skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> personal space with a door, which most companies can't afford

A company that cannot afford proper offices is probably not creating much value. Big tech companies can afford offices. They choose to allocate capital differently.

When I ran a consultancy, I spent a lot of rent of making sure my employees had both proper offices where they could think and common areas where they could collaborate. Doing otherwise is foolish.
Not quite that simple…
Does it have a ChatGPT-powered voice in the car dash?
What can we explore here, about world?
Funny. It just so happens that the contagion did just that I was was laid off 2 months ago.
Advertising and marketing have ruined society, the internet is just one of a long string of casualties.

Mail? We throw most of it out without reading it. Phones? We don't answer them. If you invent a new way for people to communicate advertisers will insert themselves and ruin it.

But the big problem with them, and why Bill Hicks once told them to kill themselves, is that they prey on insecurities to create demand and manipulate people into giving them money.

I assert that marketing is objectively a predatory industry with no positives for society and ludicrously huge negatives.

I won't go so far as to say people who work in marketing should kill themselves, but I'd they'd all quit their jobs and try doing a job that actually benefits society for a change we'd all be a lot better off.
They definitely hallucinate a lot too. But they also seem to do things genuinely like reasoning, e.g. they seem to contain and use "cognitive" world models, and seem to be capable of learning fully general algorithms.

Beyond that, many intellectual capabilities are also useful for successful bullshitting, so even if we can confidently say that that's all they do (in some sense), that doesn't mean they don't also do something-like-human-reasoning etc.
Don’t stop there. What happens after they fail? A flight to perceived strength. The top of the market would be the only place where people would feel safe parking their funds. Think Wells Fargo, Goldman, USBank, etc.

Now consider which would be the better buy. Twitter for $40 something billion or bail all these investors out for similar money and own the startup banking business almost entirely. I know what id do if I was sitting on billions looking for capital returns ala Apple.

(Apple could outright buy this market, use the returns from banking to issue monthly/quarterly dividends, and still have hundreds of billions in cash. They could then buy some significant portion of the emerging launch market. Wait a few years to mature. Then declare their checkmate on the global economy. Edit-correction, they’ve done buybacks so they’d have to issue some stocks or raise funds. Point remains.)
I can't say you are wrong since that was the original deal when it came to broadcast entertainment, but it lacks nuance. Not only was advertising on broadcast media somewhat regulated (by the government) or controlled by industry ad boards (the networks themselves), at no point did radio, TV or newsprint ever report back so much information to the advertisers.

It isn't a matter of expecting everything to be free. For example, look at attending a professional hockey game where there is absolutely zero expectation of anything free, yet attendees are deluged with advertising upon entering the venue. There are often breaks in game play, just for advertising.

With respect to the internet, the ad industry has managed to ingrain itself where ads may never be shown. Google (an ad company) provides site analytics for free, and those analytics can be used by Google to steer advertising on sites far removed from the site being monitored.

Take an hour and watch the DNS traffic from any streaming app, free or paid, and watch the privacy circus unfold. This industry simply can't help itself from figuring out ways to look over everyone's shoulders.

Recall that I mentioned that at no point did radio, TV or newsprint report back so much information, even that has been changing. ATSC3 TV receivers by default will report back location information and viewing habits not only to the TV stations, but to any number of ratings services. Over the air guide data is intentionally hobbled so one must use the internet to get it, providing metadata on viewing habits. Online subscriptions to newspapers require use of readers, again reporting home on reading habits.

While I think you are correct to raise the point that in some ways it is the price of free, the advertising industry has managed to wiggle their way into data collection for things that are not free, and on devices for which we pay a considerable amount of money to own. It may be wrong to say they've taken over the internet, but they've sure come into our lives uninvited in increasingly intrusive ways.
Doesn't it support scrolling officially?
It's a bailout for the depositors. Some of those depositors are multi-billion dollar companies. However, even though they are above the FDIC limit, there is a good chance they will get most or all of their money back. If the assets are worth enough to more than repay the depositors, shareholders may get a nominal sum when the dust settles, but probably they will get zero.
And how he's gone from selling blockchain bullshit to selling AI bullshit? Yeah, not exactly someone to emulate either.
> nearly everybody expects content to be free to the end user on the internet.

as it has been the first years of the internet?

I did pay back then ... with my taxes. Public funded Universities were large back bones of the internet. Then it all got privatized and we are in the sump were in right now.

The internet is a public good and should be financed accordingly.
I was under the impression that pgrok was unmaintained until now, to the extend that I was looking for alternatives. Did I miss something?
> Why does everybody want everything to be free?

Personally, I want it to continue to be free because:

* It's very low friction: you can go from site to site without needing to provide payment details, sign up, or consider whether a sites per pageview charge is reasonable.

* It lets everyone participate. If you have some form of paying money for content then I expect that amount gets set high enough that it excludes a large fraction of the population.
In the mid to late 90s when dialup was the only way to get to the internet for most people, I remember buying magazines specifically to get the bundled software CD. Sometimes it was games, demos, and web browsers but quite often full Linux distributions.

Yes, you could install Slackware from a stack of 30 floppies, but that was the kind of thing you realistically only did once, out of either desperation or novelty.
> After gaining the access, the hacker inserted a 76 ETH payment to himself in the sheet, and set it invisible

It might not be a real hack in the traditional sense, but hiding critical information so a human makes an incorrect choice is good enough to be considered social engineering for me.
Yeah, but it's still a universal problem in high paying tech because their offices are in big cities (and sometimes expensive small cities).

Editing to clarify - by tech being centred around expensive cities I don’t mean that tech offices are in urban areas rather than suburban. I mean that the large tech companies generally are in cities and towns that are more expensive than many other cities and towns.

For example, there are cheap and pleasant places big tech workers have moved to during WFH times instead of staying in the Silicon Valley-SF region of CA. But some of these towns don’t have a big office building in sight.
If you are happy you are happy and there is nothing wrong with that.

It is one thing to have a widget set, build system, CSS framework that you are comfortable with and know how to knock out things with.

It’s another thing to have a whole bunch of them in use that make you know the details of all of them and to always be climbing the learning curve.
Yes no moral hazard. Sure. That’s why China has the most distorted property market in the world creating ghost cities. Are we actually at the point where Chinese absurd practices are talked about as something to emulate? What did you mean by this comment?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings...
The cost of private offices isn't in the construction, it's in the increased square footage you need to lease because they take more space per worker than an open floor plan or cubicles.
Writing is a recorded symbolic convention for the benefit of the sufficiently educated reader.

Eschewingallpunctuationforscriptocontinuaisofcourseppossiblethoughitishelltoread.Itisevendifficulttotypewithoutaddingthespacesreflexivelyifindasipostthis.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptio_continua>

There's a reason monks of old read aloud. It was about the only way to confirm the actual meaning of a text.
This blog plucks the most positive figure and quote from a more balanced article: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe...

And this article compares figures from various sources, which aren't all in agreement: https://www.thelocal.dk/20230310/fact-check-did-sweden-have-...
The cathedrals are the window, bro.
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16450">
If you define "doing fine" as only available to a limited few and barely sratching the surface of what was possible with the technology then sure. But to scale it to a broader audience and to empower more business models than just hobbyist site and university faculty pages you needed a way to fund it.

I was there before the gold rush. If you had a page on the internet and it got at all popular half the people who visited would see either a notice from the hosting company that the page was no longer available because some limit had been reached or you would get some outrageous bill from your ISP. Only a limited few people could afford to visit the internet let alone publish on it. It had a certain exclusivity that came with certain benefits. But I'm not sure that staying exclusive was either a good idea or useful to society at large.

Advertising in the early days helped the internet provide real value to more people than ever before. Like many good things though taken to extremes it has particular failure modes that we are seeing now. That doesn't mean introducing advertising was the problem necessarily. It does mean that controlling the failure modes of advertising is probably necessary for a well functioning society.
A bit offtopic, but — a5100 is even cheaper, more compact (!) and has exact same imaging hardware, just with a slight artificial fps limitation. I've long ago upgraded to a6400 and still use the a5100 all the time when I don't plan any serious shooting.
What if you just charge people? TBH I don't want to pay because I don't need the content. It's good but optional. Turn it into paid and I simply go away. People may view your content just because it's free.
The issue of non-ASCII-constrained environments is that it's still not easily accessible on most keyboards.

I do know and use the compose key but it's not the same as having a standard key for it. Trying on a mobile device, long pressing the dash key there suggests 2 dashes (not sure if the second choice is en-dash or em-dash), which is some but that's not the 4 types discussed here.
How can I buy those claims? While I certainly don't think it's 100%, I also thinks the redemption will be higher than 60%
Tell HN: Use less pinky finger when programming
Remap `CapsLock + key` to symbols, arrows, and delete/backspace keys.

I didn't realize how awkwardly the buttons are positioned until I started adding a "layer" to my keymap.

Here is the layer I use:

https://build-your-own.org/blog/20230310_coding_kbd/
MP and PerfectDay have been doing this for Whey for a while:
https://perfectday.com/newsroom/myprotein-continues-innovati... (PR speak)
“a garbage collector at system level in the kernel and letting those languages using that instead” would mean processes written in those languages would have access to kernel memory.

You’d have to tighten what such processes can do with memory to make that not be a gaping security hole.

Certainly, anything ‘unsafe’ would have to be forbidden.

If you think that’s worth it and try to close that hole, you’ll find out that is harder than the relatively simple “ordinary processes cannot access kernel memory at all” that we have now, increasing the risk of having a bug that opens up the security hole.

Also, running a single garbage collector gives up the option of using different ones or ones with different settings for different processes. For short-running ones, for example, not doing any garbage collection ever, leaving it to the OS to release all memory at program exit time can be the optimal approach.

Other processes might be better of with a collector with low latency, even if that means giving up some throughput, or vice versa.

So no, running a kernel garbage collector for use by non-kernel processes isn’t a good idea.

Providing one as a library might be, but in practice, people cannot agree on what the API for such a garbage collection library should be because there are too many differences between languages to make that work for every language. For example, some languages allow internal pointers to objects to prevent those objects from being garbage collected, but others require keeping around a pointer to the start of the object. Also, some languages will produce relatively little garbage (for example by having GC-ed classes and non-GC-ed structs and having a culture of using structs where possible), others may make everything a GC-ed object, including small integers and IEEE floats.
Most likely $0. Money raised is almost always preferred when it comes to an exit, so it gets paid back first
"Business people tend to like giving business school people jobs" isn't exactly a new insight, and doesn't say anything about whether they're actually qualified for them.
They don’t only contain data though, you can define methods as you said. Yes, there is no-inheritance, but they contain data, maintain state, and allow for defined methods. 90% of the time people are talking about classes, they are talking about that.
Yeah, I have one of those Vision V2’s and I think all the parts except a good case, but I know the initial firmware update is a bit of work and I just need to get started on it.
Linux happened and nobody paid (in the beginning)

There are studies where money ruins altruism and pure joy of creating sthg. has to be replaced with a payment which becomes according to Herzberg a hygiene factor and wears out.

The --internet-- www as we know it - give it back!
If you flip a bit in some file in a restic or Borg repository, you will lose data (the amount of which depends on the location, possibly the repository is corrupted). With error correction, that bit flip is corrected by the software from parities.
Yeah it's similar to yggdrasil and the dream of ipv6 everywhere--if everything has a static IP then there's no drama or trouble routing to anything else in the entire internet. Definitely worth checking out IMHO: https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/
When I interviewed with Boeing in the early 80s, their setup was a big open area filled with individual desks and ringed by offices with big glass partitions.
At least they're not tankies, I guess.
>but the internet back then was really barren

The internet back then was a forest into which you couldn't really see, you just went dumpster diving and it was an adventure.

Today's internet is barren, with most content centered around Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Youtube, and various commercial propaganda campaign sites known colloquially as journalism. That is a fucking desert, a wasteland.
Thanks! will fix!
Does anyone know if it's possible to split this model across multiple (identical, sli) GPUs, to run a version bigger than fits in the RAM of a single GPU?
I don’t have a link to share, but I’d like to thank OP and every comment in this thread. There are some gems here. Of course one can google, but when something is recommended by a human, and is purely based on merit, it is much more trustworthy than a random site filled with ads looking to make a buck.

In short, HN is awesome
When you say that the output of LLM is "correct", what do you mean? The output that seems impressive is merely "plausibly written by an intelligent entity" but there is nothing about it that could be characterized as being "correct".

Similarly, we could sprinkle formic acid on the floor in a pattern that fooled ants into following it in search of food, but there is nothing "correct" about it, merely "realistic".

Asking GPT3 to create a persuasive essay is impressive in the same way. It "knows" how to string words together in a persuasive way, but just as some salespeople may not care about how factual their statements are, ChatGPT generates the veneer of realism but will often generate something that in spite of its realism is utter nonsense, or is even mostly "filler words" with little meat.

The veneer, filler words and style that humans (and LLMs) use in language are the parts that more similarly mirror the chemical signals used by insects. They are what we use to manipulate and to persuade rather than to convey understanding. This is why LLMs are scary when we consider their use in political misinformation campaigns, but less scary when we consider them writing dissertations about deep scientific topics.
I think I mostly agree with you, but I think this framing is a bit misleading. On autocomplete, I'll just lazily quote the relevant part from my post:

It’s completely true that LLMs are trained on next-token prediction (although some, like ChatGPT, are then additionally trained using reinforcement learning with human feedback). It’s also completely true that this fact profoundly influences the texts they generate. So I don’t think it’s unreasonable to call LLMs autocomplete engines or to emphasise next-token prediction. But I think it’s subtly misleading:

- Though LLMs were trained to optimise success on next-token prediction, that is not necessarily what they do. We don’t know what it is they do. The training process reinforces behaviours/heuristics in the model that tend to cause it to make better next-token predictions on in-distribution data. This does not mean that those behaviours/heuristics are fundamentally “about” optimising next-token prediction, especially when the model encounters out-of-distribution data.

- The usual example here is human evolution. Humans were shaped by a process that optimised for reproductive fitness. This gave us a bundle of drives such as family kinship, prestige and sexual pleasure – drives that aren’t fundamentally about optimising for reproduction, which becomes evident as we enter a new environment – one with contraceptives, say.

- Optimising for a task for which intelligence is useful encourages the optimised thing to become more intelligent. Sam Altman gave expression to this last week when he wrote, “Language models just being programmed to try to predict the next word is true, but it’s not the dunk some people think it is. Animals, including us, are just programmed to try to survive and reproduce, and yet amazingly complex and beautiful stuff comes from it.”

- The forms of intelligence that are useful in doing next-token prediction are different from those that are useful in human reproduction, but I think there’s a considerable overlap, as (1) some fundamental abilities, for example using and applying concepts, just seem very broadly useful and (2) the data LLMs are trained on are written by humans, for humans and often about humans and things that matter to us.

I think the "they're just autocomplete" take also hides other properties of LLMs, like them seeming to (as mentioned in another comment, and in the post) contain and use world models, and being able to learn general algorithms.
There are a couple of challenges with the word vectorization + cosine distance approach:

1. The current embedding models are for relatively small amounts of content rather than whole web pages. For example, most of the popular Huggingface sentence-transformers are for 256 tokens max, which is only sufficient for a small part of most web pages. There are some models for larger sizes, e.g. Longformer and BigBird, but they're still only 4096 tokens, and there aren't any ready-made implementations for cosine or dot product similarity at the moment so you'd need to roll your own. Some of the new LLM OpenAI embedding models do go to 8191 tokens and can be used for cosine similarity, and costs may be acceptable for the content embedding, but for the query embedding you'd have to be super-careful about costs because if you put any kind of search on the public internet you could find that you'll soon be overwhelmed by SEO spam bots (most of which even Cloudflare can't block) and that could become prohibitively expensive to service via a paid-for API solution like OpenAI. A popular approach to the token length issue is to chunk your pages into multiple blocks.

2. Even if you get the embedding and chunking approach working, that is still just for page comparison, and single web pages are not necessarily representative of whole web sites. For example, if comparing home pages, many blogs just have a link to the posts page on the home page without any of the actual content from the posts. Or some websites cover an eclectic range of topics, and if your goal is to find other sites that cover a similar eclectic range of topics then you you need an embedding for the whole site rather than individual pages. Not sure about the best way to address this one though. Apparently averaging embeddings may work surprisingly well but I haven't tried that out yet. Other possible options might include summarising (chunked) pages and summarising the summaries for the site, or using topic modelling (e.g. BERTopic) alongside some kind of website taxonomy, or something like that. Keen to read of other possible approaches here.
I agree. Bailouts are bad because they lead people to ignore risk, especially people who should know better, like investors and people with > $250,000 in a single account. Furthermore, we seem to bail out wealthy parties much more regularly than poor parties... Where is the bailout or simple assistance for people who cannot afford basic necessities or housing due to overall economic conditions? But poor Roku may get a half billion bailout.
I think you're missing the point. He's clearly not against advertising per se, nor against free content; rather, he's against online tracking.

> "They stole the internet from us", he says of advertisers. “The internet is supposed to be open and free, and you shouldn’t be afraid of being monitored.

> he believes the current state of advertising is less profitable for sites now than it was before widespread tracking was in place.

> He mentions "normal ads," which you may see in a magazine or on TV, were the standard for about a decade, even on the internet. "A lot of sites were more profitable, and people were less worried about having to block ads. The ads were normal, it was kind of like what you were seeing if you were going and reading a magazine. There were ads, but they weren’t following you."

Advertising has existed for as long as business has existed. But for most of business history, advertisers could not track you. A magazine or a billboard can't track you or personally identify you.
This is what we should be contending with, not existential thought-exercises like Chomsky's. How do we grapple, as a society, with the huge economic upheaval these models cause as side-effect? Because we view non-working humans as "a problem", what do we do with all these displaced humans as efficiencies continue to increase?