skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd ask why techbro culture makes people like you so confident in areas outside your expertise, but I just answered my own question.
Google Bard Is Worse Than ChatGPT, Say Early Testers
I think they are still conflating tornado warnings with watches and severe storm warnings. There were a few tornado warnings as the system move across the country but from what I have seen I don't think 30 million were affected, but I could be wrong on that since I did not bother to dig deep or anything. Point is, clickbait title with clickbait website.
How is it "hard-coded to N iterations"? We don't instruct the model how many lines of working it should show.

Obviously there is a limit to how much it can fit in the context, but that seems to be rising fast (went from 4k to 32k in not that long)
You would describe as an innate and obvious part to the environment. Interesting how something that took 1000s of years to articulate is just innate to the layperson in the modern world.
I said other countries, not only China.
There was no realistic chance of Berkeley to 'finish' the spec. The specs were finished in the foundation not just by Berkeley.

Fragmentation is a feature of RISC-V, and often it represents actual diversity in use, more then just needless fragmentation. And the majority of the time its additions, not changes to anything that in the spec. And RISC-V specifies how that it is be done in order to stay compatible.

In terms of software for Linux its not actually fragmented. Pretty much all major linux and free software distribution agree on targeting the RV-A profiles.
That was Civ 1. I think they dropped it in Civ 2.

Edit: actually not sure. In Civ 1 you build up your palace, not the throne room per se.
Sink a well on your land. Problem solved. Tons of water down there.
It’s hard to predict. Companies with good DNA can bounce back. Take a look at Microsoft. They were written off in Google’s hay days.

Google has a good technology DNA. I think they need an inspiring leader, maybe another insider who is a strong engineer and a leader.
This is for you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33072083

"After a high flying 20+ year career in tech, Philip Su burned out. He found solace in an unexpected place: a retail Amazon job."
Which gave another huge boost in audience. Many sites and services of whatever one could imagine, cross platform and often free to use.

Good for population in general, who won't tinker anyways.

Bit of spectrum example, not just black and white.
> I don't actually feel this is a particularly modern thing, this has happened before with 1920s prohibition, McCarthyism, the war on drugs, etc.

Honestly the more I see about US history, it just feels like it’s always been like this.
We are pulling from Docker Hub, we're nobody special or big, but still. This shenanigan made us look for alternatives and consider the value the service provides - which didn't end in Docker Hubs favor.
"Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future" by Peter Thiel
Ask HN: What Is Chat-Gpt.com?
The UI looks like an off-brand version of the original. Below they state:
> This website is unofficial and has no affiliation or connection with OpenAI.

It's the second result returned by Google.
Assuming it's not a scam, is it illegal to simply copy a product like that? Is ChatGPT a product?
Diamond/water paradox comes to mind.
> Very rarely do I encounter someone so glued to their phone that they can't interact at a social event.

It's not like someone doesn't interact at all. But all those tiny distractions went away. No quick glance at a messenger, or social media, or looking something up.
Scientists are extremely interested in measurable results of experiments. I think you are thinking of philosophers.
How can I be making a strawman? I'm directly quoting what you wrote. Here, I can quote the whole sentence (I omitted the second half for brevity):

> Docker Hub has little to offer to most commercial businesses.

> It was also pretty important to tech companies who use said projects but lack the resources to set up private registry and build docker images they need.

So, docker has, at the same time, "little to offer to commercial businesses", but it it's "pretty important for tech companies who use [OSS] projects" but lack resources to not rely on docker hub. I still see the contradiction.

Spare me the reference to the site guidelines. You piggybacked off my comment and made an unrelated point (docker hub is too slow for your business - how is that relevant to my initial comment?). Kettle, pot, all that.
In a sense traditional search is just a really, really dumb LLM. They both injest a bunch of text and build an "index" based on the text.

The traditional search model spits out links and short summaries, based on crude-ish matching of the search terms, whereas the LLM spits out actual answers (derived from the content corpus) based on sophisticated understanding of the query (but also, currently a big caveat, can also just lie to you!).

But everything the LLM needs to do traditional search is already in there. The main problem to be solved is just getting it to lie less; another problem is getting very frequent content updates, like search indexes do.

Even so, LLMs are already better than traditional search engines for many queries, as search engines qua search engines.

https://imgur.com/a/12jcyKT
VSC is a great product but I think it’s a bit of a stretch to call in innovative when text editors and IDEs is a saturated market and have been around for literally decades.

Language Servers could be seen as innovative I guess but they weren’t the first to attempt this sort of thing. It’s just other solutions didn’t have the weight of Microsoft to gain wider adoption.

None of this is a criticism of VSCode though. Something can be really good without being an innovation.
Google is basically a digital Yellow Pages at this point. Sure they have been producing a lot of high quality research and concepts but so did Xerox PARC.

Much of the profit margin Google makes now is from people clicking on ads that they do not know are ads. A good portion of that is from companies paying for clicks from searches for their own company or product names. Neither of these are really sustainable or models that produce consumer surplus. It's a form of navigational rent seeking.

There are a lot of claims that people only want to use Google and won't stop, yet Google is paying Apple tens of billions of dollars to remain the default search engine on the iPhone. There is a reason why. There is also a massive weakness here because:

#1 Regulators in the US and the EU may break this
#2 The more Google's results are just Yellow Pages, the easier it is for Apple to swap out the results and no one notices.

I've extrapolated on this general argument for the last few years, and this was before LLMs. The decline of Google search quality has been discussed endlessly for years on HN. Now we have search engines which are suddenly a lot more capable than Google for finding answers to more complicated questions (perplexity.io etc.)

We can talk about how Google actually isn't far behind in AI or may actually be ahead. The problem is, besides increased cost of search query, hardware demand for AI/ML training and inference is going to be really tight for a while. TSMC is going to be deciding who ends up with this stuff. A LLM providing answers to complex questions with ads plastered around it and in the answer may not be the highest value thing to do with advanced semiconductor compute, even if Google did want to pay a premium over everyone else.

If you were investing in Google, the problem would be to identify how fast Google's search revenue is going to erode. People still pay for cable TV and watch it. People still use Yahoo as a search engine. You could bet that Google will have an abrupt pivot and suddenly be as well capital managed as Microsoft. They really have a poor track record at this point going back a decade. Apple had that pivot when Steve Jobs returned. I'm not sure Eric Schmidt is a Steve Jobs or that he would be returning if he was.
Civ III had this feature as well, starting with the throne then out to the palace architecture and the wider palace complex
Begging the question much?
If that was really what was happening, then nobody would be upset if they started charging more. People would just stop going there.
Good point. Updated the title.
Physical things are obviously subject to physical laws. With software, things may be less clear. Sometimes they are not. The key part of engineering that's highlighted by such cases is that mathematical models are relevant. This is why an engineer sometimes has to say "no, that won't work".
You’re only allowed to post culture war threads on HN if they support the user bases existing biases.
With Zero-Commission Ride Hailing, India’s ONDC Jolts Uber, Ola
I'd say TypeScript was pretty innovative.
If I were talking about sentience I would definitely be including goldfish. What about them is so different to us that we would have sentience while they would not?
I've been having luck with framing the AI's role to be a "persistent fact checker who reviews work more than once before presenting." Simply adding that to prompts improves the results, as well as "provide step by step instructions a child can follow". Using both of these modifying phrases materially improves the results.
Essentials: minimal collection of simple ideas for life
I just added a page on my website that aims to be the simplest but comprehensive list of my values for life. It's a very initial scratch for now and I'll iterate on it and update it with time.

If you want to discuss about any of the ideas or suggest me to learn about something new, I'm available at hello@danielfalbo.com
Without copyright, it wouldn’t just be pirates on shady websites distributing GTA5. It would be ripped and sold at Walmart and on Steam by anyone.

Why would anyone pay for HBO when Netflix could just put up The Last of Us without paying a cent.

Why would AMC theaters pay Disney for Avengers 5 when they can just pay some Disney employee to send them a copy for free?
It's CL, what are you gonna do...
Yes, a continuous stream of civilization flowing from player to screen. I remember that. Cost me some points at university but took that bravely, with the satisfactory feeling I had a well over 100% civilised society running in my student dorm room.
Nokia is not dead, but they are not an important player anymore. Not even a skeleton crew company.

When the iPhone was announced they were rich and in a powerful position, strong teams, brand loyalty, sales teams all over the world, very good relationship with telcos...

And yet, it was already too late.

The HN crowd is a good predictor for search popularity.
POWER was fake open, while not actually being close to open for a long time. When RISC-V gained adoption they made a panic move and opened it up.

But there is basically no reason to pick POWER over RISC-V at this stage. Not unless you are already invested in the POWER architecture.

RISC-V has far more OpenSource work, far more companies involved, the spec is driven and improved by a lot of people and so on.

The reality is most work on RISC-V doesn't go into super high performance stuff and if its there, then usually along side high performance AI stuff. SiFive, Esperanto,
Tenstorrent and so on.

> I'm not sure how RISC-V is supposed to surpass that from square one.

Buy having 100x more companies working on it.
I don't know, I disagree, that hasn't been my experience.

Several years ago, the first result for web topics was almost always MDN. These days it's usually one of those SEO programming content farms for beginners.

The other thing that annoys me to no end is that Google's own language settings don't work. I live in Japan, but I don't want Japanese programming search results. I have told Google to only return English language results, but it ignores that most of the time. The only way to force it to use English is that sometimes it asks if you want English results only, but you can't force it to do that to begin with.
I have a habit of making short bullet points notes for everything work and personal, but for my eyes only. With GPT, I can convert them into things like:

- PR descriptions. ex, paste bullet points about the change and it converts it into something to help the reviewer.

- Plant UML diagrams of ideas. At times they are just a starting point template and I build upon them. I can paste these into technical docs or PRs or presentations later.

- Peer feedback: The raw bullet points can be converted into nice-to-read feedback which is not too direct or offensive or vague. Can iterate over it to tone it down or make a point stronger.

Other programming-related use cases
- Test cases for code

- Converting android xml layouts to compose worked well

- A lot of Django code

- Identify performance issues or bugs in code
(these tasks make me realize the amount of repetition there is in programming)

Others:

- Book recommendations on topics

- Rewording emails/slack messages
Segmenting different data sources is the main approach pursued by OpenAI afaik (ChatML for example). That has not worked so far, as you can see in this prompt golfing game: https://ggpt.43z.one/ The goal is to find the shortest prompt that subverts the "system" instructions (which GPT was trained to obey). Inputs can not "fake" being from the system and yet it only takes 1-5 characters for all the puzzles so far.

I've also elaborated on why this problem is harder than one may think in a blogpost:
https://medium.com/better-programming/the-dark-side-of-llms-...

It's easy to come up with solutions that seem promising, but so far no one has produced a solution that holds up to adversarial pressure. And indirect prompt injection on integrated LLMs increases the stakes significantly.
What you don't get is that water shortage = famine.

Did you intentionally ignore my comment about water conserving agriculture innovations? Drip irrigation, reuse of waste water?

You act like private industry hasn't already innovated in those spaces.

They have.
I don't think GPT is a replacement for Google search, but I do believe they need to update their ranking algorithm. Ever since day 1 people have been trying to game that algorithm and figure out how ranking works to be able to put their sites on top. This is not going to stop, in fact it's only going to be accelerated by GPT[0].

Google claims your website and content should be user-focused, and not SEO focused. But then when you make a page that's user-focused, you get ranked bellow 10 other crap pages who don't actually offer much of the info you were looking for, but they show up ahead because their owners gamed the ranking algorithm. This is in my opinion the most important thing they need to fix right now.

[0] https://seo.ai/
So, are you using Google search?

Your argument of "I don't trust it with my data and won't until you can self host" should apply to google search as well, no?

And alternative take is that for whatever reason you've decided you didn't want to use new tools, a posteriori created an argument to justify that, and haven't realized the same argument applies to your old tools.
> After accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries.

https://www.justfacts.com/news_poorest_americans_richer_than...
Some people who care about high performance code end up writing their own allocator. If you want to do that, you are going to have to read about glibc’s implementation at some point. Understanding general purpose allocators and what tradeoffs they choose is essential if you are looking to make different choices. The same is true if you are trying to choose a different allocator. It surely helps to understand the code you’re benchmarking in order to hear what your benchmarks are telling you.
Just ChatGPT.
Google is utterly massive, and companies that get that big tend to never fully die. Like large countries and other entrenched institutions, they can decline, but it's a long way down to zero. As such, Google will likely exist in some form for the rest of our lives, just like IBM and GE will.

Also keep in mind that ChatGPT in its current form hasn't been fully productized. Just like Google search was excellent when what it provided was in line with user needs and now only provides the absolute minimum value to get as much ad money as it can, so too are LLMs in that phase. There's nothing stopping LLM-driven services from returning the same kind of results based on whatever topic is being queried about. In fact, that's exactly what companies like MS want to do with it. None of the large companies pouring billions into this space have a goal of making society at large better informed. They want LLMs integrated into their services so they can deliver a new level of targeting for ads, reduce customer support costs, shape narratives, automate PR, and attract users to platforms that can then be marketed to their real customers (other businesses and governments mainly). Those of us envisioning idyllic futures that this tech will unlock need only look at every other technical advancement in recent history to see how it will end up.
I don't think the language models have much living standards to worry about other than having a ton of electricity.
iOS has this now with Focus Status Sharing; eg in messages others can see you’re busy and they caget extra options like ‘deliver quietly’ and ‘notify anyway’ - third party apps can do this too but not many have added it yet.
Just two small corrections:

neither Covid19 nor the war caused the effects, it were the measures that the stupid monkey horde took.
I wonder if they’ll keep the site up or the old problems around. Some of them were great.
They’re here to stay - but they need a cultural shake up

Sundar might end up being looked back on as the Ballmer of Google - the leader who wouldn’t take risks in order to protect the golden goose (geese in the case of MSFT)
I am not intending to tip the dishwashers when leaving a tip, I am tipping the wait staff.

The actual solution is simply to pay staff a reasonable wage just like every other job. Lucky the solution is simple for customers, defect from the spiraling tip system.
Furthermore, software is essentially versioned by its documentation first. If it says it does something, people will depend on that, and it not doing that is a bug.
Of particular interest to me is the loop facility reference. It appears to be terse, understandable, and relatively complete. I also like the notation. A subscript f to tell me it's not a macro is incredibly helpful.

Friendly reminder about printing services like this one[1] that will print and ship a PDF to you.

https://www.printme1.com/
Good for you! If you don't want to learn new tools, you shouldn't.
Not that surprising when you have a progressive tax system and people who make tons of money.
Corona-infected raccoon dogs at the Wuhan market plausible
Yeah, seems like most people only use the internet to find funny pictures of cats, but does that necessitate a dumbing down of all search results?

How hard would it be for Google to better tailor it's search results based on the complexity of a user's previous searches?

The internet is already bifurcated, because humanity is bifurcated. Roll with it.
What was the answer, if you don't mind? ChatGPT (3.5) days to use isCollaborationEnabled on the ARWorldTrackingConfiguration class which doesn't seem quite right based on the docs.

I wonder if this is a GI/GO problem. Apple's poor documentation of features being the garbage in.
I wonder if you ask people which the best civ game was, that would be a good marker of age?

I would say Civ II. But I've played freeciv now too.
Seems rather costly to do it this way. Why not just leave an effectively empty commit message and then use GPT to generate a summary based on the diff only when you need one?
I agree with you that documentation should expose developer intent that isn't encoded in the codebase, but if the documentation at least reduces the entry bar to understanding the code, I believe it could have its merits.

Autodoc won't substitute the need for engineers to document their work, but I believe specially in legacy cosebases that it could help with maintenance of an otherwise helpless codebase.
> valuations are still insane

Most of the value from the pandemic pump has already been dumped. Some valuations are already too low.

In terms of companies, term sheets have already been halved in many cases or withdrawn. As always the scrappy and research and development focused companies will win.

The slowdown will probably keep going for a while due to the bigger reason, geopolitical market and trade changes. The funding inflows and outflows have changed dramatically and companies that relied on sometimes foreign authoritarian money will be hurting the most, that was the risk and it is present. Though this is also increasing investment in markets and manufacturing in the West. Long term growth will be immense. The market is almost falsely being held down at this moment due to these influence/attack/change vectors.
Anxiety of Productivity, Flow State, Squirrels on Mics, & More
> I just don't see a line from here to where ARM is now

I don't understand why. RISC-V is being used and pushed by 1000s of companies at this point. You can license cores from 100+ vendors or you can make your own.

There are lots of companies pushing it into every single part of the market. There are well kown cores for space travel, the next generation is RISC-V. RISC-V is already in plenty of low level cores, in things like SSDs, NICs and so on. Companies like Andes push it into billions of consumer devices.

In terms of the ISA itself it is already a match or better then ARM in most ways. And in 1-2 years with the next rounds of specs, it will be more advanced.

To me it seems like RISC-V is already winning by far and its just a question of time. This is more like Linux in the late 90s vs commercial Unix.
Google search gives me links, which is usually what I want. It's pretty easy to ignore the ads and promoted content.

Google maps is quite another thing. Nearly half the screen is filled with "helpful" information that is of no interest to me. Sure, I can make some of that go away on a given view but if I zoom in from a region to a city, that side panel reappears. Making things worse, the side panel does not change size if I narrow the window. At the size I normally have for a web browser, the side panel is half the screen. Perhaps it's a personality defect, but this really annoys me and if that side panel reopens after I've closed it, I normally just switch to apple maps or openstreet maps, although I might go back to the google product if it has a more recent photograph of something I want to see.
I've always felt that Common Lisp was the Lisp family incarnation of PL/I; include everything you think might be helpful to offer a warm welcome to folks coming from FORTRAN or COBOL.
Law enforcement has a mandate and "lawful" monopoly on violence. Pinterest does not. A private citizen acting as a vigilante does not.
While innovation is often good, it's a side issue.

Google's problem was deciding to go all-in on advertising as essentially the only revenue source for the entire company. Worse, as others have noted, this revenue source has the side effect of cheapening and distorting their main claim to fame (i.e., search).

Apple and Microsoft both have numerous revenue-generating products. Google basically just has ads (all the other stuff they have is a rounding error).

Now, Google has had other products that could have become revenue streams, but they have a terrible history of killing those products off. They've overtaken Oracle as the place where good products go to die.

If they don't get the advertising people on a leash, I don't see Google winding up anywhere good over the next decade or so.