skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fixed now. Thanks!

(Submitted title was "John Carmack: From a DM, just in case anyone else needs to hear this". A mod changed it to "I’m concerned AI will make CS jobs obsolete" but yeah, that changed the meaning. Sorry!)
I’d bet (though in all fairness, only a low amount ;)) the intersection between a user that has both a weak master password and attackers willing to spend a ton to rent a GPU farm is pretty low, though.
Granted it's a Wikipedia article and not the original research, but I have two quibbles. The first is that it still takes the same number of people to perform a Beethoven symphony, but 4 kids with electric guitars and barely any training can now perform music to a packed concert hall or dance floor. And those kids are under price pressure from someone who can now deliver the same productivity with a laptop. (I was one of those kids once).

The second is that college professors have been phased out of teaching for a long time, increasingly replaced by adjuncts who earn starvation wages.

Healthcare, I'm not sure about. At my most recent clinic visits, a doctor (i.e., MD) was nowhere in sight. A technician examined me, a physician's assistant interpreted the exam results, and ordered a visit to a MRI machine operated by technicians. (Thankfully, it turns out I'm OK). My healthcare costs twice as much as in most civilized countries for no good reason despite roughly equal labor inputs.

It would be useful to remove education and healthcare from the graph and see if the theory still makes sense.
Someone's gotta grow the food. Our farmers deserve Netflix.
I'm building an integration that will use a long lived token once a month. In your experience will a long lived token expiry if not used for a month? How long do they remain valid until expiring from not being used?
I'm surprised Africa doesn't already have South American and SEA style drug production and farming. I guess the lack of infrastructure and the existing competition, and all of the other problems in Africa limited it. Having constant security vacuums is probably not good for manufacturers. Stuff like FARC kept their jungle growing regions stable.
The bad version of all three look exactly the same. And the bad version of all three are actually worse than nobody at all. Yet, high management is completely convinced those people are essential so they'd rather keep a bad professional there than get rid of them.

Anyway, the good version of those three are completely different, and add a ton of value on very different places. I think they are rare enough that many people don't ever meet one of them.
I'll paste here GP's question that we're discussing (emphasis mine):

"No, the main question is are the highest paid workers getting that because of college, or did the most driven and smartest go to college, and would have been equally successful had no one gone to college?"

There are a few interesting questions we could ask related to college attendance. The most common ones are:

1. From an individual student's perspective, does going to college have a positive ROI, in a world where the college and employment landscape exists as it does today.

2. If the answer to #1 is yes, how much of this is due to education, and how much is due to pure signalling ("sorting hat") effects?

3. If we were to eliminate all colleges, so that no one has a bachelors' degree, would that reduce the outputs and incomes of the most driven and smartest people.

The papers you cited attempt to address #1 and #2. But neither of those are the question that GP asked (which is #3).

You claim that they do address this question, but are asking me for evidence that they don't. I'm not sure what you're expecting me to do? Go through each and every paragraph in each paper and explain how it doesn't address #3?

It might be easier for you point us to a sentence or paragraph in either paper that envisages a world where no one goes to college.
We can just make them pay for it instead of mooching off everybody else.
> Developers are really lazy.

Speak for yourself.

> We have terms like DX and UX. It’s not a false dichotomy at all.

It's still a false dichotomy, because they're not necessarily opposed. Making the native Mac software DX worse can also make the UX worse, and making the DX better can make the UX better. When I said "Eventually everything on the Mac will just be a cross-platform afterthought", I meant that the UX is becoming totally crappy. We get Electron, we get Catalyst, we get iOS apps on macOS. Crap. Bad UX.

Lack of powerful software, due to excessive security restrictions, is also a bad UX. Endless "Cancel or Allow" dialogs are a bad UX.
Ensure you have a backup supplier that you can switch to.
Real Artificial Intelligence? Yeah, that would definitely factor out a lot of the wasted work we call "engineering".

Language Learning Models like GPT? Not even close.

We should absolutely stop calling those "AI". They are not intelligent. They model intelligent behavior: human writing.

We should probably even stop calling them "Language Learning". They don't know or care what language is: they learn whatever patterns are present in text, language or not.

Text contains the patterns that humans identify as language; but those aren't the only patterns present in text: which means language is not the only thing being modeled by an LLM. There is no categorization happening either: a pattern is a pattern.

There is this religious cult surrounding LLMs that bases all of its expectations of what an LLM can become on a personification of the LLM. They say that we can't possibly understand the limitations of this method; therefore there are no limitations at all! It's absurd.
> Like what?

Are you under the impression that AI can do most things well? Because so far it cannot.
> It seems to support both?

Ah, only saw the api one!
Seems incredibly shortsighted, even in the limited examples provided; It says "the number of musicians required for a quartet is the same as in Beethoven's day" which is true, but even by 1960 recording technology provided those musicians the chance to be more "productive" by all but the most myopic of measures (i.e. "times they drew their bow across the strings").
Find your local Hackspace, it’s probably populated by the same sort of people, building things for the love of doing something fun and interesting. (Unfortunately it’ll also be populated by the sort of antagonistic nerds you’d quietly leave a bar to avoid, but that was the case back in the 90s as well)
But, increasingly, users don’t need desktop software.

In fact, the move towards sandboxes apps makes native apps closer to browser apps.

I’m not even saying it’s a good thing. Just that gimping native apps isn’t the footgun it would have been 10 years ago.
They are lowering the long term risk of too little short term risk, an unsafe excess of safety. This is a kind of behavioral hormesis. The dose/response curve of a potential toxin is seldom linear, including for jungle gyms.
Anything that’s not a glorified copy/paste.
obvious missing piece here is we're not the farrier, we're the horse. horses ended up as glue. ('glue code' pun intended, mostly)

ATMs didn't kill the bank branch, exactly, but crappy banks have survived competition just by having access to cheap credit + yield

Key thinker in this topic w/ Piketty, bc his lens is perfect: when can machines do what people do, economically. He is agnostic to technology in that he doesn't care about computers vs steampunk, and he is open to the market + political dynamics of labor as factors.
Well, people have to be convinced of the usefulness of anything. You can't just approach a person with "trust me, it's good for you".
I’m suddenly reminded of the existence of n-gate!
OP here. Same. I was using NVIDIA graphics and it was very very bad.
There's also paexec
I web searched it and found a dedicated wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdiction but I still can't figure out what TPM interdiction is supposed to mean

Anyway if a TPM was trivially bypassable then there would be no point to having them so I'm doubtful of whatever this off-hand comment is supposed to mean
The difference is that a human playing chess, once told the rules, doesn't suddenly start making illegal moves after passing the memorized opening phase. Accidentally making illegal moves is the categorical definition of not knowing how to play.
Dump the heat into the ground.
What puzzles me about all the skeptics (deniers, ever) is that they don't seem to be too forward thinking. Sure, these LLMs will not replace anyone right now, but damn look at the progression. Going back 5-10 years, we're doing stuff was seemingly impossible back then. Just imagine what things will look like in another 10-15-20 years?

If you're a 14-15 year old computer enthusiast, planning on getting a BS or MS in CS, you'll likely first enter the workforce 7-10 years. The time you spend in University is a lifetime for certain fields of Machine Learning / AI, and who knows what entry jobs have been completely automated.

Personally, I think this will be the death of entry-level jobs.
Africa has no public transport and had the lowest rates of transmission.
Bummer that its not usable on the browser extension though. I used to have the desktop app but it ended up being mostly useless. 99% of my passwords go into the browser where I want autofill, and for the rest I almost always have a browser open anyways so I can just as easily copy/paste from the extension as the app.
I'm thinking there will be another announcement when they've actually done it. However you define that word, though, the point about the comments is clear: the discussion, if and when they do open source the code, will be quite different because there will be actual code to discuss.
The problem with AI such as GPT4 is training data. As it usage increases, most of its training data will be data generated by GPT4, hence creating a positive feedback loop. This would actually increase the value of human knowledge workers.
release notes: https://www.htmlunit.org/changes-report.html#a3.0.0
Responses like this are just so bizarre to me. Do you think other Presidents didn't extort other countries for various concessions, even selfish ones that help their political ambitions? Do you think other Presidents were not grifters? Perhaps you should look into Obama's and the Clinton's net worth before and after their presidency.

What really broke people's brains about Trump is that he was openly rude and obnoxious and unapologetic about it, and so didn't hide the self-serving behind a polite facade that preserved the collective fiction that politicians were looking out for the people and not themselves. That's what people both love and hate about him.
I thought the disillusionment around here with wikileaks had more to do with the way they had changed from careful curation, removing the personal information of those not involved, to just bulk dumps. Less that Hillary's emails were leaked and more that the personal information of lesser figures in and donors to the DNC were also released in mass. They had changed in perception from journalism to personal revenge against Hillary for her pursuing Assange as Secretary of State. The fact that the RNC had been hacked but emails not released helped in this perception...
Very true. It’s a small but very helpful act of looking out for your future self to generalize access to APIs or multiple providers in your codebase via your own concept of accessing a list of service providers can be easily swapped out or added to.
In English, we use the habitual aspect for things that have been, and are still, done on a regular basis. If you wish to speak about a currently-implemented process for making food, for instance, you say "panko is baked by passing an electrical current through it".

If you have a small bag of panko on the counter, you may point to it and say "an electrical current was passed through this panko to bake it", but you could also construct the former sentence and be completely correct. But your use of the past tense in a general statement about panko implies that it is no longer made by that process, which leads those of us who speak English to incorrect conclusions. This confusion can be further compounded by the fact that we were discussing events of many decades past, so Triscuits, for example, may no longer be baked in electric ovens, although they certainly could still be.

https://twitter.com/sageboggs/status/1242968548949004288/pho...
Thanks.
True but at least they have a job and some economic freedom. Without that job they would be reliant on other people. I'm not sure I see the problem here actually.
Even better than the terminals in this video is the extensive look at the warehouse floor robots, which portend Amazon's system.

This was 45 years ago and even Amazon hasn't brought this technology to the last mile. They only use these robots in giant warehouses, and not in the stores themselves, as this video suggests is "right around the corner."

Why not?
I dont see the connection here.

SVB failed because they dumped most of their liquidity into 10 year bonds before the Fed started hiking rates, essentially locking in those assets for 10 years. No company would buy a bond for next to no interest when a new bond can be had at 5% now.

They failed to diversify and that seems a top level decision that has nothing to do with WFH.

Additionally a lot of their depositors were companies with accounts well over the FDIC insurance. Arguably the werent a consumer bank and the repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed them to act like they were when it suited them, and act like an investment bank when it simiarly suited them.

Arguably this would be an example of why repealing GS was bad, from my very limited understanding.

And the whole WFH seems a red herring at best to try and avoid any actual accountability for the real decisions that led to its run and collapse.
The manipulations within the state dept. by Victoria Nuland are well known. She was literally caught on the phone planning who was going to be pushed as the next leader. By labelling it a conspiracy, you are simply trying to disparage a very valid possibility. Conspiracies are nothing more than multiple people collaborating to make something happen. It does happen, and they should not be dismissed out of hand.
I know literally hundreds of people who regularly or semi-regularly do illicit drugs, including myself. And if you read the testing instructions, you'll find that the best way is to mix and test the entire package of drugs, not just a sample. Though to be honest, few people I know test with any regularity.
The reason you think frontend is more complicated is because of historically terrible terrible decisions made. Frontend is made complex because of the initial idiots developing it.

I didn't make anything up. I just noticed that frontend devs were being looked down upon when talking to some devs and I investigated further. It seems that most frontend devs are just what is usually called "code monkeys" who just fling shit until it works. No real understanding of math, algorithms, architecture and general good engineering principles. Which is also why usually frontend code looks like garbage. I am sure there are exceptions but for the most part frontend stuff doesn't get the best and brightest people working on it. Because it's considered boring and uninteresting.
Personally I don't care. Web dev in general seems to be complete and utter trash and I work on things that are on a completely different plane of complexity (as in if things go wrong people die). It's just funny that you still cling on to the idea that frontend is some sort of holy grail of engineering and absolute complexity.
reminds me of when I was a kid in the UK, there was these places that was called 'funhouses' where kids was supposed to play, I was seriously terrified of dying. I'm unsure if it's my memory and/or if I was just too young
You can set "Home" to anything you want, but apparently Home isn't what happens when you open a new tab any more, it's what happens when you click the Home button.

It's pretty icky, and being stuck on this Windows work laptop is shortening the time I'll spend in this gig.
I disabled it for purpose :)
There was no need for villification. For whatever good Wikileaks did for "the truth" or people's curiousity, it was a danger to US troops and their allies from the first moments.

That's got nothing to do with political views. And the charges against him are still perfectly legal. An "authoritarian" system would go about this completely differently.
Seems to fall back to GPT 3 if you haven't got access to GPT 4 API yet
raise untraceable funds for black projects by selling fentanyl
Agree in parts but behind this argument there is an assumption that legal drugs would cause the market for illegal drugs to collapse entirely. Has not happened with alcohol (between 14 and 23% of alcohol sold in the US is illegal).

Adderall (fake or legit) is heavily sold illegally and their lacing with Fentanyl is a massive problem already.
There's no real info in the article. One thing I'd speculate is that if the company really has a culture of making excuses like this, that's probably a sign of the kind of cultural problems that would have led to a failure.

I've seen this a lot in government and large organizations. Most people do next to nothing, but everyone is an expert at explaining why it's not their fault, and something outside their control (usually understaffing) is to blame. It's a culture of defeat and avoidance, and the same kind of thing that would absurdly blame remote work for risk management decisions.
In some loose sense, AI doomerism could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Future LLMs will be trained on today’s content. So if the AI doomers convincingly argue that future AIs will be malignant, those AIs might be more likely to exhibit malignant tendencies.
Solidly false. Just a few days ago I was held from behind with a knife to my neck by a Colombian who was sure I had cocaine and was demanding I hand it over. After insisting I didn't, he threw us both to the ground and choked me out until I went limp. I was mentally aware of the sensation of him stealing all my shit (as a backpacker, everything I had was on me), but was too out of breath when I came back around to do anything about it.

Keep in mind cocaine goes for $6/g there, and that's gringo street price.

Degenerate coke fiends can't be rationalized into "poor byproducts of the war on drugs". They're gnarly, and I'm glad to be away from them. God bless the USCG.
Somehow criminals are never mentioned in these arguments.
Enjoy starving to death then.
Living in Seattle and seeing the fentanyl crisis first hand, I disagree with you that addicts aren’t victims.

Not to mention the citizens who are victimized by the crime needed to sustain that addiction.

Legalization of marijuana has gone fine, but there are drugs so powerful that adults lose all control and reason, and I can’t see ever legalizing something like that.
I think pharmaceutical contamination happens. As does over the counter products, especially under-regulated stuff like vitamins and supplements.

It's just that fentanyl risk is more dramatic than those contaminants. Maybe one is "increase your risk of cancer over a couple of decades" or even "does not have intended effect" and the other is "stop your heart soon after consumption".
Does the TPM limit retries or something? If it's a 4-6 digit number, you can just count upwards and try them all in a trivial amount of time.
Are you talking about capitalism or from a broader perspective?

If the latter, the "point" of people is not to be "productive". That's not how we measure mankind. Why would we program an AI to only consider human productivity (for a capitalist definition of it, too)?
The benefit of nuclear powered ships/submarines is that they can operate for a very long time without refueling - despite being extremely expensive, that can be a tradeoff the planners are willing to make.
Demonstration > Explanation.

If you can't do that for one reason or another, you use Marketing.
Higher cancer rates found in military pilots, ground crews
This is a bizarre argument.

Do you feel the same way about Windows finally starting to take security seriously back in the mid 2000s?
In my company, all of our sales people have a technical background. They are not the best engineers in the company, but they could do the job if they had to. More importantly, when faced with technical people, they are not completely clueless.
Up until last month: draw physically reasonable hands.
> Complaints about AI and automation are actually complaints about capitalism

No that's not it at all. Complaints about AI are actually complains about loss of control. In capitalism, communism or any other society you like to describe, if AI displaces people -- those people lose control over their lives and that gets very serious quickly.
If it’s really just tritium water, it’s not that worrying. I’d be worried that it seems like they’re covering something up and maybe something worse has happened?
I think the only consistent and reasonable measure for productivity of labor is how much the economy is willing to pay for the labor[1]. So if the society is willing to pay nurses n times higher salaries than 20 years before, the value of nurses work has become n times higher, and the productivity has increased n-fold. (minus inflation). And the baumol effect vanishes as a puff of smoke into air.

[1] But surely a worker creating only one thingie at the same time than other produce five thingies must be less productive, you say? Well, if the first one is able to sell his thingies at more than 5 times higher price than others, quite obviously s/he is more productive than the others.
> The sources are all over the place

You gave specific figures. From which source, and why choose that one?
One thing that scares the hell out of me is the power structure. In Boulder Colorado, at the university of Colorado there was a horrific incident where a female student allegedly shared childhood sexual abuse material of a male student with another student via airdrop.

That other student reported it - to the universities DEI organization. They of course got the police involved - but it tells you where students think power and authority lies.
You are exactly right; people (strangely here) seem to me hammering on it is not good enough or means anything now. We are talking 10-20 years… if chatgpt ‘22 didn’t happen, I would’ve expected big changes more like 50 years away ; now I believe it’s 10 or less. All the ‘this means nothing’ is so naive and frankly weird for normally forward thinking people here.
It’s about diversification. Don’t build a company entirely dependent on a single other company that can’t be replaced.

If your payment provider stops offering payments, it’s annoying but not existential. If your whole business is reselling a single artist and they die or switch to a different gallery, you’re done.
The idea is...centralize your PWs but "harden" them behind a single longer and less brute-forceable master pw. And since the PW manager is doing the fill in, those can be longer and more random as well.

Perfect? No. 100x better than what most people do? Yes!!!

Moi? For the important stuff? I add in a YubiKey. Perfect? Again, no. But closer than no YK at all.

As a side note: I do contract web dev work for various agencies. Generally, talk about a lazy approach to clients' PWs. They think 1PW makes things secure. Meanwhile I generally have access to all vaults, even projects I'm not working on. Good sec is bases on less trust, not too much blind trust.
Hosting things like the snowden and manning leaks caused a lot of fallout for him, iirc. He was rightly pissed off at the administration. The information he had in 2016 was of interest to and was used against the public - those weren't mutually exclusive.

How this affects a legal precedent is infuriating beyond text, and it is incumbent on good people to defend him now.