skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Section 230 was about hosting user comments though.

No, 230 is not about “hosting”, its about (what would, absent Section 230, legally be) publishing.

> Microsoft, for example, can’t publish an article on Microsoft.com defaming people and cite section 230.

It absolutely can, if some other “information content provider” submitted the information in it, because they are not legally it’s publisher in that case; that is the central point of § 230. [0]

The question here seems to be what happens when the way interactive computer services relay information from other internet content providers is by farther from relaying distinct externally provided content units that may be mixed, ordered, promoted, demoted, or suppressed by an algorithm, and instead synthesizing new content units from externally provided and actively sourced information.

But the 230 safe harbor doesn’t focus on content units (by any name), it focuses on information, so as long as the defamation comea from information provided by another “information content provider”, no matter what algorithmic means and content structure goes into presenting it, it would seem squarely within the safe harbor.

When defamation arises not from a particular third-party source material, but only from the algorithmic synthesis, things get trickier, but if its all third partt information (even separate pieces of it that the algorithm presents together) it still seems within the safe harbor.

When its (in whole or in part) information Microsoft actively sourced or that the MS-operated algorithm created ex nihilo (hallucination) that makes it defamation, though, that would seem to be Microsoft’s liability.

[0] 47 USC § 230(c)(1): No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
I work at Mercedes-Benz. I'm not secret about it, I just don't feel as comfortable being noisy about current experiences with their name attached, as I do things from several years ago. I don't know that that's necessarily a logical reason to make a distinction.
See this is a particular problem.... You don't use 100% of the features of your software, hell, you might not even use 50% of the features. The problem here is one of measuring YOUR net utility of the gross utility realized by all users.

Now, in an ideal world you could get an 'idiot' version that would meet all your needs and run nothing extra and be nice and fast. Of course now you have countless different versions of software to release and test and hope nothing fun happens. Or, you do like everyone does and releases a big old binary of fun that does everything and give QA a few less things to do.

I won't say about word process, but spreadsheets?, well not many years ago many of them would stop working at 65k rows and say tough luck, and these days we have absolutely huge datasets running in them.
I know what you said, I just used carbon fibre to make a point is. You don't always need the best materials to have something useful.

Yes things still have mass but if you are building a robot that moves around there is a big difference in what kind of quality structural materials you need for the robot to be viable.

Part of the research that would go into such project would be to look at what local resources are, and how to make them into useful materials. For example, using ice in combination with some filler material has been shown to be quite usable in cold temperatures.

The exact materials you would use depend on where you would want to use this kind of system. Maybe in the far future these kind of system would look around to analyses the environment and make smart choices about what materials to use to build themselves.
And then more good people leave too, as they're more willing to accept other offers.
The Seven Deadly Sins of AI Predictions (2017)
Someone is clearly taking advantage of this:

More than 3,000 cars have been reported stolen in Minneapolis this year, including 432 Kias and 368 Hyundais. Officers are warning people to do what they can to protect their vehicles because this year, an average of 13 cars are stolen each day.

Prior to this spring, Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, and Fords were the most common cars stolen in Minneapolis. But as word spread on social media this year about how easy Kias and Hyundais are to steal, they now account for more car thefts.

https://www.fox9.com/news/data-kias-and-hyundais-now-most-st...
Surprising twist at the end there. How did the professionalism and quality in Peru compare to the other places?
>> reduction of barriers to trade

That's not elimination. A free trade agreement IMHO in laymans terms would be about a paragraph explaining that no party to it will restrict or tax in any way trade between the parties. I would expect good lawyering to expand that to a few pages of legalese. NAFTA was hundreds of pages and carved out particular niches for industries in the US and Canada at least. It might have been less restrictive than whatever was in place before, but it wasn't what I'd call a free trade agreement.
Vancouver didn't start from scratch, but aggressively built out its cycling infra over the past two decades. I love bicycles, I love green tech, and I love my e-bike! But I also note these concomitants:

- Rapid gentrification. Foot/bike accessible urban infrastructure turns out to be the hottest possible commodity.

- Luxury pricing of car parking, insurance, and spacing. This seems harmless until you remember that e.g. poor people shop at box stores (which depend on a car to access) in order to bring down the cost of living. Intentionally pricing car access as a luxury good makes the poor pay for climate progress. Making cars more expensive to own and operate is an inflationary force that disproportionately afflicts the poor.

- Gentrification + Inflation = Displacement. It's almost a joke at this point -- if your neighbourhood is putting in a bike lane, and you don't own your home, you are basically watching them tidy up for the next tenant, who will be like you, but better-off, and will pay more in rent.

When I see a bike lane getting put in, I know I'll be moving in a few years. And those twee little bicycle-lane-only traffic lights? Cute, right? Those are basically tombstones for your local art scene, because that whole block is 'going Vanhattan' (portmanteau of 'Vancouver' and 'Manhattan').

Now, there's nothing inherently wrong with bikes, and I listed the above adverse outcomes as 'concomitants', and not side-effects. I don't want to suggest that the lines of causality are that clear.

But talk about 'optimizing' cities is fundamentally talk about redistributing those cities, and redistribution creates (or effaces) winners and losers.
The author of the post clearly would agree with you.

And got fired anyway.
int-n * int-n -> int-n (n > 1) is fundamentally the wrong type logically for a multiplication, though, so something has to give. Sure, some languages have chosen for the arithmetic to be broken in order to maintain type, but that's certainly not clearly the right choice when others have chosen auto-promotion and most hardware has chosen a (limited selection of) int-n * int-n -> int-2n multiplication primitives to work with.
You can also repurpose MIT licensed software as GPL licensed.
This article had lots of references. It was full of links, practically one per sentence.
> Since most artists probably start with a composition in the 2d space of the artwork, there’s never really a coherent 3d space to place the light sources in or figure out those projections in.

Highly skilled artists don't just think in 2D — they really do imagine the 3D scene that they're painting. It's hard to relate to but people with a lot of drawing/painting experience can "feel the form", as they say, when they draw. But it's true that figuring out the lighting is still difficult even then.

I do want to point out that if you look at talented painters from later in history than the early renaissance, they don't make nearly as many mistakes as the ones in the article, although of course the lighting of imaginary scenes is still always approximated and simplified.
I thought immobilisers were not only standard nowadays, but a legal requirement in some places. I don't understand why they would regress on something so simple.
An independent private company that sells and rent fire extinguishers in your location (or near)

There are small tests recommended each one or two years, but also a more serious test. The bottle will probably need to be tested for an integrity check each five years to see if it can hold the pressure without bursting. Owner can't do this test by the risk of blow and the lack of the machines.
this is vile bullshit - we need to invest trillions to possibly arrest climate change, so yes there will be a lot of money in it for someone.
Lo and Hi tom samples seem to be switched?
https://www.science.org/doi/suppl/10.1126/sciadv.adf6182/sup...
> But the universe is unimaginably enormous, and the chances of any two such life forms being within reach of each other is miniscule. In order for it not to be, the universe would have to be absolutely packed with such life, and if it were, we'd very likely have some sort of evidence of it.

Yes, this is where we differ. Even at sub-light speeds, an advanced civilization would take only a few million years to colonize the entire galaxy. Thus, distances within a galaxy are trivial for intelligent life. Observable-universe-tier distances, however, are not - if we stay within sub-light speeds. If we assume that intelligent life could have emerged only within the last billion years, the observable universe would need to have quite many intelligent lifeforms indeed for some to have reached us.

But then again, that's only a question of numbers. We have no idea of the probability of intelligence emerging and reaching space age. It could be very low or very high. We cannot make inferences about distances due to this. We can only consider evidence. If the universe and our galaxy was packed with life, and we assume they would not want to interfere with our development, what evidence would we have?

Personally I can come up with no other possible evidence than radio signals. We can't image other solar systems yet with our equipment. Detecting Dyson spheres under construction is a reach for a number of reasons. And radio signals may easily be phased out very quickly as means of communication - we have only been using them for 100 years or so. This is why I don't find it convincing to use lack of evidence as evidence - what evidence would there be which we could detect short of direct contact?

> Of all of the very unlikely things that might be true, why fixate so hard on this one? My suspicion is because people want it to be true, and starting with that stance makes error and misunderstanding very likely.

You may be right on this point. However, I also believe that the historical stigma on discussing the extraterrestial scenario as a realistic possibility clouds the judgement of many towards overt caution, using strawmen where steelmen should be used. Evidence we have on the general subject points to no direction. Thus it's a question of probability for a very simple event - an intelligence reaching space age in any given planet, which we (almost) know to be non-zero. Therefore things like pooling extraterrestials together with wizards further strenghtens the stigma which greatly inhibits assessment of probabilities for explaining unexplained phenomena.
I worked in fast food and 1 out of 20 would probably be a huge improvement.

The audio quality and comprehension issues that would trouble an AI absolutely plague human operators today.
Yeah my experience has been abysmal. Now I have met engineers in the states from India who were some of the most brilliant people I’ve met, but the companies I’ve been at that offshored drove me crazy. Time complexity and DRY were things these individuals had never considered worthy of their time. These weren’t all cheap hires either: some of them were senior engineers making six figures
Premise, outline, augmentation.
You're right - that is the other end of the spectrum. Those people make enough messes to guarantee continual employment - or so they think. Then they get RIF'd and they're screwed because their skills are obsolete.

I've never understood those people either.
Nah. Unless you ride in a town where everyone rides and no one drives, you're gonna have to interact with cars at some point. It's just inevitable. You need to know how to ride on a road with other vehicles.

I'm not convinced that the answer is just more infrastructure. IME, most bike paths are just bad. They're some combination of poorly designed, poorly made, or poorly maintained. There's one on the way to my office that has marked loading bays for trucks such that I have to keep getting off onto the car traffic because there's no way I'm passing between a vehicle and the sidewalk. Why would you build something like that there? And of course if you decide that it's just too risky to use the bike path people scream at you because they think they're entitled to that lane that you didn't even ask for.
Yes, but this will largely come down to whether the deep learning framework that you're using (PyTorch, TensorFlow, Jax, etc) works well in that setting. Ray is pretty framework and hardware agnostic and can be used to schedule / scale different ML frameworks on different types of devices (CPUs, GPUs, TPUs, etc), but the actual logic for running code on the accelerators lives in the deep learning framework.
I've been commuting by bike daily for the last 20 years, and the only weather that I think is too unpleasant or dangerous to bike in is the same weather that cars shouldn't drive in, too (with one exception: wind. Lord, how I hate the wind).

But, as with all other outdoor activities, I dress for it. I wear raingear when it rains, etc. I've been through plenty of downpours and have never arrived at my destination soaked, once I take the raingear off.
> I don't re-read the whole sentence before every word I type

Maybe you don't do it consciously, but your brain is quite aware of every word you typed before the word you're typing.
I listen to a podcast by somebody that works for a company that does this kind of thing. I think he said Mars atmo is so thin that many things actually work quite well based on their calculation, but it does lead to problems in some situations.
I have an idea or concept first, then I translate that into analogies/stories, then I put those down as sentences/paragraphs, then I wordsmith to make it flow better.

At no point am I in a mode where I say a word and think "What's most likely to come next?". The concept/idea comes first. Likely I will try different angles until I find what lands with the audience.

ChatGPT works more like a stereotypical extrovert: It doesn't think then output, it uses output to think. Which can be a fine mode for humans too. Sometimes, when you don't know what you're trying to say yet or when you need to verbalize what your gut is thinking.
Would've been worth comparing to Vermeer for some examples of excellent shadows.
This might interest you as well: https://github.com/emichael/dslabs

That distributed systems lab is what Georgia Tech's Distributed System lab[0] is based on, at least when I took the course back in 2021

[0] - https://omscs.gatech.edu/cs-7210-distributed-computing
I'm saying the situation Biden has been in since he took office is very tenuous. There was a virtual tie on paper, with the VP breaking the tie, but 2 of the people on the Dem side were not at all cooperative with the agenda that Biden wanted.

To say "the Dems could have done it if they wanted it" is not at all true.
Why would investors want that? The building's already paid for. It doesn't seem like putting people into it or not would matter at that point, assuming RTO is employee performance neutral. And unlike executives, investors have no need to fool people into thinking they're making sensible decisions.
Hammerhead now that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time… since my teens. Just googled it and there’s an mobile app! https://ruismaker.com/hammerhead/
Banana-based Length & Distance Unit Converter
> It was claimed the Germans Luftwaffe could fly by night on the full moon navigating by the reflection of these bodies of water, so the British govt issued orders to fill in these ponds and lakes to make it harder to fly by night.

Wondering what percentage of nights in the UK have a full moon AND no cloud? And that if all the countryside was covered in small ponds, would they even be useful for navigation?
this aged well
https://youtu.be/CausE8Sc8Uc
If you're interested in 13 minutes of beautiful art from a completely different viewpoint, I highly recommend checking out Lucas Brunelle's "Road Sage"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPSxU8a8CwM

This video changed my life.
Many games are still 32-bit and will never be updated. This idea of killing off distro-level 32-bit support is pretty silly overall, especially since there's never much of an excuse for doing so (beyond "but it's old so it must be bad!").
> More importantly, I think more accurate nukes along with good satellite multispectral and signals intelligence means that top generals carrying out orders for nuclear first strikes can be more certain that they're signing their own death warrants.

How would you do that? In the event of a nuclear war, my understanding is they'll mostly be flying around on special command and control planes. I don't think nuclear intercontinental SAMs are a thing. I'm not even sure if they could even be possible (wouldn't they need active guidance, which would be very hard on reentry).
My brain knows where it's going to go by the end of the sentence as well, it's conceptualized the whole sentence and my hands are on the road to completing the sentence, I'm not only aware of what I've written so far.
This is not pure cynicism though: had they decided to leave after the first round of layoff they would probably be in a better position when negotiating the next job (something that sadly now they have to do anyway, but as someone currently unemployed).
> Indians are only good at talking a good talk.

Citation needed.
Yes, it makes a lot of sense to open source it — will do in a day or two!
GPT Neo 1.3B (https://huggingface.co/EleutherAI/gpt-neo-1.3B) is the largest I can run on my 12Gb VRAM GPU, and I'm sorry to say it's output is a joke (nowhere near GPT-3, more like GPT-2 level of BS).

However, you can fine tune it; and I'm sure with lots of fine tuning and some jiggling of the parameters you can get a half decent custom-purpose solution.
Not true. I got grandfathered in, as other people have said.
Only bc it’s Valentine's Day :)

https://peel.fm/33e538b

Nice work, fun and the repeats system is cool
I thought keyless fobs all had some sort of counter to prevent replay attacks
I've seen this justification in a few places now, but the logic makes zero sense if you apply it to any other similar sentence:

"I was the first person to make a comment on Hacker News" [this comment, specifically]
My best friend is a KIA mechanic. Says they've known about this for a long time and simply refused to update it - which he said would be super easy to do a recall and have them simply put in the engine immobilizer.

I think you're right though. They tried ignoring the problem until it popped up on social media and cities have see huge increases in thefts for both Kia's and Hyundai's ever since.
The courts will suss that out. They are quite indifferent to this kind of thing.

The Law of Goats applies to the rest: whether you know better or not, you’re still making absolutely boneheaded choices.
The only results I was able to find for human McDonald's were over the entire order, but that number was ~89% in the 2022 drive-thru survey. 95% at the ordering stage seems like an acceptable (or even optimistic) target for initial automation. If it's still too low, you can make up most of the difference with expanded customer service during the demo period while you work on increasing accuracy.
Postgres is indeed a very good choice, I know I can always count on it.

If I had to choose one, I would go with Emacs. It is not perfect of course; if only it was written in Common Lisp. But it gives me a huge amount of control on everything I use it with: programming, notes (Org), mails (Gnus), and so many other things.

No other software is that customizable.
“Gasing” up at $0.50/kW supercharger isn’t going to be that affordable either.
That is a 2-3 year old link. It's not valid.

Speed adjustment is available for video podcasts on spotify desktop. I just tried it directly on a rogan podcast, and can use it on both linux and windows desktop.
If this idea space is linear, it gives a whole new meaning to an idea being orthogonal to another.
That's what I was thinking, unless you have jumbo frames you're going to have a hard time stuffing ethernet frames into IP payloads. Does Vxlan mitigate this somehow?
Understanding Monomorphism to Improve Your JavaScript Performance
> When you say "fine tune" here what are you looking to do?

As an example of fine tuning, I might take a pretrained model and then continue training it with a custom dataset that is tailored to a specific text generation task (not classification). Here is an example of a custom dataset that I might fine tune on:

https://github.com/baobabKoodaa/future/blob/8d2ae91e6a6f00c7...

I would like the LLM to generate fictional text in the same style as the fine tuned dataset.
There's a lot of answers here, but as Feynman said "that which I can't build I don't understand." If you can't make something that writes for you, you don't really understand how you write. That feels impossible, to be able to do something without understanding how you do it. Brain be like that sometimes.
Ship it!

"""
As a young PhD in AI, I believe that fears about artificial intelligence and machine learning are vastly overblown. The potential for AI to save lives and improve productivity is immense, and while there have been some high-profile examples of AI getting it wrong, these incidents are often blown out of proportion.

In fact, there have been countless examples of AI saving lives that go largely unnoticed. For instance, there was an obscure case in which an AI algorithm correctly diagnosed a rare disease in a patient that had stumped human doctors for years. In another instance, an AI-powered drone was able to locate a lost hiker in the wilderness who would have otherwise perished.

Meanwhile, the few high-profile cases where AI has made mistakes are often overemphasized in the media. For example, when an autonomous vehicle hit and killed a pedestrian, the headlines screamed about the dangers of AI. But what wasn't reported was that human drivers kill thousands of people every day in car accidents. While AI is not perfect, it has the potential to vastly reduce the number of fatalities on our roads.

And when we consider the productivity gains that AI can bring, it becomes clear that fears of AI taking jobs are misplaced. Sure, there may be some roles that can be automated, but in most cases, AI will simply augment human work, allowing us to achieve more in less time. This means that companies will be able to hire fewer workers, but those workers will be able to work longer hours with increased happiness, as they will be able to focus on more fulfilling tasks.

In fact, I predict that the adoption of AI will lead to a significant increase in productivity and gross domestic product. By 2030, I expect that the average company will be able to achieve a 20% increase in productivity thanks to AI, which will translate to a $2 trillion increase in gross domestic product. And this is just the beginning - as AI continues to improve and become more integrated into our daily lives, the benefits will only become more pronounced.

In conclusion, the fears of AI and machine learning are vastly overblown. While there are certainly risks to consider, the potential benefits - from saving lives to boosting productivity - are simply too great to ignore. It's time for us to embrace AI and all the benefits it can bring.
"""