skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I'd call "knowing what to even ask for and also asking for it in a clear manner".

It was a very important skill for searching. Nowadays, with Google "I know what you want better than you" search, it’s not that useful anymore (not useless, I get better search results by not using google and knowing what I want, just less required).
I did the work to wrap it up and make it "easy" to install. The researchers who did the real work can be found here: https://www.timothybrooks.com/instruct-pix2pix
Not really, that would follow my logic if I had said sometbing like "the universe took millions of years to create the human species in including the human brain", and that's not what I said, the baseline is an organism and it's ability to evolve, nothing before that.

And anyway in this context "evolution took millions of years" is just another way to say that a huge amount of lesser brains died while the ancestors of the current brain survived, AKA self-selection; so clearly is unlikely to be any similar to the process we will take to improve artificial intelligence as we will measure it with a different standard and NOT over its ability to survive in the wild.
What's your product? I'd love to test it.
> I'd definitely teach my inexperienced acolytes to add a little petty theft to their sabotage to avoid a terrorism enhancement

The far right literature e.g. The Turner Diaries, describes terror cells funding themselves through theft so theft/sabotage should be expected together with such groups.

"The Order" - a real life group modelled on The Turner Diaries robbed banks and armoured cars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Order_(white_supremacist_g...
It's built similar to the accelerometers and the compass you have in your phone. MEMS devices are considered solid state.
"Look boss, I aint here to reinvent the wheel."

You stare in horror at your new GoLand house with GoLand(tm) roof, floor, tiles and windows. At least it isn't Node you reassure yourself as the AWS bills roll in.
Yes if you're not careful it can ruin the face. You can play with the strength factor to see if something can be worked out. Bigger faces are safer.
>Do you ask for permission when you train your mind on copyrighted books? Or observe paintings?

I think this is a specious analogy at best. The two are remarkably different contexts. AI can work at a significantly greater rate. There's also a very large question about whether for profit commercial software should be afforded the same leeway we give to ordinary human behaviour.
They did mention licenses as a complicating factor.
It's funny that in another thread I was just talking about Jeff Dean or Dennis Hassabis being a much better Google CEO than Sundar.

He shouldn't ,,present a solution''. He should take over incompetent leadership.
First bigger surface area two you can run it backwards each time you power it on and the filter increases time between automatic cleaning and helps with dusty environments.
I, born on the another side of the strait, also believe the possiblity of attacking is very slim. PRC's economy is still pretty dependant on exports to western countries. If a war with ROC start, CPC will have to pay a great cost to compensate the loss in exports.

However, for some reason I don't understand, a significant portion of people from PRC are expecting a war to happen, and ridiculously believing such a war can be good to them. Maybe CPC is playing the old game again, posturing the "pro-democracy" entities as hostile in the propaganda to gain support politically.
robots.txt lacks nuance about copyright, it doesn't really serve the same purpose.
You are not their target audience.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.09800
A meeting in Germany approves more arms for Ukraine, but no Leopard tanks
https://archive.ph/l2cfn
Such a long article, repeatedly praising the "simplicity" of the metric system, and it still ignores all possible opposing views. Not a word about the superiority of the duodecimal system when dividing quantities, even though a couple of examples are quoted (12 inches is a foot, 12 pence to the shilling). No effort to explain whyever someone would approach the matter in this way. The author is either extremely biased or extremely ignorant.
Epicyon ActivityPub server release version 1.4.0
dreambooth perhaps?
Why regressed? You sure can trial them for either kidnapping or murder. But first do the same thing to them they did to the victim, and then you also know for what to trial them. Sounds fair and makes total sense to me.
Take a look at their messaging service that they marketed for years as E2EE while it was closed source and uploaded the chat messages readable by Apple to the cloud
Apart from Leopard tanks, Ukraine is getting lots of weapons
https://archive.is/skohM
I found Andrej Karpathy's explanation of transformers to be very insightful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uw3F6rndnA
I'm familiar with this line of reasoning, but I'm always struggling to understand the exact thing that humans can do that computers don't. Usually, the differentiation is that humans have e.g.

"true understanding"

I assume you mean the process of looking at an image and not just deriving patterns, but seeing that you are looking at a cat, that a cat is an "animal" which has "four legs and a tail" and that cats can be friendly towards you or aggressive, depending on your own behavior and theirs.

Neural Nets are certainly capable of the first two: classification and creating taxonomies. The last one I admit is tricky as it requires the Neural Net to be an entity within the observed world

"intellectual process"

the intellectual process is arguably exactly the process input->categorize and analyze->compile->produce output loop that we've modelled AI based upon

"creativity"

is the ability to create something truly new. This one seems obvious as Neural Nets only can derive patterns (plus maybe a random input) - but I would posit the question if any human ever created something truly new in the "apple pie from scratch" sense or if we've only ever created higher level works derived from existent things.

"consciousness"

this one is hard to grasp. I would argue that consciousness is the realization that one exists (in the descartian sense) - coupled with the desire to continue to do so. It is a quality that wouldn't make much sense for an output focused neural net like the one behind Stable Diffusion - but it might be a desirable trait in a decision making focused deep learning setup - similar to a self-healing cloud deployment.

"love/emotion"

This builds on the previous consciousness example. Not to sound like Rick Sanchez /some other cynic - but aren't these at their core adjustment mechanisms that help us further evolutionary goals like survival and continuation of our lineage. Wouldn't a decision making focused deep learning setup be more stable/have a higher uptime if it would facilitate its goal of "staying on" through a strong drive of survival/expansion?

The last two examples are where my point falls apart a bit. But I still stand by my general thesis: We are way too certain that our particular human way of processing information and "thinking" has some divine quality to it that isn't replicable in neural networks. Against that, I would argue that neural networks are largely the same mechanism we employ in our thinking and that they are just a couple of millenia in evolution behind, but are catching up at a multiple of the speed it took us to get to where we are now intellectually.
Related, and I'm most probably missing something, but is there a way to use/test ChatGPT without having to create an account on OpenAI?
Sounds a lot like chat rooms on early community websites. Just a bunch of people (who in my case loved a specific set of books), chatting about whatever under a handle and without needing to carry around your real self - but nor with any fear to hide anything.

I dunno, I cannot see anything like that ever surviving mass adoption
> That’s all there is, Detective. Clearly, there’s been no murder. Inconvenience, probably, but has he actually said so? Is he pressing charges? I didn’t think so.

This seems like the kind of "clever" legal defense that I expect judges in the real world would probably shoot down real quick though.

Even without a black hole or stasis tech, you could attempt, a similar situation occurs e.g. with people in coma. Someone who injured a person badly enough that he is in coma could also try to argue "Your honour, the person never said he is uncomfortable with the situation, you can go right ahead and ask him..."

I don't think that would be very convincing.
Prompt engineering already exists, it's called management.
SSD means the data itself is stored on semiconductor (memory) chips, instead of a physical magnetic pattern on the mechanical recorder of a HDD.

Other than electrolytic capacitors, both peripherals are electrically solid-state.

Even the helium in some HDDs is for physical purposes, not as a gaseous electrical element.
Aren't unions, once they're formed, just participants in the free market who wield market influence? The other participants in the market will just have to compete with the unions for better conditions to get the labor they need.
I think in late high school, or maybe even after I started my electrical engineering degree, I bought a few of his books from Tandy (the Radio Shack brand here in Australia). They were a great way to get enthused about electronics and encouraged me to build and get hands-on (which is obviously what Tandy wanted to achieve)
> Why do people say they don't now how it works

"Curve Fitting" is the objective, the function encoded in the weights is the solution, and not actually well understood. See work from Anthropic[1] and Google[2] that explores this.

As an analogy consider applying the same argument to the AlphaGo value function. It's "just" fitting a bunch of curves to the statistics of millions of self-played games. However, to effectively capture those statistics the network needed to develop a bunch of heuristics. Needless to say these heuristics are not understood (else we'd already know the principles needed to play at AlphaGo's level), and are not just exhaustive lists of statistical trends but more like strategies[3].

Recent work[4] strongly suggests that "grokking" (a striking but not unnatural[5] form of generalization) involves networks transitioning from memorized statistics/solutions to a general solution. The curve fitting perspective would totally miss all this for a comfortable but misleading story: "the objective is curve fitting so it's just interpolating data points".

[1] https://transformer-circuits.pub

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.07677

[3] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2206625119

[4] https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.05217

[5] https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01117
Quick, how many inches are in a yard?
I'm running on a 2080 TI and an edit runs in 2 seconds. On my Apple M1 Max 32Gb edits take about 60 seconds.
This is literally what the AI does as well. It didn't walk into a bookstore and steal all the books off the shelf, it read through material made available to it entirely legally.

The thing that authors are trying to argue here is that they should get to control what type of entity should be allowed to view the work they purchased. It's the same as going "you bought my book, but now that I know you're a communist, I think the courts should ban you from reading it".
OK. I noticed that the images are not accurate when I give my own descriptions. Not sure if this is a limitation of Stable Diffusion. For example, for the text
"cat and mouse samurai fight in a forest, watched by a porcupine" I got a cat and a mouse (with a cat's face and tail!!) in a forest sort of fighting. But no - porcupine

Thank you for creating this.
In my mind there are two things going on, and perhaps an emergent property of both:

1. Banning people for any reason or no reason at all from a private business. Not a privacy issue, but a rights issue (the right of a business to refuse whomever they want, the right of a patron to be served without prejudice). We have laws about these things. Maybe they should be revisited since with a distributed list the scale of the problem is different. I can see arguments for and against.

2. A powerful new technology that has until now mainly been used against those with the fewest legal options. There are perhaps some questions about the way this person was identified and banned, and perhaps this would be illegal in states with better biometric protections such as Illinois. However I see technological whack-a-mole as a pretty weak argument against the more central issue. It doesn’t have to be a face, it could be cell phone location data or even satellite imagery moving forward.

Where it gets interesting is in the combination of the two. This new technology will enable blacklisting on a scale never seen before. And the inverse, tracking ideal customer behavior anywhere they go. A social credit score, privatized and packaged neatly into products sold by companies you’ll have never heard of. And just like with Equifax and Experian, you’re not the customer, you’re the product.
There is a huge mistake in this reasoning! Time dilation goes to infinity at the center of the black hole - at the singularity, not at the event horizon! The event horizon could be millions of miles (many AUs) away from the singularity. Near the event horizon, her husband is likely to be falling rapidly into the black hole and is not going to be stuck indefinitely. So, it's Murder 1, immediately.
Apologies! I got that from some blog post somewhere I believe, not from any personal wackereren our judgement (which I should have signalled better in my post).

Nonetheless, would reading a parquet file with polars be faster than reading a csv?

Also thanks for polars! Great contribution data science!
What frame of reference does the Justice system see as canonical?
A decade of Siri research & development... overshadowed by a single clever GPT-3 prompt. Love it.
If you have the patent on this tech and the ability to manufacture them in bulk why would you sell? There is a huge potential here and selling it to one of the big guys to just then sit on a few billion at home seems quite a boring life.

Apple can easily license or buy from them which is what they do with other tech. Apple does not make OLED panels themselves nor do most that use OLED panels in their products.
https://archive.ph/lqFW2
They are the least “open” company out there. They are also nosy about your business and always “afraid” you are doing something you shouldn’t be doing. Unless you are paying for the API of course.

They went from very open to very closed and “private” to open up again because competition caught up with them (lookup mid-journey for example).
This might have a measurable effect though, basically 200K+ workers kicked out of the industry, and the fear of a second round for the remaining workers. That is a some serious belt-tightening there. If it feeds into other less progressive industries, it might well help (which I suspect is the whole impetus behind it, at least the coordination suggests so).
Try these prompts:

"Add lens flare"

"Increase saturation"

"Add sparkles and gleam"
IANAL, but an avid mapper with OpenStretMap. Contributors are listed at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors (via https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright). A written document by skyfi allowing the use of their images for tracing would be necessary.
Yes, let’s name it after the machine that helped the Germans kill and isolate the Allied powers. Great work /s
If you pirate a book, learn from it and then create something using the information you learned, would that creation constitute copyright infringement? If so how far does the tainting go? Once you put your eyes on something which you haven't purchased, all future works could potentially be inspired by that experience and should therefore be considered infringement, following your logic.
Everything is validated by the user, it's more of a AI-prepared Tweet that you are free to edit before posting.
ChatGPT plays the role of a generic word here (like Xerox, Kleenex, Google).
I have to admit you're right there, now thinking about how I would explain games I play, approaches to tasks, etc.
About 3k tech employees now being fired a day on average in January
Looks great, much better. Love the BSD support!
no. there are a few restricted applications built on top of it. but if you want direct interaction, you need to create an account.
You just gave two examples of where both ends of the scale are illegal, which only strengthens the argument of GP. IANAL, and I'm not stating anything about the reality of the judicial system, but only following the logic of the argument.
It’s interesting that we spent decades arguing against corporate IP control because it reduces the intellectual freedom of the human race but now that the corpus of data comes from everyday people instead of big companies (a direct effect of the internet democratizing the creation of content), people are suddenly pro IP control.

It shows that a lot of people in this space only cared about standing up against corporations, they didn’t care about the philosophy behind the anti-IP movement,
which "he" do you mean?
Since the article is kind of shallow, here are a few atypical approaches to Biblical translation I’ve found interesting over the years:

• The Five Books of Moses, by Everett Fox, who attempts to retain in English the underlying poetry of the Hebrew like alliteration, meter, wordplay, and so on. (https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/55160/the-five-book...)

• The Books of the Bible: not a new translation (it’s just the NIV), but rather than a typical modern Bible which is laid out for easy referencing, instead cuts out chapters and verses completely, formatting it instead in the way the books were originally written, and eliminating a few historical artifacts of translation like the splitting of the Book of Chronicles, the order of books relative to each other, and so on. (https://www.christianbook.com/niv-books-of-the-bible-volumes...)

• Alpha: A Translation of Genesis 1. (https://llamasandmystegosaurus.blogspot.com/2017/05/alpha.ht...)
> The big thing pandas has going for it is that it's already been through this field testing. All the bugs have been ironed out by the hundreds of thousands of users.

At this very moment pandas github repo has 1563 open issues labeled with a bug tag [0]. So much for "all the bugs have been ironed out".

[0] https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3...
However, AI learning is not the same as a person learning. The same way memorizing a book is not the same way as putting it into computer memory. Nobody would sue you for copyright infringement if you memorized a book, song or movie in your head. No the issue is a completely different matter if you made a copy on a harddrive.
> Columns have names, except when they don't. Things (rows? individual cells?)

They are not a fit for every problem. Please don't try to use them for that. For normalized tabular data, it is a good fit.

> have types which is sometimes enforced and sometimes not. If you don't follow a recipe exactly, your dataframe will be subtly different and might not work.

Polars is really strict on types. A type is always determined by the input datatype and the operation applied. You can check the schema before you run the query. Polars will produce the same output datatype as defined by its logical plan.

> A lot of code mixes mutation in place and creating new dataframes, and so on

All polars methods are pure, e.g. they don't mutate the original.
In the article it's Jeff Dean.
Any chance you could elaborate on what an exodus to Course 6/CS means? Does that mean a bunch of people switched majors to CS or do I have it backwards?

I think it will continue to be relatively lucrative, but I think the entry level will continue to become more competitive and we will see fewer people with a CS dprofessionally if we cross into oversupply.
It does work on some things with people. I colorized a black and white photo of myself and then turned the colorized version into me as a Dwarven king.
There are plenty of competitors to the corporate AI models that are freely distributed, free to use, etc. You just need to have the hardware, which is admittedly pricey. The worst outcome is if there is a legal risk in creating AI models that only big companies with an army of lawyers large enough to fend off lawsuits can afford to face. Then you'd have the continuation of big tech controlling things for "responsibility" reasons instead of AI being a technology anybody can use.
I keep seeing this even when the prompt is unchanged

Downloading https://huggingface.co/runwayml/stable-diffusion-v1-5/resolv... from huggingface
Loading model /home/hrishi/.cache/huggingface/hub/models--runwayml--stable-diffusion-v1-5/snapshots/889b629140e71758e1e0006e355c331a5744b4bf/v1-5-pruned-emaonly.ckpt onto cuda backend...

followed by a download
I would summarise the finding of this analysis as:

“Given current skill levels, and current levels of preparation, human players have very small differences in win rates for different 960 positions”

The general finding of computer chess is that draw rates asymptote to 100% as computer skill increases, unless you force them to play specific imbalanced starting positions.

Intermediate questions are hard to evaluate. If we made chess starting position always variation 27, how often would well prepared grandmasters win/lose?
Seems like a field where GPT could do a descent job
I perceive google as a less stable company than most. An equally effective product in any of the areas they occupy, coupled with leadership and commitment to not shut the product down after six months isn’t that high of a bar to compete with, should someone else desire.

The real issue is Google is in bed with the CIA and many other agencies and are willing to play ball for all kinds of kickbacks. Competing with their products has a technically feasible angle, but competing their position within the power structure of the non-separated tech and state? Impossible, at this point.
I think you do your point a disservice with your examples. General-purpose programming languages are nothing like Turing tarpits.

> I wouldn't write a website in C.

With appropriate libraries, why not? The safety issues might be a problem, but you could sandbox it.

> I wouldn't write a robot arm driver in PHP.

I would. It's general-purpose enough to speak binary protocols without too much hassle, though it'd be more fun to use something else.
I tried it out :-)

`aimg edit assets/girl_with_a_pearl_earring.jpg "make it pop" --prompt-strength 40 --gif`

https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1217531/213912442-...
I lived in Clerkenwell and the Barbican from teenage through mid 20s and I loved walking through the market. Sometimes if up early or pulling an all nighter to study I’d go walk there at 4am to see all the traders in action. This is truly a damn shame.
You're right, apologies for the mistake.
Au contraire.

While our brains are more complex than the networks, this has never been in dispute.

The quantity of experiences needed to train GPT-3, however, is many more than we are capable of experiencing in a lifetime.
So does "The Divine Authority of Holy Scripture Asserted" by self-professed Messiah, John Miller. There are plenty of cults that spring out of every major religion, but that doesn't necessarily mean that relationship is anything more than tenuous.

This isn't a statement on Islam - depending how you examine certain things and weigh them, it could be either Abrahamic or maybe a little bit more distant. But you need to make a judgement call.