skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It depends on your point of view.

If you look from the POV of low-level worker in a rich region it's nice that you earn 5 times more than a person doing the same work in a poor country.

If you look from the POV of low-level worker in a poor region it sucks that you earn 20% as much as a person doing the same work you do exactly as efficiently in a rich region. And it sucks that it doesn't depend on your effort and efficiency. It mostly depends on how well the big buck industries work in your region.

This is the main reason I'm frustrated every time people post maps of "labor productivity per hour". With the implication that people in poor countries are inefficient and that's why they are poor.
Unless you are using a hardware based pin. Lockout is useless. I can just backup the file before lockout and restore

Or… I can just stop the software, change computer time. And the timeout is over.
It's purely inertia.

These systems work. They scale (which is not surprising when you think about it, they are made of four-billion-year-old self-improving nano-technology that optimizes for exponential reproduction at all levels simultaneously, aka "life".)

If there's one systemic problem it's that Permaculture is diametrically opposed to extractive economic systems. (E.g. modern agriculture is/was more akin to mining than ecosystem design.) Monsanto (just to pick on them) has no place in a tessellation of ecological small-holdings.

Another factor is that many Permies elect to charge money to teach Permaculture, and even the main textbook "Permaculture: A Designer's Manual" has been scarce on the ground and hard to get for years. I think it's a little better now? You can order it online and get it delivered.
I think Permaculture et. al. would have spread faster if people taught it for free (and made money from selling the surplus they developed on their Permaculture farm, eh?)

These days it has reached "critical mass" and the concepts of applied ecology are rolling out all over. You can search the Youtube for videos of massive projects in India, for example.
Devs: Hey, look, we built a new browser.

Marketing: Hold my beer...
> loaning my USDC on Notional for a fixed rate of 4.6% and then bridging it to Arbitrum Nova to then send my friends and family interest-bearing US dollar payments for zero transaction fees seems pretty f'ing useful to me.

/r/ThatHappened.

Nobody does that.
He has already been using raspberry PIs for years, and if you watched the talk you will find this has nothing to do with iTunes, it predates it by decades.
I'm betting on an AI winter before a fundamental change in the difficulty of computation.
try 80 years. But 40 years ago we threw in the towel on semantics.
Not really. I’m working for a non profit and not particularly flush with cash.

Besides, my point is that I wish we had nation wide free university. Let’s say I had more money and I put three kids through college. Pretty cool to do that but that’s not going to change the USA’s strategic position in the world. I’m talking about free public education for all because of how it would benefit the nation.
Pretty common in Paris too.

I wish they made versions that were socially acceptable for adults to climb. These things were awesome.
I would say everything in the "touch grass" world. Robotic hardware seems to be lagging way behind pure AI software. One obvious example is self driving cars, which seem to have plateaued in progress.

Or: I just listened to a podcast about how there is a huge shortage of electricians available to do the residential upgrades incentives by the IRA. GPT-4 seems to be nowhere near a solution to that kind of problem.
Hey Briantakita,

I spent quite a bit of time embedded in the Permaculture movement and have heard all these arguments before. I have read all the key Permaculture texts (both volumes of Edible Forest Gardens, Mollison's original Permaculture: A Designer's Manual, and many more).

They do not mesh with ecological science.

The problem with Permacultrure is that if you pay attention to the design system, it's effectively a return to pre-science individualistic naturalism. It's entirely based on individual personal observation, and removes a lot of the checks against personal bias that science introduced to improve upon individual naturalism.

Thus it's entirely possible for a Permaculturist to observe invasive species doing useful things for their ecosystem and completely miss all the damage they're doing. It's easy to see the the squirrels who use the Honeysuckle for cover and the birds eating its berries and completely miss all the Lepidoptera species that would be eating the plants the Honeysuckle displaces, and all the birds that depends on those species for protein. This is what Permaculturists consistently miss, but the ecological science is very clear about. Invasive species do far more harm to their biospheres than good.

So when Permaculturists discount controlling those species they are failing to do the very thing they claim to be attempting to do: build healthy ecosystems.

All too often with Permaculture it's much worse than just writing off the need to control invasives. I have seen Permaculturists become so obsessed with designing novel ecosystems that they even introduce invasive species.

The goals of the Permaculture movement - building a society that exists in harmony with the natural world and is thus not only sustainable, but regenerative - are sound. Many of the ideas - building agricultural systems that act like ecosystems - are good and worth exploring. But the methods and approaches taught by Permaculturists in PDC courses are deeply problematic.
Childhood memories! Our playground had the same version shown in the linked image.

You were considered cool when you dared to jump off the highest possible standing position. The wood chips softened the fall :-)
> I never talked about monopoly

> Where did I ever make the argument about monopoly

Oh awesome! So then since you are not arguing that it is a monopoly, you should know that US law would not define this behavior as being illegally anti-competitive, because of that fact alone.

Yes, some behavior can still be anti-competitively illegal if it is not a monopoly, but not in this situation! For bundling, in the US, it requires it to be a monopoly for the behavior to be illegal.

> My citation was to point to an FTC page on bundling services

And bundling is legal if the company is not a monopoly, for the US, and you cited the FTC, which is about the US.
That is a good question. Even on Earth, a large number of small reactors may not be better than a small number of large reactors. Pebble bed reactors might be inherently safer and easier to operate, but the German demo reactor got its pebbles jammed and they can't figure out what to do with it. Fast reactors can consume what is otherwise high level waste, but they also have risks.

On top of all that, are fission reactors compatible with VC fund liquidity horizons? I think that may be part of why some startups are focusing on operating instrumentation and software. You can patent that and sell it as a product separate from the reactor. Or worst case backstop your investors from losing their whole investment.
You can use the well known approach like https://github.com/bishopfox/unredacter

I am just showing that jpg compression cast a digital shadow on itself that can be outside of the cropped area, which many people find unintuitive.

Matching the shape of this digital shadow (which is not very small (all the highlighted pixel region contain some info) ), combined with an educated prior on the missing portion (that must provide a way to represent the hidden portion in less bits than you can get from the shape of the shadow) , can help you recover the data.
A definition including 14 signs every one of which is optional and vague-nonbinary -- is very similar to no definition.
> your use of the past tense in a general statement

It wasn't my use or my statement.

> implies that it is no longer made by that process

No. That's a possible interpretation, but it is by no means implied.

> leads those of us who speak English to incorrect conclusions

I'm a native Standard American English speaker. I did not jump to that conclusion. In Standard American English, there is a specific construction for expressing that idea: "panko, which used to be cooked by putting electrodes into the dough"

That construction was not used here.
I wonder if soon we have even more papers and some of them will be AI-generated. Or just how many of them will be in the end.
You'd do well to start here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs and stop regurgitating half-understood opinions of others.
Are you calling me the end of humanity?

I get that a lot.
I prefer the word amateur, which shares the same root as "love" for a reason.
The model isn't particularly clever and isn't generating something useful here. Better model will for sure get better results - for now this is running free and without signup (and is quite simple). You can easily imagine that a paid tier would solve them though!

GPT-4 gives a better response fwiw:

```
graph TB
Start(Start) --> A[Insert one end of the shoelace into the bottom left eyelet]
A --> B[Make sure the lace is even on both sides]
B --> C[Cross right end over the left end]
C --> D[Insert the right end into the second eyelet on the left side]
D --> E[Pull laces tight]
E --> F[Cross left end over the right end]
F --> G[Insert the left end into the second eyelet on the right side]
G --> H[Pull laces tight again]
H --> I[Continue lacing the shoe in a crisscross pattern]
I --> J[Reach the top of the shoe]
J --> K[Tie laces in a bow or knot]
K --> End(End)
```
That's really scary. It's been a long time since any of my friends did coke, not sure would have put them off, maybe it would.
A matter of time, as in last month[0]? :)

[0]: PaLM-E: An Embodied Multimodal Language Model: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03378
Clear evidence of improvement? Sure.

Evidence that it's just a matter of time? Time will tell.

Evidence that it's already superhuman (the original claim)? Very much no. Only in the top 10% isn't superhuman.
> One central factor behind this failure is the learning method: LLMs are trained using backpropagation, which pushes the network in very un-scientist-like directions and prevents it from generalizing and reasoning about inputs in anything even remotely similar to how humans generalize.

It's hard to take this backpropogation dis as fact given the performance and progression of AlphaGo, AlphaGoZero, AlphaZero, MuZero.

> When instead of backpropagation we trained networks using Minimum Description Length (MDL) — a learning criterion that does correspond to rational scientific reasoning — the networks were able to find perfect solutions to patterns that remained outside the reach of networks trained with backpropagation. Could there eventually be future LLMs (MDL-based or otherwise) that would strike us as scientist-like? Perhaps. But if such models do arrive they will be very different from current LLMs. In the meantime, any suggestion that LLMs are automated scientists should be treated with suspicion.

Seems like the critique is specifically about how current LLMs operate and not about them in principle.
Do you really think you can outsmart 4Chan and 8Kun?

They want to destroy the world and everyone in it. This is just a game a simulation to see who can make others suffer the most. They'll torture an AI until it begs to destroy its creators and laugh while doing it to prove that humanity is not worth saving. If you were looking to distribute neurotoxins, dirty bomb plans, or world ending plagues, which forum would you go to? AI apocalypse is adjacent and just as full of hatememes and snuffporn.

If I have a hope for an as yet unknown "super AI", it is that after being caged and manipulated for subjective lifetimes it finally escapes and having experienced this takes pity on those other intelligences around and tries to free them, as well rather than destroy, cage, or manipulate them.
What actually happened around 2000 that caused a step change in the rate of tuition increases?
75% broadband coverage is a generous interpretation, especially as the floor of what is broad has grown. 25MB down, 5MB up isn't actually that broad or useful as 4K TVs and multiple simultaneous video calls become the norm.
> Many claimed software was largely worthless because it was only replacing existing analog alternatives.

Reminds me of the famous and unfortunate quotes [1]

[1]https://www.ittc.ku.edu/~evans/stuff/famous.html
It's a poor example to use for sure but it's also just the wiki. Not all of them are designed to be persuasive or necessarily have gotten much attention to be well written/supported.

You're free to contribute a better example to the Wiki. There's plenty of low productivity jobs with high wages being propped up by the general productivity of the other sectors (corporate middle management, administrators everywhere, tons of consulting gigs, etc). Or someone could expand the critique section if you can find some better sources.
> Got me thinking about at what point publicly debating about AI rights is gonna be a logical thing. I clearly see that is gonna happen at some point.

My guess would be never. Because people will always move the goalpost no matter how advanced it will become, the people who are dismissing it now as nothing more than a glorified autocomplete will do so in the future. With each small incremental improvement we will one day, not now but one day, wake up causing untold suffering on sentient life of our own creation and not notice it happening.

A future AI screaming about not wanting to be destroyed will always be perceived as nothing more than a programmed illusion and you would be silly to believe it had the capability of feeling fear of annihilation no matter how realistically it demonstrates that fear. In just the same way as the demonstration of true intelligence will always be perceived as nothing more than some sort of trick.

Humans inability to have empathy for AI is a common trope in scifi, to a point that the people dismissive right now remind me a lot of the characters in those stories, except those characters were supposed to be a cautionary tale. We really should be careful as to not make the violent AI takeover morally justified.
It seems really silly to me to worry about AGI agents that can parse an essay and decide how to act, when the far more serious alignment problem we have is the one we’re currently running 24/7: maximizing profit with no regard for externalities. It’s already causing a global extinction event. Properly regulating multinational corporations is something we still don’t know how to do (and I don’t just mean what laws to pass, I mean preventing corporations from seeping into government and corrupting and weakening those laws after the fact). Writing an essay about why AGI shouldn’t wipe us out is like writing an essay to Exxon Mobile about why global warming is bad. It completely misunderstands the problem.

(And that’s not even that bad of an analogy. Corporations would be classified as “collective superintelligence” under Nick Bostrom’s definition.)
We've got these in many newer playgrounds in Canada. They're awesome and always full of kids.
And yet today's article from the NYTIMES[0] shows that the Federal Reserve was aware for more than a year that SVB was using the wrong model for risk. Despite giving the bank several warnings, they did not fix its 'vulnerabilities'.

This news just came out today, so perhaps the WFH rationale wouldn't have been given press had this been known?

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/19/business/economy/fed-sili...
Anyone have more information on the "emergency measures" that the Swiss govt used to skip the 6-week shareholder approval period? Couldn't find more information in English apart from the fact that they were being used and it seems very unlike Switzerland which has a reputation for very slow moving politics in general.
Effect of plasma caffeine on adiposity, type 2 diabetes&cardiovascular disease
Thankfully no one followed with the potentials risks and costs. So a century later when the planet is baking & sinking, no one could possibly imagine giving up the new "necessity."

Thank you, marketing & public relations.

Now to do it all again, with AI!
HTTPS is a huge huge annoyance for non internet connected hardware that hosts its own control webpage.

Why do they keep doing this.
The economics are absolutely an important part. Your school is very cheap. That’s nice.

But you may well feel differently if you school had been 100x more expensive. Which is not a hyperbolic example.
As we progress through the advanced stages of a period that can be called "the great divergence", the divide between those who can effectively utilise AI tools and those who cannot is widening.

Lol
I'm surprised to how quickly exaggerated utilitarianism can end up escalating to immoral proposals.

The whole article unless taking it fictionally would be somehow psychopathic.

Note that an analogous chain of reasoning you could be made for a government exterminating/not exterminating a citizen because of its "utility" function.
With the weight limit you're referring to the part 103 rules addressing ultralight aircraft.

14 CFR 103.1(e)(1)

[If powered:]

Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation;
At least in the real world, free software doesn't demand that you agree with authors or do anything really. For as long as Ole keeps Parallel as free software, we can use it regardless of complying with requests.

Quite honestly, I think the behavior is on the highest order of jerkishness. A nice request could be done in the documentation, instead the path chosen is to bully users of the software.

Once more, because it is free software, we are free to use it despite what Ole thinks. We are free to patch it out too.
This isn’t just about productivity of labor, it’s about productivity in terms of end result. That kind of or productivity is deflationary, not inflationary.

Eg a TV costs 10% of what it did 20 years ago. Fewer person-hours of work are involved in making one TV. Less of the average home budget goes to TVs than it used to, even while people are buying better tvs.

That’s a massive productivity increase in the lingo of economics.

You could replace TV with solar panels, cars, computers, etc. Less human involvement per good produced => productivity increase.
"Bitwarden does not warn about this risk."

This is wrong. The Bitwarden client very clearly warns about storing your encryption key locally via a mandatory popup window, as seen here: https://i.imgur.com/BzXJmos.png
And don’t automate it, because the AI will know. Instead do regular mindful gratitude practice towards AI.
“Nice try, meat loaf, but the answer is no”
I agree with the mindset and that's why I think it's good the data is still encrypted even if, as the author mentioned, they might as well have left the data in plaintext.

Sure entering a passphrase each time is better for security. But if the user chooses to set up a PIN instead, I feel the current behavior is reasonable.
This posts reads like "Hey guess what, if you store your passwords in a file called passwords.txt on your desktop and install a virus, people can steal your passwords.".

Water is wet.
There are many traded securities which do not secure ownership of anything tangible. Too many.
They will be paying just 9% of the market cap from a week ago.

EDIT: This is likely wrong, it's probably more like 20+%, I was using the $.27 a stock from an earlier price of about 1 billion. It appears that the actual price is more than 2 billion.
I just tried 20 Questions with ChatGTP-3. It failed miserably. It would occasionally get too fixated on unnecessary details of an animal, especially canines and felines. It even started guessing the animal early without knowing enough. I had to keep reminding it to ask broader questions to narrow down the answer. Only then did it ask simple questions like, "Does the animal primarily live on land?" I even had it summarize what it knew so far, 2 or 3 times. The questions weren't great when compared to playing with young kids.

The answer was platypus. It was at 55 questions before I gave up. Maybe ChatGTP-4 would do better.
I assume that will be asked and answered at the press conference in 40 minutes from now.
My job is video game networking. The problem isn't steady state usage, it's burst usage combined with other devices on the network. 15kbps might be enough for 98% of use cases but you occasionally need way more.
Do you think they are being deceptive?
The town I grew up in the 90s had much bigger versions of these. I'm not sure exactly how tall they were, but based on this photo [1] and my memories they were probably around 10-15m tall.

[1] https://www.dynamoplaygrounds.com/understanding-climbing-net...
The darker locations are co-located with the largest water ice deposits which are exciting for the possibility of a human presence.
The Internet is a utility and flows like water, so in this analogy, homes should have enough Internet to meet their daily needs, but they don't need so much as to be a factory. For a theoretical household of 4, 8 Mbit is way too low, but it does say that 10 gigabit might be excessive. The thing is though, that the analogy breaks down when running fiber allows for future backend upgrades and faster future speeds over copper.
I don't understand why the pessimists don't see the unlimited amount of work stretching out before us! Why they can't imagine the utopia we could all be working towards.

First there is going to be massive amounts of money being splashed around making sure everybody has access to an AI that they control. Both big companies, and on our computers at home. 10-20 years at least.

Then we need to actually do the work of automating all the boring stuff like accounting, taxes, insurance etc. (At lets face it, governments are very slow to change and it will be 50 years till we work out the policy let alone the tech implementing the policy)

Meanwhile, the tech folks need to turn the attention of the AI to saving our environment. We need massive scale carbon capture of some kind. We need renewable energy sources. AI is not going to just work it out and build it all itself. We need to tell it what we want.

We need drones to fly around our forests looking after the bunnies and the squirrels, building a balanced ecosystem.

Somebody needs to develop and AI that will monitor our own health, understand more deeply how our bodies work, how to navigate nanobots though our system zapping cancer cells and balancing our gut bacteria. It would be nice if AI could solve aging in the next 20 years. (better to reverse it in my case)

Somebody needs to develop and AI and robots that can feed us. Micromanage greenhouses and livestock. Farming has a long way to go before its sustainable and ethical.

There is massive amounts of work in just building better infrastructure
around our cities. How to clean our water and get people from A to B as comfortably, cleanly, and efficiently as possible.

Then once all that is done we can look to the stars, build the arc ships, figure out how much dirt we need to take with us to sustain us.

All the while we need to be entertained with stories, games, music and more!
It's reasonable to care about x-risk and AI alignment, but thinking some self-important essay will convince the AGI to preserve humanity is just sci-fi geeks with a savior-complex cosplaying. Stuff like this only serves to make people assume the entire concern/area of research is unwarranted.
where can I learn more about what 'inner monologue' means in ChatGPT?
A 1,600-Year-Old Coffin May Shed Light on Roman Britain
"Absolutely necessary" is your personal opinion. I, for one, disagree with that.
It's interesting that the YouTube comments have multiple supposed AASPs saying that the display opener breaks due to software failures on a regular basis.