skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They are literally tape measures. Source: I know engineers at Lockheed martin..

Manufacing that tape is a highly specialized big factory scale production process. It doesn't make sense to build a special tape factory just for the 100 feet of it they need for satalites annually. The tape many of them use is sourced from the same suppliers as tape measures for these reasons.
You will under time pressure :) even Grandmasters have done that (I'm around 1900 elo for context)

Also people forgetting they moved the king/rook and trying to castle.
Ah, yes that is more or less my understanding of it as well. Though I would like to see how it would perform if given the state of the board as input to predict the next move, rather than a sequence of moves, since that is how we humans normally determine the next move. I believe the move history is only relevant when it comes to en passant and certain draw scenarios (like repetition and that 50 move rule). Needless to say, it would first have to be trained on those types of inputs, which it probably is not.

Edit: move history can also be relevant when it comes to castling.
No, this was done from fear. My generation were given peanut butter early, and it was tested in a small amount to see if there was a problem first. This was common sense for a long long time, and it seemed to work fine.

A generation later parents were told to avoid it until age 3 or 4 for no real reason, and it created a ton of peanut allergies in those kids. They were scared of their kid having a peanut allergy. This was fear, counter to the common sense they themselves were raised with.
I think current LLM architectures are limiting the strategies it learned. MCTS requires recursion but GPT is always executing a fixed number of steps. Allowing language models more flexibility by a variable number of steps, for example through recursion of the model, would eliminate this hard bound but they are harder to design and train. We have just been able to train GPT-sized models.
All this above, and people are claiming that ChatGPT lacks human level comprehension of the text it consumes.

In Chess.com, you absolutely can attempt an illegal move, and many players do, and you will not get punished for it, so chatgpt is better then a 1400 human player.
> There are plenty of people who can do the technical side of teaching the curriculum. Most of them can earn more elsewhere [...]

Yes.

One problem I come across repeatedly is: how do you identify whether someone has the technical competence to do the teaching? Is there any way of knowing if they're doing a good job?

As an IC they are implementing features and shipping products. As a teacher...? Test scores going up is uncorrelated with teaching quality, apparently. (NYC, just look at the scatterplot in [1].) So it seems like there's a deep problem here.

Now imagine someone in K-12 hiring a CS teacher. Who do they have that is competent to evaluate the skills of the person they want to hire? Probably nobody at all.

[1] https://garyrubinstein.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/analyzing-re...
I think GPT is more useful to people writing self-help books than programmers.
> here have been chess programs for years that show you for a given position all of the previous games in its database with the same position and the win outcome % of each move. That's all that's going on here.

It could be, but would you think that of the 100-300 bn parameters in the model a lot are dedicated to chess move sequences? It seems likely that it has seen such data, but I would be surprised if it is using a considerable chunk to store chess database information.
Are you talking about Optane/3D-XPoint? The physics behind it seemed insane to me, amazing that they got it to work. I heard that the NVME protocol was originally designed with it in mind
If it makes you feel better, I've had serious issues with AX cards on enterprise Windows ThinkPads.
China got embargoed on high end chips, though. (Very wise decision in hindsight.)
So, if the embargo is enforced properly, it seems to me, that this would make it very difficult for China to leapfrog us on AI, if we push the breaks for a bit.
Oh hi :) Thanks for posting, AMA
I own't speak to weather this shows ChatGPT can play chess, but did you notify your opponents beforehand they are playing chatgpt? Otherwise (maybe even if) you're cheating and your account should be removed. If anyone else here is thinking of doing this - don't.
As a cyber security guy, I can say new cyber-attacks are the biggest issue that
AI can create.
It does not matter how great technology is, it there are always two sides of a coin.
FWIW, my experience has been that companies using less popular languages with a good reputation (Haskell, Clojure, lisp, OCaml...) are really, really awesome places to work and learn.
I gave it this prompt, and pasted the game. Its reply:

"45. Qxg6#
This is a checkmate!"
Thanks for the future you helped create for us young people. Hopefully the next generation is more merciful to 'useless' people than the previous one.
How does the hardware stand up over time ?
It would depend how often did this happen:

> Occasionally it does make an illegal move

Since it would lose every game in which it made more than a single illegal move.
I think that will be true if meaningful rewiring of someone's brain becomes possible. One of the reasons these types of aberrant behaviors aren't "treated" is that no such treatment exists. (I know interventions can be made that have predictably positive aggregate effects, but it is certainly not true at present that you can take any individual and therapy them into a moral, law-abiding person.)
I hope they would, but in my 40 years of owning homes, prices to have things done double every 7 years. This would mean 10% inflation year over year, but that isn't the case, and wood prices have not gone up that much. Everyone is just charging more because they can. I keep thinking: at some point homeowners won't be able to afford this, but I've been wrong for 4 decades and just keep writing the checks with firmly clenched buttocks every time I need a major repair.
>It doesn't understand anything. It combines symbols according to a probabilistic algorithm and you assign meaning to it.

This is what the human brain does. I'm not assigning meaning to it. I am simply saying the algorithm is isomorphic to our definition of the word "understanding". No additional meaning.

>Because you keep replying with statements indicating you are yet to grasp it.

No no. What's going on here is I'm replying with statements to help YOU understand and you are repeatedly failing.

>There is just as much evidence for sentience as understanding.

Sentience is too fuzzy of a word to discuss. We can't even fully define it. Understanding is less fuzzy and more definable thus the question and claim for "understanding" is a much more practical query.

A human can be inconsistent and even lie. It does not mean the human does not understand you. Thus because your logic is applicable to humans it is akin to saying humans don't understand you. That is why your logic is incorrect.
Is this the top comment (and not even grey) because more people failed to read the article than read it?
So far I found most purely normal/depth map based effects disappointing: Yes, they kook amazing when you look at the object frontally and sufficiently far away. But especially if you look from the side, the effect falls flat because occlusion and silhouettes are still following the model, not the textures.

Not sure if this has changed in recent years though.
> If it had any understanding of chess, it would never play an illegal move.

Plenty of people who have a basic understanding of chess would make an illegal move if they had no board to see and had to play only with notation.
Well, it seems trivial to write a program that uses GPT API and curl request to feed GPT. Or am I missing something?
I'm referring to the statistical power of the model. For example, if you replace GPT4 with GPT2 it will lose every game, because the statistical power is lower. Increasing the statistical power doesn't make the model understand any better, it just makes it more likely to generate a response that aligns with human expectations.
> What if AIs don’t fail the same way as humans?

But it is failing the same way as a human. Humans who remembers patterns and don't learn the logic makes these kind of errors in math or logic all the time.

ChatGPT is much better than humans at pattern matching, you see it right here it can pattern match chess moves and win games! But its inability to apply logic to its output instead of just pattern matching is holding it back, as long as that isn't solved it wont be able to perform on the level of humans in many tasks. Chess might be easy enough to solve using just pattern matching and no logic that scaling it up will make it pretty good at chess, but many other topics wont be.
But that's exactly why this is so interesting. You take a set of people with extremely similar genetics but somehow have very different reactions.

I suppose a technical (albeit not precise) analogy would be you producing 100 servers and selling half to both AWS and Azure. Then you find out that 25 of the servers at Azure are overheating and dying while AWS doesn't seem to have this problem at all. So you look into it and find that AWS is air-cooling their systems while Azure isn't. Sure you could argue post post hoc ergo propter hoc but you'd also probably call the folks at Azure and tell them to install an air-cooling system.

Extrapolating that to your point, you're saying it would be "shit" to tell the folks at Azure to install the air-cooling because you didn't test this acrossa majority of servers you've produced. The folks at Azure would point the incredible similarities (this is the same server model, the same chips, the same manufacturing run etc.) and then would promptly find another vendor.
my little laser cutting / 3dprinting service buys me lunch a couple times a month :) oakclifflaser.com
War crimes court seeks Putin arrest over deportation of Ukraine's children
> And no practical amount of shaking the jar will ever return the marbles to a high order state again.

This can't be true. Take the case where there's only 2 marbles, it's likely that at some point that shaking them will return them to the original state. For higher numbers of marbles the probability becomes lower and lower, but is never 0.
Well we already had much better chess bots years ago to be fair.. People still play chess for some reason (not sure why)
>did you know that even if you aren't a very big pizzeria or bakery you can order custom-milled flour from King Arthur for your restaurant? Their factory can handle it, and it engenders brand loyalty from fussy chefs.

I didn't. Although I'm not that surprised given I think King Arthur Flour has maybe around 500 employees or so including a cafe, retail shop, and cooking classes and sells a pretty premium product. (Was actually surprised the number is so low. It's also employee-owned.)
Sure will. My comments didn't mention the fact that I enjoyed reading your post and following your systematic analysis.
https://archive.is/iLfUv
So, I looked into the St. Louis Post-Dispatch's archive (1874 to present) in the hope of solving this mystery, but could not find anything. However, I did find a rather fascinating article titled "A Morning in the Cave" that was published on 28 July 1996. If anyone is affiliated with an academic institution, they can read it on ProQuest.

There is a free OCR version available here:

Page 7: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/142619929/?terms=%22cher...

Unfortunately, I could not find the page 8 clipping on newspapers.com.

Edit: I found the page 8 clipping - https://www.newspapers.com/clip/25694845/the-world-beneath-1...

It looks like this was part of a larger Sunday piece titled "The World Beneath". You can find all six clippings on r22tycoon's newspapers.com account at https://www.newspapers.com/clippings/?user=4850847%3Ar22tyco...
Scott Aaronson's "Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine" tackled this question in a way I found enlightening. It's a bit of a dense read (I needed a plane trip to sit down and focus on it), but it presents a compelling case for the possible reversal of time arrows when it comes to the effects of quantum indeterminism on macro scale interactions. In short: what if humans, somehow, someway, have the ability to "influence" the resolution of unobserved universal start-state quantum noise in order to affect our "will" onto the universe? Furthermore, what experiments could be done to validate or invalidate aspects of this hypothesis?

https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159
I'm fairly certain that writing about JavaScript on my personal blog (https://adequatelygood.com) led directly to landing a lucrative job at Twitter in 2010 which was foundational to my career. I had just a few months of experience in JavaScript (or programming in any serious professional capacity) but writing about it made me taken seriously and was a major accelerant to my career.

Not sure of whether that experience is transferable in the current landscape. It also didn't hurt that I was already living in SF.
There's a difference between chess.com and USCF ratings.
You can click through the Lichess opening database (click the book icon, and then the Lichess tab) to get an idea: https://lichess.org/analysis

But the answer is insanely unlikely, past a certain number of moves. The combinatorial explosion is inescapable. Even grandmaster games are often novelties in <10 moves.

So, it has a to have some kind of internal representation of board state and what makes a reasonable move and such that enables it to generalize (choosing random legal moves is almost unbelievably bad, so it’s not doing that).

I also doubt that it has been trained on the full (massive) database of Lichess games, but that would be an interesting experiment: https://database.lichess.org/
What got me to break out of this habit is realizing that the vast majority of what news sites/tv report on isn't remotely actionable or relevant for the average viewer.

It's basically something that scratches the itch of human curiosity, but with manipulative and lowest common denominator garbage.

We'd all be better off if we scratched that curiosity itch by reading about things we're interested in, rather than current events.
As far as I know the N64 didn't support quads, just triangles.
It does seem that way.
The example the GP mentioned is checking if the printer is on. That should be no more harder than checking if the light is on in your room.
On the other hand this is about 0.1 sqkm of lunar surface stripped and processed. This feels like a pretty small quarry mine on earth. Given that, it feels like it would probably be worth shipping the materials one would need to operate a quarry plus build the ISRU as without material environmental concerns you could process considerably more in a sustainable fashion than shipping elements from earth. The ISRU could extract all sorts of other useful materials -

Oxygen

Silicon (can be used to make plastics)

Iron

Aluminum

Magnesium

Sodium

Potassium

Phosphorus

Etc

Power would be abundant to fuel the reactions via solar radiation. So I wouldn’t write it off, I think regolith processing would be foundational for establishing any meaningful presence. Likely it can be entirely automated as well.
Large language models are storytellers. To write a story about someone using a computer terminal, there are things it’s helpful to know, but there are easier ways than simulating a computer.

Since we don’t know how it works, we should be open to the possibility that it’s using all sorts of storytelling techniques.
If verbosity would be a good thing Java wouldn't introduce language features/ library enhancements to cut down the noise (var, collection factories, switch expressions, records).
D2 v0.2.5 (text-to-diagram language)
I remember that. It was my first thought. This userscript blocking snowdenposts got wiped from the list of posts https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5929494 and you couldn't find it on HN or AskHN.
There are interesting studies being done about the effect of cesarean (non-vaginal) birth is having on babies not picking up a lot of the bacteria from the mother.

I know soap marketing has convinced us all that bacteria is evil, but apparently some bacteria is essential for humans (and animals, insects, etc..) being able to process certain foods.

Some bacteria is bad, some is bad in high quantities, and some is essential to digestion and/or virus control. If this is true, I would expect countries with higher cesarean birth rates to also have more allergies (though that wouldn't have to be the only reason).
Peanut allergies were exceptionally rare decades ago when nobody worried about peanut allergies in the first place. In the 20th century everybody in America sent their kids to school with peanut butter sandwiches and virtually everybody was fine. I didn't even know people could be allergic to peanuts until I was an adult. Now schools ban peanut butter sandwiches and it seems like every other family claims their child is allergic to peanuts. Common sense says that we need to give kids more peanut butter sandwiches, like we used to, and it would stop being a problem.

Also, we should stop testing for allergies unless there is a good reason to test a specific person for a specific allergy (e.g. they already had a bad reaction to something, and need to figure out what.) Those allergen tests have many false positives, people that could have gone their whole lives eating peanuts without thinking twice about it will instead spend their whole lives avoiding peanuts because a precautionary allergen test came back sliightly positive and they "don't want to take the risk". More medical testing is not always a good thing.
Watch this ChatGPT game.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AnarchyChess/comments/10ydnbb/i_pla...

We're talking about pieces that don't exist, reappearing pieces, pieces moving completely wrong (Knight takes as if its a Pawn), etc. etc.

---------

People are taking these example games and saying ChatGPT is 1400 strength. I don't think so. This isn't a case of "oops, I castled even though I moved my king 15 turns ago".
If you have a spreadsheet on a share that you'd like multiple people to have concurrent access to, Excel is not the way to go (until now; nowadays you can just put it on OneDrive and add access). Access was perfect for that kind of configuration for a small office that you could customize a small database without being a DBA.

I use it for a few hobby things and it's fun. Drag and drop a few things in a form, add a couple fields and you're good to go! Sure beats having to write SQL by hand and a few hundred lines of Python to interface with it; and that's before you write the UI for it.

I wish MS would spend a little bit of that R&D budget to improve on it some more, and expand its capability. But that'd cannibalize their other products, likely. It's too niche nowadays.
Java's superior G1/Parallel/Serial GC that they're changing?
Note that this is not for launching the war and invading Ukraine. This is for the specific crime of abducting tens of thousands of Ukrainian children and putting them in "orphanages and foster families" (Russia's claim) where they are brainwashed into becoming Russians. Modern day cultural genocide.
It does make explaining some things much easier, like the "Delayed-choice Quantum Eraser"[0] experiment.

Basically what's possible next is anything that can solve for conditions set by the past, and some from the future.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraser
OP explained that you need to prompt the whole game, not just a position.

ChatGPT is an LLM, not a game tree engine. It needs the move history to help it create context for it's attention.
Ensign Crusher might have a point here!
Sure.. most people still smoke it though. Which is what matters.

If Germany was only planning to legalize edibles, oils etc. it would be a different matter.

Not that I care that much about the smell. And increased cancer risk shouldn't be that high either unless you start smoking weed every day.
Least durable and resilient hard drives were made after 2015
As pointed out by Matias Goldberg [1], neither model is particularly optimized, however. They produce too many sliver triangles. The max-area approach [2] was brought up as an alternative that can significantly improve shading performance. I'd like to see benchmarks against constrained Delaunay triangulations too, which also tend to reduce sliver triangles and have some potential advantages over the greedy max-area approach because they distribute the large areas over many big triangles instead of leaving a few slivers around the edges.

(Of course, none of this would be likely to improve FPS in the game, but it's an interesting computational geometry problem nonetheless.)

[1]: https://twitter.com/matiasgoldberg/status/163650418707999539...

[2]: https://www.humus.name/index.php?page=Comments&ID=228
Launch HN: Codeparrot (YC W23) – Automated API testing using production traffic
Hi HN, we’re Royal and Vedant, co-founders of CodeParrot (https://www.codeparrot.ai/). CodeParrot automates API testing so developers can speed up release cycles and increase test coverage. It captures production traffic and database state to generate test cases that update with every release.

Here’s a short video that shows how it works: https://www.loom.com/share/dd6c12e23ceb43f587814a2fbc165c1f .

As managers of engineering teams (I was CTO of an ed-tech startup, Vedant was the founding engineer of a unicorn company) both of us faced challenges in enforcing high test coverage. We ended up relying a lot on manual testing but it became hard to scale, and led to reduced velocity and higher production bugs. This motivated us to build CodeParrot.

How it works: we auto-instrument backend services to capture production traffic. Requests and responses coming to your backend service, as well as the downstream calls made by it like DB calls are stored. As part of your CI pipeline, we replay the captured requests whenever your service is updated. The responses are compared with the responses from production env and regressions are highlighted to the developers. To ensure that the same codebase gives the same response in CI environment and production, we mock all downstream calls with the values from production.

Most tools to record and replay production traffic for the purpose of testing capture traffic on the network layer (as sidecar or through load balancer), CodeParrot instead relies on an instrumentation agent (built on top of OpenTelemetry) to capture traffic, enabling us to capture downstream request/response like database responses which are otherwise encrypted on network layer. This helps us mock downstream calls and compare the response from CI environment vs production environment. Additionally, this helps us sample requests based on code flow and downstream responses which provide better test coverage compared to just relying on API headers & parameters.

Our self-serve product will be out in a few weeks. Meanwhile, we can help you integrate CodeParrot, please reach out at royal@codeparrot.ai or you can choose a slot here - https://tidycal.com/royal1/schedule-demo. We’ll be selling CodeParrot via a subscription model but the details are TBD. In addition, we will be open sourcing the project soon.

If you’ve already tried or are thinking of using tools in this space, we’d love to hear your experience and what you care about most. We look forward to everyone’s comments!
No ELO 1400 player will have that rate of illegal moves, so saying it that it plays with an ELO 1400 rating is disingenuous.

Reinterpreting illegal moves as resignation is absurd when an LLM is formally capable of expressing statements "I resign" or "I cannot conceive of a winning move from here" just as well as any human player. It just doesn't do so because it's not actually playing chess the way we think of an ELO 1400 player playing chess.