skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
worth noting that bonuses are customarily paid when the business is doing better than projected

I've been chewing on this part. It's odd for a large profitable company to tighten the belt over a small miss that still left them large and profitable; they are not in trouble and their people aren't responsible for the macro. On the other hand, it's also no good to handsomely reward people when the business is not performing as it should; it misaligns key incentives.

Perhaps a good balance would be to retroactively adjust business targets for the purposes of the bonus; "One year ago, $X revenue looked feasible. Knowing what we know now, $Y would have been more in line with this year's market". Then you still measure collective success, but don't punish people for missing what turned out to be an impossible target.
Good Segfaulting Help with Node.js
Some people just have the knack and others like me don't and are forgotten to the sands of time.
Given that the "AI" community apparently couldn't care less about treating intellectual property rights with wanton abandon, I can't say such a response would be unwarranted.

Dire circumstances call for drastic measures, as they say.
Yeah, for sure. If anyone made a real "mistake" here, it was Alex, who failed spectacularly at managing the account.

If our protagonist saw a bank as a convenient stash of money, then that's all it was for him. If it were to be anything else, Alex would have been the person who would inform him of that, something he clearly massively failed to do.

If I happened to start a startup and be given a $35M check, I would do exactly what the person in this story did, for the same reasons, and unless a bank person told me otherwise I wouldn't think anything more of it. A bank is a bank is a bank until they demonstrate otherwise to their customer, not the other way around.
So are Cubase, Pro Tools, Live, Premiere, DaVinci, and tons of others, so?
next post in a few months: google shutdown google AI.
Yes it's true that "Third World" originally was a political term that meant non-aligned.

However it was non-aligned nations that started using the term themselves in conjunction with poverty to highlight the issues they were facing. Although slightly different, Mao's "Three Worlds Theory" included China in the "Third World" as an "exploited nation" (whereas under purely political terms it was a "Second World" nation because of its communist government)
Chat GPT 12: The paperclips get chatty and semi-sentient. Clipy-GPT12 is born. Windows RGPT edition is released (Real good pretrained transformer), as the worthy successor of Windows RG (real good) edition.

For those who wouldn't remember/know Windows RG or how intelligent the first clippy was:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbEYOaO9kp4
Maybe, but don't you think they would be a small group compared to the others?
I would disagree! It takes time and resources to learn ASL or even fingerspelling. This would allow people without the time/resources to communicate effortlessly, which I would say is a marked improvement. That said, you could argue it would be a one-way conversation, which is a fair point.
The Butlerian Jihad
I have been answering you point by point, showing you where you're wrong.

If a solid majority of Ukrainians do not want to join NATO in the period 1990-2010, but Bush pushed for it in 2007, then a lot of questions arise:

1) Why does NATO push for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO?

2) Why did they not welcome Russia as well? Was it more corrupt than Ukraine, or less democratic than Turkey, an existing member?

Most people outside the Western bubble know the real reason. The goal was always to gradually surround Russia with NATO bases. Russia needed to be the enemy. If Russia was part of NATO, then NATO wouldn't have an enemy to defend against. Also then Europe's security would be very strong, and there would be no need for USA's weapons to keep the peace. And the bases USA has around the world would have to be reduced, too.

In doing so, US presidents ignored Russian presidents (including Yeltsin, Putin and Medvedev.) They also ignored everyone's warnings, and even the original architects of the USSR containment strategy:

https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-follows-decades-of-w...

Clinton ignored 50 top foreign policy experts:

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/o...

Bush ignored pretty much everybody, including his own ambassadors and experts:

https://nonzero.substack.com/p/the-memo-that-failed-to-preve...

I hope this addresses what relevance NATO expansion has. Every expert knew the predictable outcome. They said it for DECADES.

And even today, billions of people around the world think like me ... according to polls:

https://thewire.in/world/more-indians-hold-us-nato-responsib...

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/06/14/italy-vat...

You can repeat the words "unprovoked and unjustified" many times but that's just a verbatim phrase that you've been taught to repeat, obviously it was provoked. NATO expansion was systematic provocation. As was buzzing airspace. As was the rhetoric and the drone warfare, which worked so well in Nagorno Karabakh against Armenia. And so on.

Obviously if the shoe was on the other foot, USA would do the same. In fact, they did, and does often. The Cuban Missile Crisis is an example.

USA takes far less provocation to attack. Sometimes none. Like in Laos, halfway around the world. No other country does that. You seem to operate on a complete double-standard.

So no, Russia isn't solely at fault. Russia can surely end it, but the consequences will be that Russia will be surrounded in short order by NATO bases, and in a decade or so, nuclear weapons pointed straight at Moscow. Maybe even broken up.

While as a libertarian, I don't have a horse in this race, I can tell you that no country (especially not USA) would ever allow anything close to that to happen. Russia does not want Ukraine to become a NATO member.
Is there? JP Morgan Chase repeated stated throughout 2022 that Fed would lower interest rates; that they'd be foolish not to. And, they haven't. So, if SVB (and anyone else) took JP Morgan's cavalier assertions as fact when deciding how and where to invest, that would prove catastrophic.

Interestingly, majority of the articles highlighting JP Morgan's position are no longer available on the first few pages of DuckDuckGo and Google search engines...

Sept 2022:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market...

Jan 2023:
https://www.barchart.com/story/news/13401774/two-of-the-larg...

Here's a June 2021 report stating that JP Morgan would stand to lose the most of all banking institutions under severe recession (roughly 84 billion US dollars), according to Federal Reserve Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test:

https://www.risk.net/risk-quantum/7848481/fed-stress-test-jp...

"JP Morgan’s loan portfolio would be hit the hardest under a severe recession, according to the results of this year’s Federal Reserve Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test. Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citi would be the next worst hit.

JPM’s losses as projected under the DFAST’s severely adverse scenario, which saw real US GDP drop as much as 4% below end-2020 levels and unemployment peak at 10.75%, would amount to $84 billion, representing 17.7% of total losses across the 23 banks subject to the test..."

May be worth rethinking one's opinion about the position of "more trustworthy" + "JP Morgan Chase."
I’m not sure what that article is supposed to prove. They are using sone computational language and focusing physical responses to visual stimuli but I don’t think it shows “neural computations” as being equivalent to the kinds of computations done by a TM.
Demand for medicine is increasing this will probably make the lives of gp better and free them to do more enjoyable tasks. The law and medicine are closed fields with limited spaces on purpose so I expect them to be least affected.

Whatever job sounds great in a movie avoid, find something with a moat for entry that's what successful startups do.
> They're paraphrasing machines, they have no problem contradicting themselves, they can't define adjectives really, they'll give you synonyms. Again, it's all they have, why should they produce anything else?

It can certainly do more than paraphrasing. And re: the contradicting nature, humans do that quite often.

Not sure what you mean by "can't define adjectives"
Can you give a list of the permissive licenses you train on? MIT for example requires attribution. In fact, most permissive licenses have similar requirements.
Ideally the algorithm and tricks they used to train the model, which they didn't disclose in their associated gpt4 technical paper. We got this far this quickly in AI research because the sector was open with results and innovations.
> It is possible that someday it reads in an entire codebase (say, millions of lines of code), and I can describe a new API I need and it implements the entire thing. This would be quite useful.

You can get this today by switching to being a product manager/owner! Dream up an idea, describe it to a bunch of fuzzy intelligences, go through a few cycles of refinement, and voila: A software.
I miss it too, but it was the sharp end of the wedge in the dumbing-down of search query interpretation. Now they'll take every word of your query, find all the synonyms, word-stem everything (think "kicked" -> "kick"), and search for that instead of what you typed.

I know, some (the majority of) users don't know or care about the difference, and I'm glad that you can for now still enclose the things you mean verbatim in quotation marks, but I wouldn't be surprised to see that disappear.
Nobody is going to "generate training data" if they get precisely nothing out of it.

The complete disregard for intellectual property rights being exhibited by the "AI" community will inevitably come back to bite them in the arse one day.
It seems like you could use Microsoft’s API Extractor to validate schema changes between HEAD’s phero-schema.d.ts and $(git merge-base HEAD main). I haven’t run Phero yet but it would be cool to leverage existing investment here.
It seems likely your neurologist shares a neural architecture with your 2 year old, just benefiting from 30 years of additional training data.
Seems borderline anticompetitive. Short of a customized corporate version of internet explorer or chrome, why should the browser I use dictate what sites I can be served?
Oh come on, it's only 2.5 meters long, what wrong it ca
We did. Someone younger and hungrier didn't.
We have a process that really requires applicants to develop their own high conviction[0]; it would be unsurprising if candidates for whom compensation is disqualifying never actually applied to Oxide.

In terms of candidates in process who did not matriculate over compensation: prior to writing this blog entry, we had had one candidate drop out over compensation (the lesson we learned was that our compensation had been shared too late in the process with the candidate). Amazingly, after we published this blog post we also had one candidate drop out over compensation (albeit earlier in the process). That one was enlightening because the candidate had read the blog entry but had assumed it was false (?!) and that everyone was actually making secret signing bonuses. Finally, we had one candidate who had simply too much equity as their existing employer to leave. This candidate was absolutely miserable at work, they were disgusted by the company they worked for (and they loved Oxide!), but simply couldn't walk away from the equity, which was vesting quarter over quarter with more money than their parents had made over decades. This was causing real angst for the candidate, even though I assured them that their decision was very understandable!

Finally, your last question is the most important one, because we have always endeavored to build the team that we wanted to be on. For me personally, yes, I would emphatically be willing to work at Oxide -- would that they would have me!

[0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xtofg-fMQfZoq8Y3oSAKjEgD...
Frankly I agree, and think it was part of their plan. Sort of. They needed to cool inflation after printing money in huge amounts. Only now they got caught with an over-correction problem that nearly (and still might) cause a 2008 style meltdown.

I don’t believe at all that hiking interest rates this fast was something the Fed thought would not put banks in bad positions that would need risk mitigation and capital raises. If they didn’t know that, they must be abhorrently oblivious. So let’s assume they realized that rapid rate increases would affect certain “safe” investment vehicles and those would be a loss, and some banks would have over exposure. What would the Fed do? Not raise rates? Or take the risk, see what banks were vulnerable, and deal with it then. I feel like the latter is the simplest answer, unfortunately.
The oddest thing to me is being given round after round of cash, and not needing it. Sure it could be 'invested' in an index or something. But wasn't it meant to be 'invested' in the actual startup?
Do any of these show you what the workspace editions miss out on relative to regular Gmail?
There’s a significant amount of evidence pointing to the fact that “anchored” captions (a la speech bubbles, like a comic book) is a preferred way to render captions, assuming the bubbles are at the same focal distance as the speaker. This is solvable with “true” AR, but getting that compute into the lightweight form factor of the original video is an unsolved problem, and is a ways off.
The naming choice is.. not wise.
Yeah, this is probably also true for TSMC, Intel and ARM. Look how slow progress is on RISC-V on the high end despite RISC-V having the best academic talent.
> And they have to work somewhere. If there are no jobs these new grads can "flip burgers" or something, but more likely they'll find someone willing to hire them to crank out code.

If there are no jobs, then how? The market doesn't have to use up the entire supply of skilled workers. It's not going to create jobs just to give people jobs.
Well, if "The latest GPT-4 page shows that when you put the safety stuff in, it loses power"[1] is correct (no citation or explanation given), then Google would be severely handicapping themselves, in which case it'll be interesting to see if they're willing to throw off that constraint in the name of profit, as they did with search ads.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35159269
"We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training data"

Sounds like a good way for the people generating the data to impart their own biases on it while the mindless masses comsuming the end products just nod in agreement.
With all the hype and euphoria over ChatGPT, all we get is a site which is asking you to paste in code you probably copied internally from work or StackOverflow to give an opaque explanation about what is wrong with it.

Even most of the time, it generates broken code as you attempt to use more sophisticated language features (especially Rust) and confidently generates code that doesn't compile or is flat out incorrect.

I guess you're spending more time reviewing the broken AI code more than actually writing the code itself. On top of that, no-one here would be comfortable to paste in code that is internal to their work on a random website either.
1) Yes, most likely. Interns are usually a great investment. Intern class sizes may be scaled down from previous years though. I can see very cash strapped companies cancelling their intern program altogether, but this seems rare. Interns dont cost a lot and are almost always a better hire than an external entry level applicant.

2) Maybe. My guess is external new grad offers (i.e offers extended to people that were not previously interns at the company) will become much harder to get/if not impossible. There were already a few companies that almost exclusively hired out of their intern class even before tech was hit hard by the economy.

Intern return offer rates might be lower as well, but if the overall class size decreases, my guess is the % of offers extended won't go down as much.
Yes, midlife crisis purchases and mail-order-style gold-diggers (supercars and foreign women in the context of what the parent is talking about) sure are fun, if you haven't got an actual life!
I would be interested to know if ChatGPT would confirm that the flaw here is that the argument is a strawman.
Great project! This seems fun and though retro I like the spirit of this more than more modern and more complex games. Good job guys. Hope to see more of this…
Ok. Regardless, you're not going to get a cash offer at a startup that rivals the "today" dollar value of a publicly traded company offering RSUs as compensation. Whether the risk is worth it to you or not is a different and unrelated discussion.
Yes and how does one do due diligence on a bank anyway?
I have seen this take on a few HN threads and I don't know where it comes from. People didn't stop reading books just because audiobooks got popular.

Why would people suddenly just turn to AI for all their entertainment? Part of the reason people love art is because they relate to it.

Like, in 2023 with the internet, blog posts, youtube, reddit, movies, etc, there's still enough demand for books that people buy them. Just because a new medium is created doesn't mean it suddenly just becomes the only medium.
This reminds me of sonic the hedge hog and Nintendo games. Very eerie 90s feeling. Back then I used to think it was so awesome and now I get the feeling how much of my life I just waisted by trying to get good at a game that was not worth judging myself by.
You could move to Chicago and do both. Apparently the plumbers union got a law passed requiring electric lines to run In plumbing conduit. Not sure what they call it. Plumbectrican?
I fully agree. The hybrid option rules for flexibility but I miss an office environment where engineering was seen as a collective interpersonal effort. In person felt effective and useful. Sometimes wfh feels like being put in the corner with a ticket to work on and a presentation due date and that can be depressing no matter how fun the problem is to work on, imho.
8 years is probably the maximum length of time a project can live, given the political cycle.

I had a friend who worked in nuclear, and progress was dictated by changes in washington every 4 or sometimes 8 years.
Literally had to tune out a super senior employee this morning who was talking about this flavor of DRY.

Invoking the same function from two places in the code with vaguely similar parameters is lot repeating yourself, dude.

Sometimes I wonder if the amount of sanity in the industry is finite and adding more people just makes us all crazier.
This will only work until and unless BingGPT becomes very popular, in which case Microsoft will very quickly implement better technical checks to try to anticompetitively boost Edge's market share.
What if we can see things on the solar system plane because of some yet to be discovered laws of multidimensional physics that hide other objects from detection that live outside the plane.

Maybe an infinite multiverse is all around us and we just don't have capabilities to see it with human senses or tools, or to comprehend how it interacts with what we can measure and detect?
You can look at Google's recent PaLM-E model for a possible approach. They use a vision transformer to tokenise the image (or to generate embeddings and then tokenise those?) and they also tokenise detected objects so the model can reason at a semantic level. Either way, it's been shown that these massive LLMs can handle images in tokenised form if you pretend it's text. In Google's case, the model is trained to look for sentinel values in the prompt (i.e. <img>) that denote images/objects are being sent.
If people aren't clicking, then their headlines and summaries are either not interesting enough or too revealing.

The news media needs to put up strong paywalls and give up on full subscriptions. No one wants to pay $100 per news source to access hundreds of articles they don't want to read. They need to let people pay per article. Paying one article at a time is too expensive due to transaction fees. They need to offer something like 40 articles for $20 and request another payment when the 40 articles run out.

The news media needs social media to spread their article links around. Charging social media per click will result in their article links being reduced or blocked because of the cost. News media with lower cost links will be promoted.
I've tried it on a few of the wtfjs examples, and it explains the snippets surprisingly well, sometimes even better than the original explanations!

https://whatdoesthiscodedo.com/g/cfa4c2c

https://github.com/denysdovhan/wtfjs
> An LLM can only take the whole model and repeat its parts with the most familiar patterns. It is stuck fuzzing around the strategies (or sections of strategy) it has been given. It cannot invent a new divergent strategy, even if the game rules require it to. It cannot choose the winning strategy unless that behavior is what was already recorded in the training corpus.

Where are you getting that from? My understanding is that you can get new, advanced, winning moves by starting a prompt with "total victory for the genius grandmaster player one who uses new and advanced winning techniques". If the model is capable and big enough, it'll give the correct completion by really inventing new strategies.
And this is why we don't let people build the paperclip optimizer.

Making a machine that could do what you say above probably isn't that hard.

Making the machine that could do the above without destroying the world is impossible.
Of those, MQTT should be the only thing you expose to the outside world. Secure it with regular TLS, possibly with mutual auth for your clients if you care about that.

For the others, secure them using the same tech you use to secure your database. Ideally they wouldn't be accessible from the internet at all.
The nuclear project for UAMPS is particularly absurd when you realize how enormous the potential for off river pumped hydro storage is in that area (Idaho and Utah). The west should be going with renewables, period.
Just stumbled upon ChatGPT 4, and I must say, I'm impressed. OpenAI has really upped their game since the GPT-3 days. It's got that classic HN-approved recursive learning, but they've seemingly solved most of the context-limit issues. I'm still a bit concerned about the ethical implications of AI-generated content (how many jobs will be lost this time?), but I've got to admit, it's a game-changer. As an aside, anyone else here tinkering with GPT-4 powered startup ideas? Could be the next gold rush.

(Not my own comment. Generated by ChatGPT.)
Yes, we do see so many positive contributions from the community - not only on the technical side but also for example environmental justice organisations that build workshop material for students on top of the kit. So we want to make sure that all contributors get attributed.
Why would they do that for you? Don't you think that intelligent machines will have their own interests?
Profession:

https://www.abelard.org/asimov.php
I tried it with some of the Perl source code in, and... it actually impressed me by explaining what a few of the variables mean, e.g. that "PL_lex_inpat" means "currently parsing inside a pattern (i.e., regex)."

On the other hand, it finished up with: "In summary, this code checks whether certain tokens are present in the input stream, and takes some actions or returns a boolean value accordingly." That's pretty much the grammatically correct but vacuous word-paste I expect from High Schoolers on a deadline and large language models.