skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not available yet:

> ChatGPT Plus subscribers will get GPT-4 access on chat.openai.com with a usage cap. We will adjust the exact usage cap depending on demand and system performance in practice, but we expect to be severely capacity constrained (though we will scale up and optimize over upcoming months).

You're still talking to ChatGPT-3.5-turbo.
Disclaimer: I work on Cheerp.

We do include the C (Musl) and C++ (Clang's libcxx) standard libraries.

And we do have some custom LLVM passes to improve code size and performance (See for example [1] and [2]).

But the main selling point in my opinion is the ability to target JavaScript, and
(almost) freely mix data and code compiled to either JS or Wasm.

Emscripten can also target JS, but it still retains the linear memory model of Wasm (or X86, Arm, ...),
which means that what you get in the end is a big TypedArray and operations on it using basic types.

With Cheerp, code compiled to JS uses an object memory model: a C++ object will become a garbage-collected JS object.
While this has some limitations (you can't do unsafe casts and treat your memory like it's a big array, because it isn't), it allows seamless integration with the Browser (or any third-party) APIs:

- You can store a DOM element directly in your C++ objects (instead of doing everything through tables)

- You can directly manipulate JS Strings instead of constantly converting back and forth to C strings

- You can create nice zero-overhead interfaces to use your C++ classes from manually written JS

- Or, you can just write your whole program in C++, including callbacks for DOM events and whatnot

And you can still compile the peformance-sensitive or type-unsafe parts of your code to Wasm (losing access to some convenience in exchange for speed).

You can get an idea from the Pong tutorial [3], although it's a bit of a contrived example to showcase what can be done.

[1] https://medium.com/leaningtech/partialexecuter-reducing-weba...

[2] https://docs.leaningtech.com/cheerp/Cheerp-PreExecuter.html

[3] https://docs.leaningtech.com/cheerp/Cheerp-Tutorial-Mixed-mo...
At the end of the day, you're still responsible for reading the email before you send it. I don't think it matters how the email was written. I think the final content matters more. There's many ways to prompt an AI, both carelessly and with extreme attention to detail.

For example, I typed this message. But I'm sure with careful massaging, I could get an AI to write the same thing, word-for-word. The laziness you're referring to probably happens even if the manager is typing the email out themselves.
> Those guard rails will be their undoing.

IMO effective guard rails seem like the most meaningful competitive advantage an AI company can offer. AI can obviously do some really impressive stuff, but the downside risk is also high and unbounded. If you're thinking of putting in into your pipeline, your main concern is going to be it going rogue and abandoning its purpose without warning.

Now that's not to say that the particular guard rails OpenAI puts in their general access models are the "correct" ones - but being able to reliably set them up seems essential for commercialization.
If not for nuclear weapons, WW3 almost certainly would have already occurred during the 20th century, plausibly starting during the Berlin Blockade in the immediate aftermath of WW2. And if not then when wounds were still healing, then a few years later.

Advances in weapon delivery have made WW3 less likely to start now than ever before. With very precise guidance, the feasibility of ensuring the utter destruction of leadership has improved dramatically. The idea is to make WW3 the least rational option for anybody who might start it. Even if somebody goes insane and wants to die in a fireball, it is unlikely that they would be able to convince everybody else in the kill-chain to go along with that decision. A "General Ripper" scenario in which only a few nukes fly at first is unlikely to escalate into a full blown war, because even in that scenario a full committed nuclear exchange would still be irrational for both sides. Furthermore, ballistic missile submarines make it infeasible to "win" a short nuclear war with a decapitating strike. The effect of all of these systems taken together is a strong incentive to deescalate even if a limited nuclear exchange were to occur.

> We've avoided an atomic holocaust in spite of nuclear stockpiles, not because of them.

If not for nuclear weapons, an "atomic holocaust" would never have been on the table, so that's basically a tautological statement. What we actually avoided with nuclear weapons was a WW3 fought with chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. The supposed ineffectiveness of chemical weapons is a modern myth; during the cold war both sides fully expected and prepared for the extensive use of chemical weapons. Such disasters were only narrowly averted during WW2; Hitler refused to use nerve gasses perhaps for personal reasons, and because he feared the allied bombers operating with near impunity over Germany would be able to respond in kind (the allies did not then have nerve gas, but Hitler didn't know that.) And if Churchill had his way, Germany would have been rendered uninhabitable for generations using anthrax bombs; thankfully his staff managed to talk him out of it. You might think that these are examples of chemical and biological weapons providing sufficient deterrence on their own, but they weren't sufficient deterrence to stop the war generally, and neither chemical nor biological weapons could be as effective at killing leadership in bunkers as nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have proven to be much more effective at deterrence.
Ah yeah, I had the year off. At the time it knocked out my SO's entire company for a couple of hours.
I think macrohard would be a great name for a hardware company. I don’t think they could sue you…
At the end of the article: "Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available."
Can't seem to find basic information like how many parameters were used or how big the training set was. Results are very impressive but would like to know what they are coming from!
Context is how many tokens it can be fed to produce an output. So now you can feed it up to 32k words (tokens).
If I ever had to interview someone with one of these certificates they would get the most technical, least buzzword friendly interview in human history.
We benchmark humans with these tests -- why would we not do that for AIs?

The implications for society? We better up our game.
But what is at the end?

I don't see any real understanding only human like appearance.

So we don't get new knowledge but better spam and disinformation campaigns.
There's always money in the banking stand.
I would still place that bet.
A big part of this company has turned out to be figuring out how to explain FHE :)

I'm working on a higher-level "why/how to use this" blog post that should help. Thanks for the suggestions!
I am still praying for this to hit its local maximum spot soon, because I don't want to lose my job. If we get GPT-5 and 6 at the same speed, they get the capability to be trained on proprietary code bases and become able to automagically solve most tickets under supervision, most software engineering jobs are done for. I have become a luddite.
This person worked mornings, evenings, and weekends for a year for (optimistically) a $2400 USD annual raise and calls it passive income.
Something to note is that a large amount of individuals have "intrusive thoughts" that are typically only associated with the mentally ill.

One example is the "call of the void", the "what if I jumped?" when looking from tall heights.

However there are also many other violent or sexual thoughts that are suppressed and also difficult to talk about socially. What defines the "mentally ill" then is how prominent this voice is and how often it leaks into the "physical" world.

These actions are usually controlled by threat of imprisonment/violence by the state, social punishment by the community, or controlled by being channeled into specific arenas and fantasies.(games/porns/sports/war/etc...)

Behaviors that leak out of these boundaries are "eccentric" when they don't seem to do any harm and immoral when they disrupt the boundaries themselves (hacker) or the structures within the boundaries.

Sometimes the boundaries are too restrictive like a straightjacket. They increase the internal pressure requiring stronger boundaries that increase the internal pressure until the whole thing explodes.

Sometimes the structures themselves need to be updated and modernized. E.g. women showing their face in public or wearing a bikini shouldn't topple all of society.

The pace of technology disrupts boundaries. This incentivizes and leads to more adaptable and resilient structures. The white-hat school prankster crosses into black-hat destruction territory only when others "can't keep up".

The point is that maybe there isn't a specific mental "illness" like a bug or a virus that acts as an antagonistic external entity. It's just behavior relative to societal boundaries and outlets (which vary greatly across culture and time).

Even a very black/white "illness" like schizophrenia seemingly used to have an social role as shaman-oracle but w/o this outlet can only express itself as axe murderer
Is there precedent for that? It’s quite debatable.
> What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and writing becomes like Chess?

“General thinking” is much more than token prediction. Hook it up to some servos and see if it can walk.
This is legitimately filling me with anxiety. I'm not an "AI hype guy". I work on and understand machine learning. But these scores are shocking and it makes me nervous. Things are about to change
Healthcare is completely separate from your employment in EU. It's your personal thing to sort out your health insurance, you just notify your employer when you make a change of insurer (because the employer is sending them your money).

In some states there's a national insurance plan, in some you have a tax-funded healthcare, and in some you have mandatory health insurance (with private insurers, based on your income, 15-30%).
I think there needs to be a version of this for pure FP languages like Haskell or even OCaml or F#; almost none of these maxims and aphorisms seem to apply.

Abstraction? It has a completely different meaning in this context. Our business is abstraction: creating precise definitions and semantic meaning where none existed before. It is much easier to create abstractions and sufficiently demonstrate their laws hold. So much so that we often design our programs and libraries with abstractions first.

This forces our programs to deal with the side-effects of interacting with the world outside of our programs' memory-space at the very edges of our program. We can prove a great deal of our code is correct by construction which lets us focus our testing efforts on a much smaller portion of our programs.

However even in non-FP languages I think a lot of these problems do go away if you use the above definition of abstraction and spend a bit more time thinking about the problem up front before writing code. Not too much, mind you, because the enemy of a good plan is a perfect one; however enough that you know what the essential properties and laws are at least tends to help and reduce the amount of code you need to consider and write.
It might, but in this specific instance some kind of fine-tuning would be better.
OpenAI Unveils GPT-4, Months After ChatGPT Stunned Silicon Valley
> If most sites nowadays are on HTTPS, is vpn still needed for daily use

Let's say every website is still on HTTP (not S). How does a VPN for daily use help you at all?

Your traffic traverses the Internet unencrypted anyway: either from your ISP to target server, or from the VPN's ISP to target server.

It shifts the responsibility from one party to another, but it doesn't reduce the unencrypted path. Instead of trusting your ISP, you now have to trust a shady operator that often promises not to comply with local laws when the police comes with a warrant. They often also don't have assets to seize, so little reason to be legit. And it's not like you can stop paying the ISP that you are so distrustful of. It only costs you more money.
I'm curious what your environment is like, because my experience has been the opposite. No one that I know would recommend a nosql database in the vast majority of cases. Especially since there's great offerings out there nowadays, and plenty of proven experience with stuff like MySQL (most often with Vitess) supporting super high loads such as Youtube, Shopify, GitHub, etc. MySQL scales for a lonnnnng time. And the same is true for Postgres, with multiple hosted offerings and also reimplementations that are PG compatible.

My experience is that NoSQL databases are used in last resort situations: you _need_ Cassandra, etcd, ElasticSearch for XYZ reason, as a dependency to another distributed system. But I haven't seen anyone suggest actually using stuff like MongoDB and the likes.
US says 'Reaper' drone crashes into Black Sea after Russian intercept
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=outcGtbnMuQ&ab_channel=OpenA... 2h!!
Back when I took a Comp sci course 16 years ago (shit) I was taught that a single function should try to fit within a screen. The idea is that breaking a task up into digestible steps would both harbor more readable code, self-documentation and code reuse.
Yeah I agree, money and goods are changing hand, it seemed reasonable to do that level of detection.
Read twitter files.
This isn't an issue with crypto. This is a centralized exchange that has halted deposits and withdrawals through bank transfers.
That's how you ship Rust with resource constraints. You get on with your work and pay down debts as you go.
The fear of what other people will think about your code can become seriously debilitating, fucking up project timelines and priorities. Good on the author(s) for sharing. Perfect is the enemy of good enough.

I thought people have moved on from using slog for structured logging and instead rely on the same as exposed by the tracing library. In the end, slog was good enough for the task at hand and that's what matters most.
> completely rely on the unsophisticated masses, to whom a computer is a magical box of fairy dust that plays Netflix shows

And that’s perfectly fine - computers are a tool, enabling valuable usecases for everyone.
This technology has been a true blessing to me. I have always wished to have a personal PhD in a particular subject whom I could ask endless questions until I grasped the topic. Thanks to recent advancements, I feel like I have my very own personal PhDs in multiple subjects, whom I can bombard with questions all day long. Although I acknowledge that the technology may occasionally produce inaccurate information, the significant benefits it offers in terms of enhancing my knowledge are truly tremendous. I am absolutely thrilled with this technology and its potential to support my learning.

Note: As I'm shy of my writing style, GPT helped me refine the above.
Duolingo Max, a learning experience powered by GPT-4
It would be more newsworthy if cybercriminals didn't exploit some news event, especially some complicated economic event
> Data that has been encrypted de-identified or pseudonymized but can be used to re-identify a person is still personal data.

https://www.gdpreu.org/the-regulation/key-concepts/personal-...
Does anyone see GPT-4 in ChatGPT yet?
I think that’s largely because people who get certificates often do so because they didn’t have formal (or close to formal, e.g. highly motivated dropouts) education in the field they are getting a certificate.

(also - job churn, and/or they may be slightly less autodidactic)
Thanks for the context around the subject - piles of data don't mean anything until run through some kind of system and with a goal IMHO. That's an interesting wrinkle in the evaluation / desensitization of employees as humans. Metrics!

What's so hilarious to me in the big picture is how Google and AI in general realize they only make interesting news when they use finished products or concepts because their systems are evolutionally stupid and still can't make a decent song like a child at a piano.
The page says image uploading will come later.
I'm not believer in character assassination, but facts don't lie. Barney Frank's credibility is worthy of examination.

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-one-thing-no-one-is-ment...
EY is not rare, but he is famous by proximity to powerful/wealthy actors. There are many philosophers, likely more than ever in history. Aside from professional philosophers, there’s a large pipeline of PhDs “doctor of philosophy” who work at a high enough level of abstraction in their own field to be considered a philosopher.
> or the perspective of a company which wants to do business with less technical people.

Trying to understand Sony through such a lens is folly, see: the inexplicable limitations on Fallout/Skyrim modding. "less technical people" with Xboxes enjoy modding Fallout and Skyrim, but Sony chose to severely limit that on their platform and the reasons they gave never made any rational business sense.

Sony is best understood as an irrational animal with a history of biting people without apparent provocation. Sony leadership does not understand many if not most of the businesses Sony is involved in, so they self-sabotage often.
We already have robots that can walk.
It is extremely hard to break cryptographic hash functions to the point it is considered impossible. If you could do that, then you could be breaking into all sorts of systems. Cryptographic one-way hash functions are actually the preferred way to secure passwords.
Dogs can walk, doesn’t mean that they’re capable of “general thinking”
How GPT-4 Is Impressive but Still Flawed
The actually open models like BLOOM?
They trumpet the exam results, but isn't it likely that the model has just memorized the exam?
> Basically I read his point 3 times, and felt it could’ve been distilled into 1 sentence…

“Making profit on AI is basically the same as making profit on other software, except that the sensitive bits include the direct inputs and outputs to the core model, not just the software itself.”

Yes, it could. But then, the attempt to sell the idea this was some kind of radical phase transition that the players in the AI industry (largely, very experienced players in the software industry) simply were fundamentally not prepared for would be a lot harder.
My guess is that anything requiring nontrivial business/technical domain knowledge will be fairly safe. Also anything with a visual (or auditory) correlate, like UI work.
> Just a few weeks ago they released a tool to "detect" ChatGPT. Obsolete already?

I've seen so much hype around these tools. Not only are they theoretically unsound, they're downright dangerous and equip folks with spurious confidence. Going forward, the default assumption should be that the content you're looking at is fake unless you have sufficiently high trust in the source.
Ooof, exactly as predicted a few days ago:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/03/google-dusts-off-the...

Now every Google team needs to shoehorn "AI" into its products, no matter if it makes sense or not.
> but the ethics folks are at least a little closer to reality.

I have the exact opposite read on the situation. Everything bad which has come from AI are things the AI Alignment crowd predicted while none have been things the AI Ethics crowd predicted.
Yeah, but I kind of want my diagnostician to be obsoleted by orders of magnitude.
> The implications for society? We better up our game.

For how long can we better up our game? GPT-4 comes less than half a year after ChatGPT. What will come in 5 years? What will come in 50?
AGI is not required for walking.
You don’t need to play devil’s advocate for a bad-faith terribly-written, terribly-argued, and terribly-researched article.

No one involved in serious research or policymaking needs to be reminded that second order effects exist.
Why would the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve care about corporate shareholders? Their main constituency is the banks, especially those that sit on the boards of the regional Feds. Those banks benefited from quantitative easing, and similar policies, as it allowed them to originate a lot of loans and make a lot of money. Raising interest rates is very bad for investment banks.

That said, I don't think there is any sort of complex plan. They're not as clever as you give them credit for, and it seems like things have spiraled out of control.
Talk about moving the goalpost!
The "visual inputs" samples are extraordinary, and well worth paying extra attention to.

I wasn't expecting GPT-4 to be able to correctly answer "What is funny about this image?" for an image of a mobile phone charger designed to resemble a VGA cable - but it can.

(Note that they have a disclaimer: "Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available.")
3.5 might be their loss leader to keep people in their ecosystem for most use cases and to create a unique wall in terms of the training dataset they made via ChatGPT, GPT-4 they must be confident enough that nobody can compete that they can charge much more. Plus the use cases it can be used to replace cost centers like you said
> it “hallucinates” facts and makes reasoning errors

Cant wait for people to use it for facts
Learn sign language ;)
> If he could shut down his reasoning and spend hours moving resonator stones around on top of his CD transport until he thought he had improved the sound, and this gave him pleasure, was that pleasure not real even if the sound was exactly the same?

Of course it was, the placebo effect exists and works after all. Where these audiophiles turn into audiophools is here:

> hideously expensive isolation platforms, resonator weights, unobtanium cables, "ambient field conditioners"... You name it

They allow themselves to be duped by unscrupulous snake oil merchants instead of simply telling themselves that the rocks they collected on the beach are just the thing to liven up their sound stage.
It's not about will, but the managers capability to oversee what is going on. Since they dont know anything about programming, they cant even really know if someone is slacking, or working really hard.

That is, their capability to manage.
The real winning play is #2. Zuckerberg should more aggressively push for hate speech legislation to permanently shut down the Internet at large. Users should have to get a license from the DMV to post, for $35 renew in-person at DMV office or AAA. They can also opt for a RealInternetID for $50 that has more security features. Also unlimited privacy violation, logging and tracking with zero recourse for users.
GP means hardware, you’re talking about peripherals.

Would you reconsider if you could connect a keyboard/mouse to a PS/Xbox and play strategy games?

I’d love to have just 1 gaming box, that can do everything!
Curated knowledge graphs are the only way to accurately map knowledge. Essential for things like medical KGs. You don't want to kill patients because the magical numbers used to hone the algorithm weren't magic enough.
When it does exactly that you will find a new place to put your goalposts, of course.
Confirming what we’ve suspected for decades. Certs are a waste of time and money.

Food for thought: So are degrees.