skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wizards is not that forward thinking, if it was they would have pulled the plug on all the 3E content when 4E was floundering.

I don't think moving from a license which Wizards is trying to rely on ambiguity to claim it allows them to pull the plug to a license which definitively allows them to pull the plug is a business safe move. Especially since the new license requires you to accept the end of OGL v1.0a so there's no way back if you do sign.

Add to that that Wizards has pulled the plug on them before, _twice_, first by kicking them out of their official adventure publishing role, then pulling the plug on their position as an online retailer of first party 3E PDFs, and there can't be much trust for Wizards from Paizo.

Paizo could have made this decision before (without the one way nature, even), and chose not to in the 3E to 4E days. Charting their own path instead took them from the a small adventure path publisher to the #2 publisher in tabletop games, so it worked out for them, so I don't see why Paizo would choose to deal with Wizards here.

Finally, I'm not sure tabletop publishing is that high margin a business. I'm not sure Paizo could afford 25% of their revenue, or even if they got a sweetheart deal like 10% on account of their size. Plus the aforementioned trust issues regarding keeping that split long term would still be there
It sounds more like a swiss town in crises. The local economy probably relies on visitors coming during the snow season to provide for the rest of the year. It is nothing to do with greed.
Oh, and by the way, people are not equal.

/s (probably)
Citing your IQ is cringe but I like the idea of information:action ratio. I think I would benefit from keeping that in mind
The OOBE should be good enough for such people
These are mostly people that are bossing other people around, and just review the work occasionally, not actually creating whole drafts.
I don’t understand the author’s position in this article. It spends a long time talking about details of the licenses, but I can’t see any way the suit will actually be about licenses, because if it’s about licenses then it seems patently obvious to me that GitHub will lose very quickly, because they have undoubtedly violated the terms of the licenses.

As I see it, the only leg GitHub can possibly stand on is the “fair use” exemption of copyright law—that the license is irrelevant, because they weren’t using it under that license.

So then you get to the last paragraph of the article, and the “fair use” claim is finally mentioned—as something the plaintiffs seem to be seeking to avoid bringing into it because that would make things messy. But… GitHub’s defence must be “fair use”, I can see no other response. Yes, the plaintiffs “chose to focus on something that is beyond factual dispute”, but how are GitHub ever going to do anything other than bring fair use into it? So I don’t see how they could expect it to “still provide the same damages” without bringing fair use into it. (And I can’t imagine GitHub will settle for anything other that total vindication here—even settlement would doom Copilot.)

Returning to the title: I cannot imagine any way that We May Learn Something About Creative Commons Licensing from this suit. About the interactions between copyright law and machine learning, maybe. But about CC-*, GPL, Apache-2.0, MIT, whatever? Nah, there’s nothing interesting about them in the suit, because if they were involved, it’d be cut and dried.
I have 2 phone lines with 2 DSL connections that are around 20 MBps, a load balancing router, four Ubiquiti access points, lots of gigabit ethernet with I think four hubs, one of which is a Ubiquiti managed hub, 3 IoT gateways, a tower PC that works as a server. I have some long range Ubiquiti radios that I've thought about using to run a link to the barn or the other house but never got around to installing it.
No, no, as a side gig, you can be the canary!
That is the easy part. What I really want is someone to administer the upgrades for me. Make sure everything just works, and all security holes are closed. Too often I get things almost working perfect just as some software goes out of support, and next thing I know everything is broke again after I make one upgrade.
If we take an approach of one at a time looking at each activity and going "is this going to stop global warming?" the answer is always going to be "no" and we're going to be left going "well, there's nothing we could do, we couldn't find any activity that would stop it".

No single wasteful activity is going to stop it. We need to stop a lot of them. This could and possibly should be one of them.
Dang it, we lost 2 of the biggest champions of the Actor model, Carl and Joe a couple of years ago. Who is left to carry the torch to illuminate millions of developers who have no idea or have never heard of the Actor model? Sadly, we will see thousands or poorly thought out replacement models (eg. C++ futures, thread pools etc), which only offer a subset of Actor functionality instead of implementing the whole she-bang. E
I'd imagine they're just going to leverage SDIO and a cheaper ESP32 variant (like a C3) to bring wifi to the chip. Makes sense when you start looking at EMC/EMI with high speed interfaces, adding Wifi just adds another layer to the chaos which might not be needed in a lot of applications
I have been collecting bookmarks for some time now as well - all unsorted... Doing it manually would be a nightmare so I have been thinking about making a SaaS - webcrawler + AI (NLP + clustering)

It would at least accomplish a preliminary sort/grouping; manual cleanup or fine tuning would always be needed, I think, but at least the bulk of the work could be done in an automated fashion to give the user a head start.

Would anyone else want such a SaaS? I thought about how to charge for it, but ideally it is a one-time operation, so charging anything more than $1 to $5 doesn't seem reasonable. And the privacy issues ... bunch of practical problems, so I may just write some OSS.
Since the first release of Flutter in 2017, this framework gained leading positions among cross-platform mobile development technologies. We did explore Flutter for Web as it was in early beta. And yes – we are excited to research what the technology can offer after its improvement. What’s new in Flutter 2, and which features are notable?
It is not false. There’s data to back it up. I did use the word starving, which has a gradient of meanings (see below for separate numbers for the gradients), and I did not mean dying of starvation. The latest numbers are (definitions of state in the links):

* 828 million people are hungry

* 345 million are experiencing acute hunger

* 924 million experience severe food insecurity

* 2.3 billion people experience moderate or severe food insecurity

* at least 9 million people die of starvation every year

https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/un-report-global-hunger-...

https://www.concernusa.org/story/world-hunger-facts/

https://www.who.int/news/item/06-07-2022-un-report--global-h...

https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/losing-25000-hunger-...

World populations:

* 1850: 1.2 billion

* 1800: 959 million

* 1750: 629 million

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=world+population+1750

Wealth concentration has dramatically increased since the 1970s and 1800s.
Like coal plants, they’ll end up needing funds to transition to a new normal going forward. The next 100 years won’t be like the last 100 years.
Linus will be a tough one. I have never seen somebody who is able to play the role of benevolent dictator for so long.
It takes a scammer to spot a scammer.

If you know that there is wide spread fraud in science, and you know how it's done, why not profit and publish a paper on it?
I've also heard "Key Person Risk" recently for the same concept.
It seems a lot of this stems from how the DMCA does not require that these hosting providers actually check for code ownership at submission, or maybe just how they don't have an explicit checkbox for "I affirm that I can license this code to GitHub" every time someone is uploading code.

If it is shown that the license in the TOS is valid, the legal question might boil down to "is the TOS License broad enough to where nobody thought that it allowed their code to be used in for-profit ML models?"
Sure. Publishing means having your name listed among the authors. This does not necessarily translate in the production of results, or in the active participation in the writing process.

An interesting statistic would be the number of scientists who are able to publish a paper every five days or so, while going solo in their work. Essentially nobody, I suppose, for so many reasons I will not list here.
> But why waste FBI manpower in this case?

Because half of the purpose of punishment for crime is deterrence?

If “they should have known better” was a valid legal defense for fraud…
I got my first name on Github and now on omg.lol. I feel so fortunate.
* Windows only
because Vice essentially sells eyeball-attention?
Charts: Tesla stock tanks even as it sets EV delivery record
In summary, once you remove large teams like in particle physics and biomedicine and long running major cohort studies, and fix the data for bad disambiguation of non-Western author names, you get down to around a hundred people.

Of those, the most prolific authors are in countries that reward authorship with money, and so seem much more potentially related to corruption on average, and of the best sample of the remainder, most who bothered to respond in a survey aggreed they did not mostly meet all 4 of the somewhat-rigorous Vancouver criteria of authorship, like "substantially contributed to the idea of the paper" and "drafted most of the paper".

The paper concludes, "ultimately you'd have to read an author's work to understand what they've actually done".

So... this is kind of an interesting review of the data and why it may be what it is, but it seems like there are relatively few truly "hyper-prolific" (if any!) scientists out there.

I'd be interested to see a much more rigorous study of the mid range of smaller fields: the authors who do contribute substantially to say, 10-15 papers a year for a few years. Who are they? What is their work, and maybe most interestingly: _how_ do they work?
Agreed, it's all a bit odd. There are no interesting discoveries here, so this must be a methods paper, which is fine, except it's a method that's so laborious that surely nobody will ever use it again. Still, laymen are clearly wowed by the scale of the thing, so it's perfect Nature fodder.
Seems like they should consider a dome, like Houston (to fight humidity).

If your snow mountain reflects most heat energy, has a great heat pump (including heating the homes and businesses) then you have a huge indoor ski mountain. Bonus if it's made inexpensively with recycled glass and plastic.
There are countless open source projects that don't charge a dime and don't have the "Gnome attitude".

There's such a thing as too opinionated (and it's coming from someone that likes opinionated).
Even so, that doesn't necessarily make it any less economically sound.

If it cost as much as 10 canaries, but replaced the need for 20 canaries (over a lifespan of 10-15 years), it still checks out from a business sense. And the device itself lasts for decades so it's amortized across many years. Not to mention the additional cost and complexity of a "canary supply chain". Unlike bottles of oxygen, you can't just warehouse canaries for months without constant daily care.

Now obviously there are emotional/ethical elements as well as mentioned by other commenters... but I just want to point out that these don't have to be opposed to the economics of it, but can be in addition to it.
I was in a similar group a decade ago. At the time, I found it impressive and efficient, but looking back now, I find much of those papers not to amount to much. I wonder what your experience is: were those 30 papers per year good science overall?
AI is not just that. That's a myth.

Yes, when you train on a human generated corpus you're going to get an interpolative AI. But when you train on a dataset generated by AI, you can surpass human level.

AlphaZero started, as the name says, from zero. No examples of how we play the game. In just three days of self-play it surpassed the best human. How was that possible? We got a 2000 year head start, larger brains, and many players, not just one model. AlphaZero did it by creating its own training data.

Here is an example of using code language models for this kind of dataset-creation by play.

> Evolution through Large Models

https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.08896

By the way, GPT-3 and chatGPT are not simple interpolative language models. They have also been trained on many tasks, problems, and codes, which is the kind of data that will awaken the skills of the model to a whole new level. What I am saying is that we can auto-generate more problem data and increase their skills.
>Masking is somewhat effective, even the cloth masks may prevent infection in passing. It's only when sharing the same space for extended periods of time that it becomes ineffective, and N95s and Surgical masks remain effective in such environments.

KN95/N95 - yes. Surgical and cloth - very limited, especially at the population level. Large-scale masking was MAYBE effective at reducing transmission by something like 10%. This means that it wasn't stopping anything.

>Before vaccines masking and lockdowns were the best things we could do to even blunt the death count,

Woah woah woah. No. That is not true at all. It isn't true now, and it wasn't true then. The policy of "lockdowns" (including school closures) or "no lockdowns" wasn't the only thing on the table. It was certainly presented this way, and ANYONE who dared to question that was labeled, well ... the way you labeled Herman Cain in the next paragraph, or worse.

The sad part is, we had a century of knowledge when it came to fighting respiratory pandemics .. that we threw out and just winged it based on the Chinese zero-COVID policy (even though it was clear as day that China was lying about its numbers and in hindsight their zero-COVID policy was an abject failure).

We could have done targeted lockdowns at high-risk populations, and while letting the low-risk population live their lives and take appropriate measures commensurate to their risk-tolerance. Sweden was heavily criticized for that kind of policy - WHY? Florida was heavily criticized. In the end, there was no difference in outcomes when comparing lockdown regions to non-lockdown regions - comparing Florida to California.

>They weren't misjudged prophets who knew something other people didn't, they were selfish people making selfish decisions who happened to be partially correct, but also made the problem worse than it had to be.

They weren't prophets. They were people who had major issues with the public health policy. And even if they turned out they were wrong (and in hindsight, they weren't wrong), it was disgusting how celebrated, for example, Herman Cain's death was EVEN THOUGH he was just a victim of viral pandemic, like millions of others. Him masking would not have made a difference, just as it hasn't made a difference to 70% of the population that, regardless of masks, lockdowns, and vaccines, got COVID. The rest of the population will get COVID eventually.

Speaking of misguided prophets .. in July 2020, the consensus was that vaccines aren't going to be there potentially for years - so what was the end-game for lockdown policy? I remember that that time. There literally was the idea, amongst the lockdown proponents, that we could kill the pandemic by locking-down even though it was clear that was never going to happen.
I mean, obviously the cartels have lots of money, but they don't have anywhere near the kind of money that NATO states spend on defense. The UK, for example, spends like $60 billion on defense.

Which NATO states do you have in mind?
A paper is only a few pages long usually. A read of a paper takes perhaps half an hour. And in that time, you might even be able to check some references, make a few edits, or drop an email to someone to gather some more results for a figure or two.

Doing this once a week seems very reasonable.
> I don't see regurgitation as a long term problem, it's just waiting for attention, probably wasn't top priority

The fact that Microsoft is wary of providing it with things like the Windows source code says all we need to know about how much it can be trusted.
Hey, don't forget the steel box is also going to be air conditioned as well.
Having lived there 2016-2022, it certainly does not feel anything like a major metro to me.
The problem is worse than that. The particular case on the blog may be shoddy code. But it is easy to encounter cases where the bit of the code that is emitting is most naturally written as making a ton of little write calls.

Here's an example. I have some code that streams a very large JSON array out from a DB query. It loops through the results of the DB query and constructs that individual value to send out, then goes to the next one. The resulting write calls are basically '.Write({the JSON object})', and '.Write(",\n ")'. But the JSON objects are individually small. I don't quite end up with literally one write call per character, but you can imagine it's not that hard to end up with several million '.Write("[1,2,3]"', '.Write(",\n ")', which translated to packets is still a problem.

Since I'm aware of this problem, I know to put a coalescing buffer between my writer and my network. Any serious language will have one somewhere. The challenge isn't finding it or using it, the challenge is knowing you need to.

But you shouldn't really think of the code writing that JSON object out as "shoddy code". It would be an inappropriate separation of concerns for that code to also be inlining its own coalescing buffer implementation into itself. That code should be making a ton of little .Write calls, to keep it simple and focused on its one task. It only becomes "shoddy code" if it is run in a context where the code calling it fails to provide it a coalescing buffer of some sort, be it a language feature, a socket without TCP_NODELAY, etc.
In Mathematics, there is Paul Erdős* - who published >1,500 papers, with 500+ co-authors, in a ~65-year professional career. Though he is recognized as being very, very unusual. And Mathematics has the huge advantage of not needing the labs, equipment, experiments, etc. that restrict pretty much any "science" to a far slower pace.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erd%C5%91s#Erd%C5%91s_num...
Apparently I'm misremembering: https://www.engram9.info/excel-2007-vba-2/date-literals.html

Still, this violates the principle of least surprise for non-american developers, at least, so seems pretty on brand for VB.
Well I clearly saw this miles away. [0] [1]

Effectively you can't even use the code since it has trampled on licenses which are incompatible with each other. But it is more of a problem for Copilot.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27725322

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27772446
Yeah, light cars are rare, especially in the US. A brand-new base model Hyundai Elantra, which is a very mainstream compact sedan, weighs 2,725 lbs. The lightest new passenger car sold is the Mitsubishi Mirage at 2,095 lbs. It has all of 78 horsepower. ;-)
This isn't a new phenomenon or something restricted to "exclusive" resorts. I have seen this happen in other alpine ski areas over the last 5-10 years when there has been particularly bad snow. Normally in places that are of high importance and traffic, such as at the top of main lifts.

Ski resorts use helicopters for many logistical activities, if it keeps the area open they will do it. This year the Alps are having a particularly bad January, and with it only being four weeks till the traditional February rolling school holidays for family skiing trips, they are very concerned about keeping the areas open.

That's not to say there isn't a level of absurdity to the whole thing!
Caddy to reverse proxy everything. Vaultwarden. Jellyfin. Nextcloud. Miniflux. Samba.
Air conditioning is a lot more efficient than heating.
> the advent of electronic sensors in the mid-1980s

We used actual canaries into the 80s? That’s a few decades later than I would have guessed...
Why is Switzerland so hot? I know climate change is a thing, but many other countries are receiving a lot of big snow falls. What's specifically going on in Switzerland? Jet stream weirdness allowing warm air further north?
And Google kept the copyright notices and attributions; probably not super relevant, but it's a difference between the two cases.

I mean in essence Github is a library; they did have a license to a point to do with the code as they pleased, but they then started to create a derivative work in the form of an AI, without correctly crediting the source materials.

I mean I think they made a gamble on it; as far as I'm aware, AI training sets were yet unchallenged in a court of law, so legally not fully defined yet. These lawsuits - and the ones (if any) aimed at the image generators, using CC artwork from e.g. artstation - will lay the legal groundwork for future AI / ML development.
yeah that's great but we still unlocked tons of productivity

who cares man

just build stuff

if you don't want people to learn off your code just don't share it!
> Global warming being caused in part by internal combustion engines and aviation results in less snow for skiers... Solution? Chopper some more snow in to counter the effects of I.C.E's and aviation. Huhmmmm.... Does anyone else spot a dichotomy in thinking here?

Well, they're doing it to keep their income and profits coming. A major part of it in fact - probably half the yearly income.

Since you're probably from a western country, how much of an income cut and inconvenience when driving/commuting were you prepared to take to combat climate change until now?

Because that's really what you're asking here - are you going to take a 50% paycut and stop using your ICE vehicle forever?
The problem is not to be dominant, it is that there was no money to be made in this type of website. These sites come and go, it is very difficult to monetize them.
> Linus for Linux

Responsibility for various sub-systems is already distributed to many individuals. As for overall responsibility to maintain the canonical tree and merge patches in, it'll probably similar to the last time Linus stepped down for personal reasons. Greg Kroah-Hartman handled the 4.19 release of Linux while Linus took a break.
1/6th or 1/7th of profits is significant. 9 million dollars could be ignored by a company making 54,000 or 63,000 million dollars, but 9,000 million is a lot.
> Uploading someone else's code without permissions is, in itself, copyright infringement

Suppose person A comitted a crime, that does not mean you are now allowed to profit from someone else's crime
I wouldn't be surprised if the result varied by country.
What would you consider a sufficient example to highlight the problematic mindset behind these actions then? On its own, neither the helicopter here, nor the private jet there or the cruiseship in the Mediterranean and so forth are a problem. In total, they absolutely are.

What would you suggest to submit instead?
This blew my mind when going into hardware.

People be proud as hell of their box businesses!
Note that the extra arguments to trace are not defined in the standard, but are allowed by the standard. They are implementation specific.

You can also get something like arbitrary computation at function calls using :around methods.
Google also used all of this to improve their OCR algorithms, almost certainly used in Google Cloud Vision[0], but I doubt this was a consideration when deciding if it was transformative/fair use.

0: https://cloud.google.com/vision
Lenovo brings Surface Neo back to reality.