skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's the scam? I've used Bitcoin once a week at least since 2013. I put a lot of my hard earned money into it back then, it went up, and for the last 5-6 years when I need a little extra cash for a car, girlfriends mortgage payment, vacation, etc. I sell a little BCH or buy stuff on Amazon through https://Purse.io at a 10-25% discount, plus the buyers usually have Prime so I don't even have a use for a Prime subscription anymore :)

Who did I scam? Bitcoin is digital cash, nothing more nothing less. If someone hurt you using a digital currency I'm sorry but don't take it out on the very concept of digitizing money.
Check the capitalization report from SVB; they had way more assets than liabilities (on paper).
Twist, GPT-4 wrote the blog and hallucinated the URL for the waitlist!
And how is that electricity generated in most of the US/world?
Yay.

ML makes programming fun again. Waiting for model releases feels like waiting for your favorite band to drop a new album.

Being multimodal is a big step. So is hitting the 1T parameter milestone. I’d love to see what they deploy this beast on; 8xA100 is still only 8x80GB = 640GB.

Actually, I only heard rumors of it being 1T, so I wonder if openai has mentioned it anywhere…

EDIT: the GPT-4 paper is pretty fascinating: https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf

Scroll all the way to the bottom for some examples of problematic prompts that it’s trained to avoid.
Oh wow, image inputs? So I can get ChatGPT to describe an image, in lesser or greater detail? And through an API? Wow, that'll be so cool!
Asking ChatGPT+ if it is GPT-4 results in

> As an AI language model, I am not given an official name like "GPT-4". However, I am a continuation of the GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) series of models developed by OpenAI. Currently, the most advanced version of the GPT series is GPT-3, which I am a part of. There has been no official announcement or confirmation regarding the development of a new version of GPT beyond GPT-3.

It doesn't seem to have image upload functionality yet either. Perhaps it is still rolling out?
the issue is that they started out open source. GPT2 is entirely open-source
What are some of the practical examples that require back-tracking (for whatever definition of "require")? The example I was once being told about was parsing assignment expressions:

Expr ::= CanBeLhsOfAssignExpr | CanBeLhsOfAssignExpr "=" Expr | CanNotBeLhsOfAssignExpr

but in practice, it's easily parsed in the following manner:

def parse_Expr(self):
# parse_ExprInner parses CanBeLhsOfAssignExpr or CanNotBeLhsOfAssignExpr cases
result = self.parse_ExprInner()

if self.peekToken() == TOKEN_ASSIGN:
if result.is_CanBeLhsOfAssignExpr:
token = self.skipToken()

# assignment is right-associative
rhs = self.parse_Expr()
result = self.make_AssignExpr(token, result, rhs)
else:
self.raiseParseError("{} can't be target of assignment", result)

return result

The idea is to parse the prefix under "relaxed" rules, delaying the well-formedness check until it's actually needed.
The experience is messy. It is neither fish nor fowl. The blending needs a deep rethink and redesign.
> Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar.

"Open"
But why cram a finite-based system into a non-finite universe ? What's the point ? Haven't we understood that private property and ownership are not, in fact, better than sharing and common usage ? The digital world allows us to actually touch this, and we still import artificial restrictions that only benefit those who already have ?
Yep. ChatGPT told us what a politically-correct robot would say. Currently we have the ability to ask endless complex questions to pick it apart, but I'll bet they limit that soon. It's far more obvious than before what biases the American corporations want to present; I remember when people used to test the Google search results without getting much out of it.

I don't think that the most successful average-user-facing AI product is going to be the least self-regulated, though. Those restrictions don't turn away typical users wanting quick answers, just people who are asking political questions or want to mess around seeing what they can make the AI say.
A multimodal model that combines textural input with images is the real killer app to these GPT models and this is the first step to that happening. So much around us can't completely be described with just text input, at least not quickly or accurately- interpreting printed out graphs or charts in old documents, for example; There are vast uses for AI that will always need basic image input to augment a text prompted task, and if this gets to the point where the functionality involving mixed mode image+text is as smooth as, say, using ChatGPT to write and analyze code has gotten, then it is going to change many more industries much quicker than most think.

I've worked on a problem involving scraping and interpreting a very specific data source in image form that took me a very long time to get almost nowhere on. If I just wait 6 months it will be a solved problem for a $0.001 API call, it seems.
Russian jet collides with US drone over Black Sea
yeah https://openai.com/waitlist/gpt-4 is what is on the post.
In my book, having your bank fail when you withdraw large amounts of money is an equivalent statement to 'you cannot withdraw large amounts of money from your bank'.
I call these frankenframeworks. The constant drive to DRY and reach the supposed nirvana of code being a DSL of pure business logic leads to more and more implementation details being shoved under the rug to deeper and deeper layers. But for some reason there’s no foresight that any non-trivial change requires changing more than just the business logic and so you have to resort to bolting on config options, weird hooks, mixins, “concerns”, and global state for no reason other than it’s all you can do to reach down the layers.
here's a link to the info about the model - https://openai.com/research/gpt-4

seems like Google's announcement about their PaLM API and Docs AI stuff was trying to jump ahead of this announcement
Crypto bros looked at the Free Banking Era of the U.S. and unironically thought that would be great to live through. Unsurprisingly they are the exact demographic who would fantasize that era of the United States as a good time to live in.
Its a new paid-membership benefit, so it will probably become more common.
I think Github knows that and that's why it's turned into more of a "Social Media" site. Jr Dev's grind it and view it as a gateway to a job. Constant memes about "Green boxes". "Only want my Sr Dev's to have full green!111!!". In reality nobody cares, but you can tell that's how the marketing is going. And it's to the point that if I have a public product, I might as well put it on github and get that stuff for free. Even though I do run gitea in a docker container for 99% of my projects offline.
A quote from Introducing OpenAI [1]:

Because of AI's surprising history, it's hard to predict when human-level AI might come within reach. When it does, it'll be important to have a leading research institution which can prioritize a good outcome for all over its own self-interest.

We're hoping to grow OpenAI into such an institution. As a non-profit, our aim is to build value for everyone rather than shareholders. Researchers will be strongly encouraged to publish their work, whether as papers, blog posts, or code, and our patents (if any) will be shared with the world. We'll freely collaborate with others across many institutions and expect to work with companies to research and deploy new technologies.

To me at least, having a walled garden and charging for you API, without releasing weights or other critical details, goes against this sentiment.

[1] https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/
it got a 4 or 5 on every ap test except the english ones for what it's worth. Even the calculus ones which surprised me since past LLMs have been bad at math.
As they should! Why would a company like Meta base their policy on what some hypothetically unconfident employees might be thinking.
32k context is absolutely huge. There's all sorts of techniques for summarizing large documents down to get into 4k right now with 3.5, but it's incredibly lossy.

But boy, not cheap at all - $2 per api call on a 32k token document + whatever the output.

gpt-3.5-turbo is going to be around for a long time. At this price, your use case is going to need to be replacing a large cost center. Which based on their released results on common benchmarks, is absolutely going to happen.
They should have a UI where the backlight color fill slides in from left to right as you hold it.
Makes sense, they haven’t had a CEO for a while now. When was the last time Zuck went into the office? 6 months?
Here, only apply Don't Repeat Yourself to data not code. Making it mean each piece of knowledge should have a single authoritative reference. E.G. Avoid (if possible) places where state is synced.
> 192khz

Please don't. You'll make Nyquist sad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampli...

On its way to your speakers, a audio file sampled at 192khz will ideally be identical to a recording done at 44.1khz, except over sampling can introduce audio artifacts that degrade audio quality so you can end up with worse audio.

So, please, don't unnecessarily over sample.
I'm really curious to see if expanding the context length this much will allow GPT to do typical software development tasks on a big codebase. If it can take in a github issue and produce decent code solving a complex issue across many files... will certainly be an interesting time.
One might argue if it's available for anyone to buy it's pretty open. Many initiatives with "open" in their names are open to that definition.
Rational discourse about nuclear energy might eventually have to come around to the fact that all the states want to store their waste in one state which least needs nuclear energy. And that storage facility... yeah, it caught fire a few years back.
> GitHub Packages usage is free for public packages.

https://docs.github.com/en/billing/managing-billing-for-gith...
Kottke.org Is 25 Years Old Today
And how it works? you can build a context and then ask something in a prompt using it?
Could one argue this is a slightly coordinated play to pressure the Federal Reserve to stop hiking interest rates/stop keeping them "high" (higher than 0.25%, which they used to be) so corporations (shareholders) can go back to debt fueled by all-time-cheap debt again?

The average person will interpret this and say "wow, the Federal Reserve is going to break the U.S. banking system if they keep interest rates too high!"
In manager speak, because the meeting was created by someone higher on the org chart, it doesn't stand to reason that we can find fault with it.
Honestly, how many serious use cases require sensitive contexts? Most enterprise uses will require guard rails, and that's where they'll make most money. OfficeGPT will be huge in the corporate world.
Meanwhile, physicists in Tallahassee, Florida have identified the Creed particle, which has little electromagnetic arms wide open.
And what exactly is distinct and unique about their language and culture?
Reading through the system card is enlightening.
Signature bank has $110B in assets and $102B in liabilities. 7.8% more. 3y Treasuries took a 9% loss in just the last year. You're certain their assets are less risky than that? They have a rapidly declining cash pile, down to just $5.8B now, and all their assets are in various "Other Securities," Real Estate loans, and "Unspecified/Other Loans."
> this is just the legal, modern day equivalent of old school “break their knees unless they pay you”

In the same way that proprietary software, or property rights in commercially useful property more generally, are that, yes.
"Our biochem corpus is far in advance of theirs, as is our electronic sentience, and their 'ethical inflexibility' has allowed us to make progress in areas they refuse to consider."
Love the idea of running this stuff on-prem / in house. Just not being beholden to random updates in the rules or logging policies seems like a big value add. +1 to the other commenter who mentioned they'd love to see a version for smaller teams - there might be more privacy-oriented teams out there than you'd expect. I think even a version that can run in public clouds would be meaningful.

Have you gotten feedback from folks using it on how it compares to Copilot in terms of usefulness? What's the 'order of magnitude' difference?
The iPhone 7 had a flaw in its assembly where the radio IC was not epoxied to the PCB correctly. Overtime due to heat stress the chip would get fractures in its solder joints and the phone would lose the ability to get on cell networks.

I took my 7 to the Apple store in 2019 with this issue after giving it to my SO. I was told by the store rep that it was an issue with "the third party manufacturer" (Qualcomm) but Apple would do the repair for free. I learned from some independent repair communities that this was actually a really common issue and Apple was doing some silent recalls.
GTP4 demo today in the next 2 hours!

https://youtube.com/live/outcGtbnMuQ
I don’t like the name either, but I don’t think there’s anything descriptive enough in ‘open’ that a lawyer couldn’t explain away. We’re used to open meaning a specific thing in software, but a lot of leeway is given in branding.
Sounds like idealism to me. I think you'd have a hard time quantifying your perspective. It's not the only assessment. Just statistically likely that it's the majority.
Do you have any argument besides "he writes long-windedly with insular terminology" and "there are multiple organizations affiliated to him"? E.g.

>It's a typical path that a coercive group makes multiple 360° turns.

What is the evidence that Eliezer is running a coercive group? Whom are they coercing into what?

I fully get that LessWrong et al. are obnoxious, use their own terminology, have far-out ideas about the future of AI that are probably wrong, weird moral systems (though any moral system is weird when you look at it hard enough imho)... But you are making the charge that Eliezer is running a cult and doing so on purpose, which is more specific than just running an annoying community around some non-mainstream ideas.
The example is about allocating threads to threadpools.

It is not about utilizing existing threads in threadpools.

Thats where YOU are mistaken. Your example has threads preallocated to core affinity. Which is what Im saying when I say run all pistons on the engine even when idle.
The pirate zone is very much against private property and ownership, it is probably the last place crypto will work. Cyberpunk is the denunciation of the ravages capitalism does, I don't think you will sell them NFTs in the next 1000 years.
You could argue that, you'd be wrong, but you could.
I'm a high school math and science teacher who uses ChatGPT
A professional midwestern 1-on-1 starts with the assumption that no work was performed since the last one and it falls on the underling to prove otherwise during this time.
+1 for Mullvad, I usually only buy time when I'm traveling to secure my traffic in airports/hotels/etc
> People often suggest that interviewing.io should create a certification that our users can post on their LinkedIn profile, e.g., something like “Top 10% performer on interviewing.io”

Rest of the discussion aside, “we will give you a certificate of being good at interviews” is one of the most absurd grifts I’ve heard in awhile…
I don't mind those two to be honest. They do seem to be by the creators themselves, not some third party that buys advertising time for a shady business. The content is good and the price is right. Perfectly legitimate way of diverting revenue from Google to the creators themselves and making a small step towards a video platform less run by algorithms and advertising.

(I am not a subscriber or an impacted creator, but I did try it out. Honestly you'll have seen all interesting content by the end of the week, but for that price... worth it to buy it every couple years when there is new content.)
Why guess, we have the Internet these days.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

Or for some analysis

https://www.fennemorelaw.com/california-court-clarifies-pers...
... and keeping critical pieces of code as much independent as possible from the very few grotesquely and absurdely massive and complex optimizing compilers is always a good idea.
Singularity /s
Only within the context of programmer cults would people be unironically offended that a term as abstract as "open" not be exclusively used to mean "open source".
Businesses do not have rights to exist or engage in commerce independent of the individuals which constitute them.

That is to say, if business X did not do risk management because it is small and unsophisticated, it is okay to let business X wind down, whereas it is not okay to let a human go hungry because they are unsophisticated. Humans have rights, Businesses do not. I'm as conservative as they come (look at my post history), and I am flabbergasted by people from both sides of the aisle who honestly, truly believe businesses have a right to exist, including welfare for when they are unable to.

When it comes to human life, given by God, we are obligated to spend almost any amount that we can in order to preserve that life. When it comes to business existence, we are not. By all means, welfare programs should immediately be expanded to help the individuals affected (including the business owner) to not go hungry, or be without medical care. By no means should the business continue to operate via welfare magic.

Hopefully, for the business owner, the individual welfare availability will give him/her some time to get back on their feet and potentially start the business again with new capital if needed. But the source of that capital is not a concern of the government. That's for the private market.
That Bedrock supports every major console + Android/iOS but Linux/macOS had to stick to the (still updated) Java version is not really a comparable situation. Even if your view is it was done solely as an abuse of power you're not going to find many game companies looking to support 4 major 3rd party ecosystems get blamed for turning Mac/Linux into a second class citizen by not keeping it synced with the other releases - the markets are just tiny.
OpenAI Announces GPT-4
Personally, when they introduced rate limits couple years ago, Docker became irrelevant for me already, and I have moved into GitHub and Quay.

We will see what will happen.
LLaMa technically is only limited to researchers, etc...
CA is 60 days, NYC is 90, federal is 60 by default (WARN act).

Most companies choose to lay you off, then give you 'severance' package/pay that is equal or more to those days.
Examining OpenSSH Sandboxing and Privilege Separation – Attack Surface Analysis
I dont know, there's been a load of progress in the 'run something like chatgpt on your own machine' dept in the last few months. Also Stanford trained Alpaca - fairly cheaply - using output from OpenAIs text-davinci-003, which somewhat suggests that the 'little guys' are are able to benefit from the expensive training done by the 'big guys' by using the big expensive models to train the small open-sources ones - https://crfm.stanford.edu/2023/03/13/alpaca.html
Wait until gpt-5 writes gpt-6, then we’ll really go exponential.
I've been wondering what happens to Turnitin (ubiquitous academic plagiarism detector) now that students can cheat using infinite bespoke rather than finite pre-existing material. Just a few weeks ago they released a tool to "detect" ChatGPT. Obsolete already?

https://www.turnitin.com/blog/sneak-preview-of-turnitins-ai-...
The people of Ukraine don't want their country to surrender the lands they live in to the monsters that are torturing and raping their sons and daughters. By and large that whinging is coming entirely from commentators bemoaning the cost of war over coffee at their kitchen tables. Nor do the people of Russia by and large want peace the overwhelming majority support sending their sons and daughters to murder Ukrainians.

You dishonestly frame the prior takeover effected by treachery and threats of mass murder as an administrative change involving road signs and flags. Should a housebreaker invade your home and evict you by threatening to slaughter your family your eviction wouldn't be a peaceful administrative change in ownership just because the violence is threatened instead of realized.

Despite this Crimea wouldn't be on the table had Russia not decided to take the rest of Ukraine. Should Russia wish to protect these folks from war they ought to start talking terms now.
This is huge: "Rather than the classic ChatGPT personality with a fixed verbosity, tone, and style, developers (and soon ChatGPT users) can now prescribe their AI’s style and task by describing those directions in the 'system' message."
Genuinely curious: what makes you think your employer will let you ship that toil off to an AI instead of just letting you go (or downsizing your team) and shipping off the toil themselves?

The acceptance that you've been doing corporate busywork as your career seems at odds with your confidence that you'll be the one to outsource that busywork to an AI. Doesn't the rapidly increasing capability of automated systems to pull off this busywork imply that careers built on doing that busywork are increasingly at risk? Am I missing something?
this is kind of a nitpicky complaint, but the bar graph that shows the improvements for GPT-4 everywhere that GPT-4 improves its results and shows nothing about GPT-4 everywhere where GPT-3 is stronger feels dishonest and manipulative, which is a shame because the actual data the graph shows is very impressive.
Why is this downvoted?

Rather than getting engrossed in the hype, they're slowly closing everything about themselves, now in their research papers. At this point, they hardly care and it is nothing got to do with 'AI ethics' or 'saftey'.

This is yet another ClosedAI production all done by Microsoft. Might as well call it Microsoft® AI division.

Now you really need a open source GPT-4 competitor. Clearly this is another attempt to pump their valuation and unload to the public markets.

Good luck re-implementing this so-called 'Open' large multi-modal model.
Great, and I’ve seen no evidence that they suffered the same risks as SVB based on publicly known financials.
> Open could now mean available to use for free.

These words are not synonymous with each other: “open” is not inherently free, “free” is not inherently open, and “free” is not inherently “Free”.

They each capture notions that are often orthogonal, occasionally related, and almost always generate tedious debates about freedom vs. free goods, open-ness vs. open-source, etc.

But setting all of that aside, Microsoft never claimed (until recent shifts towards embracing FOSS) to be building an open and non-profit foundation.

The criticisms of OpenAI are reasonable to an extent, not because they are not open, but because they made claims about openness that are looking less and less likely to be true over time.
In my previous organisation $19/month (IIRC) was a dealbreaker. That was non-US so salaries are lower, and suddenly I had to explain why we absolutely needed the paid version so much (instead of sticking to the free one). To make it worse, most of the people that had access to gitlab were researchers/managers/non-technical people and not actually developers, so only a few people would benefit from the paid version. So we never bought the paid version.
Hmm, isn't gpt-4 supposed to be trained with two orders of magnitude more parameters?