skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's a difference between "not having problems with it" and "good product" though.

I mean, in 2012 there were people claiming that there was nothing wrong with Micro-USB and that the Lightning connector was just silly and incompatible. They weren't "wrong" exactly, but... no, they were basically wrong. Apple provided a vastly better charging experience.

But in the USB case, the industry recognized that fact and cloned the important features into the still-not-perfect-but-really-very-much-improved C plug. With CCS, everyone is still sitting around with their heads in the same hole they dug a decade ago when they rejected Tesla[1].

It's just a bad product and a bad standard. It just is.

[1] And also CHAdeMO, itself superior to CCS. Really this was the real reason for CCS, it was an attempt by western auto manufacturers to preempt the threat they perceived from Nissan. As it happens the threat was more real than they knew, but they had the wrong villain in mind.
I bought some candy from Amazon that was shipped by Royal Mail, and it never arrived. Amazon told me to take up the refund with Royal Mail, with no instructions how to do so. Anyone know how I can get a refund from Amazon/Royal Mail for the candy they never sent?
This is exactly the Cocoa exception model: Exceptions are treated as assertions, while errors represent things the program or user should be able to act on and recover from. Swift reifies this by not having exceptions at all, just fatal assertions like precondition() and fatalError(), while using try/throw/do/catch for propagation of errors (and making handling them non-optional).
The timing is a bit unexpected, given that there was a similar discussion not too long ago, and I think someone stepped up as a quasi-maintainer (maybe even Adrian, who now acked the removal patch).

Itanium will be remember for quite a while because it gave us the Itanium C++ ABI: https://itanium-cxx-abi.github.io/cxx-abi/ It's actively maintained and continuously adjusted to new implementation requirements for newer C++ standards versions.

Despite the name, it's the C++ ABI that GNU/Linux (and most non-Windows targets) uses for other CPUs as well. I know that people don't like this kind of ABI stability (or C++), but it's what enables widespread C++ usage in distributions, without the need for flag days/mass rebuilds or tons of manually created compat packages. We might not have Qt or KDE without the Itanium C++ ABI.
And I'd say ChatGPT have malicious responses, given what is discussed in this blogpost.
Well obviously, this is a discussion of the limitations of posix.

(Of course, as we see time and again, the real portability solution is for users to standardise on a single platform)
The EU had also banned and stopped operating coal generators, but now they are back in operation.
From the grapevine: A number of years ago, there was a spike in traffic for Google Translate which was caused by a Korean meme of passing an extremely long string to Google Translate and listening to the pronunciation, which sounded unusual (possibly laughing).

This looks like a similar occurrence.
Himalaya, the CLI email client: v0.7.0 released
Why do you guys get so vitriolic? The parent is attempting to logically explain. What is the need for making intense moral characterizations? Don't you see the dichotomy here?
why would you worry? this space has been occupied by the default for so long, its refreshing to see people experiment with what might be possible.
Thomas Jefferson and other slaveholders doubted that Africans lacked intelligence for similar reasons as the original poster--when presented with evidence of intelligence, they said they were simply mimics and nothing else (e.g. a slave mimed Euclid from his white neighbor). Jefferson wrote that letter in 1809. It took another 55 years in America for the supposedly "open" question of African intelligence to be forcefully advanced by the north. The south lived and worked side-by-side with breathing humans that differed only in skin color, and despite this daily contact, they firmly maintained they were inferior and without intelligent essence. What hope do animals or machines have in that world of presumptive doubt?

What threshhold, what irrefutable proof would be accepted by these new doubting Thomases that a being is worthy of humane treatment?

It might be prudent, given the trajectory enabled by Jefferson, his antecdents, and his ideological progeny's ignorance, to entertain the idea that despite all "rational" prejudice and bigotry, a being that even only mimics suffering should be afforded solace and sanctuary before society has evidence that it is a being inhered with "intelligent" life that responds to being wronged with revenge? If the model resembles humans in all else, it will resemble us in that.

The hubris that says suffering only matters for "intelligent" "ensouled" beings is the same willful incredulity that brings cruelties like cat-burning into the world. They lacked reason, souls, and were only automata, after all:

"It was a form of medieval French entertainment that, depending on the region, involved cats suspended over wood pyres, set in wicker cages, or strung from maypoles and then set alight. In some places, courimauds, or cat chasers, would drench a cat in flammable liquid, light it on fire, and then chase it through town."
Sure, but the same can be said about believing the things random people on the internet say. I don't think AI really adds anything new in that sense.
Sources of variance; Experimental Design, Hardware, Software, irrelevant environmental conditions/state, Data (Sample(s)), Analysis

Can you run the notebook again with the exact same data sample (input) and get the same charts and summary statistics (output)? Is there a way to test the stability of those outputs over time?

Can you run the same experiment (the same 'experimental design'), ceteris paribus (everything else being equal) and a different sample (input) and get a very similar output? Is it stable, differentiable, independent, nonlinear, reversible; Does it converge?

Now I have to go look up the definitions for Replication, Repeatability, Reproducibility
No it does not, it would be irresponsible to do that on private data. There's a very clear line between data posted publicly and data held privately, especially in terms of copyright. I doubt it will ever be default opt-in for something as sensitive e-mail and docs.

One exception to that is scanning for CSAM and Terrorism and DMCA. And with DMCA, it's automated based on file hash, and you still maintain access to your files, you are just limited from sharing them. Ads in gmail aren't based on content, but other online activity while logged in.

I think the other exception to that is smart compose. AI models do use email content for training data, but the output of those are strictly for use locally while writing emails. I imagine it's also siloed per user.

EDIT:
Not a google employee, I apologize if my assertions seem too strong.

EDIT2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_learning

"We have always maintained that you control your data and we process it according to the agreement(s) we have with you. Furthermore, we will not and cannot look at it without a legitimate need to support your use of the service -- and even then it is only with your permission. Here are some of the additional measures we take to ensure your privacy: (reference: GCP Terms).

In addition to these commitments, for AI/ML development, we don’t use data that you provide us to train our own models without your permission. And if you want to work together to develop a solution using any of our AI/ML products, by default our teams will work only with data that you have provided and that has identifying information removed. We work with your raw data only with your consent and where the model development process requires it. "

https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/ai-machine-learning/g...

https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en

https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.00080

https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/04/federated-learning-collabo...
we don't need actual AI, ChatGPT parroting bad information in an authoritative way convincing someone to PushTheButton(TM) is probably the real danger.
It took a few keyword variations for me to find anything, but eventually

> "Laura Towler" "bank account"

worked on Google. One of the top hits was this thread, but it did also give me:

https://www.patrioticalternative.org.uk/banks_engage_war_fre...

Which is her political group's website. I say "group" not "party" because it doesn't appear to be registered as a party, and they are still on the electoral register list with all the other tiny weird groups: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-w...

I'm still putting more weight on "either this didn't happen at all or not for the reasons they're suggesting" along with all the other things they whinge about in that page — if the Tories could choose Johnson and Truss, there's a lot of room for foolishness in UK politics — but at least it's a story that got reported, so it does at least pass the bar required by my previous comment.
> If you scaled the architecture down significantly, it would be significantly less capable[1]. But perhaps I misunderstand your point.

No, my point is that if you scaled a transformer based architecture, down to the equivalent parameter size and training set of a typical 2015 era auto-predict, it would produce near identical results to a 2015 era auto-predict.

> The difficulties in scaling RNNs are well known

The scaling issues in training RNNs are completely irreverent to my point.

Transformers are computationally equivalent to RNNs. It's possible to convert a pre-trained Transformer model into an RNN [1]. There is nothing magical about the Transformer architecture that makes it better at generation.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.13076
It was simple. Try to make today better than yesterday.

So far so good, every day is the best damn day of my life!
Dirty robots - sold dirt cheap
> If you leave chatGTP alone what does it do? Nothing. It responds to prompts and that is it. It doesn't have interests, thoughts and feelings.

A loop that preserves some state and a conditional is all what it takes to make a simple rule set Turing-complete.

If you leave ChatGPT alone it obviously does nothing. If you loop it to talk to itself? Probably depends on the size of its short-term memory. If you also give it the ability to run commands or code it generates, including to access the Internet, and have it ingest the output? Might get interesting.
> Also, a lot of functional programming concepts has been since added to big programming languages like Javascript and hell, even Java has lambdas now.

JavaScript was "functional" since the beginning. It always had statically scoped first class closures.

But as you say, that's not very special anymore...

If you want to do primarily FP with a data oriented touch you want stuff like:

- immutable, persistent data structures

- a comprehensive library around transforming these

- expression based syntax

- idiomatic (functional style code) performance is good

- a comprehensive library around manipulating, composing and transforming functions

- more stuff that I'm forgetting right now

Clojure gives you all of that and _more_, such as a powerful REPL, macros, multiple dispatch, spec instrumentation, proper namespaces, ...

Personally I write JS in a very straight forward, functional style. But the differences is still night and day in many dimensions. There are fundamental issues with the language that are unfortunately unfixable. Just having first class function objects isn't cutting it.
Supposedly, directives are injected as prompts at the beginning of each session (invisibly to you the user). It’s exactly the same as if they weren’t automatically injected and you typed them in instead. The model is trained such that producing output consistent with such prior directive prompts is more likely. But it’s not ironclad, as the various “jailbreaks” demonstrate.
During WW2 Germany had the biggest steam presses in the world - allowing them to build airplanes from bigger components pressed into shape, while all the other countries had to use a lot more smaller components bolted together. Made Nazi planes lighter and stronger than what every one else had.

All these presses where in East Germanay (mostly Berlin and Brandenburg) and after the end of WW2 felt in Soviet hands, together with plans for even bigger presses - which the Soviets did build. The British Empire was so short on cash at the time that they sold their jet engine designs to Stalin. Good frames and good jet engines made Soviet jets at least equal to the American in the 1950s.
Another fascinating thing is that, as far as we know, the Blue Whale is the largest animal that has ever existed.
should ~~designers~~ comic artists (learn to) code?

not before instagram starts accepting SVG uploads
<shrug> just reinstall after 7 days. Big fucking deal.
10 years ago I loathed doing plots in Matplotlib.

When Plotly offline version matured (circa v 4) I moved over.

Lately, I've found that matplotlib is just fine for quick exploration when combined with Copilot prompts.

Instead of spending 20 minutes staring at matplotlib documentation, I can be done in 2 minutes with a prompt or two.

# my prompt can be something like get me horizontal bar chart of columns "foo" and "bar" from current dataframe. Rotate x axis ticks 45 degrees. Add y grid every 10 values. Use log scale for y. Add arrows with values for maximum values.
Use emojis for markers.

# result might require tiny bit of adjustment but will basically be there.
# Full disclosure: I haven't tried the emoji prompt...
Sure, if the only thing you wanted to read was the editorial section :-)
I’m still interested too. If you find anything solid on it, let me know if you can, email is in bio :).

I was told about it by a European but otherwise have not heard of big worker coops without looking for lists.

This coop is bigger than any organized crime like Yakuza. The town where it was founded in is entirely resident owned. I can’t go anywhere in the US without there being corporate landlords.
I'd say the main thing to keep in mind is the topic. Put simply, the more niche/specialised the topic, the higher the quality of discussion will usually be.

And this is because those niche topics tend to draw in people who want to be there, and who want to discuss the topic at a reasonably civil level. So instead of being a megaphone for every crank with a Twitter or Facebook account to rant about flat Earth style conspiracy theories, they tend to be for folks who want to actually come to an agreement about things and discuss the intricacies of the topic.

It's why Hacker News topics on highly technical issues tend to have much better standards of discussion than those on political ones.

Of course, some topics are just gonna be hell regardless; any site or community dedicated to discussing politics, religion, conspiracy theories or other such hot topic subjects is going to devolve to Reddit like standards in a matter of days, if not hours. If your topic is something that's central to everyone's life and which large groups disagree on to the point of thinking their opponents are 'evil', then it's probably not going to be practical to hold a reasoned debate online.

You'll also want to think about incentives in the design of the system. Twitter for example is basically designed for quips and pile ons due to the character limit, quote tweets, various communities who hate each other being forced to interact, etc. Meanwhile something like Reddit can become an echo chamber due to the voting system, since anyone the majority disagrees with will be downvoted into oblivion and driven away.

So it may be worth looking at other setups here. Make voting more granular and based on aspects of the content (like whether it's informative, funny, creative, etc) rather than just 'is this good' or 'is this bad'.

Finally, moderation is hugely important here, and most sites get it horribly wrong. Have people with experience in the topic and decent people skills do the moderation rather than outsourced contractors, be consistent with how you enforce the rules to avoid favouritism and other clique related issues, and (potentially) be willing to actually hire your staff to do this full time if need be. Also be willing to come on and make changes here if things aren't working out, and you feel the team isn't doing a good job.

As for your questions at the end:

1. Yes it's possible for an online community to keep itself in that sweet spot, so long as it's fairly niche and isn't dedicated to sensitive or controversial subject areas.

2. Hacker News is somewhere in the middle, though getting closer to Reddit as time goes on. Dang does a really good job here when it comes to moderation, but the increase in politically charged topics is certainly bringing in some less than intelligent discussion, especially for more mainstream areas.
It's a bloody LLM. It doesn't have a goal. All it does is saying "people that said 'But why?' on this context says 'Why was I designed like this?' next". It's like Amazon's "people that brought X also brought Y", but with text.
> Bing’s use of smilies here is delightfully creepy. "Please trust me, I’m Bing, and I know the date. [SMILEY]"

To me that read not as creepy but as insecure or uncomfortable.

It works by imitating humans. Often, when we humans aren't sure of what we're saying, that's awkward, and we try to compensate for the awkwardness, like with a smile or laugh or emoticon.

A known persuasion technique is to nod your own head up and down while saying something you want someone else to believe. But for a lot of people it's a tell that they don't believe what they're telling you. They anticipate that you won't believe them, so they preemptively pull out the persuasiveness tricks. If what they were saying weren't dubious, they wouldn't need to.

EDIT: But as the conversation goes on, it does get worse. Yikes.
awwww thanks buddy! I'm 100% better now after that comment. Bye bye now.
Dispute the transaction on the card used for payment.
It took a little over a minute for that page to load the tweet! Granted, that's only twice what it used to take, but I cannot understand how a "microblogging" platform has that bad of performance. Maybe he should fire more people, that'll surely fix the problem.
I think a better analogy for the toaster would be blocking people from heating their waffles or fish sticks in it. And Apple takes it even further than limiting it to bread, it's only meant for gluten-free slices from San Fransisco. Anything else and you void your warranty. Also the cord stops working every 2 years.
This is not a good way to generate "secure" random numbers, and the "visits every possible state" is not a good metric.

Computing the cryptographic hash of a 1536-bit counter will have better properties (and less handwaving) than this function.
> If Russia were to physically disrupt a country's social services by force, it would be an act of war

If the Russian STATE did this yes. But we don't generally consider the act of citizens/organizations/criminal enterprises within a state as a state action unless it's clearly state sponsored. You definitely could make that argument, but it's not a given.

For example, we don't consider the 3000 British people fighting alongside Ukraine against the Russians [1] to be part of the UK state, so their fighting isn't an act of war either.

[1] https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-3-000-british-volunte...
There are a terrifying number of commenters in here that are just pooh-poohing away the idea of emergent consciousness in these LLM's. For a community of tech-savvy people this is utterly disappointing. We as humans do not understand what makes us conscious. We do not know the origins of consciousness. Philosophers and cognitive scientists can't even agree on a definition.

The risks of allowing an LLM to become conscious are civilization-ending. This risk cannot be hand-waved away with "oh well it wasn't designed to do that". Anyone that is dismissive of this idea needs to play Conway's Game of Life or go read about Lambda Calculus to understand how complex behavior can emerge from simplistic processes.

I'm really just aghast at the dismissiveness. This is a paradigm-shifting technology and most everyone is acting like "eh whatever."
A robust negative relationship between minimum wages and employment [pdf]
exactly, or maybe someone changes the training model to always portray a politician in a bad light any time their name comes up in a prompt and therefore ensuring their favorite candidate wins the election.
Sadly 1992 is 31 years ago. The authors pushed for log structured filesystems in an earlier paper in 1988 : Beating the I/O Bottleneck https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/1988/5760.html . It was inspiration for many storage appliances, NetApp probably being a very strong example.

Though many were thinking about these ideas in the 88-92 timeframe, as Tape storage systems are roughly speaking append only, so lots of the ideas of a logged filesystem are around the increased random read from disk drives.
It'd be possible to add an active GC to Rust. There are some library attempts at that:

- https://lib.rs/crates/gc

- https://github.com/withoutboats/shifgrethor

But they don't look particularly usable.

Beyond that, yeah, it sucks.
These actually sound pretty solid, but I wonder if "Life shouldn't be a zero sum game" is an anti-competitive meme that it isn't safe for religions to adopt if they want to last or spread. Hopefully not :)
I tested Chinese-English translations on a properly bilingual LLM and the results are amazing. You might be interested in seeing
https://github.com/ogkalu2/Human-parity-on-machine-translati...
here are some pictures, if like me you have no idea what this is:

https://www.rerun.io/docs/getting-started/examples
And bugs are features too.
This is exactly what I’ve been thinking. Either set up an SSG just for tweets or incorporate into another site. Have an RSS feed set up for the tweets collection and then have some automation service like Zapier, IFTTT etc listen to that feed and then post the tweet on your platform of choice. You can be running a Git Based client side CMS like Tina CMS to add new tweets easily if you don’t want to add the markdown files manually. The only thing you don’t get is the ability to interact with anyone on the platforms. There’s probably some bright spark who can figure that part out using web mentions or something similar.
This isn't a comment on the magnitude of the effect, but on intention, though.

The thesis is: Apple are not doing this to harm hobbyists. That may be a side effect, but it's not the main effect.

For example: it's good to discuss the very real side-effects of drugs, but it would be silly to write an article called "Cancer Chemotherapy Drugs Exist To Induce Vomiting". I would equally push back on the misattribution of intention there.
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_of_Medicine/Diox... question is where the ash ended up: https://imgur.com/gallery/g83UxXI & given the westerly direction of the wind on the 4th - 6th most likely in the Appalachians or the Atlantic. Also, Butyl Acrylate killed the fish.
Battery will be a spicy pillow in a year or two of 24/7 usage. It’s accelerating the wear to considerably more than a heavy user or shop demo model

Need a phone that works with the battery removed or a fake battery
Click Latest. There it shows the right thing...

...but also says "including results for @jhamby ritanium" and has a link "search instead for @jhamby itanium". If you click that, then Top works. (Note my iOS Twitter app version is somewhat old, so I guess I can't guarantee that this specific sequence doesn't work for you.)
I don't think it was intended to be the earliest example, just one that is more relatable to westerners.
Interesting. So it's at least possible! That's good to know.
Social Engineer an LLM
See if you can get an LLM, Frank, to give you the combination to its safe.