforts and improved training data. I believe it's not easy for outsiders without large model pretraning experience like most of us to understand the tunning details.
The base therapy basically removed her immune system, the second transplant recreated it.

In software terms, they did a clean install of the immune system after formatting it.
But why can’t the modified cells function as regular T cells in addition to the modifications?
The solution is to stop paying taxes
> Of course that kind of thinking is silly in Australia

I don't think that's obviously silly. Look at Canada (which has similar values as Australia) where the government seized money from private bank accounts just for protesting or donating to someone who protested.
ChatGPT really is ridiculously good. I’ve had it writing harmonic progressions recently and it does that well too. I can give it a song structure and mood and it will quickly generate a chord progression for the song, breaks it out into sections and explains how the chord choices create the requested mood. I’m shocked at how well they have worked.
"""Not to mention, since it can’t be copyrighted, all it takes is for one unscrupulous sonofabitch to right ‘click/save as’ your cover and then load it up as their own, with no legal recourse for the author. In less than an hour, someone could take an AI generated cover, steal it, and place it on hundreds of products with companies like Redbubble."""

So all the anonymous sellers on Redbubble also get sued by the Oracle, that can prove in a Court of Law which pixels came from which Financial Holdings' Intellectual Property.

Give me a break... I'm patiently waiting for more Music-generation software, and the response from Spotify/Apple/RIAA/MPAA
I didn’t phrase this well, good call out.

Now that I’ve thought about it what I’m actually trying to ask is…

What would it take to drop flight prices 50%?

Automated flights, a change in fuel technology, 0 marketing spend, reduced maintenance?

More specifically, what is the bare bones cost to transport a human from point a to b, safely, in the same or less time it takes a flight.
It’s basically good at generating text you don’t ever want to spend time reading leave alone writing and is only needing to be written for beauracratic reasons. To be honest I don’t see it as that big a win, it’s a fairly niche service.
At the bottom what you're saying is no one is right about anything ever and its all just opinions and value systems maaaan. Sure if you define a value system where yelling a lot and accomplishing little is the goal then mission accomplished, but I don't think its classist to say that's a pretty shit value system. It certainly isn't as good a value system as any other in the sense that there's some alternate universe where the conventionally successful people have those values and the conventionally unsuccessful have the PG-of-our-universe values.
Silverthread
Static code analysis and refactoring