skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This ain't as bad as international PayPal... We (EU company) have clients paying from abroad via PayPal. I can't figure out what to do with this. We're being hit with 4.7% PayPal international fee, then ~ 3.75% fee to convert USD to our local currency to withdraw to our bank account. (PayPal won't let us withdraw USD.) Then another 2-3% to convert it back to USD in our bank to pay our supplier in USD. Imagine the total.

And the number of our PayPal-paying customers keeps growing. For some mysterious reasons it is convenient for people in very remote parts of the world to use PayPal. Direct credit card payment gateway and wire transfers are significantly more difficult for them.
Yeah that is not even remotely legal in any country with decent consumer protection.
The pro remote work viewpoints on HN seem like experienced developers, probably with families, often with terrible commutes externalizing the costs of what’s apparently good for them personally to their colleagues and peers:

* removing an outlet for socializing for people that are new to the area / country and don’t have friends.

* lack of face to face team bonding for new employees.

* lack of personal social contact for an activity we typically spend 1/3 of our day on.

* reduced ability to learn by absorbing what happens around oneself.

* higher competition for junior and mid-career positions from other countries.

New employees, particularly at the beginning of their careers are disproportionately negatively affected by remote work. And while many of the disadvantages I’ve mentioned above can be mitigated, remote work nudges all these aspects towards the negative. These nudges when applied at large scale add up.

Like anything, remote work has downsides which are often downplayed by those with an interest to gain an advantage for themselves.
I'm in Northern Europe and we haven't had a sunny morning since November. It's been cloudy every morning since then. Yesterday I saw the sun for the first time in weeks, for around 30 minutes...
Granted. I didn‘t use Grammarly this time to fix the article‘s numerous mistakes. But frankly, it‘s also a way to prove that my article wasn‘t chatGPT generated hahahahaha
I'd be tempted to suggest they include that information in their dating profile.
I neither intended to imply that a writer must sound exactly like their context, nor did I intend for context to be interpreted as a style that a writer should achieve or imitate.

What I meant by context was: (1) For whom is the writing intended? (2) What is the purpose of the writing? (3) What is the intended tone?

(1) Is the reader an academic? New to a subject? An expert? A layperson? How old are they?

(2) Is the purpose of this text to inform? To persuade? To entertain? To instruct?

(3) Optimistic, pessimistic, uplifting, formal, casual?

The most effective communicators will have a consistent (and unique) voice whether writing a newspaper article, a college text book, or a toast. I believe strong communicators consider the context of their writing or speaking.
"At the end of the tour, Pierce would try (often desperately) to sell t-shirts."

Heh heh, I bought one!
If the same work gets done without the burning, I’d say yes, it’s pointless.
> actual documentation was already written in the internal wiki

I think that's a reasonable approach if it's easy to find the relevant section of the wiki that describes the code you're looking at by searching. Or just have a comment in the code that points to the wiki. The important thing is to document the "why's".
probably absolutely madness but would be cool if these generative tools could cite the training images based on prompts, and maybe artists could be verified and receive a micropayment for when their image is used as an input for an image
Yeah, I find it odd how many people think "usable while travelling" is not an important feature of a laptop.
Interviewing is a game to be played. It's very much a funnel. Resume/cover letter applications get phone screens. Phone screens get interviews. Interviews get second interviews, until you finally get an offer. Where in the funnel are you getting ghosted? Step 1 or further down the line? Each step (stage) has it's pitfalls. Definitely think of this as a game, how can you play it better.
Agree with this, the data is consistent with small, additive, effects of learning over time. (And those additive effects don't show much variance between students, at least for these short courses.)

I have a pet theory in general for noisy social science data -- the best we can do is often find additive effects (there is a boutique subset of social science showing "simple models" do almost just as well as more complicated machine learning models).

Here there is variance in each of the test stages, maybe I am guessing standard deviation of 5 percent points within person (e.g. if you could have a person retake the entry exam, one time 65, another time 70, another 60, etc. would not surprise me). The variance likely swamps any ability to identify different rates of growth over the shorter course period. (Also for course instruments, truncation of 100% makes it more difficult as well.)

Just a pet theory anyway!
Yes, the same thing jumped out at me with the timeline given by OP. Your analysis is spot on.
Here's a free method that's twice as much work but produces great results:

immediately after composing, for each step and nested step, write a line or two of what its place in the code is for. Write it as though the code is broken and you're following the imaginary line threading through, explained as if to your rubber duck.

Then, having written out the business logic map, look at each written step and see if they're just a description of the logic "iterates through file, passes hits onto nextFunc" and you can safely delete those. They're just glue, really, holding processes together.

What you'll have left is skeletal comments that are restricted to "we did this because this stackoverflow post gave the solution" as well as those mental maps of the solution in your head, which is really what comments are for, future programmers to grok your state of mind and thus better implement their code changes.
This seems like a very tortured extrapolation of what embrace/extend originally meant. They talk about Uber and Amazon but these are not implementing any open standards. Google has more of a history of this, but even there it’s not core to their strategy—they might be harming SMTP but they’re not going to kill it, nor is that key to their success.

If we’re just talking about offering more to attract customers in a growth phase then locking them in with some kind of market dominance then I agree that is the VC playbook, but let’s not water down the meaning of EEE to refer to that. Walmart has been doing it for decades.
Sorry, ambiguous comment: yes, always PDF. My phrasing was intended to communicate: PDF (good) vs other formats (bad).
I can hardly imagine an idea more ridiculous than "blasphemy". The G-d is not a psychologically immature human being easy to offend. Nothing a human might possibly say can change the state of G-d from perfect harmony to anything else.
> Personally, I don't think power consumption is the only legitimate argument against the application of GPT.

Well, it depends what you mean by "the application of GPT". As a toy and a technical proof of concept, it works quite well. The problem is that people want something that's mostly correct and won't just make stuff up - and that's just not what GPT is for.
Can you define "similar", please?

The FBI sending Twitter emails about TOS violations they noticed and being executed for being an atheist are "similar" only if you really torture the definition.
Can you share some details on the hippies and too small situations with Mangopay?
A manifesto on shower temperature control
You can roughly classify the images first (we already have very good AI model for this) and use humans as an additional layer. If two images don't get the same top-3 labels from the classifier, the chance that they're duplicates is neglectable.
I guess because while minimum turn radius is unavoidable in real life, most games prefer to minimize it and its consequences as much as possible, due to the explosion in complexity they create ?
I am sad to inform you that you have no future as a supervillain.

With a radiation source like this even a dust sized particle, if ingested or inhaled, is enough to cause excruciating death. Anything that turns the capsule into a powder and releases it into the air near a large group of people or into a water source or even a public pool could cause mass fatalities.
Yeah, there was no difference between joining SS and resistance or American army. Or, between fighting against invading army (like Russia) and being invader.

Everything is always the same.
Thank you, God, for your healing gift of religion.
That seems a stretch to call an "accidental side effect" though. It's an effect exactly inasmuch as human language use is inextricable from reality.

Put otherwise, GPT doesn't interact with reality directly, but mediated through our language. But we also don't experience reality directly, so it's hard to see how much of a hindrance that would pose. Hell, much of our model of the world is just as rooted in language as GPT's. The part of my model of reality of which I have direct sensory experience is tiny.
That wouldn't even remotely change my impression. I'm already aware, as I said, that ChatGPT is very good at continuing text.

Indeed, the scariest thing about ChatGPT as a technology is that the thing it is most useful for, the most obvious use case, is exactly what you are using it for: Increasing the amount of bullshit text in the world without even the gate of a human having to write it, which was already not much of a gate at all.

The problem is, that's by far the thing it is best at, and by far the most useful use for it. But that's a net loss for humanity overall. Hooray. Unfortunately, it is not something that be stopped; there's so many people rushing to take a dump in that Commons that it is unstoppable now. If indeed it hasn't already been happening for a while now (Dead Internet theory; if it isn't already true, it certainly will be).
It means you're set for a very specific type of job in a very specific industry. If I'm launching a start up and you showed up to be employee #4, unless you were #4 at the FAANG or are in your late 30's or older, I'm probably not going to hire you.

The fact is that FAANGs do things in a very particular manner and on small, focused teams. That's the opposite of how start ups work and applying most of the managerial "skills" that are in place at FAANGs are a good way to apply a ton of unnecessary bureaucracy to a company that doesn't even have an HR department yet.

"Founder is formerly Google and Facebook!" makes me stay very very far away from the company because outside of the VC world the reason those words have power are red flags.
There are so many problems in this world that could be solved if only we could "get everyone to do X." The biggest problem is that we don't know how to "get everyone to do X." So when a small team comes up with a plan and says "we (small team) are going to do Y (something very technically difficult)", it's not helpful to reply "but wouldn't it be easier if we just got everyone to do X?"
Whispers of A.I.’s Modular Future
The whole point is about people seeking out a class just to get a date. Like, if you were interviewing someone for a job and they said they were interested in your company because they wanted to date your coworkers? Would you hire them?

I wouldn’t, because that’s not the point of work.

That doesn’t mean you should stop people from dating their coworkers at all.

If I’m teaching or participating in a class it’s reasonable to expect that everyone shows up with the same primary purpose: learning. Doesn’t mean you need to ban people from dating. But these men are showing up and ignoring the whole point of the class.
Right, it's about the "why". For instance with your loop that calculates a score, I might want to know why it wasn't done in SQL. Or if it could be, but whoever was writing it just wanted to hurry along. Is there a TODO to get rid of an N+1 problem associated with it?
This article https://www.geo.tv/latest/468510-pakistan-warns-blocking-wik... says depictions of Muhammad and saying this person https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Masroor_Ahmad is a Muslim. I'm not sure if that press conference was over the 2020 issue or the current one.
Good for you. This is really moot.

29, the age fits the angst..

I'm not saying WFH is bad. It should be allowed, but I disagree that it should not be a full working week. To those who prefer to work in the office, who communicate better in the office. Should be taken in to consideration. Sorry that my brain operates differently to yours.

When you start to throw personal insults, "ITS A YOU" problem those make your points very weak and blind sided. If I have a problem, I fix it but the problem isn't me.

We both have different jobs, it works for you and going in to the office for me. Which is what I do. Hobbies outside work? I have plenty.

Your angry, and I don't know why, you sure your not an disgruntled 35 year old? I'm disgruntled at 33.
Right. Fiction-as-a-service is a fantastical API, but not a very practical one. When you boil it down, you're paying a lot of money for some carefully-arranged noise to get sent over the internet.
This makes perfect sense and is expected. But you have to know, none of the images are memorized. It's a coincidence. I can explain.

Think of the analogy of linear regression. You have X,Y 2D space. X is the input (the English sentence), Y is the output (the image).

You use training data, which is a bunch of coordinates in this 2D space (each coordinate representing an <English, image> pair) to generate a best fit line (aka the machine learning model).

The properties of that line fit exactly what's going on here. That trend line will not touch most of the coordinates, but it likely will touch a few. When you take an X from the coordinate that touches the line and feed it into the equation of that line (aka model) you will get a Y (an image) that matches the coordinate Y exactly because the coordinate and the line intersect. Makes sense.

This is why an image appears to be memorized. But really it's not memorized. The equation of that line is the ONLY thing memorized here.

Why does it happen more when the image appears multiple times in the training data?

Well this is exactly what happens in least squares analysis. The line is generated from an equation that involves the averages of all the training data (aka coordinates) and if you have many samples of the same coordinate (aka image) you will skew the average and therefore the line towards touching that specific coordinate.

There is no complete technical fix for this issue. With enough training data, EVEN when you get rid of duplicates, the line will likely touch or be very close to a coordinate.

If you think about it, for a 2D coordinate system you can select a bunch of coordinates that generate a line that the never touches a single coordinate. But this defeats the purpose of machine learning. You're suppose to sample data you have no knowledge about and derive a model from it.

If you can already pre-select images that form a model that never touches a coordinate, it means you already have an understanding of the model and can likely just manually tune all the weights by hand to get what you want. As regular humans, we don't have the super-human ability to do this. We can only do it for the simplest 2D example and all the higher dimensional stuff can only be understood by analogy and random sampling.

One thing you can do is just add more data to the training set. That will move the trendline and could shift it away from something it touches. But at the same time it could move it towards touching a new coordinate.
Note that glass filters UV and infrared
I think so yes. I think it has solved the problem of making believable human language with some sense of consistency. That's no small feat, and for some tasks (writing limericks, reformulating a letter, translation) it's even the whole point of the exercise, so we have AI making something a "Solved problem" to the point that we had it recognize digits better than humans, years back. No small feat.

But for other tasks the key isn't just producing believable consistent text, but something else. Perhaps the text must be factually correct or creative or traceable or have some other trait like that. And that's the majority of applications by far. And I'm sure it's the majority of monetizable applications.

I think at this point people, especially non-technical people, are lured by the glitter of ChatGPT. When it spits out an amazing limerick I immediately hear managers in my company raving about how it could revolutionize our product help documentation. They ask it a question, which it generates a correct answer to "How do you make text bold in [ourproduct]" to which it replied "You select the text and hit Ctrl+B". Manager now immediately convinced ChatGPT is intelligent enough to basically run the company. I'm trying to downplay the answer, explaining that it's more a statistical sentence-completing thing than world knowledge, and that the Ctrl+B might just have been a generic answer...

With that said, I also have an opposite argument here: that current LLMs while not intelligent, are very close to a tipping point that is going to be as important as AGI will:

The big AI revolution will be when we have AI's that people think are intelligent, not when they actually are.

There was much said about the google engineer who thought his chatbot was intelligent. And while it might not have been, we clearly saw the societal impact of AI right there. It's not what the AI can do for us, it's what ut will do TO us. Imagine if your pocket AI tamagotchi was the only being you had opened up to about something, for the last 10 years, and you felt as though it really listened. Now how would you feel if someone broke it? What happens to our communications when we can't tell artificial from real? This "societal singularity" we'd have to deal with might be a few years away, even if actual AGI is centuries away.
The real reason is because recipes consisting of just the list of ingredients can't be copyrighted, but the articles and all the other stuff are copyrightable.
You don't need a study. Enough people, myself included, have used the healthcare system multiple countries or have family in other places, that this is mostly common knowledge. That might not satisfy a debate judge, but it's good enough for most of us.
Then everyone in Pakistan gets deprived of a valuable source of knowledge on virtue of their government being obscurantist.
I use https://github.com/Dunky13/outlook_unsafelink to fix that. I agree, it's a stupid way of training users to accept dodgy links.
I love being part of the modern human experiment where we’re subjected to arbitary change without any prior tests. (I don’t love it that much)
The thing is most models for Stable Diffusion aren't created by companies but rather by end-users. There are literally hundreds of models for stable diffusion that you can download, from landscapes, to animals, to (of course) porn. A few of them were created by Stability or Huggingface, but most are trained by end-users. It isn't hard at all to train a model with existing tools -- you don't have to be an AI expert to do it.
Not the op but I read some article saying that it it is caused by the dietary product from corn fed cow as opposed to the traditional dietary product. Supplements with Vit K2 is an easy fix.
Thank you @adamboazbecker. One can be very creative while prompt engineering. Especially in a game context.
It's fine. but it's not exactly small, either. It does a lot of different things.
I worry about the application that AI will be trusted with.
An ideological commitment to free knowledge, mostly. It's upsetting to be cut off from people who could use it.
They might care that Pakistani Wikipedia editors and readers alike could find themselves targeted by the Pakistani authorities.
Not really. CTEs are still optimization barriers after v12 if they're referenced more than once. That blog post is confused, but the commit message in the post is clear enough.
FYI - Adyen has a cost plus pricing model, which many people appreciate.

Note: I have no affiliation with any PSP.
But there has to be a better way to create automatic backups.

If the way you are doing it works, there isn't a better way.

So to me, the place to start is to make sure what you are doing is working (if you haven't).

I mean having one copy on another cloud provider isn't very deep.

As in only one cancelled credit card from failure (or maybe two).

Or two compromised credentials, at best.

Backing up either sucks or it isn't really backing up. It is not a good place to look for efficiency, because not backing up is always going to be easier than what you are doing.

Good luck.
xgamma -rgamma 1.0 -ggamma 0.1 -bgamma 0.1

It's something.
Yes, and that's been the cause for several previous blocks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia#Pakist...
I agree about huge pages in HPC, but regarding Linux -- if you want high performance (at least on a system designed for differing workloads), surely you should expect to do performance engineering. Whether or not you should be doing HPC on such a kernel is another question, but alternatives haven't caught on, perhaps because of the way applications which they need to support are written.

If OOMkiller kicks in it suggests a resource manager issue (not accounting memory). Then, you can't blame the kernel for NUMA, which you presumably want for performance; I don't understand the difficulty people have with pinning processes after many years of it being necessary. There's something to be said for userspace filesystems too, like the venerable PVFS. The answer to hypervisors should be don't do that.
> I would never dare to imagine imposing my values or beliefs on them

As I get older, I realize that while this may be idealized values - this works very poorly in the "real world". At some point, you realize that your arbitrary morals are simply better - better for everyone. Death penalty for blasphemy would be one of them - the world would simply be a better place if this did not exist.
Microsoft hopes to be able to map SAL into C++ contracts if they ever be part of the standard, as that was their initial goal when they started implementing lifetimes support in VC++.

As for C folks, I don't have any hopes of them every going down that route.
Not sure if anyone else has said this but: the timing is also pretty bad. A lot of companies have tight budgets for 2023 and I suspect people are waiting out Q1, maybe even Q2, before they start to spend too much, just to see how things shake out and if it's going to get better or worse.

So this may not just be about you.
For Poland, Przelewy24 or direct BLIK integration might be an option.
W.E. Coyote was just ahead of his time. Imagine the YouTube revenue he'd get.
They are are good for 2 things:

- So that the URL shortener service can see which site you visit (usually bad for the user)

- if you have to type a url by hand
https://archive.ph/EwE5d
... Why not edit out the "offensive" material?

edit I meant why didn't the Pakistani government just edit Wikipedia like any other person. I realized my post could be taken as saying "why didn't Wikipedia just do what they want" which was not what I meant.
Probably not. Anecdotally, the websites I used recently for a job change forced me to fill in even short gaps with explanations before I could progress through the document packet.

Maybe if there were more humans in the loop there would be less emphasis. No one during an interview asked for explanation of these. Perhaps they’re just caught by the software before it becomes “problematic”. Gap fascism is baked into the system.
It is funny, but what are the use cases?