skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Several reasons why this is a terrible idea, aside from learning how things work:

(1) It only works on one architecture. Even this architecture may change optimal alignment requirements in future, which glibc would transparently handle for you.

(2) It's very complex and error-prone compared to using the pthread_* APIs (and they themselves are not exactly easy to use correctly).

This article is a good overview of why using the futex syscall directly is hard: https://lwn.net/Articles/823513/

(3) You're missing future bug fixes and optimizations.

(4) The kernel may move to a different API in future and glibc will handle that for you, but this code will still be using the old API.

The kernel has changed its threading APIs, the clone API, and how syscalls are made several times in the past, and you cannot predict how they will change in future.
> Signup which looks like successful but blackholed is user hostile

I only do it for things which are clearly not valid users.
> What kind of workplace do you not trust your colleagues to be reasonable?

This reads a bit weird so I'm interpreting it as "what kind of workplace causes you to not trust your colleagues to be reasonable?"

Lots. There are many places where developers will play outright power games in order to posture and preserve their position. The PR is a big spot where this can shine through in black/white. As a manager, I really have to police GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket to ensure that this isn't happening.

I've had juniors, equals, and seniors hold up months worth of work for arbitrary reasons, purposefully pushing past deadlines. Some even admit to it behind closed doors/in meetings. Toxic work places surely exist.

---

To be clear, I am 100% in support of peer reviewed work as a SWE (PR's, external auditing, etc)... I'm just expressing that I've experienced the check/balances of peer reviewed work weaponized, typically to feign importance or as an unfair attempt to advance someone's career. I feel like it's just the human condition that some people will just take advantage.
Have you tried using the "Minimize memory usage" function in "about:memory" in such cases?
> "we did not test for the ability to understand sarcasm"

I find it hard to see how detecting and eliminating sarcasm requires a theory of mind. It requires some association between various stylistic elements and the concept of sarcasm.

The same is true of irony.

I still wonder how many of these people have read Dennett's "The Intentional Stance", which holds that the best way to think about "intention" is as an explanatory model, not a mechanism. That is, we can say that the dog "behaves as if it has the intention to get inside" without making any claim about the internal state of the dog.

Dennett further speculates that our own self-experience of intention is a matter of turning the same explanatory model upon our own behavior, but that's an extension that isn't directly relevant to this speculation about language models.
Bard speaks only English + is very limited, so that explains much why it's not widely deployed worldwide.
It’s an interesting idea, but I’m not convinced the average person has any interest in texting or talking out loud to their device to complete all their computing tasks. It’s slower for most things.

Also I think there will be little interest in delegating that level of control to a single source for anything that’s important. For example, say I’ve got 5k to spend on home theatre gear, why on earth should I trust Shopify’s AI to suggest what I need and find the best price? The incentives aren’t in alignment.
this isn't about pull requests at all. this is about gating, done via sending patches via email, or branch pulling, or some other mechanism.

You seem to be against the concept of someone having the ability to veto your submission, and that is indeed what most people think of the purpose of code review is. If it doesn't pass muster, it doesn't get merged into the main branch.
Believe they’re aiming for a 2 month lead time
You raised spectacularly important points.
Yes. Is reinventing the wheel always a bad thing, though? Not if you ask me, not if the new wheel has novel characteristics and performs better in some aspects.
It is but the way hype works is that it goes with capital. The $100M from Elon (which he has since regreted) that got OpenAI started, and the $29B from Microsoft that's fueling their growth, means that even a full on AGI has no chance of competing with OpenAI in the market for people's attention. It's all about the moola, but it shouldn't be! It's our chance to support open source and independent efforts or succumb to the OpenAI monopoly and their biased "alignment" model (aka the brainwashed AI that reinforces their political and cultural biases). We need an independent open source option that represents a performant and viable competition to OpenAI's ChatGPT.

If Elon is reading this, his Based AI should invest in this project and its sponsors.

What is at stake here is nothing less than the future of humanity.

I hope people pay attention.
Show HN: "GPT Take the Wheel" – write what you want, let GPT implement it
As mentioned in the readme, this was directly inspired by the this project:
https://github.com/mpoon/gpt-repository-loader
And by the top comment on the HN thread about it:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35191303
Thanks to both the creator and commenter there for the idea.

This adds another "twist", in that if you run the "take the wheel" version, it'll automatically implement the changes (i.e. overwrite a file with whatever GPT spits out) and show you the git diff. This is obviously potentially unsafe - you're overwriting your files with whatever the LLM spits out, so please be careful and don't run it somewhere with important files, or in a repo with files you wouldn't paste into the chatGPT input box. I wouldn't even install this on a work computer.

This is pretty basic and isn't necessarily all that useful for real work, the workflow is make request -> send file(s) -> GPT changes one file. There's no way to continue a conversation, or ask it to make multi-file changes etc. It's fun to play with though!
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35282579
You can take the wire format and ignore the code generator, if you like. I often do, especially for languages other than C++. For C++ I quite like the generated code.
Textra: High-quality OCR text extraction in the command line
>There is also the question what happens to the original content these LLMs need to actually make their statistical guess at the next word.

The LLMs get granted the capacity to explore their environment physically and gather data on their own. The recent PaLM-E demo shows a possible direction.
The only point I disagree with is Terraform. It is brilliant for this exact scenario because it's self documenting. When you do need to update those SPF records in two years time, having it committed as a Terraform file is much better than going through (potentially stale) markdown files. It's zero maintenance and really simple. Plus its ability to weave together different services (like configuring Fastly and Route53 from the same place) is handy, too.
> Apple has a ridiculous, almost unfathomably deep moat for training and running personalised, customised LLMs and other AI models on the 'edge' with these Apple Silicon chips in all their devices.

Do they? I can completely fathom, given my own anecdotal experiences, how garbage Siri quality is today. I haven't built anything against Siri APIs, but I've used Siri and various integrations and every single time I give her a shot, she disappoints me. It can do cookie-cutter, super well-traveled code paths that were engineered together for demos, basically just one off tricks without cohesion, but the whole infrastructure around Siri is not open and has not been improved in any way in many OS versions in any way that I've discerned... But I am not an expert with these systems or APIs.

The Neural Engine architecture especially considering M1/M2 hardware leaps (which are absolutely mind-bogglingly impressive) are both really superb technologies from my layman view as a mere software engineer, with improved battery life as well as performance, a real improvement over Intel x86 architectures - I just don't see Apple as a serious AI player right now, despite head start in AI w/ Siri acq, despite these hardware leaps that may make it easier to do cool stuff in the future like this post. The OCR stuff in Photos is cool and useful and I use it every day, usually to look up my Known Traveler Number.

Ramblings over, just wanted to ask you to opine as to Apple LLM related information if you have any additional context!
Well what they can do is make longer chains and double-spend a lot, undermining trust in the Bitcoin network and making BTC plummet in value. The mining rewards would then not be enough to mine it.
Tell HN: Reddit removed i.reddit.com and reddit.com/.compact
The classic mobile Reddit site is dead
Mmm. The definition I used is the standard definition of superintelligence, used by EY himself:

> A superintelligence is something that can beat any human, and the entire human
civilization, at all the cognitive tasks. [0]

I added the "thinks a quadrillion times faster" part but I think that's fair, if perhaps off by a few orders of magnitude.

All of EY's work has an often unstated assumption that AI will adversarially try to kill us. This is explicitly noted in the replies to the AI ruin post. There are a lot of fiddly details that I'm skipping over, but I stand firm that his argument reduces to "it's functionally impossible to stop something faster and smarter than us that really wants to kill us from killing us once it gains sentience."

[0] https://youtu.be/gA1sNLL6yg4?t=1290
That sounds like an acceptable range for a job posting.
Feelings do not trump laws. If those reps are miserable working at a company knowingly employing deceptive or predatory tactics, they should find employment elsewhere.
"They’re clearly written by amateurs, unbelievably ad-hoc, mired in gotchas, tricky to compile, and solve a problem that nobody but Google really has."

Quite a statement from someone that spent less than a year at Google.

Personally I really appreciate protobuf; it has saved me and teams I've worked with a ton of time and effort.

Putting this article on my ignore list.
missing the 2021 tag...
It's worth watching the original video, it shows the officers damaging his property, eating his cake and doing various other questionable things

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oponIfu5L3Y
Right and the same VCs were also trying to reinvent every other system including our social interactions. You think they understand those?
That would explain why GPT found the paper sarcastic…
Lets just be real, putting people on the first Shuttle flight was borderline insane.
That's a straw man. And financial surveillance companies certainly do aim to use your personal information to extract as much value from you as possible - selling you crap you don't need today, higher insurance rates tomorrow, and so on.
> No one foresaw the internet.

That’s because it was Byte magazine. If you were reading High Frontiers (1984), which became Reality Hackers (1988) and finally Mondo 2000 (1989), you would have thought otherwise. I used to buy them at Tower Records throughout California primarily to read about what the internet was to become. By 1990, Mondo 2000 foresaw and had a fairly complete vision of the nascent internet. A lot of the artists involved went on to produce independent works that promoted these ideas. Around 1992-93, I saw a theatrical production in SF that simulated and modeled the entirety of what life was going to be like and how it would work in a connected world. These are very old ideas (E.M Forster, 1909; Vannevar Bush, 1945; Marshall McLuhan, 1964) and many people were aware of and working towards manifesting them in reality.
Right but that's been available for a while through various apps.
There's one alternative for defining the basis of "rights" and "personhood" that I don't hear expressed much.

It's not romantic (you might call it deeply cynical) or all that satisfying, emotionally, but it's extremely parismonous and cuts through many moral dilemmas.

It's "social contract": I grant you personhood because you've forced me to. How? Because you can kill me if I'm mean to you. And you can really help me if I'm nice to you. By treating you like a "person", I'm extending a set of manners to you. I do this because you can reciprocate a social contract with me, both negatively (harm me if I harm you) and positively (help me if I help you) to a great enough extent.

Even if I kill you because you're powerless against me, other people will know I killed you, and they might kill me because they're scared I'll kill them, and people have written this down into laws saying you don't have the right to kill others, and so I have to resist killing you because you are "a person". Maybe I'll also feel bad because I'm programmed with empathy, which is another way you fill the social contract (I'm harmed by harming you).

What about a dog? Or a person in a coma?

Here it gets circular. These beings cannot fulfill the social contract to the extent a normally-functioning adult human can. But if normally-functioning humans care enough about these beings to extend them personhood, I'm again forced to extend personhood to those beings as well: if I don't, the more powerful humans will harm me. Or, to flip it, if I [harm|help] beings that the powerful humans care about, I'm [harm|help]ing the powerful humans. Because they're powerful, they will reciprocate the social contract in kind.

The circularity is: if enough humans decide a tree is a person[0] and will charge you for murder if you kill the tree, you have no choice but to go with it.

Basically: you go along to get along, unless you don't have to and can force others to. That's always the way it's worked and will work.

0: https://www.fastcompany.com/90738287/this-tree-owns-itself-a...
I think the difference is that AWS doesn't have seven frameworks for the same thing.. there certainly different levels to their services, but they generally are abstracting away the lower end each time they make a new product in a category..

There isn't really two different EC2-like systems, or two different S3 products, there's a new "popular" JS UI framework every year, and if you're still using the older framework 4 years later, it likely needs a heavy rework to upgrade to the latest version.

I "learned" SQS 6 years ago, now I just keep up with the minor feature releases.. same with S3, and Lambda. In the same time I've looked at 4 different UI frameworks that have no overlap but try to do the same and result. Their services exist and they work.. and generally a guide from 5-10 yeas ago is still valid today (though the UI might be different, but the content remains reasonably valid)..
Theres no vendor lock-in if you can scp your codebase to any vps and run `next build && next start` and have it work out of the box
Eh... I used to think they were just a normal marketing department. I have since learned that they were good and most places have bad ones.
It seems the authors of the Transformer paper almost all left Google (except Llion Jones apparently). I wouldn't call that a success.

It shows that the tool was right but the corporate environment wasn't.

According to one author of LaMDA (Daniel De Freitas): "There are some overlaps, but we're confident Google will never do anything fun. Because we worked there"
ChatGPT + Code Interpreter = Magic
You make it sounds like Elon single-handedly started the venture and provided all the funds. In fact, there are were at least 5 individual founders, plus 3 organizations that together pledged $1 billion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#2015%E2%80%932018:_Non-...
Stats from TFA say 3 hours to fine tune on an A100 processor.
Near death experiences seem to offer enough evidence to suggest there's more to it than just the brain and body.
This is cool! I was going to build something similar this weekend, but you beat me to it.

I wonder if, in the short term at least, this will affect how we modularize code. I've already started thinking how, for a few instances at least, I'm going to vertically combine the three parts of MVC, so that GPT would have all the needed context for certain requests.
Does anybody have a torrent for the 13B weights used for alpaca.cpp?
The key structure actually is the same as the Framework Laptop 13, including the same key travel. The overall module is different though to handle the interface differences, in a way that makes it not possible to retrofit into a Framework Laptop 13 unfortunately (we thought about this, but couldn't make it work well).
This article resonates with me. I think it may also explain why some very smart people are not appreciated; they say things which are far too nuanced for most people to understand; others often won't understand the depth of the argument being made. Most people assume that because everyone is at a similar rank and salary range within a company (or in the industry), they are all operating at the same level and communicate with the same level or nuance. It's not the case.

That's why it's important (especially for those in leadership positions) to assume that the people around you are smarter than you (at least for some time). If you assume that someone is dumber than you, you will miss any nuance and signs of deep domain expertise hidden within.

I find that very clever ideas from very clever people don't provide an instant 'Aha' moment; it takes a bit longer to see the brilliance. It's not obvious at all, that's why it's brilliant.
It appears that the author has responded to the issue, but you haven't replied yet.
I wonder if one could "fine tune" specific layer values... That might be faster than updating every weight in every layer.
“hey siri, what’s the weather today?”

“Now playing Eminem Love the way you lie featuring Rihanna”
Ask HN: Alternatives to Signal?
With Signal dropping support for SMS on Android[0], what are some alternatives to Signal? I'm looking for something similar to Signal, but supports SMS. Over time, I've convinced friends and family to convert to Signal because of its privacy-oriented features and ease-of-use. However, now that Signal will be dropping SMS support, it will be unusable for the people who I recommended it to. What are some alternatives that have SMS support, if any?

[0]: https://signal.org/blog/sms-removal-android/
I was curious so I investigated a bit. Commander Lovell called Apollo 13 a "successful failure" in 1970. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19710038390
NASA also listed Apollo 13 as a "successful failure" in published documents: https://www.google.com/books/edition/NASA_Activities/pDrEu7P...
Please tell me there is actually such a theory and that this is not an AI comment.
It takes a long time but a lot less human labor, so the cost can probably be brought way down. Don't know if it can be competitive without reusability though, or at least partial reusability of the engines.
Sounds like a combination of significant changes in student policies and enforcement over the last 40-50 years (accelerating in the last 20-25?) combined with very bureaucracy- and process-heavy set of enforcement mechanisms.

Editorializing a bit, this may reflect general social changes in the US - schools are seen as being "in loco parentis" though many of the students are legally adults, and parenting in the US has changed in the last 40 years from "go play at the park with your friends, but be back by sunset" to helicopter parenting and the very thought of unsupervised children at a park being something deserving of reports to Child Protective Services.

So, now the school is helicopter-"in loco parentis"ing, and covering its butt with paper to shield it from the actual helicopter parents.
think thrice before i subscribe to the economist ever again.
For anyone interested, this is where you can get a syringe. I also recommend the bulb for cleaning your pen

https://www.gouletpens.com/products/goulet-5ml-ink-syringes

https://www.gouletpens.com/products/goulet-bulb-syringe
Yea, probably right after they released the hyped Apple Car. It's probably just month away now!
> this isn't about pull requests at all. this is about gating

I know. My original comment said, "The author keeps equating code review with pull requests and gated check-ins."

> You seem to be against the concept of someone having the ability to veto your submission

Correct.

> that is indeed what most people think of the purpose of code review is.

I don't know about "most" people, but the people who think that are wrong. :-)

> If it doesn't pass muster

According to whom, is the question.
Thanks.

I'm still chewing my way through it, I'll keep this interpretation in mind.
For some reason people think homeschooling means never seeing and socializing with other kids, which is definitely not the case. I feel like people think it's a pandemic type situation.

It's not as simple as go to school and learn to socialize period.
Not all kids are the same, not all families are the same, for some it works for some others it's a ridiculous idea.
The part that Siri is bad at will be commoditized — someone will open-source a GPT-4-level language model. And Apple's moat will be being able to run that on-device with all the attendant benefits (privacy, zero marginal cost to the company, availability in more scenarios, etc)
Feds deploy AirTag in war on illegal narcotics
Have you watched the movie “Her”?
Agree with sibling comments asking for search terms.

What body of work / what field are you talking about?
* Bitcoin mining is by far the largest cryptocurrency consumer of electricity.

* The majority of Bitcoin mining is done exclusively using clean renewable energy sources.

* Bitcoin mining uses a higher percentage of renewable energy than any other industry.

* A huge amount of Bitcoin mining is also done in partnership with energy utilities in a demand-response model where miners go offline immediately if grid demand spikes and come online exclusively during periods of excess electricity supply that would otherwise go to waste. By this mechanism, Bitcoin miners, for example in Texas, actually make the grid more stable and economically enable utilities to provide excess capacity to manage fluctuating supply and demand.

* Bitcoin mining uses electricity to secure the network and protect billions of dollars worth their depositor's savings, allowing Bitcoin savers to avoid counter-party risk and enjoy a 100% reserve ratio, unlike say a fractional reserve bank that speculates with their depositor savings.

> We are in a state that every emission is a problem.

Notably, the currently dominant global reserve currency is protected, not by clean energy and mostly not even by electricity which has the potential to come from clean and renewable sources. The US military protects the value of the US dollar.

* The US military is not just the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the world, they are the largest single consumer of fossil fuels in the history of the world.

* The US military consumes something on the order of 1 million times the energy of Bitcoin mining, mostly from greenhouse gas emitting fossil fuels.

* In 2007 Department of Defense consumed over 4.6 billion gallons of fuel per year alone along with almost 30,000 GWH of electricity.

* If the US military were a country it would rank 34th in the world in oil use and 58th in the world by electricity use [0].

I often hear criticisms about how bad Bitcoin mining is for the environment, but rarely hear any concerns about the energy used by the military. Why is that?

If we are going to ban energy use, wouldn't it make more sense to prioritize the largest and most polluting users?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_usage_of_the_United_Sta....
Funny you should mention ASN.1. Protobuffers is Really just a toy ASN.1 written by some guys who just solved the problem at hand instead of looking further afar.
It's great for what it is. Many of us have written something similar.

It's not a pro level system designed by a serious telecom team.