skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It works for attorneys and accountants. It’s an approach with ups and downs. The biggest down being it’s harder to scale.
This article gives me shivers (freshly appointed CTOs/VPengs trampling all over the existing team dynamics/stack choices and dosing fires with gasoline). If I learned anything - when you get to a situation when setting something like this think thrice whether you are doing empire building or actually solving a problem. Also it might be that you are the only person in the room seeing a problem or perceiving as a problem. I've also seen these strategies used as a tool to assert authority/present a nonexistent issue as existential threat to the CEOs.
Lex Fridman with Tim Urban 2.0
Well that's not true but thanks for the laugh
Maybe that's all sentience is.
“People are getting tripped up because they are seeing legitimate intelligence in the output from these systems -- but that intelligence was in the people who wrote the texts that it was trained with, not in the LLM.”

This is the real magic. Let’s train ChatGPT on absolute garbage information and compare the intelligence of the two.
I am a REAL bad software developer and this is my life
I used to think so.

But then I reconsidered.

Those poo-pooing LLMs say it is merely ‘a fancier version of autocompletion.’ Or, they make comments (correctly) that ‘it isn’t reasoning… it’s just guessing which word ought come next.’

Such a point-of-view is similar to thinking, in regard to a circle saw, “it doesn’t ‘want’ to cut off your hand! It’s just a circle of spinning serrated steel!”

The human race is about to get its hand cut off.

We are in a bad place.

So much time spent being wasted debating how to make LLMs ‘safe’ by ensuring they don’t inadvertently say something racist! People are utterly missing the point as to the true danger.
Sweet. A conversation with a toaster. This is exactly what everyone is clamoring for.
> I'm going with no, as a society we can't and/or won't.

But we definitely should. The number of IPv6-only networks is growing by the day.

The next generation of tinkerers and internet engineers will have no IPv4 address space at all, because it makes no sense whatsoever paying $14k (at current prices) for /24 of legacy IP address space.

Unfortunately, the best we can hope for is for giant corporations like Cloudflare, Microsoft and Amazon to buy up most of the IPv4 space.
https://archive.is/AtBsV
Couldn't agree more on "it is a mistake to conclude...the truth is unknowable"

Just ask yourself: who benefits? (aka follow the money). For example, short term: where the increase in military spendings go?

On basic facts: you could compare economic military power of various countries (order of magnitude is enough), the number of countries bombed (order of magnitude is enough), the number of military bases (order of magnitude is enough), etc. Then make your own conclusions.
I got my simple docker files working with podman but my more advanced ones didn't. This was about 8 months ago. After running podman for about 2-3 weeks on my dev machine, I went back to docker.
For this, systemd syntax is a lot better than yaml IMO.

In fact, I'd prefer if the tools you mentioned used something else besides yaml.
No, we are supposed to believe you are not supposed to learn any of that because some technology exists and you will be better off with “higher level” tasks … that’s what they tell me, anyway.
The largest ships output about 30MW when slow steaming. The largest wind turbines (which are considerably smaller) average about 8MW.

A 100m wing span kite with a swept region of about 500m diameter is equivalent power to the engine.

Comparing potential staffing fuckups that will cost the ship owner half a million to potential staffing fuckups that will make a city uninhabitable is also completely facile.
...are awesome ? No sorry, Im not very good at predicting the next word. However, since I do have a theory of mind, I understand that you semi-sarcastically try to humble the person you reply to by making him reflect on how truly (not) complex his own mind is. Either because you truly believe you're helping him understand himself more, or, more likely, because you feel pleasure humbling people who assert truths you disagree with.

And if Im wrong you ll tell me, and Ill correct my model.

Do that, chatGPT...
Yes okay, so you should have a scarlet letter only visible to people with whom you have a class of relationship that is particularly fundamental for human happiness.
It seemed to me that the original target audience for this is users already familiar with systemd's unit syntax, so making these "unit files" use it as well was a sensible choice.
Advertising has been proven to work, over and over. Any good ad campaign includes metrics to see how effective they are, and they are in fact effective.

You too probably have been influenced by ads far more than you think. They're in all kinds of things you consume like videos and podcasts, blogs... even many frontpage HN posts are blatantly advertising a service or platform. You might think you're not falling prey because you don't see an ad for Wendys and go immediately there for dinner that night. But tons of companies are slowly exposing you to their preferred platform, building goodwill towards their brands, or otherwise subtly influencing your behavior.

Marketers are using a combination of paid ads along with HN posts and other social media posts to drive a variety of traffic to their page, and they have the data to show where everyone is coming from, what they're looking at, and how often they're converting to paid customers. I know this first hand from working with enterprise level marketing experts.

HN itself is basically a y combinator ad. You are for sure aware of y combinator by now, and if you needed startup funding you might consider applying there.
Let bindings in Lisp are not const. You can use `setf` (among others) to mutate the variable. For instance, this works just fine in Lisp:

(let ((x 1))
(print x) ;; => 1
(incf x)
(print x)) ;; => 2

Scheme also allows let bindings to be mutated, but using `set!`.
> Cows basically don’t exist in the wild

Elephant, whale, seal, etc. cows are quite commonly found in the wild. Cattle cows, not so much.
Said “guy in hoodie” and his close buddies “guy in khakis” and “athleisure gal” have just materially increased the likelihood that they’ll be spending $15B (or whatever the going rate is in 5 years).
In the US, employers are legally required to withhold. You can only ask them not to if: "the employee must have had no tax liability for the previous year and must expect to have no tax liability for the current year."
I don’t generally like the word “gaslight” as it is normally used by the unsavory but in this case, I think you used it perfectly. That is exactly what people are doing, except for the extremely naive ones. I don’t really know why, though?
Note that the authors report the speed of generating many sequences in parallel (per token):

> The batch size is tuned to a value that maximizes the generation throughput for each system.

> FlexGen cannot achieve its best throughput in [...] single-batch case.

For 175B models, this likely means that the system takes a few seconds for each generation step, but you can generate multiple sequences in parallel and get a good performance _per token_.

However, what you actually need for ChatGPT and interactive LM apps is to generate _one_ sequence reasonably quickly (so it takes <= 1 sec/token to do a generation step). I'm not sure if this system can be used for that, since our measurements [1] show that even the theoretically-best RAM offloading setup can't run the single-batch generation faster than 5.5 sec/token due to hardware constraints.

The authors don't report the speed of the single-batch generation in the repo and the paper.

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2209.01188.pdf
Hmm, for me I think part of it is the certainty that you won’t get interrupted or distracted while sitting or showering.
> In fact, I'd prefer if the tools you mentioned used something else besides yaml.

Unfortunately, there norway way that's going happen.
All valid (and depressing) data points.

It takes some inate optimism to think that things could be otherwise but I believe the commoditisation of digital infrastructure and the suboptimal stewardship acts against its ongoing tight control by a small entrenched minority.

The underlying zero marginal cost trend is gnawing at the foundations of the current architecture. The wave upon wave of fizzling hypes is one symptom of this.

The other headwind is expressed at the macro level as the missing IT productivity that economists puzzle over. Simply put: the tech industry, through its recurrent monopolies, adtech business models etc is holding societies and economies back. Not developing the tools that will increase welfare both on a financial and psychological scale.

The same commoditized tech deployed in a decentralized way could open up a completely new era. As has been stated many times, we live in a feudal digital system and we know for a fact that market systems are superior to feudalism.
Monthly IMF money flows and current balance
As depressing as it would be, I could accept that sentience is just some manifestation of our atomic desire to increase the entropy of the universe. Based on what we know, that's plausible, if kind of disappointing. But it's very different from linear algebra.
ChatGPT on cover of Time Magazine
> whatever you and I are doing, it's not simply statistical analysis.

How do you know?
But from what I’ve seen many skilled AI researchers who have even reimplemented these models themselves do in fact believe that a scaled up ChatGPT could be AGI, or at least that it’s a step towards AGI
This reminds me of when I interviewed at Stripe, a few years back. It was a surreal experience. We were in a small conference room. I sat at the table on one side, Patrick and Edwin sat on the other side. They asked me questions, I answered them. It was a good discussion.

Then there was a brief pause in the conversation. Suddenly, Patrick let off the most absurdly loud fart. I chuckled in surprise. Patrick and Edwin stared back at me, in a stony silence, neither of them making any acknowledgement of Patrick's colonic eruption. I forced myself to adopt a similarly straight face.

As the smell of it filled the room and my nostrils, I could only assume this was a power move, intended to dominate. I held my nerve, and continued the interview. Unfortunately, I wasn't offered the job. Now I wonder if maybe it was a cue to speak up and point out the loud, smelly elephant in the room. I suppose I'll never know.

Has anyone else here who's interviewed at Stripe had a similar experience? To this day, I still wonder if Patrick's fart was a deliberate and calculated part of the hiring process.
Yeah this is way wrong, unless counting the salaries of everyone involved for a few years in the lead up while writing software that ended up being used

https://bigscience.huggingface.co/blog/bloom was trained with a $7M grant, and that was the first time they'd done it (so there was a lot of failures).
Interesting! I also got the Pro with the 10G network card and haven't seen this issue.
I'd add to this list somewhere legal, correct, but utterly dishonest marketing language meant to confuse people. This includes hidden fees.
Because consumption feeds the machine that ultimately increases the availability of resources which deliver basic human needs to people around the world [1]. Food, water, and shelter are important.

From another perspective: global GDP seems to be in the ballpark of $100T. If we grow at 3% for 100 years, we get 100T*(1.03)^100, almost 2000T global GDP. If we cut off 1% of that growth and use it to feed and house people worldwide, it becomes 100T*(1.02)^100 = 725T, plus 1% of global GDP per year in assistance (1T per year now, 7T in 2123, summing to 35T over 100 years [2]).

I think the utilitarian question is whether an additional 1200T in global wealth outweighs 35T of targeted assistance to the most vulnerable people in the world. If we look at the wealth distribution [3], the bottom 53% have 1.4% of the wealth. If that holds (which isn't necessarily a safe assumption, it could get worse), the bottom 53% would get 16T. Doesn't look so great compared to that 35T (probably targeted at the very bottom of that 53%), I admit. If we extend out to 200 years though, even these lines cross (if we make it that far :).

I think this tells me the most beneficial path forward is to maximize GDP growth while minimizing inequality to ensure that the fruits of that labor/growth help the vulnerable get food, not the rich buy another boat. That said, I think cutting global wealth by a factor of 3 in 100 years is not a great outcome. It would be like global wealth in 2020 being reverted back to that of 1980ish [4]. Life wasn't so different in the developed world then, but it was quite different outside of it (see [1]).

There is a valid criticism that perhaps the world doesn't need more wealth than that which can house, clothe, and feed everyone on earth. And we already produce that much wealth, it's just not distributed evenly enough to meet those needs. OTOH, what luxuries would you forgo to deliver those benefits? AC? Your laundry machine? Availability and quality of healthcare? We also need to motivate 8B people to continue working and producing the goods/services that yield a good life for everyone.

In the face of these questions, I don't find capitalism to be as evil as I once did when I was a bit younger. I don't mean to blindly support the invisible hand. The Keynesian approach balances government intervention ("distributions", above) with capital investment. My point is just that the trade-offs are not as simple as I once thought they were, and that growth is not the unmitigated evil many are eager to make it out to be.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_poverty#/media/File:Wo...
[2]: https://imgur.com/a/rEneaxK
[3]: https://cdni0.trtworld.com/w960/q75/93908_Theglobalwealthpyr...
[4]: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-gdp-over-the-last-t...
Even assuming those "right people" exist, you'd need a hiring process that could pick them out, and they'd need to want to work for you.
Peltier Element Efficiency
If a mathematical technique helps understand and predict nature, why not use it? The quote criticizing the method misunderstands it. It's certainly not "wrong" or "absurd."

I dislike the paper because it is sensationalist and highly misleading. For example, as far as I can tell, Karplus and Kroll didn't "confess" to anything (no direct quote is provided in the paper); we just have a secondhand assertion by Feynman. Nothing they did is "fraud," as the author claims - this is false and defamatory. Further, the issue got wrapped up by Petermann in 1957; the author is just annoyed that he didn't publish full details of the calculations. The suggestion that there is somehow lingering uncertainty is just wrong.

I no particular wishes for the author, other than that he cease writing bad papers.
In addition to the other points above, i have found that in some workflows I have found that using talon and cursorless i am faster than I was using just a keyboard and mouse. I have had some bad RSI flare ups over the past few years and they have been a lifesaver getting me though my undergrad and most of my masters. Even during the times in-between flare ups i found that using them to editing a latex document was much more convenient being able to reference paragraphs/sentences/words and then change them or move them around.
A golden visa doesn’t prevent extradition nor US tax filing or payment requirements (unless you’re renouncing US citizenship and paying your exit tax due).
Soooo expensive though
It does‘t answer who the matrix multiplication is for. No reason to make an illusion.
artificial intelligence (countable and uncountable, plural artificial intelligences)

(computer science) Anything that performs better than whatever we called “artificial intelligence” a few years ago.
I guess that makes sense on the scale of a single photon
It has been legal since Jan 1, 1975.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/senate-bill/2665
It's because you and I also have mental resources that are structured very differently from ChatGPT. Even if some part of our brain might resemble a LLM, a LLM is a very poor representation of other parts of the brain. If you take ChatGPT too far, it falls into repetition and demonstrates that it obviously has no comprehension of the material it's remixing.

Maybe some combination of a LLM and other mental machinery would result in AGI with real comprehension.
While this article is more about Southern California, for Northern California (Marin county) worth also mentioning this article co-authored by Gabriel Rosenberg (@bearistotle) about cattle on Point Reyes , California - "the myth of regenerative ranching" - https://newrepublic.com/article/163735/myth-regenerative-ran...

"the Harvard Animal Law and Policy Clinic, on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund and a number of individual plaintiffs, filed suit against the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service, which manages Point Reyes National Park, alleging that cattle ranching is endangering the iconic tule elk.* It’s not the first such lawsuit that has been filed over the past decade against the NPS to stop alleged environmental damage from Point Reyes cows."
I’m becoming a bit disenchanted with new things in general. This website is a perfect example of how needlessly complicated most other websites have become.

Imagine how pleasant browsing the internet would be if most sites were like this?

I’m starting to think tech in general is 1% signal and 99% noise…
Seeing a bunch of people here saying Penguin is "perfectly within their rights" to do this

Likewise, the government is perfectly within their rights to punish Penguin for other, unrelated monopolistic behavior

For any other book, how do you know that Penguin hasn't "corrected" it? A publishing company with this little regard for historical accuracy doesn't deserve to exist
I'm interested in this as well but don't know enough about how other entities do it. How do the World Bank, IMF, other governments, etc go about this?

As outlined in the article, common sense solutions do exist so the problem isn't technical per se. Is it just that not enough people are using these datasets for it to be an important enough problem to solve? Or is it more of a bureaucratic/political issue where its difficult to come to a consensus among these departments?
Sure, I think buy this interpretation. As long as we can agree that bogosort and quicksort are both still sorting algorithms. My brain definitely has some structures that are useful for me understanding the world that are more immediately useful than trillion dimensional token soup.

But I'm also not convinced that it's impossible those structures could be successfully emulated by quadrillion dimensional token soup. And a lot of folks seem to be convinced that it's some kind of fundamental impossibility.
> many skilled

citation needed, I'm only aware of one case which might be characterized as such (though I digress): https://www.engadget.com/blake-lemoide-fired-google-lamda-se...
That's highly debateable. From my point of view youtube is a disinformation vector which is far prone to indoctrinating people into extremist views because of the way the algorithm acts.

From my point of view, I think that losing it would be a net win for society as a whole.

I use youtube -daily. But I see it for what it is.
> not to mention it’s ableist

Recognizing the immense value of effective communication is ableist?

Coding is the easy part. Deciding what to code or how to code it with a team is the hard part and that requires effective communication, there's simply no way around it. That's what separates junior engineers from senior engineers who see the bigger picture.
It's called a retrovirus. There is a handful of them dangerous to humans.
Aha, so the reason the "refreshed" logo looks damn near identical to the original is because the brief is not "give us a new logo" but "give us the old logo but fixed so we can put it on our website, print it on paper, and vinyl cut it on the side of a van, and it won't look wrong" then.
So you're not killing the company? You're justing selling it (bad safety culture and all) to another company?
I blame Costco. They're at the forefront of making overconsumption fashionable.
I was under the impression that the river throwers were not the riders. Annoyed locals trying to hurt the company, teens looking for tiktoks, etc.
Maybe you're just totally misguided on what a producer does, which may be the joke you're trying to make that nobody knows what a producer does. The producer would be closer to the president of the board while the director would be the CEO.

This is false. It seems you don't know what you're talking about. OTOH, I have worked with multiple studios including Fox (now 20th Century), Searchlight, Vendome, Canal+, and Lightstorm.

The executive producer is similar to the CEO or other executive; hence the "executive" in their title. They are in charge of the overall production, but not the creative aspects of the film or episode, and usually are not involved in the day-to-day operations. A regular "producer" can be anyone involved with the day-to-day operations of this production, and this title was once given out like candy. (Look at the credits for Top Gun: Maverick, for example: David Ellison is credited with a "producer" title despite having no actual involvement with the movie beyond being the CEO of one of the studios funding the production.)

The director is not involved with hiring crew, unless they also act as a producer (aka, the "auteur" school). These days, many directors also executive produce their own films (e.g., Nolan, Cameron, etc.), but many don't (e.g., almost all Disney movies). The director gets to provide input as to who gets hired, but quite frequently the main crew and cast will already be attached to the film. Notably, directors can and do leave films all the time (e.g., Rogue One, Justice League).

Who the creator/founder equivalent is really differs between projects. Sometimes, the producer has the idea and staffs around it. Sometimes, the director has the idea and also acts as a producer or just staffs the producer out to someone. Sometimes, it's the studio's idea and staffs everything out.

This is true for a few films, but the vast majority of films start with a screenplay that has come across the producer's desk. Auteur directors might produce their own ideas (e.g., Lucas, Shamalayan, Nolan, Cameron), but even they will usually start with an idea they acquired from someone else (Shamalayan: Old and Cabin at the End of the World, Gunn: Guardians of the Galaxy, Nolan: Insomnia, The Prestige, Batman Begins, Spielberg: almost all of his films, etc. Look at IMDB to see the production credits they have far exceed the films they actually direct).
While you are right, I don't think any of this is an excuse for not sharing your status.

Yes we should remove the stigma around HIV and I am sympathetic towards those that have it and still deal with that stigma that very much exists within the gay community.

Myself I am on Prep, and while it is a near 100% it is not in fact 100%. And yes I know I can't get it from someone who is undetectable.

But I also know I had a situation where after hooking up with someone I found out they were undetectable. That made me feel uncomfortable, largely because he did not tell me. It immediately made me question, is this guy actually undetectable as he is claiming? Is he taking is medication properly? Is there something else he didn't tell me.

To be clear I have hooked up with people who have that information in their profile or they told me beforehand, but I have major issues with not being up front with that information if we are about to have sex. I would expect the same for any STD, testing positive for Covid, or any other thing that could have an impact on me.