skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Although the code generated might be similar, it's not a "distinction without a difference" because the language doesn't provide the same tools for interacting with panics as say C++ does with exceptions. There is no "try catch" for panics, you either catch them at the thread boundary or catch them with catch_unwind. Everything in the std lib is built with Result for errors that can be handled, not panic.
Programming is hard, but that doesn't mean that certain language design choices don't have meaningful impact on what type of code becomes easier/harder to write.
Other people are saying similar things, and I ask you listen to what they're saying, rather than talking about people being "traumatized" by a programming construct.
What you're referring to is the Youtubers own lack of understanding on what a VPN can and can't do. NordVPN provide some talking points but I myself have seen some Youtubers stumble through and add in some wild claims that just aren't true. That's still on Nord for not vetting and correcting them and this is also what you get when you try to shill something to your community that you have no expertise on.
How Collation Works in PostgreSQL
Even just in the exam passing category, GPT4 showed no improvement over GPT3.5 on AP Language & Composition or AP English Literature, and scored quite poorly.

Now, granted, plenty of humans don't score above a 2 on those exams either. But I think it's indicative that there's still plenty of progress left to make before this technology is indistinguishable from magic.
For real, any of these threads is guaranteed to have a ton of nitpicks and comparisons with products that are way more mature. It's pretty sad to see specially in a so-called hacker community. Congrats on the launch!
The one thing where I disagree is Cisco certification. CCIE, at least back in the day, was the gold standard for network engineer. It was pretty much required if you wanted anything to do with networking. I’m not sure now if that’s relevant but I think it can’t hurt.

Programming certifications definitely look terrible. I would rather interview someone with a side project than someone with a cert.
A lot of buildings down have floors under floor #1 so its always above you
General thinking requires an AGI, which GPT-4 is not. But it can already have a major impact. Unlike self-driving cars which we require 99.999+% safety to be deployed widely, people already use the imperfect GPT-3 and ChatGPT for many productive tasks.

Driving as well as an attentive human in real time, in all conditions, probably requires AGI as well.

GPT-4 is not an AGI and GPT-5 might not be it yet. But the barriers toward it are getting thinner and thinner. Are we really ready for AGI in a plausibly-within-our-lifetime future?

Sam Altman wrote that AGI is a top potential explanation for the Fermi Paradox. If that were remotely true, we should be doing 10x-100x work on AI Alignment research.
That's how you escalate a conflict into an all-out war. Nobody, not even the dickheads who did this, want that.

I hope they spend the rest of the year flying their desks and doing paperwork.
That seems artificial, no? Do I list them on my resume? Wouldn't that have the same "result"?
That's...certainly more than I recall, having left Windows behind for good in 2009 after using both a Dell Latitude and a 15" MacBook Pro in my last couple years of college.

I'm surprised that Win+P isn't "Print" by now. Sure, when you invoke it, you're telling the application to print the contents of window or the document you're looking at, but to some people any application should be able to print.

The default macOS application project in Xcode still gives you a print menu item by default and I've even heard stories from people who have gotten rejected from the Mac App Store because they hadn't explicitly removed that item from the menu.
GPT is a better scraper/parser. It’s interesting but I don’t understand why people are acting like this is the second coming.
MNT Pocket Reform open for orders
> Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available.
The last page in the paper is really, really impressive. GPT4 does R&D. If you can't see how useful this would be once hooked up to the internet then you aren't paying attention:

https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf
Maybe someone who actually knows stuff can provide a better reply, I think its about alignment of structures we see in the CMB.
What has happened to this site? Full of bs takes like this.
As opposed to war?

I'll take strongly worded letter.
I don't get it, there are multiple people in this thread saying they are running experiments with it?

Is it random assignment?
There was blog post on HN recently about the upbringings of great scientists, physicists, polymaths, etc. They almost invariably had access to near unlimited time with high quality tutors. He cited a source that claimed modern students who had access to significant tutoring resources were very likely to be at the top of their class.

Personalized learning is highly effective. I think your idea is an exciting one indeed.
Indeed, as I said it can be a downside.

What we usually suggest is to compile most of the application to Wasm (which is also the default), and move the parts that most interact with the outside world to JS.

This can actually result in a speedup if it avoids multiple back-and-forths between JS and Wasm, which is common if you use a Browser/JS api from Wasm.
I think it's always a mistake to hope that a business is going to not exploit innovation for their own gain at the expense of society. If we don't want this technology to have huge effects on society, governments will need to regulate it. I doubt that's feasible, but it's more feasible than hoping that Silicon Valley (or any other business) is going to just hold themselves back from releasing world-shaking tech that will make them trillionaires.
I mean, most AI technologies are already considered ITAR for the sole sake of maintaining a competitive advantage. At least, that's what my last two employers have told me and I hope I didn't go through all of that training for nothing.
I wonder if there will be a race to buy defunct companies for access to their now valuable junky tech-debt ridden hairball code, so they can train on it and benchmark on fixing bugs and stuff. With full source control history they could also find bug resolution diffs.
> Companies don't have to put themselves in a position to be bought to have offers thrown at them.

We're past the stage where offers have been thrown at them. We're at the stage where wedding vows have started to be exchanged "pending regulatory approval". Companies do have to put a lot of work into those parts of the M&A stages (they've done multiple rounds of fit vetting and offer/contract approvals and investor handshakes, etc). At the waiting for regulatory approval stage they've already gone above and beyond any "fiduciary duty" they are expected to perform to already seeing the M&A as the "foregone conclusion". They've agreed to be bought and have put tons of work into being bought. A lot of companies don't come back from that when the regulatory agencies disapprove and shut the whole thing down. At the very least it is a morale blow for all the of the hard work of the M&A process up to that point and boards/investors often seem to become more certain that the next step is an exit, especially after the pain of a failed exit.

> The rest of your response hinges of the fact that we don't know the unknown variables and therefore the decision is not simple. But this argument could be made for literally every decision in life and we would all be stuck doing nothing. We have to make decisions based on what we know and accept that there will be a margin of error. Ideally we also know all the risk factors but that's literally impossible.

We aren't making any decisions here. Other than I guess picking sides in "anti-buyout" and "pro-buyout". I admitted I'm not feeling like my opinions weight to either side, I'm just pointing out the possible real world fallout of "anti-buyout". That's nothing to do with decisions at all. I am just pointing out all the unknowns because people are assuming that supporting "anti-buyout" means supporting the status quo and that's absolutely not the same thing.
> but the problem is that all of the content of those works will have to have been formalized into rules before it is produced, since computers can only work with formalized data.

Clearly the key takeaway from GPT is that given enough unstructured data, LLM can produce impressive results.

From my point of view, the flaw in most discussion surrounding AI is not that people underestimate computers but overestimate how special humans are. At the end of day, every thoughts are a bunch of chemical potentials changing in a small blob of flesh.
> If ChatGPT-4 hallucinates an answer, it won't kill me

Not yet it won't. It doesn't take much imagination to foresee where this kind of AI is used to inform legal or medical decisions.
Same for this site
https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/
These results are extremely impressive and encouraging, but also remember:

> Despite its capabilities, GPT-4 has similar limitations as earlier GPT models. Most importantly, it still is not fully reliable (it “hallucinates” facts and makes reasoning errors).

That's a quote from this announcement. As these models get more and more capable, it's going to become more and more important that we understand when and how they fail. Right now, it seems like we have very little insight into that. It feels more or less random. But that won't fly when these models are asked to do actually important things. And we'll undoubtedly be tempted to make them do those things as their output gets better.
Poe.com(by Quora) have gpt4 now, give it a shot
As a long time LLM enjoyer, here is the most insightful take I've seen https://generative.ink/posts/simulators/ but it's not an easy read if you don't already know some stuff about large language models. Read it if you have seen the "stochastic parrot" and "blurry jpeg" explanations and you feel like they are missing the mark.
You are just purposely ignoring the DAO then, or everything tether does
Whatever gets us to successive waves "tech burnouts turned mushroom farmers" is fine by me!
No, you have it backwards.

Insolvency means the value of their liabilities exceeds the value of the assets. The bank owned long term bonds that lost value and could no longer cover deposits. That's what happened, that's why people started pulling money from the bank.
On Page 36[1], the AI can read an image of chicken nuggets being put in the shape of an earth map. And goes on to explain what it is. Key words that came up on me are joke ... mundane ... silly.

This might be because the question the user asked was "Explain this meme". Meme implies a joke that is mundane and silly. These words do seem out of place. I would not describe it as a joke, mundane, and/or silly.

What does everyone else think?

[1] https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf#p36
This basically was a slogan in my house when I was growing up.

I think the only thing wrong with it is that it puts too much blame on Reagan and not enough blame on the powerful interests he was working for.
My girlfriend is Spanish. I don’t think her family would be impressed if I were to pronounce “gracias” as “grassy ass” xD
"Ssssh! The owl might be listening"

glances at phone with panic in his eyes
Autotranslation for the lazy: https://www-clarin-com.translate.goog/rural/nasa-derribo-mit...

It would be nice to see some hard numbers, because that article was an interview to two experts of the "Argentinean Beef Promotion Institute" (or something like that, sorry for the bad translation).

Cows here eat much more grass and less grain than in other countries.

I can't find the numbers of how much surface is used by agriculture and how much by husbandry. And it's more complicated because inn spite a big part of the cows life is free and eating grass, there are a lot that are also eating grain. (I think, close to the time to kill them to get the beef.) So some corn/soybean/alfalfa production is indirect beef production. And in the last years the amount of cows got reduced a lot, and I think Uruguay has more cow in proportion.

Also, there are some recent method to make agriculture more soil friendly like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-till_farming that also claim to capture carbon.

So I'm skeptical the result is so clearly related to beef.
It's weird that it does so well without even having some modality to know whether it's being asked to answer a factual question or create a work of fiction.

It does great at rationalizing... and maybe the way the format the questions were entered (and the multiple-guess response) gave it some indication what was expected or restricted the space sufficiently.

Certainly, it can create decent fanfic, and I'm surprised if that's not already inundated.
Funny you claim this, because the AP Environmental Science pass rate is really low compared to other APs, at least it was when I took it. Maybe it's because the quality of the avg test taker was lower, but I'm not especially convinced that this is the case.
This reporting rings of "A democratic leaning judge can't rule on republicans due to bias" and vice versa.
When all the exchanges are gone, the only people using crypto will be those doing "pure" crypto.

That'll be a market contraction of 1000x. The uses of crypto will then be extremely limited.

I think it's safe to say that exchanges are crypto for most people.
This USAF aircraft in international airspace was almost certainly indirectly involved in an ongoing military conflict. It's not there for no reason. It's very likely providing intelligence to the Ukrainian military, which will cause deaths in the Russian military.

I'm not saying whether that's good or bad, just that we should not be surprised they are expressing their displeasure with us being there. They avoided using missiles for diplomatic reasons, but given that this is clearly an aircraft aiding a combatant in a war, it's understandable that they could just shoot it down. The only reason they are not is because they're being cautious about expanding the war, but we're already provoking an expansion of the war by using our aircraft in this way.
Seems it's been decided that we're all going to have one of those giga-meltdowns that leaves hundreds of millions, or possibly billions, dead.
No, its on waitlist.
OpenAI didn't pick that name arbitrarily.

Here was their manifesto when they first started: https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai

> OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.

> We believe AI should be an extension of individual human wills and, in the spirit of liberty, as broadly and evenly distributed as possible. The outcome of this venture is uncertain and the work is difficult, but we believe the goal and the structure are right. We hope this is what matters most to the best in the field.

OpenAI as it exists right now contradicts basically every single thing they said they would be. I think that is a nontrivial issue!
That's a great way to summarize it.

With the corollary that "hard-coded data" is still data, not code.
This is like the "free" vs free debate that has been raging for decades and prompted the famous quote "“free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.”".
This is probably a deliberate escalation on Russia's part, authorized at a high level. Since near the beginning of the current war, NATO has been operating a variety of manned and unmanned surveillance aircraft just outside of Russian and Ukrainian airspace, then passing actionable targeting data to Ukrainian military forces in near real time. This has been a huge force multiplier for Ukraine and allowed them to stop multiple Russian offensives.

Now the Russians are getting desperate because they are literally running out of deployable troops and vehicles. So they are trying to push the surveillance aircraft back from the battle area. If they continue to escalate then the next steps will be similar aggressive harassment of manned aircraft and actively shooting down drones. We can afford some attrition losses of Predators but the manned aircraft will now need heavier and continuous fighter escort.
They definitely do. I do all the time where I start explaining something just to realize that I'm actually not sure anymore but then it's often too late and the best I can do is add a disclaimer but most people don't.
> Not that there's necessarily a technological way around those limitations either.

I can see at some point here being able to wear AR glasses that overlay hand signing over the speaker
Limited in what way? LLVM LTO works seamlessly if you use LLD on both macOS and Windows; that's what Chrome does, for example. LLVM LTO also works pretty seamlessly with ld64 on macOS; the linker needs libLTO, but the driver takes care of that for you.
>good luck with that

I don't think they need it.[0][1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processo...
The Turing Test was proposed as one example of a test for "indistinguishable from a human", not the singular goalpost for indistinguishability.
found the American ;)

all joking aside, these sorts of watermarks regardless of their altruistic authenticity or perfection were routinely downplayed and ignored during the 2008 collapse. the Bush administration for all its best efforts literally devolved into a propaganda instrument with daily or weekly updates amounting to little more than wishful thinking at best, or wholesale deception at worst.

It feels like the finance of capitalism is some Heisenbergian monstrosity that, when functional and performant is observable and available for introspection and critique however once the wheels begin to fall off all hell breaks loose and we wind up with adolescent thinking that does all it can to elicit thoughts and prayers in an almost cargo cult performance random crap that often just serves as noise to drown out the human misery of the system itself.
In case you don’t want to spent for plus, Poe.com(by Quora) have GPT-4 now. You can try it there
Because Russia has not explicitly declared war or hostilities, or taken any actual redlined actions, it's up to the US to define if they consider this an act of war or not.

It's an obvious provocation, and it's absolutely not in the US (or NATO's) interest to be drawn in in this manner and time. So instead you get this passive-aggressive shit talk.
Assuming the range of intelligence spanning all the humans that can pass Calculus BC is narrow on the scale of all possible intelligences.

It’s a guess, of course. But, the requisite concepts for getting Transformers working are not much broader than calculus and a bit of programming.
The training data is so large that it incidentally includes basically anything that Google would index plus the contents of as many thousands of copyrighted works that they could get their hands on. So that would definitely include some test prep books.
Hah. That's not where I'm investing my attention these days, but good luck!
Yes, should have added more detail, I was talking specifically about my experience on the mobile app
not a paper but a project: http://libscie.org
Right. I was including subwoofers in the cost of those systems approaching $2500. It's a broad topic, of course, and I'd already typed a zillion words. It's always a challenge what to type and what to leave out, huh?

A stereo system with subwoofers is still a stereo to me. My main system is 2.2 and I call it a stereo. But I see the confusion. Some people don't call it a "stereo" unless it's strictly 2.0!
https://discord.com/invite/mwkNcAR

We are using the above discord server to communicate in real time during GDC next week. There is a hacker-news channel that you can join.

Thanks!
But you can't "just hold to maturity"; you are obligated to pay back deposits on demand.
Do pattern matching engines get out of bed in the morning and make breakfast?
If you take the stance that in-person work is more effective (an "uncomfortable truth" as you call it), then it would seem to reason that engineers who transferred to remote work would see a decrease in performance, but that is not the case as you also mention.

It seems like the real issue may be the hiring process between remote and in-person engineers, or biases in evaluating in-person vs. remote engineers.
This is interesting because my impression is that LLMs perform poorly on non-english languages[1]. This is likely 'just' a corpus size problem - but it's not like that is going to be fixed any time soon. That said, at least in language instruction there's a lot of meta material that will be helpful. I wonder how Duolingo is detecting when GPT-4 is hallucinating.

[1] https://twitter.com/asmelashteka/status/1630966233217605632
In what way is Google scrambling to catch up? In my opinion PaLM-E is more impressive than GPT-4. Additionally Google do not have the same incentive to publicise what they’ve worked on as much as OpenAI. Google has had similarly performant LLMs the whole time. Who were the publishers of the “Attention is all you need” paper, of which almost everything OpenAI has been credited for is built upon?
What a joke. This is literary as closed as it gets. They don't even tell you how many parameters the model has.

People may criticize Google because they don't release the weights or an API, but at least they publish papers, which allows the field to progress.
Except that the main political competitor (from the US perspective) is the country producing most of them, so this might backfire quite quickly.
Hm? How so. It is a genuine question as I fail to see how that is even a valid talking point.
That's a pretty unfair comparison. We know the answers to the problems in AP Calculus BC, whereas we don't even yet know whether answers are possible for a self-improving AI, let alone what they are.
Sounds like they pissed on the aircraft?

Suspect this will win praise and the only victim was a US drone.
I've been using the same system for decades.

Is there a way I can measure how well it does at sound quality other than the "listen to it and see if it seems ok" method? Because as with glasses, you get used to a prescription that is slowly degrading over time, same with hearing.

How are people measuring fidelity in a home environment?
Let's just assume the cold war cooled down for a couple years until Putin got a firm enough hold on his power he could rewarm it.

And yes, the Age of Aquarius was remarkably short and I found it severely lacking.
AGI used to mean to Turing test to many. Obviously that's an incomplete definition and it's good that we've fleshed it out more, but the goalposts have moved.
> you need to be critical about which patterns to match

and how do you do that? By pattern-matching on "high-quality source"
The point was quantity is important. Of course a lot of things were there before, but the same things being more common now would be worse.
I would think google already replaced the need for such books. You think people would be better at asking "AI" than asking google?
Recognizing that the Turing Test is not a sufficient bar for judging if a computer is true AGI is not moving the goalposts, it's just realizing that passing the test and the location of the goalposts weren't actually the same in the first place.
If it's your web server, you can analyze the apache/nginx/iix/etc logs.
you're supposed to be able to come up with the solution by yourself