skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Are SBF's bond guarantors posting collateral or are they actually paying a non-recoverable expense?

I thought it was closer to the former.
> They are calling for boycotts and de-platforming, both of which fall well within the bounds of the "marketplace of ideas."

This is a really obvious idea that people seem to have a lot of trouble understanding, especially when the framing of the conversation drifts toward "cancel culture".
It's not gated by median skill.

Rather, it's the level of effort required to standardize, carry over, or reproduce a particular feature in the disparate environments we use.

Say Windows maintained that filesystem transactional feature. It'd be exposed in their C++ (?) API. What if you wanted to write your program in Python? What if you wanted to port it to Mac? Linux?

It just takes time for such platform features to percolate to the various environments that could use them.
Show HN: Spotify Blend + Mood
So you're saying that you equate speech (not credible, specific threats or other extreme examples of non-protected speech) with having your life threatened physically.

I wish I could understand where you're coming from. I genuinely do.

-------------
Replying here due to rate limit:

That's why I said "generally." I'm not setting out to invalidate or disrespect any individual's experience.

It's likely that we'd have no trouble finding Holocaust survivors who would equate Nazi rhetoric with violence, for instance. They would agree with your position, given that such rhetoric arguably facilitated violence against them that would not otherwise have occurred. German law reflects this point of view.

But my position has traditionally been that prior restraint empowers the bad guys to an even greater extent. You don't want Nazis spreading messages of hate and violence... but you really don't want them telling you what you can say, if/when they come to power again.
If true, is that actually a breach of bail conditions? How did they prove that he actually used the VPN rather than just, for the sake of argument, signing up to NordVPN to support his favourite YouTube creator?
Not so long ago, bodily punishments were considered fully acceptable, or even beneficial. So the distinction against physical violence which this article paints as clear, is in fact a recent development. Which may or may not continue further.
As academia rushes to mint an army of PhDs in the burgeoning new mis/disinformation programs, they're learning that "de-bunking" doesn't actually work, and it often makes the situation worse. I'm not sure the "pre-bunking" will do any better but at least they're trying to change the strategy.
> plenty of time to use a VPN for whatever deeds he doesn't want the court to know about

This is why SBF’s counsel “represented that the defendant will not use a VPN in the interim.” Absent that representation, the government would have petitioned the court to revoke bail.
>The 13th gen have barely been integrated in stuff and they seem to, at least on single thread, smash AMD in the price/performance ranking.

Costs more to run, costs more to make, runs hotter and louder, by "smash" we're usually talking single digit performance gulfs, and performance is worse in a fairly broad amount of applications and where Intel's performance IS better it often is in an application where you would never be able to tell the difference without measurement tools.

The 12400 "kicking the m1 in the teeth" is likely due more to software optimisation than the 12400 actually being meaningfully better.

Your like of Intel's products as a consumer isn't really a reflection of their competitiveness. The only reason you're willing to buy their products at all is that Intel is cutting their margins to the bone whereas AMD is making stacks on every sale. Intel has had the best single core performance for eons and that hasn't saved them from their decline.
That sounds like a dumb game all the bored AIs in the solar system will play once they've eradicated carbon-based life.
Check out my other reply

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34811353

The relevant part

“However, keep in mind that the value of the rewards can vary depending on how you redeem them, and your personal spending habits and travel preferences may also play a role in determining which card is right for you.”
Those professors and teachers are employees of the government. Like it or not, that puts them under the same umbrella as police officers, fire fighters, and others. Government employees are very much restricted in what they can say and do when they are on the clock.
>>When a message board or user is kicked off a platform, it's never for "saying the wrong thing" or "political correctness".

That is not what I have seen - what about all the MDs and scientists that warned about possible side-effects of the vaccine, but since their opinions were not approved by the government, were kicked off twitter/facebook etc?

How about the NYPost being de-platformed for reporting on the hunter biden laptop story? a story which has now been admitted to being true?
See downthread. The two non-parental guarantors haven't paid anything, but his parents will be zeroed out if he jumps bail. The point of the bail arrangement is to guarantee his appearance, not to extract money or repay his offenses, so this concern with how the government recovers this "asset" seems misplaced.
For me, this just says it isn't available in my region, which is the United States, in a greater metro area of >1m
A520 motherboards should be coming out soon. Hopefully they're cheap and don't suck.
Are we seeing the case where AI is now suffering from multiple personality disorder? As much as fascinating this is, I think the fact that an LLM cannot _really_ think for itself opens it up to abuse from humans.
And totally not due to the UK Foreign Secretary declaring they wouldn't abide to the terms of what they were going to sign anyway. Uh-uh.
Yeah this must be it. In my experience new AMD server chips are better in pretty much any way, for most workloads. Everybody I know seems to agree. It just doesn't make economic sense to go Intel for new servers.
Bing claimed it spied on Microsoft’s employees through webcams on their laptops
The point is that there's less of a repressive force from some areas and more of an attractive force to others.

There isn't a list of "These are the problem languages", it's an experience of "Oh, this community has a CoC that protects me and has a culture I'm OK with".
There were a few words about it, actually. TFA mentions that "someone familiar with the matter" told the journalists that a secret Israeli agency once purchased supposedly hacked financial data from Jorge but the data turned out to be useless forgery. Which seems wild to me, that he would try to scam the people who have the most power to stop him.

There's also comments from one of the team that seems to indicate that they aren't involved in such shenanigans locally, but they're not pretending it isn't happening. He still votes because he has "faith".
Every possible alternative you could suggest is worse.
Hi from OctoML -- our team just put out some benchmarking results using GPT-J with a few model config/hw combinations that have relatively low latency: /octoml.ai/blog/evaluating-gpt-j-deployment-options/
You cannot expect that from people! People will be people. Anything that is open to abuse, it will be abused!
What if you go on a trip and don't use hot water for a couple of days?
> I think knowingly sending rape threats to rape victims is pretty violent behavior.

This is correct, also because such speech is quite often a precursor to actual violence. View it as more than a thing in isolation, without consequence.

In a political context, violent rhetoric about a particular group of people is predictably followed by actual violence towards members of that group. Hate speech is very much a part of hate crimes. They're not separable.
Ask HN: Advice for getting into web application pentesting?
> You can just look at the games that rich black republicans have to play to stay in the club.

Not refuting what you are saying, but could you elaborate on this statement?
It is not a breach of bail conditions (at least not currently). The prosecution is arguing that VPN use makes SBF more of a flight risk, and is asking the court to make the bail conditions more strict because of it.
> In contrast, physical violence is an uncomplicated, universal offender. A punch to the face hurts everyone.

What a completely deranged take. It's easy to conceive of a thought experiment that absolutely destroys this perspective.

Imagine that I've applied lidocaine to my face and you punch me. Then someone points out that because I didn't feel pain, that "It's ok to punch other people in the face."

The author's argument makes about as much sense, ie: none.
At this point I'm convinced the only reason he's allowed out on bail is so that the prosecutors can run up the score on how many crimes he'll ultimately be charged with
Is creativity an exercise in invention or discovery?

If it is the latter, attribution is all that is warranted, but even that will be a bit silly. Does it really matter which particular human gets credit for "finding" a landscape feature, organism, or principal of physics? In the landscape case, over the course of eons those landscape features are meaningless. And if we include paint blobs, strings of words, or better mousetraps in our discovery scope... attributing any "invention" to any of us (instead of all of us) feels weird. I feel fine with "humans made it". Less fine with "that particular person made it, and gets all of the glory and money, even though it would have been impossible to make without a bunch of supporting everythings and also someone else was going to get to it eventually".

Intellectual ownership is indeed super interesting.
The quote was:

> People who equate speech with violence have generally never known physical violence.

Just wondering if that meets the standard or not. Not that I think all speech is violence though.

I just think you setup a strawman.
This will be something they regret: every nutball with a UFO theory or abduction "experience" will seek them out.
They're not running it off 4G. Click through to the trial and read the FAQ. It's using your home broadband connection.
I would say he was quite vigorously defended by liberals. Since the 1970s there pretty much hasn't been such a thing as the left, especially in Rushdie's hayday of the 80s-00s. If there was, I doubt it would've spent much time worrying about the fate of a bourgeoisie fantasist.

Nothing against Rushdie btw. I loved the Satanic Verses. But institutional journalism (which provides the fundamental model most people use to understand Anglo politics) has conflated the terms left and liberal. And while I respect the drift of language as natural and intrinsic to culture, this misplacement has created a silly situation in which hypocracy, action and in-action are misattributed. Because these are two groups (overlapping in some cases) but distinct in a fundamental way.

In fact, I would say articles such as this are entirely flawed in that they don't grasp this distinction because they take institutional journalism's political narrative way past its power to describe reality.

Edit: BTW, this affects conservatives and "the Right" as well. Most of the people that rise to the top of the Rupblican and Tory parties are effectively "liberal". Most would not abolish civil liberties, equality before the law, etc. Just about everyone elected to government in both the UK and the US in all parties sit on a spectrum of liberalism. Mostly they just disagree about what year the government needed to stop doing things to create a "liberal" society.
I was recently suspended from a platform for "hate speechd when I brought up the Pakistani rape gangs that were operating in the UK.

It turns out hate speech means speech somebody hates.
Can you give an example of compelled speech?
Innovation doesn’t follow any path; discovery is messy. No matter how much we advance towards smaller chips, we are never going to get to 0nm, for example.

There are limits, but even if there weren’t, we’re no closer to AGI today then we were a year ago. It’s just a different thing entirely.

LLMs are cool! They’re exciting! There should be rules around their responsible operation! But they’re not going to kill us all, or invade, or operate in any meaningful way outside of our control. Someone will always be responsible for them.
You're mixing things up.

TLC flash puts 3 bits into each cell. It's 3x as dense. The fact that it uses 8 voltage levels is only relevant to performance and durability.

(Also 2^1 versus 2^3 is not 8x anyway.)
Yes, didn't mean to imply there is no progress, just that some perceive that we are all of a sudden getting close to AGI from their first impressions of ChatGPT.
Seconding this.

Recently took a few long-ish trips in the EU, non-Tesla chargers are utter garbage. None of them just accept a credit/debit (EC) card, there are 20 different networks and you need to create an account with each of them, assuming of course their signup system isn't down today, or just the entire network. Having to randomly re-log because they kick you out of the app when they encounter any unexpected server reply or timeout, etc.

And this is just the app+payment garbage. The charger themselves.... 30% of them don't work, 10% don't exist at all, 10% are inaccessible (inside a private garage, inside private premises, etc), the rest are understandably crowded and you end up waiting a lot. The Aldi and Lidl (supermarket chains) chargers are actually the least bad, and once they stopped being free the crazy overcrowding also stopped. I just avoid all others at this point.
Companies take a huge time to realize value, say 4-10 years. And many startups have more than one founder. In that case, founder vesting is an essential tool to ensure alignment over the years.

Filing an 83(b) is easy. It's certainly worth it to:
a) Have founder vesting to align incentives for long-term work
b) File 83(b)s
> Yes, tests are expensive.

Software is expensive. But do tests increase the cost?

In my experience adding tests to a legacy project not designed for testing is never worth the cost, but a new project designed with testing in mind can be developed significantly quicker having tests providing valuable data about the work in progress.
If your normal investments are going to further active harm, though, isn't that counterproductive?
Almost every single time I've had to deal with something being slow in the Python web app I work on, it's been a bad query, or bad ORM usage spawning thousands of additional queries to pull in relations.

I've seen a couple out-of-memory deaths (mostly non-paginated db queries, but compounded with the inefficiency of py2), and occasionally an accidentally quadratic loop (which would be faster in C, but usually can just be made fast in Python with more thoughtful code), but it's almost always the DB—oops, I need to add an index, oops I did a cross join, oops, I'm spawning additional 10 queries for each row returned. The time spent in Python on a slow endpoint is usually negligible.
Toyota has a lot of PHEVs now. The RAV4 Prime is awesome if you can get one. It isn't very difficult to change a PHEV to an BEV.
Well done on helping them through it. ouch.
Thats the trade off isnt it. In the pursuit of seeming nuance or complexity, one must inevitably compromise on the incisiveness and forthrightness of one's message.

After having engaged in this activity for some time, I now comprehend how individuals can become rehearsed automatons conditioned by human resources.

I hesitate to elaborate further, as the specifics are likely to attract scrutiny or censure.
If you convince someone not to have kids, is that harmful?
Thanks, it's good to know my Gen-Z coworkers think I'm a friendly grandmother, rather than a cold psychopath :-)
I think this article makes a key mistake that I see almost all commentators make of visions of free speech less radical than, say, the first amendment: They consider only the direct effects of speech on those who hear it. If you accept this, it's very easy to(correctly) respond that it's not the state's job to police mere offense, no matter how grave it may be. Some people who try to make criticisms of a radical free speech regime(such as the NYT author this article mentions) also fall into this trap, but I think the much more compelling for limiting speech is less about harm done by speech to listeners and more about incitement of physical harm.

It's very, very easy to communicate in ways that encourage and incite violence(be it direct physical violence or denial of the means to live a dignified life), especially against groups against whom such violence is already normalized. Not all speech that does incite violence is intended to, but this fact also lends plausible deniability to people who do explicitly want violence but know that it's socially unacceptable to call for it directly. There is the danger of being overzealous with what speech to limit, but at the same time, it's undeniable that a lot of money and attention is flowing to ever-bolder provocateurs whose only possible goal is to escalate existing tensions and iniquities to violence in service of their political aims. Taking such people at their word on their intentions is dangerous, and those who do so have no right to act surprised and claim innocence when actions and rhetoric escalate past the point they're comfortable with.
> we are just like centipedes.

How can you even tell us apart? I don't think humans exist.
The derailment was almost two weeks ago; last week that sentiment was mostly true. The story seems to only have really blown up this past weekend, and people are kind of still stuck on how it wasn't a big story until then.
With a family of four in the city it's far from a life of luxury.
>While there is indeed no right to not be offended, there is also no right to be listened to, and no right to artificially amplify your speech on someone else's dime

When you prevent somebody from being on a platform, you also prevent others from hearing what that person has to say.

As for amplification, it is not amplification to show me your tweets with #stabledifussion when that is what I search for - it is the entire point of Twitter.
Unfortunatly wind turbines are also not really a big fan of the cold. When ice grows on the blades they can become unstable.
So what do people do with these things in summer? Won’t it then heat up their house excessively
An administrative subpoena under U.S. law is a subpoena issued by a federal agency without prior judicial oversight.

I didn't say a court wasn't needed; I implied that this is a Kangaroo Court
Mass surveillance is out of control as you say, and I am a strong proponent of reigning in warrantless wiretaps and governmental overreach. However, as many people have stated, a pen register (which requires a warrant) against a specific individual suspected of a crime where there is a MASSIVE amount of evidence suggesting that the suspect is guilty has nothing to do with mass surveillance. This is targeted, narrowly scoped surveillance of a specific suspect and is precisely what law enforcement should be doing.
> I don't think that most of the people who equate hate speech with violence are literally requesting assualt charges be brought

Well, they're literally doing this in the UK - people have and are being arrested for offensive speech.
If the price of something falling by 50% means it's a fraud, then does the price of something rising by 50% mean it's not a fraud?

Because the price of Bitcoin is up 60% in the last three months, so what does that mean?
The assumption that LLMs will continue to require huge investments isn't necessarily true. if GPT-4 turns out to be a nothing burger than what's happens, also I believe chatGPT was less expensive to train than GPT-3.

Also, Models can be used to train at a cost savings using other models.
Great and all, but you'd need the IPFS data pinned somewhere, else it'll get garbage collected after a while. And if you're pinning it to a specific server (such as one you're running), why not just store the actual data in the database instead ?
I never associated Hilary Putnam with postmodernism, but I suppose he could have been affected by something in the air while writing The Meaning of 'Meaning'.[1]

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilary_Putnam#Semantic_externa...
> Intel spent billions of dollars trying to make Itanic a thing.

You're looking at that wrong.

Intel spent a gigabuck and scared everybody else out of the space. That's a brilliant business manuever even if the tech was a failure.

The only company left in the space afterward was IBM with POWER. Intel basically wiped out DEC(Alpha), SGI, MIPS, HP (PA-RISC), and Sun (Sparc) for a gigabuck.
"In nations where millions of people hold diverse beliefs, who gets to decide exactly when speech becomes “harmful” and which people should be protected from offensive or critical speech?"

I don't know, maybe we could all get together and collectively decide with some kind of voting mechanism??? Or, if voting every time is too onerous, we could elect a "representative" to stand in for our views? Just a thought!
This article is too long and says too little.

The real debate about free speech is about finding the right balance between harms caused by speech and harms caused by censorship.

It's about the distinction between highly protected forms of speech like journalism, ideas, and protests/strikes, and undesirable speech such as incitements to hatred, slander/harassment, spam, and predatory speech.

As a society you have to figure out which kinds of speech is deserving of broad platforms (talks at universities, interviews on national TV), which kind of speech should be downranked but not banned, and which kind should result in outright de-platforming or even prosecution.

The "speech is violence" rhetoric just means that speech has actual consequences and that we should look at these consequences instead of unthinkingly taking an absolutist free speech position. Free speech is never an absolute, and as anybody who has spent a lot of time online knows, there cannot be free speech without moderation (i.e. censorship).
Someone reporting something you said to your employer: freedom of speech

Your employer declining to continue your employment: freedom of association

Advocating for a university to not host your talk: freedom of speech

A university not hosting your talk: freedom of association

and so on.
I think we have to be careful not to put words in each others' mouths here. To be clear, I am not saying that specific, credible threats of violence should be treated as "speech" in the First Amendment sense.

In my view, the status quo, where most speech is fair game until it rises to the level of coercive threats, is about right.
The classic "I didn't do it" defense.
I might feel that entitled too if I just got to fly a stolen first class ticket to my stolen mansion when I was meant to be in jail.

Then again maybe he actually is entitled and I'm the dumb one for thinking rules apply to rich people.
Elon Musk has mentioned one reason Tesla started doing insurance was to get more insight into repair costs and processes to help improve both vehicle design and the repair experience.
Thanks. Is Datomic also a dialect of Prolog then?
At first I thought it was noscript causing a formatting issue but when I turned it off it was still messed up lol.

Agreed
What exactly are your qualifications? How much of the scientific literature have you read?
My mom did upholstery as a hobby; it only occurred to me in adulthood that wrapping paper isn’t designed so that the patterns would just magically line up somehow.