skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Exactly the fallacy with people's expectations of AI is that it has to have a perfect track record of decision making. We humans actually fail that test and quite miserably so. Take self driving cars as an example.

Self driving cars: barely any fatal accidents but some erratic behavior. People go "oh we can't have that because something extremely unlikely might kill somebody. Never mind it hasn't happened yet and might never happen. But it just might. Therefore I will never trust AIs!!!!"

Self driving humans: lots of fatal accidents and most of them because of human error. People go: "that's just the way things are; price of being on the road is playing Russian roulette"

It's irrational. Trick question: Would you rather drive on a road where every other driver is an AI or on a road where the average driver is a fair selection of the current drivers? I'd feel safer with AIs probably. I risk my life regularly taking part in the traffic. It's not great. So, yes less of that would be great. IMHO that will become the norm not so long from now because of insurance fees.

So, yes, chat gpt makes mistakes and sometimes talks out of its ass. Read the average HN comment section for some human equivalent of that. Lots of supposedly intelligent people asserting things that are patently false, people applying broken logic, speaking with confidence about a brain fart they had, etc.

We're applying double standards here. The key thing for AGI is the ability to learn and improve. Chat gpt3 is not there yet. You train it once and then you deploy it with static capabilities. It never gets better. It doesn't experiment and learn from the mistakes it makes. It lacks the capability to learn. You can't even educate it about the mistakes it makes. Using chat gpt-3 does not evolve the AI model. Using your brain does evolve it. Out of the box, it's actually quite useless. Forget self driving. Just learning to walk takes years. It takes many years more to get some sensible thought out of a human being. And frankly, only very few people get very good at that.

An AGI would need the ability to absorb new information and adapt how it behaves based on that. It doesn't have to get it perfectly in one go. It just needs to be able to adapt at a similar or better pace than we do to rapidly get to the point where it is going to be better than us at just about anything it bothers to learn.
For as bad as Microsoft was/is, imagine if Oracle filled that role.
An sftp account is still an ssh account, and you certainly can chroot rsync.

In both cases the client is acessing an ssh server and relying on mere config files to ensure that the ssh server launches something other than a shell.

However rsync is also it's own service that doesn't have to use ssh at all, meaning no possible risk of getting a shell. It can be chrooted both from within and without (it can manage chroots of shares, and it can be chrooted itself). And wire encryption could be layered on some other way. ssh is merely convenient.
Since ISA collections affect ABI in RISC-V, getting an agreement of the baseline for RISC-V ISA for Linux-based systems was extremely difficult. On top of that, the ABI stabilization work couldn't begin until the required ISA extensions for Linux were locked in. So it was all a mess.

(It still is a mess, to be honest...)
There was also forcing EAX into Doom 3 by threatening a patent lawsuit over Carmack's Reverse, which both Creative and John Carmack independently invented.

https://techreport.com/news/7113/creative-patents-carmacks-r...
You redefine the meaning of word forgery.
When a scientist gets proved wrong the work of his is not forgery.
Maybe he _re-reads_ a lot of these classic books. Then he can go through them faster.

I speculate that he had read Brothers Karamazov in Russian (his mother tongue) before).
Most states have separate employment agreements depending on their peculiar regs. Remote workers have made this more "fun" for legal to keep up with. I had to have state-specific lawyers review the overall employment agreement and the specifics of the IP clauses around side-ventures and open-source.

Workers should be free to employed wherever or start a business that's not lifting IP.

These sort of regs needs to harmonized like UCC. California's model is mostly the right one.
My favourite tin-foil hat conspiracy theory is that Kubernetes, microservices etc are promoted by big tech to lure potentially disruptive small teams into adopting momentum-killing rabbit-hole solutions because they are "best practice"...

This also holds for project management practices such as Scrum.
Programming Actual “Hello World ”?
If you were to write program that sends "Hello World!" message to the the world so that most people as possible read it. How would you do it?
> You cannot create an image unless the object exists in front of the lens.

CGI would like to have a word with you
You said 2000 nits is nowhere good enough to be seen in daylight. 5000 nits is about the maximum you can get in specific high power outdoor displays, 2000 nits is common in applications like digital signage, etc. I personally know that 2000 nits is plenty to be seen in daylight, it's a common choice you see every day in your day to day life.

The display doesn't need to compete with the brightness of the sun u less you want a display as bright as the sun, which is crazy. You just want to be able to read it in daylight, not light the world.
How do you write an enticing homepage?
Those diagrams are pretty good, wonder how did the author make them
I would love any input. My five year old daughter asked for a guitar on Christmas. I took her to the music store and let her pick a ukelele. She loves to play at it hard and sing, and doesn’t “get” that she’s just strumming blindly and making noise. it’s adorable but I wonder if there is something I can do to nudge her. At the moment I’m thinking to

1) act impressed when she plays
2) get my own and let her see how I learn to play it

(I tried borrowing hers but she’s very territorial about her guitar.)

These are not high stakes but it would be so nice to see it go somewhere.

What do?
> I consciously pace my food intake every single day. I just had a huge plate of nachos, some christmas cookies, and a pickle...and I could still eat more.

You give some thought to it every day, but do you think about it every minute? You could still eat more, but do you still have the same intrusive hunger to eat that you did before you started the nachos?

> Almost all of us work for it.

Your claim here seems to be that you work for it harder than people who have less success. But do you have any actual evidence of that?

Like, can you truthfully say that to keep your presumably healthy BMI you overcome nearly constant thoughts about how hungry you are? Can you eat an entire pizza and still be hungry except it's physically painful to eat?

People vary in their experiences of satiety. Many people do manage to be thin without constantly feeling hunger; that's what being on semaglutide does.
This industry has drawn scum like flies to shit for decades. When I was a kid starting out, it was the beginning of the dot.com boom, and you'd see these endless stupid startup ideas thrown together by MBAs who suddenly thought SF or the Valley were the place to be instead of Wall Street. (Many of these back then involved unrealistic or bizarre schemes involving streaming media, as I recall.)

Then it was social media. The same sketchy freaks were all gonna do the new MySpace or Facebook. I remember one dude telling me at a meetup that he was doing "Facebook for payroll". What the fuck does that even mean, dude?

Then came crypto, and the serious scumbags and loonies showed up, because you didn't even need VCs to make money - the money itself was the product. Every ancap dipshit and New Age cokehead and Eastern Promises ass connected-to-scary-Russiam-sex-traffickers jerkoff came squirming out of the woodwork.

Now it's AI. As soon as any tech can be utilized by stupid or sociopathic people to scam or spam other people, it's suddenly hailed as a "boom". And now millions of human-hours and trillions of dollars will be thrown at teaching ML models to sell you boner pills and get your grandma's credit card number.

And all the interesting, useful directions we could be going as technologists are being mostly ignored, so that failed child actors and Patrick Bateman ass hustlers can throw extravagant launch parties and hype up their worthless companies until their investors finally figure out it's a scam and they go to jail, at which point Hulu or Netflix makes a docudrama miniseries about them starring somebody who was a box office draw when the last wave of tech hype was upon us.

Capitalism is so boring and predictable. Always the lowest hanging fruit, always the creepiest scum trying to pick it. I'd probably go be Amish if I could convince myself to believe in Jesus.
Nearly 20 years ago, when I was trying to find HR for my first day, there was an older man talking with them already. He said, and I quote, 'Fuck you all, I got your exit interview right here' while grabbing his crotch. He turned to walk away, smirked at me, and said 'what? I'm retired now.'

Point being, I don't think you were the only one who didn't love the company 10 years ago.
Creative Labs also made one of the strangest keyboard keyboard (not a typo) contraptions, the Prodikeys[0]

[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Creative+Labs+ProdiKeys&t=h_&iax=i...
> Does anyone remember a true positive from their AV?

Yes. I don't remember the details but there was one time where it prevented me from executing some download that was malicious. This was more than a decade ago.

On another occasion (around the same time) it failed to prevent malware from executing. I never found out what the method of infection was, but after changing back the wallpaper and removing it from startup programs, I suffered no further ill effects... fifteen year old me was not very thorough but seems to have worked anyway.

And then there are the numerous annoyance occasions where it false-positived on legitimate software like Nirsoft, Cain&Abel, Netcat, Nmap, etc. Not to mention corporate proxies blocking my personal link shortener but being fine with bitly. Security theatre, those are.

To be fair, AV also prevents executing standard metasploit things and attackers have to be a bit more creative which gets tedious and so it can be an indicator of compromise to have this pop an alert even if the attacker succeeds a few minutes later.
It’s taught in the same way math is taught.
Boring.
Get them to play music, any music. Make songs!
The Itanium was an interesting design and it wasn't even Intel's originally; Intel got in on HP's design, and HP was trying to leapfrog the superscalar designs by making parallelism the responsibility of software, akin to how the MIPS had made handling aggressive pipelining the responsibility of software: The Itanium design was to encode multiple instructions in very long instruction words, where all of the instructions in a given word can be executed at once. This removes the need for the hardware to do reordering, and shoves the responsibility for finding parallelism onto the human or compiler, both of which can, presumably, take a more global view of the problem than a piece of silicon can.

A problem with that was, apparently, figuring out good parallelism statically wasn't enough to get the performance gains Itanium needed to be competitive

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1011760/what-are-the-tec...

For example, Itanium struggled with the non-deterministic nature of memory latency

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/2793...

AMD iterating on x86 to produce AMD64 and giving x86 code a compatible path to the 64-bit world certainly didn't help Itanium's prospects, either.

Also:

> There was no longer any real point to pure RISC instruction sets.

They are simpler to decode and execute, which is nice if you're making a small, cheap core aiming at low power consumption.
Really though?

I'm on a 4K 27" monitor right now and I can see no edges or pixelation. I'm not really sure what higher resolution would do.

Honestly for the work I'm doing I'd struggle to justify a move to OLED (this is IPS), but at least there'd be a reason. I don't get what the point of ever higher resolutions is when I can't tell the difference.

Sure, someone will say "you can't see the difference but I can", but at that resolution I'm very skeptical.
The reply was on point and serious . Mainframe still exists and generates billions in revenue. Windows/ Microsoft lost their foothold in a new market. However Microsoft is also transforming into a cloud first company.
In the reply though he said:

> Pundits always say that this is going to kill the old businesses - eventually that happens but not anywhere near as soon as they say.

So to me maybe he was implying that he did think that web apps would eventually take over, just not at a rapid speed.
And it can't even tell you if science is perhaps the unified tool from god to us.

What if our world was designed on purpose including drugs like LSD to enlightenment and all earth religions are wrong because they stopped listening?

But hey true we don't know :-)
Any AGI that is supposed perform tasks in the physical world, will need some kind of world model. The model doesn't need to be perfect to be immensly useful. It just need to model elements that are necessary to make more accurate predictions in its domain.

I would argue that exactly the same goes for the human brain. Consciousness seems to play the part of the World Model for us. Between the quantum wavefunctions of the world we live in and our conscious experience (or even our sub-conscious data processing) there are layers-upon-layars-upon-layers of data loss and data compression/abstraction. Our sensory endpoints probably receive more raw data in a second than our consciousness processes in a year.

The reason it still works so well, I would argue, is a mix of darwinian learning that has been going on for hundreds of billions of years before humanity even appeared, where a data pipeline has been created in our hardware. This, combined with our ability to learn by interacting with the real world.

Creating an AI with a "perfect" world model is impossible. It will require more compute power than exists in the universe. Rather, AGI will need a simpler world model that captures the parts that are essential for its functioning, and that can be automatically updated using its input data (ideally sensors).

Just like us.

And, it seems to me, this is already happening. A self driving car will create an approximation for a 6-dimensional state for all objects (position and velocity), possibly with acceleration, speculation about intent or other "mental states. It will then extrapolate this a few seconds (or more) into the future, while keeping track of the confidence of the predictions.

This is a similar kind of world model that human brains seem to use, at least for the purpose of driving. Clearly, our brain needs a more complex model, since we make predictions much further into the future (such as the education of our children, or beyond) and we also interact with the world in more ways.

When AI systems start to make use of world model of the same complexity (type and level) as our own, and is able to "train" it both "genetically" and by standard "deep learning", I suspect it will be increasingly good at displaying what we consider "common sense".

And juding by recent developments, this could happens sooner than many think. If we're able to combine the features of ChatGPT, Tesla Self Driving, Stable Diffusion and perhaps a few other in a single model (that takes both visual data, sound and text as input, and which constructs a wold model that combines physical and abstract/textual/behavioral elements), this could happen within 10 years.
>I don’t think we gain much at all from trying to attach human labels to these machines.

That's the standard way of testing whether the neural network has learned to extract "useful" ("meaningful"?) representation from the data : You add very few layers on top of the frozen inner-state of a neural network, and make him predict known human labels, like is the music sad, or is it happy.

If it can do so with very few additional weights, it means it has already learn in its inner representation what makes a song sad or happy.

I agree that I didn't gave a precise definition a what "emotion" is. But if we had to define what emotion is for a neural network : traditional continuous vectors does fit quite well the emotions concept though. You can continuously modify them a little and they map/embed a high-dimensional space into a more meaningful lower-dimensional space where semantically near emotions are numerically near.

For example if you have identified a "sad" neuron that when it light-up the network tend to produce sad music, and a "happy" neuron that when it light-up the network tend to produce happy music, you can manually increase these neuron values to make it produce the music you want. You can interpolate to morph one emotion into the other and generate some complex mix in-between.

Neurons are quite literally adding-up and comparing the various vectors values of the previous layers to decide whether they should activate or not, (aka balancing "emotions").

Humans and machine are tasked to learn to handle data. It's quite natural that some of the mechanism useful for data manipulation emerge in both cases and correspond to each other. For example : the fetching of emotionally-related content to the working context maps quite clearly a near neighbor search to what happens when people say they have "flashing" memories when they experience some particular emotions.
I am expressing my opinion and concern for this pointless race.
Getting started with any machine learning project often starts with the question: “How much data is enough?”. The response depends on a number of factors like the diversity of production data, the availability of open-source datasets, the expected performance of the system, and the list can go on for quite a while. In this article, I’d like to debunk a popular myth about machines only learning from large amounts of data, and share a use case of applying ML with a small dataset.
Yes. This is absolutely the main answer.

But if you raise it to the people attacking renewables or prattling about a nuclear revival, they start screeching about malthusianism.

Additionally, putting your life in the hands of a new energy oligopoly consisting of Urenco, Rosatom and Cameco isn't a great strategy for getting out from the thumb of an energy oligopoly with a history of causing suffering to increase consumption of their product.
I wonder if somone studied „dragon breath” and „vacuuming” exercise vs surgery. I am 15 pounds overweight but I have a feeling that since doing these I look much better and don’t eat that much
That might be contributing. The Pevear translation is highly regarded. I researched which to read quite attentively, I found many who reported not being able to make progress via the Garnett translation found that the Pevear version opened the book up to them.
I don't I like big dense works that feel like a chore, and I was really surprised how easy this read. I'm not sure what part you're up to, but it clearly picks up steam at a certain inflection point.
Not all generalizations surely.
> The rest of us have worked hard our entire lives to stay skinny and now you all get a cheat.

Someone could just as easily say that you've had access to a cheat your entire life and are now bitter other people have access to it. The fact that you have a stronger satiety response does not mean you are morally superior or are more entitled to a healthy life than others.
I didn't know that the world was a global democracy.

Yeah, China's racist policiess are really making Europe a repressed minority /s

Democracies are limited on scope to countries and yes, the comment was made focusing on the US.
The founder is Singaporean.
Lot of devs in Europe do contract work though. It's an employee disguised as a contractor so mostly as grey area, but it's becoming more common.
If you're trying to search for a specific resistor without the prerequisite domain knowledge, how will you be able to vet whether or not the answer given by a language model meets your needs?

Imagining that language models like gpt will ever be able to index up-to-date information is literally trying to apply the concept of "artificial intelligence" to a probabilistic language model. It's incompatible with what it's actually doing.
And a lot of the C++ (and Hack (no pun) and Python) in the Meta codebase is being gradually displaced by Rust because safe with zero-cost abstraction performance is (almost) magic.

Of MAANG, only Netflix and Apple are still missing from the Rust Foundation.

The future is Rusty.
What actionable data can you get from nothing? More months of nothing?
> The new Java applications are NOT credible threats to traditional PC software any time soon

Well, Nathan was right there. But even with Java as (depending on where you look) 2nd, 3rd or 4th popular programming language, how many of those applications are being run on Windows hardware? Developed maybe, but deployed? Ultimately Microsoft didn't get stung too badly by this, since they embraced Linux on the server but it's weird to see them talking about how it's "expanding into a vaccuum" so early, batting around what to do about it when we know now that ultimately Windows lost that battle.

> Continue to "embrace and extend" - both at the level of new Java tools (like J++), and our broader browser strategy.

Kind of an "Oh my god, he admit it!" moment, it's wild to remember how open they were on the EEE strategy.
Thanks for the feedback. Could you please open an issue on GitHub? Thanks.
What pace would you recommend? 40 pages a day seems more than reasonable?
I had similar experience. I was literally crying as I didn't want to go the music class at school (the teacher was extremely strict and scary). The next year, we changed town and the new teacher was awesome. There were posters of all metal bands of the time in the classroom and the class was much more fun.

> Which was, of course, rock.

Nowadays, you can see rock prodigy kids playing guitar on YouTube. Sometimes I wonder how they feel about their instrument and the music they play. Do they even like it?
Yes, my argument sounds weird. About as weird as Google paying for software they don't have to pay for.

Maybe rephrasing my argument makes it more palatable to you: Shouldn't we, the guild of software engineers, take care of our own and pay our sub guild of open source developers? Why would we leave that to faceless companies?
Twitter is actively trying to force people to use the app by making web experience miserable.
It's not like POSIX was universally adopted the day it was released; that took a long time. And not all systems were Unix/POSIX in the first place (e.g. Windows, VMS, the IBM s/3.., and on the consumer side Amiga, Mac OS, BeOS, etc).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4FGzE4endQ is a nice and accurate demonstration of the 90's VR dream
This is laughable. Proof? How could anyone prove that AGI is imminent in a mathematical way? You would need to know the mathematical underpinning of intelligence and nobody will have that until after the fact.

It’s more likely for a winter? Dude, you either think AGI is inevitable or not. I never said how many winters are between there and now. But the idea of a winter now is completely insane. What is it precisely about the past 6 months that indicates a coming winter?

Show proof or evidence. Lol. The evidence is clear as day. The indicators and heuristics. Look at what software did 20 years ago and look at what it does now you fool.
Technically, Jesus rose again and left Earth alive, without dying again.
The Blessed Virgin Mary is certainly mentioned in the New Testament, and her death is an open question, but her assumption into Heaven is a fact.