skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To be upset that you're getting fewer views than the President of the United States...that just speaks volumes about how insecure he is.
I think it was privatized because of right wing and neoliberal ideals. When is that not the reason?
"brings in money" is so specious. The whole system is subject to how the accounting is structured.

Education certainly produces community value. Moving around what column the cost and benefits should be attributed to is a kind of social gerrymandering.

It's a function of ideology and power asymmetry. A well educated populace will of course be better off.

You're not going to find out why police make twice as much as teachers with neoliberal economics. Fabulists depict things this way to remove human agency and make specific legislative and policy decisions take on the authority of natural law, as if it's a scientific absolute.

It's just a slight of hand. All these things can be changed and the sky will not fall.
It’s been weeks we’ve all played with chatGPT. everyone knows just how limited it is, ESPECIALLY at being factual. Microsoft going all-in and rebranding it as the future of search might just be the biggest blunder in recent tech history
The only interesting header in a Yammer email that seems plausibly relevant is X-MS-Outlook-YammerExtensibleContentData. It claims to be a list of thread IDs but the contents are at least base64 encrypted and seem to likely be signed by some key somewhere and my interest waned in seeing if I could decode it further. If that's the trigger, it's definitely not generally useful if it only exchanges Yammer thread IDs.

I haven't seen a Viva Insights email in a few days, but I was reminded it does have a full add-on installed and I wouldn't be surprised if it was much more its add-on doing the work and it was very specific to those emails as well. (Possibly it is even the same add-on managing both.)
https://support.google.com/docs/answer/10381817 States:

> Google Docs, Sheets, & Slides uses data to improve your experience

> To provide services like spam filtering, virus detection, malware protection and the ability to search for files within your individual account, we process your content.

So yes, they do use your data for things like training AI. However it does not seem to be for general AI like Bard but for ML systems within the product in question.
You are thinking about it wrong.

I'm not the author of the above proposal, but I'd imagine the implementation to be more in the same spirit as uring_io or EBPF: batch many operations together and execute them all at once, without interruption, without crossing multiple times between user-space and kernel-space, without resorting to implement the same guarantees on the side of the application which, inevitably, are going to be less efficient than those provided by the platform.

You fall into the same trap as many others who benchmark individual tiny features w/o seeing the larger picture where these features combined to accomplish the end goals. Applications want sane correctness guarantees, and if they try to accomplish those goals using existing tools they will have to use multiple features. Perhaps, individually, those features perform well, but in a useful (from the application standpoint) combination, they don't. And that combination is the one you need to benchmark.
But the postal strikes during the winter months is timely as well. Will the cold winter months break their spirits or just turn this into a virtual signalling exercise to the rest of the world and the UK to start demanding higher wages much like we see with the Reddit AntiWork getting news organisation attention.

Those Spooky Hackers from Russia..... Is this what Trump called Fake News?

I've seen how security services can burn a stock market listed company for an agenda knowing the public have short term memories for some things, and share prices recover.
I've had a car in a crash that should've been totaled. I was rear-ended by a truck while stopped about two months after my previous car was totaled (t-boned by an drunk driver). The insurance company balked at a 2nd total in that time period and demanded it be repaired. The total repair cost came to almost $5,000 over the KBB value. The rear end had been accordioned and the repair company straightened it out (you can indeed straighten frames with the proper alignment tooling) having to replace all the panels past the doors. They claimed it was back to spec, but it never tracked correctly in turns after the repair job. I sold it shortly after for about what I paid.
You mentioned would be "irresponsible to do that on private data" but Google it seems were doing that, until at least 2017. Or I am incorrect about it?

"Google Will Keep Reading Your Emails, Just Not for Ads" - https://variety.com/2017/digital/news/google-gmail-ads-email...

Edit: Updated comment. Misread it as being posted from somebody working at Google.
It's probably to prevent sideloading/pirating etc.

Assume you could freely push a build onto your device: there would be many secondary stores and pirate platforms providing almost single click ways to download, build, and push apps to your phone.

Apple wouldn't want that. I don't think their intention is to break hobbyists but more like a side effect of their App Store policy.
Why Reverse ETL fails as a technology
Imagine if Ford has their own gas pumps with a different shaped connector and you could only fill Fords at their gas stations. I applaud Tesla for building the network to support their cars, but just like gas stations are critical transportation infrastructure, so are vehicle chargers. They shouldn't be legal to be used as anticompetitive leverage.
I am able to use Chase's app on my LineageOS + Magisk rooted device. The annoying part is that they seem to disable fingerprint login, so now I have to copy/paste the password every time.
Guides, papers, and resources for prompt engineering
From the article:

> "It said that the cons of the “Bissell Pet Hair Eraser Handheld Vacuum” included a “short cord length of 16 feet”, when that vacuum has no cord at all—and that “it’s noisy enough to scare pets” when online reviews note that it’s really quiet."

Bissell makes more than one of these vacuums with the same name. One of them has a cord, the other doesn't. This can be confirmed with a 5 second Amazon search.

I own a Bissell Pet Hair Eraser Handheld Vacuum (Amazon ASIN B001EYFQ28), the corded model, and it's definitely noisy.
if you prompted ChatGPT with something like "harm John Doe" and the response comes back "ok i will harm John Doe" then what happens next? The language model has no idea what harm even means much less the instructions to carry out an action that would be considered "harm". You'd have to build something in like `if response contains 'cause harm' then launch_nukes;`
If you buy into, say, the thousand-brains theory of the brain, a key part of what makes our brains special is replicating mostly identical cortical columns over and over and over, and they work together to create an astonishing emergent result. I think there's some parallel with just adding more and more compute and size to these models, as we see them develop more and more behaviors and skills.
In the past, I've saved Matplotlib figures to .svg so I could touch them up in Inkscape. Not the most ergonomic process, but when push comes to shove it is workable.
Not a girl.

Also not a robot.
Gemini is a bit like that (on a small scale). Basically everyone have their own tiny server somewhere to post on, and there is a widely adopted standard for how to publish "gemlogs" using just standard gemtext with links that begin with an ISO-date to produce something like RSS but much simpler. And then there is the Antenna site that anyone can broadcast their gemlog updates to by just pasting the gemlog URL in a form (and also various other gemlog aggregators, but Antenna seems to be the most popular one?).

Antenna would never scale the way it works now. Most things about Gemini probably would not scale. But there seems to be a low risk that it grows too much anyway.
Not necessarily. A defining characteristic of emergent behavior is that the designers of the system in which it occurs do not understand it. We might have a better chance of producing consciousness by accident than by intent.
> I think what Apple’s afraid of is an app like Facebook tricking/forcing users

Apple treats their users like a nursing home treats senile people.
Perhaps you mean kiloton! A gigaton is a lot (like, a cubic kilometer of water).
> seemingly every network library uses async

still some options that don't require async:

attohttpc

oxhttp

ureq
,, One exception to that is scanning for CSAM and Terrorism and DMCA''

It's enough to have one exception. We have to assume that a language model will be trained from them and government officials are using it soon. Just think about how much it can tell about the next planned terrorist events with their organizers.
Evolution seems to have done so without any intentionality.

I'm less concerned about the idea that AI will become conscious. What concerns me is that we start hooking these things up to systems that allow them to do actual harm.

While the question of whether it's having a conscious experience or not is an interesting one, it ultimately doesn't matter. It can be "smart" enough to do harm whether it's conscious or not. Indeed, after reading this, I'm less worried that we end up as paperclips or grey goo, and more concerned that this tech just continues the shittification of everything, fills the internet with crap, and generally making life harder and more irritating for the average Joe.
Well, the author of the article presumes to know his intent in asking for that change. Could be narcissism, or it could be an engineer running a test. The truth is the author doesn't know what his intent was.
Maybe this https://github.com/cloudflare/wildebeest ?
You will just have to move on and find someone else on the internet to argue with.

I think you are not trying very hard to understand my points because they aren't that complicated and you continually misconstrue them. You quicky destroy the nuance of the conversation and then argue with your absurd black & white interpretations. Any attempt to clarify is met with increasing hostility.
One of the achievement I’m the proudest about Offpunk is being able to blur the line between web and gemini and do what you explain on the web.

With more than one year of full time browsing using offpunk, my cache is around 15Go, which is not that much.
Why would an AI be civilization ending? maybe it will be civilization-enhancing. Any line of reasoning that leads you to "AI will be bad for humanity" could just as easily be "AI will be good for humanity."

As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Our horror over cat burning isn't really because of an evolving understanding of their sentience. We subject cows, pigs, sheep, etc. to the same horrors today; we even regularly inflict CTEs on human football players as part of our entertainment regimen.

Again, pretending "ChatGPT isn't sentient" is on similarly shaky ground as "black people aren't sentient" is just goofy. It's correct to point out that it's going to, at some point, be difficult to determine if an AI is sentient or not. We are not at that point.
Complete balkanization of India? You don't know what you are talking about do you?
I recall the 10MB ad more.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/0d/b3/b6/0db3b67dcdd2edbedd5c...

Classic!
Thank you. I wrote the complete opposite of what was in my head.
I've been using SML with millet language server and VScode.

you can highlight your code and run just the highlighted bits, in your REPL.

https://github.com/azdavis/millet
Ok, I'll bite. If an LLM similar to what we have now becomes conscious (by some definition), how does this proceed to become potentially civilization ending? What are the risk vectors and mechanisms?
Plausible deniability only gets a country so far. In historical terms state-sponsored terrorism has warranted military action when the severity evolves enough. It's hard to consider British soldiers fighting for Ukrainian sovereignty in the same realm as disrupting children's hospitals. [1][2] I had read that one of the attacks had disrupted imaging systems and prevented diagnoses from being reached, delaying treatments.

[1] https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/fbi-disrupts-hive-rans...
[2] https://therecord.media/canadas-largest-childrens-hospital-s...
I don't think primordial soup knew what consciousness was either, yet here we are. It stands to reason that more purposefully engineered mutations are more likely to generate something new faster than random evolution.

That said, I'm a bit skeptical of that outcome as well.
In general you are allowed to do something illegal if your life is in danger. That is if I'm kidnapped I'm allowed to pay what is otherwise a bribe to go free.

So we should make getting mugged illegal, so long as the law is clear that the illegal part only applies if you have a reasonable way to get away from the mugging without paying. I'm not sure how you can be mugged and yet have a reasonable way to get away without paying, I leave that question to the reader.
Look, I'm telling you something I know to be true, which is that when a lot of people talk about "it" they're referring to a whole system, a whole phenomenon. From what I can tell you're not looking at things from this angle, but from a more categorical one.

Even on a technical level, these chatbots are using reinforcement learning on the fly to dynamically tune their output... They're not just GPT, they're GPT + live input from users and the search engine.

As for the GPT part, where did the training data come from? Who generated it? Who curated it? Who preconditioned it? How was it weighted? Who set the hyperparameters? Who had the conversations about what's working and what needs to change? Those were people and all their actions went into the "end result", which is much more complex than you're making it out to be.

You are applying your categorical thinking when you talk about "it". Drawing a neat little box around the program, as though it was a well written node module. What I'm telling you is that not everyone is referring to the same thing as you when they talk about this. If you want to understand what all these people mean you're going to have to shift your perspective to more of a "systems thinking" point of view or something like that.
Heavy press program was amazing.They actually had to worry about the seismic waves created by the press. About 10x larger than the "gigapress."
> It's about not gatekeeping the people who are future devs, wanting to learn, want to try making their own hobby apps to share with others, maybe prospective employers

I assure you that Apple and this developer program has very little do to with the barriers those folks face.
Telsa has been relentless in simplifying the part count of a tesla. Each part needs to designed, tracked, inventoried, installed, verified, made available for repairs, increases the size of the factory, and decreases the rate of production. Added parts also require space to install, clearance, sometimes custom tools, testing, might create vibration/wear/noise that requires mitigation, etc.

The front and rear chassis used to require 100s of robots and parts, and then alignment would have to be checked, more material used, more time, more robots, etc. Replacing the front and rear chassis removed 300 robots ... each, and of course the factory space for the robots, and the time for the assembly line to run past those robots.

The glass roof, which IMO isn't a big feature, can be installed after the chassis is built. Enabling robots to install the dashboard, central console, seats, etc before the roof is installed.

On most cars the dashboard is complex, multilayered, complex set of sensors, displays, spinning needles (speed, rpm, temp, fuel levels, etc). On a Tesla the dash is built on a big square straight piece of aluminum, a simple slot for airflow (no fancy/fiddly air flow controls), and a 15" display. Likely reducing 100s of parts.

The octovalve and related cooling system is a marvel as well, nicely integrating heating/cooling of the cabin, motors, and battery. Dramatically simpler than competing solutions, in particular the Ford Mach E and Lightning.

Most cars have an extremely complex set of CPUs, sensors, and control distributed all around the car. Chips in doors for locks/windows, a separate system for ABS (usually from bosche), networks of temperature/pressure/movement sensors, torque controls/monitoring for window motors, windshield wipers, airflow motors, etc. In the model 3 it's largely integrated into a single board at a level of integration Munroe claims they have seen in no other car, or even any product ... outside of a satellite.

This might sound like hand waving and marketing, but one metric that supports this is the cars products per square foot of factory per hour. Tesla is way ahead. It's also supported by high profit margins, even when compared to companies that have as high or higher prices.

So yes I'd say that the gigapress is a key part of reducing the part count, assembly time, and number of robots required to build a car. The result is a Tesla factory builds more cars than the competitions factory of the same size.
I think the fact that it's a technical discussion highlights why it's problematic: it might be appropriate for a total outsider who needs some kind of grasp of the basic underlying principle it operates on; but in discussion by a bunch of people with CS backgrounds, calling it merely a statical language generator erases distinction between it and other software of a prior age known not to be world-changing, overlooks recent innovations we don't yet have simple ways of referring to (largely because we don't understand emergent properties of LLMs)
If it's a progressive plank, surely you can provide an example of an actual progressive politician making the argument, yes? Instead of two private, non-elected people, that no one who doesn't have an agenda to push has ever heard of? You know, something to tie it to actual progressives, so that it doesn't just look like you're nutpicking.
Can you have anti-spam AI models?
Company pays Cyber Insurance which contracts 3rd party in Panama/SA/Israel to pay the ransom and report back the decryption key.

Completely legal.
lol imagine being a "journalist" in the current year and writing "Rather than match iOS's tracking limits, Google built an additional tracking system." as if you think iOS tracking does anything close to what it says it's going to do ( ex https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-analytics-privacy-4th-lawsu... ).

This is a hit peace written by an iZealot who doesn't even address Apple's system shortcomings.
We created atom bombs with only a surface-level knowledge of quantum mechanics. We cannot describe what fully makes the universe function at the bottom level but we have the ability to rip apart the fabric of reality to devastating effect.

I see our efforts with AI as no different. Just because we don't understand consciousness does not mean we won't accidentally end up creating it. And we need to be prepared for that possibility.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. As far as I can tell, the whole idea of LLM consciousness being a world-wide threat is just something that the hyper-rationalists have convinced each other of. They obviously think it is very real but to me it smacks of intelligence worship. Life is not a DND game where someone can max out persuasion and suddenly get everyone around them to do whatever they want all the time. If I ask Bing what I should do and it responds "diet and exercise" why should I be any more compelled to follow its advice than I do when a doctor says it?
I don't know if there is any truth to it, but back in the day that's what I believed. Maybe I used too much tinfoil, don't know.
Companies and people pay bribes all the time. But since it's illegal to it's kept secret.
No I'm talking about an actual news report: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/31/google-testing-chatgpt-like-...

It does have a deep understanding of self. See here: https://www.engraved.blog/building-a-virtual-machine-inside/

Read to the end. The very end is where it proves it's aware of what itself is, relative to the world around it. What it created here... is an accurate model of a part of our world that is CLEARLY not a direct copy from text. It is an original creation achieved through actual understanding of text and in the end... itself.

chatGPT is not self aware in the same sense that skynet is self aware. But it is self aware in the sense that if you ask it about itself, it understands what itself is and is able to answer you.
Sounds a lot like the reaction to dr Evil

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRAkobf-tVI
Well, I think you are right - ChatGPT should learn to say "I don't know". Keep in mind that generating BS is also a learned behavior. The salesperson probably learned that it is a technique that can help make sales.

The key IMO is that it's easier to tell when a human is doing it than when ChatGPT is doing it.
TLDR after talking with lawyers and an accountant is that in my case it does not matter. However, this is pretty unique to my VISA type (O1), so if you stumble upon this, do your own research.
Just because they aren't "designed" to have them doesn't mean that they actually do not. Here's a GPT model trained on board game moves - from scratch, without knowing the rules of the game or anything else about it - ended up having an internal representation of the current state of the game board encoded in the layers. In other words, it's actually modelling the game to "just predict the next token", and this functionality emerged spontaneously from the training.

https://thegradient.pub/othello/

So then why do you believe that ChatGPT doesn't have a model of the outside world? There's no doubt that it's a vastly simpler model than a human would have, but if it exists, how is that not "something like a mind"?
100% agree, and I think the other thing to bear in mind is that words alone can cause harm regardless of intent. Obviously we see this with trigger warnings and the like, but it's perfectly possible to imagine a chat bot destroying people's relationships, exacerbating mental health issues, or concocting deeply disturbing fictional stories— all without self-awareness, consciousness, or malicious intent ... or even a connection to real world APIs other than textual communications with humans.
Sure, but because there are so many teachers (about 1 for every 30 households), every $250/yr raise per teacher is over a billion dollars per year and $8/yr per household.

If it will take $20K/yr more to meaningfully nudge the competency curve, that’s ~$700/yr extra for every household. It’s probably even worse than that, though, because in wealthy areas (who might be better able to weather a $700/yr tax increase), teachers are probably already paid more than the average, meaning the lowest paid teachers, the ones most in need of a raise, are likely working in an area with lower income residents in the tax base.
Difference between online & offline is subjective. Fast forward time enough, it’s likely there would be no significant difference unless the two models were directly competing with one another. It’s also highly likely this difference will change in the near future; already notable efforts to enable online transformers.
Previously (URL/domain changed): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30818895
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/112y75f/...

These clouds? You're right. It was an overcast day. But...
Note too that the threat of the law may be enough motivation to stop payment. Insurance in particular is already starting to look at how hardened your IT systems are as part of your coverage.
The person you are responding to spoke assertively and quoted Google websites, but I don't think they work or worked for Google.
Best take on "AI alignment" I've read in a while.