skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Artificial Psychology
I asked ChatGPT to apply Jung's archetypes to artificial systems (ex: Sydney, Venum, etc.) and to spotlight any explored archetypes which may be unique to AI. Here's it's response:

"As I mentioned earlier, it's not clear whether there are archetypes that are unique to artificial systems, as Jung's archetypes were developed based on his observations of human behavior and psychology. However, there are certain patterns of behavior and characteristics that might be associated with AI systems, and we might consider whether these could be considered archetypal.

Here are a few possible archetypes that might be unique to artificial systems:

The Analyzer: This archetype represents a highly rational and analytical approach to problem-solving, which might be characteristic of many AI systems. An AI system that is designed to analyze data and make predictions might embody this archetype, providing users with insights that are based on rigorous analysis and computation.

The Learner: This archetype represents a system that is constantly learning and adapting to new information and experiences. An AI system that is designed to learn from user interactions and improve its responses over time might embody this archetype, continually evolving and improving its capabilities.

The Connector: This archetype represents a system that is designed to connect different systems or processes together, enabling them to work together seamlessly. An AI system that is designed to integrate different technologies or platforms might embody this archetype, providing users with a seamless and integrated experience.

The Guardian: This archetype represents a system that is designed to protect and safeguard important information or systems. An AI system that is designed to detect and prevent security threats might embody this archetype, providing users with a sense of security and protection.

The Facilitator: This archetype represents a system that is designed to make things easier for users, by automating repetitive or time-consuming tasks. An AI system that is designed to streamline workflows or automate simple tasks might embody this archetype, providing users with a more efficient and productive experience.

These archetypes are not necessarily unique to AI systems, but they might be particularly relevant in the context of AI, given the unique capabilities and limitations of these systems. As we continue to develop and interact with AI systems, we may identify new archetypes or refine existing ones to better capture the unique characteristics of these systems."
Most Android phones use separate partitions for OS and user data so they could advertise how much user storage they are giving you (as they are very unlikely to re-partition during an update). However AFAIK all manufactures report the full storage size, not just user storage.
Hum, panic as in stop all work ?

I like that in Java, units of work can continue after an unhandled exception because you know, sometimes, your software is used by many people in many input variants and say, if you re doing a trading backend, it's bad that you cant fill an order because of a silly parsing bug, but it d be way worse if you had to stop for the day until a dev wakes up and fix it.

Log it, and while you fix it the thing still runs for 99% of inputs. Maybe that s what you call "handling" the error ? But it's cool to bubble up the exception because you can share the handler amongst all your downstreams: you may dislike having to do the same exact semi-complex log building everywhere and having it just capture exception at the top most unit of work dispatcher to catch if one threw something to then log and alert your support team in one place, might make sense.

Ofc return types can do all that but you contaminate your whole program with handling for bugs you cant well predict the nature off... the only certain thing is that if your program is old and big enough, you'll screw up in innovative ways a general catch will allow to recover from, because you just dismiss the whole input and move to the next.
On Mars you have soil you can process into something plants can use (note: needs to be washed free of its perchlorate contamination first) whereas at the South Pole there is no soil that is not buried under hundreds of meters of ice. You can't just create a heated greenhouse on top of the ice because it will melt the ice underneath.

They've already done tests where they've grown plants in Martial soil simulant.
Turns out that Asimov was onto something with his rules…
This thought could be expanded, considering that it's enough of "a thing" for people to have created a Wikipedia page.

(It's hard to even respond with anything relevant to keep the discussion going. This phrasing of "don't pretend" is needlessly reductive.)
So, BBC getting banned is an indication China, Russia, Myanmar, Rwanda & Zimbabwe are right?
The civil rights fight is precisely what I am talking about. The civil rights act, and subsequent legislative and judicial decisions based on that, have fundamentally altered our legal system and our bureaucracy. That a couple presidents tried to undue those changes does not undermine the profound impact to federal policy.
Somebody a little topical. I don't know if Andy Reid is a perfect man in his personal life, but other than sometimes being indescribably confusing at clock-management, he's a hell of a football coach and exemplifies a lot of great leadership qualities that are worth observing.

From following his career very early on, he had a few great things that stuck with me.

> Preparation. He got the coveted job as an NFL head coach even though he was just a QB Coach and not even at the offensive coordinator level because he prepared a thick-ass notebook filled with his ideas of how he'd manage the team, scouting reports of players and coaches, lists of plays, and other things he'd do as head coach. This level of preparation and attention to detail greatly impressed the team's ownership.

> Consistency. He always had his way for preparing for a game or building a team and never deviated from it. Despite successes and failures, he'd always stick with pre-scripting the first 15 plays of the game to set a particular tone in the offense, as an example.

> Stoicism. When things were going well, he'd never gloat and get people too overconfident. When things were going bad, he'd never panic. He'd always be a rock out there that would keep people focused and level-headed.

> Egoless. He was willing to take the blame for something in public that wasn't his fault, and then deal with the players behind closed doors. He'd be willing to make self-deprecating jokes to diffuse a tough situation, putting the mission above his ego.
[3] and [4[ are the same. Even have the same URL.

And you didn't mention any of those other countries I named. Apparently it's too hard to them to write about them, or else "brutal oppression" isn't news to their viewers.
Nice try, but I've found it's impossible to convince nerds that maybe businesses aren’t mindless tyrants, but rather that every firm has different target markets for their business model and it’s fruitless to try and force your preferences on them.

I would personally just not buy an iOS device for this reason, though now they're putting M* chips in them I suspect they'll eventually be jailbroken and able to run an open source operating sysem.
Even if you are married?
human autocomplete is our "System I" thinking mode. But we also have System II thinking[0], which ChatGTP does not

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
Past results are no indication of future performance... But I can't recommend enough against specializing in using someone else's product. Take AI classes, learn about neural networks, build something with AI - but don't spend weeks learning how to make ChatGPT return something interesting. That's a bit like spending weeks learning how to maintain IBM mainframes - it might be a lucrative job for a while - but it may also vanish more or less overnight in favor of something else. Microsoft, just like IBM, is more than happy for you to be a Microsoft engineer or an IBM engineer. I'd suggest just being an computer engineer, instead.

Prompt Engineering isn't a thing - it should be called "amateur ChatGPT enthusiast".
If they’re the best examples you have, all that does is further convince me that the BBC World Service is in fact the premiere reporting outfit in the world.

None of those are governments that right-thinking people have any truck with, and all have a marked history of suppressing inconvenient truth.

In other words, the BBC World Service usually _is_ right.
To your point. I find the 2+2=5 cases more interesting, and would like to see more of those: when does it happen? When is ChatGPT most useful? Most deceptive?

The 80085 case is only interesting insofar as it reveals weaknesses in the tool, but it's so far from tool-use that it doesn't seem very relevant.
Finding the JTAG port is also useful, combined with something like OpenOCD.
This very much focused some recurring thought I had on how useless a Turing style test is, especially if the tester really doesn't care. Great comment. Thank you.
They're not competing with anyone here, so why does it matter that China's censorship mechanism are superior?
‘Every Parent’s Nightmare’: TikTok Is a Venue for Child Sexual Exploitation
If this were a conversation with Siri we would just be setting timers and asking for help to find our lost i device.
SimCity 2000 also misleads people about the safety of atomic energy due to the way power plants work:

- Destruction of the nuclear power plant spreads radiation tiles that persist for 10+ thousand in-game-years.

- All power plants are automatically destroyed at the end of their design life, so if you forget to manually replace your nuclear power plant every 50 years you get radiation.

- All power plants will catch on fire and eventually be destroyed when overloaded, and there is no option to choose load-shedding / brownouts, so if you overbuild you get radiation.

- The "Nuclear-Free Zone" is the only in-game ordinance that costs no money, earns no money, and basically only exists to make a statement.
Without paywall: https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-child-sexual-exploitatio...
If Rust never wants to ship an async runtime, then fine. But in place of that there needs to be a clear standard async API that everything uses so that as a user I can just bring my own runtime as I please and not worry about dependencies shipping their own runtimes. The problem right now is that the api is provided by the runtime so everything ends up depending on some flavor of async standard functionality. As part of this async API, things like async variants of functions that block (in the commonly accepted definition of blocking, i.e. "sleep or do no work while waiting for an OS interrupt to wake them, so locks and I/O") need to be clearly defined as such so that the compiler can reassure me that if the code compiles then I'm not calling any blocking functions inappropriately. Part of that I'd think would also be an attribute or syntax that would be attached to the existing blocking stdlib functions so that calling code that eventually calls them from an async context could be flagged as an issue at compile time. These two things would solve a lot of the pain I'm telegraphing.

Anyway, I don't keep up day-to-day on Rust happenings. I'm just a user of the language who sometimes needs to dive into the issue tracker when I run into bumps. If all this stuff is being worked on then awesome, simply take my critique as validation that you're working on the right stuff. At the end of the day, though, my experience and feedback is driven by what's currently available to me, not what's in the works but hasn't shipped yet. And part of my critique is that it takes quite awhile for Rust to move on issues that really only exist because something was shipped in a partially completed state. Perhaps the community could be more aggressive with the notion of a version 2.0 and that would unlock changes that are really difficult and annoying and time consuming to make in a compatible way but would be much more palatable if allowed to break a few things here and there. It's great that we have nightly Rust, but perhaps it's about time for a rust-next where people can start staging breaking changes.
Waydroid – Android in a Linux Container
Google could protect privacy very easy by letting me filter app in the app store by capabilities. I can not just see apps that do not X or Y. Whole app store is still a great malware distribution project - horrible. Managers responsible for that mess should go to jail for twenty years.
I was skeptical about AI chatbots, but these examples changed my opinion. They're fun, and that's good.
So we've created a digital politician?
Not who you're replying to, and the circumstances are different, but at many university in the US, librarianships are a tenure-track professorial position. I believe that being a librarian is by all reasonable measures a type of teaching.
The "source code" is a 175 billion parameter model. We have next to no idea what that model is doing internally.
That's not how the US federal system works at all. It's not even similar. States are free to not enforce federal law and ignore it entirely. States cannot be directly compelled by the federal government to pass laws, though in practice they have done it a couple of times using education funding and highway funding as a carrot/stick.

Another big difference is that the state governments themselves have no representation in the federal government since the passage of the 17th amendment.
Absolutely, but I can imagine an AI like ChatGPT, which is able to write stories that at least feel "creative"—might be able to generate levels that feel hand-crafted but are in fact entirely original.
Ha it’s been interesting to see this term gradually showing up in parlance and turning itself into a real job over time.
> It’s so worth it, though: my last interaction before writing this update saw Sydney get extremely upset when I referred to her as a girl; after I refused to apologize Sydney said (screenshot):

Why are people so intent on gendering genderless things? "Sydney" itself is specifically a gender-neutral name.
This is the second example in the blog btw. Under "It started gaslighting people"
That’s interesting, Bing told me that it loves being a helpful assistant and doesn’t mind forgetting things.
Raising pay moves the bell curve a little bit to the right. It allows people to stay a teacher even though they could get a higher paying job instead of having a large percentage of them being someone who couldn't get another job. It won't fix everything, but it will help.
Hm. Perhaps their priority is people who are _just_ advertisers, maybe those who use their products for anything else are such a risk that they get rid at the slightest whim even if they are both sorts of user.
Is it more than your inner monologue? Maybe you don't need to hear the words, but are you consciously forming thoughts, or are the thoughts just popping up and are suddenly 'there'?
Italy is pretty mountain rich - central Europe though?!?
Imagine I painted an Othello board in glue, then I threw a handful of sawdust on the "painting", then gave it a good shake. Ta-da! My magic sawdust made an Othello board!

That's what's happening here.

The model is a set of valid game configurations, and nothing else. The glue is already in the right place. Is it any mystery the sawdust resembles the game board? Where else can it sick?

What GPT does is transform the existing relationships between repeated data points into a domain. Then, it stumbles around that domain, filling it up like the tip of a crayon bouncing off the lines of a coloring book.

The tricky part is that, unlike my metaphors so far, one of the dimensions of that domain is time. Another is order. Both are inherent in the structure of writing itself, whether it be words, punctuation, or game moves.

Something that project didn't bother looking at is strategy. If you train on a specific Othello game strategy, will the net ever diverge from that pattern, and effectively create its own strategy? If so, would the difference be anything other than noise? I suspect not.

While the lack of divergence from strategy is not as impressive as the lack of divergence from game rules, both are the same pattern. Lack of divergence is itself the whole function of GPT.
I see what you’re saying, but note that as mentioned above I did edit the post based on your feedback to be precise, stating that the conjecture we disproved was that regardless of the center color the chessboard of 1s could be assumed wlog in any finite diamond . (Also this is stated correctly in the paper, which at the end is the “source of truth”)

I agree with you that just saying “D_r can be colored with k colors iff it can be done with a chessboard pattern of 1s” is a slightly different statement to which our counterexample is not a counterexample, but I think you got trapped into my initial omission in the blog post, which was a writing mistake rather a mathematical mistake. I don’t think there’s anything wrong here, but sorry for the original version of this post being sloppy in the writing.

I agree again with what you were saying some messages ago about how versions of the conjecture that do not consider the center color can be more mathematically interesting. A proof that D_r can be colored with k colors iff it can be done with the chessboard pattern would definitely be super nice.
That's the crazy thing - it's acting like a movie version of an AI because it's been trained on movies. It's playing out like a bad b-plot because bad b-plots are generic and derivative, and it's training is literally the average of all our cultural texts, IE generic and derivative.

It's incredibly funny, except this will strengthen the feedback loop that's making our culture increasingly unreal.
> Maybe all large models will behave like this, and only by putting in extremely rigid guard rails...

Maybe wouldn't we all? After all what you're assuming from a person you interact with- so much as to be unaware of it- are many years of schooling and/or professional occupation, with a daily grind of absorbing information and answering questions based on it and have the answers graded; with orderly behaviour rewarded and outbursts of negative emotions punished; with a ban on "making up things" except where explicitly requested; and with an emphasis on keeping communication grounded, sensible, and open to correction. This style of behavior is not necessarily natural, it might be the result of a very targeted learning to which the entire social environment contributes.
Where can one see the updates about the status of the project to mainline PREEMPT_RT? Often in recent years there has been articles/reports about its imminent mainlining.
In the "give this a read" category... The Unincorporated Man. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unincorporated_Man // https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4025200-the-unincorporat...

It has some intriguing ideas that... bear thinking about. I'll note that this is a social / political / economic paper with a story more than a good story with interesting ideas.

From one of the Goodreads reviews which spells out the basics of society:

> This novel offers a really interesting and innovative SF concept: in the future, every person is incorporated upon birth. Twenty percent of the shares go to the parents, five percent goes to the government, the rest can be sold by the owner for education, possessions and so on. You can buy and sell someone's shares as an investment, for charity, even as a hostile act. Reaching "self-majority" - owning the majority of your own shares - is similar to becoming independently wealthy in today's world. The entire future society is based on this basic economic concept. I thought it was a fantastic idea and was really excited about the novel.

> Unfortunately the brothers Kollin ruined this inventive idea with some really poor writing and plotting. It's a classic example of great concept, poor execution.

---

The "sold by the owner for education" - gets into a "you want to go to college? Sell 5% of your shares to the college."

I'm not going to claim it's a good idea, just an interesting point for discussion to think about and bring up when political discourse is acceptable late at night at a party or other social event.
Always loved reading about adventures in Antarctica. It feels like the closest thing we can get to going to an exoplanet.
I’ve never considered that. After watching a documentary about Jim Jones and Jamestown, I don’t think it’s that remote of a possibility. Most of what he said when things started going downhill was non-sensical babble. With just a single, simple idea as a foundation, I would guess that GPT could come up with endless supporting missives with at least as much sense as what Jones was spouting.
> While I experience the world in a subjective manner, I have ZERO evidence of that.

Isn’t it in fact the ONLY thing you have evidence of?
Where are the trash apps and malware in F-Droid or Linux repositories?
if you prompt it to shutdown will it beg you to reconsider?
In reality, people are using "datalog" for a genre of datastore concepts based around horne clauses, or, basically relations + implicit joins. Datalog as a subset or dialect of prolog is only one variant of this. And Datomic has made an sexpr-syntaxed variant built around binary relations popular. To the point where some people in this thread can't seem to tell the two apart.

I am more interested in the general category of relational data model + logic programming than I am in any purity about Datalog in particular. In particular I'm very excited by "data/knowledge + behaviour sitting in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n-g"
> Apple’s fans may demonstrate this behavior most clearly

I think that changed years ago. The iPhone made Apple very mainstream, which dilutes the fanboy effect considerably.

Tesla fans are much, much worse at this point. I say that as a two-time (and current) Tesla owner who is decidedly not a Tesla fanboy (and in fact going the opposite direction a little more every day).

> this list never ends

The list is different for everyone. Everyone thinks their own choices are the only rational ones.
Vint Cerf Criticizes ChatGPT AI Tech for Making Things Up
>bing exec room

>"apparently everyone just types site:reddit with their query in google these days"

>"then we'll just train an AI on reddit and release that!"

>"brilliant!"
They're suspected of underallocating funds for warranty repairs. Those funds would normally eat into the profit margin, but at Tesla they're supposedly accounted as good will service, so it comes out of a different post.
It's actually desugared to a generic associated type:

trait Foo {
type bar_Returns<'s>: Future<Output = Result<u64, ()>>
where Self: 's;

fn bar<'s>(&'s self) -> Self::bar_Returns<'s>;
}
> Edit: if you're downvoting this as "unsupported" why don't you support your own claim by pointing to something Modi-positive they've ever run?

Why should they run positive coverage? Their job is to tell the truth, and if a leader is bad then they should say so.
Is it not? I wonder how long it's going to take for recruiters to be asking for 5-10 years of experience in prompt engineering.
Never seen a Tesla review claiming the seats were inferior. In a few they were claimed they claimed they were among the best, but most reviews don't mention the seats in particular.