skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don’t think OSX was better than MacOS, however I do feel like Apple has missed some opportunities for improvement and has introduced some head scratching UX elements.

I don’t feel like MacOS is any more locked down than before. I think that is just a thing people say because it aligns with their computing philosophy and makes it easy to hate on Apple.
In fairness to Microsoft's decision, more space around filenames is probably easier to read for the common man.

I hope this remains an option for power users like us who are just used to the old spacing, of course.
the first iPhone was impressive, it showed what the future would be. Then iPhone 3G was also a massive leap forward, it brought us the App Store. iPhone 4 was pretty big, FaceTime.

After that nothing has really changed (I'm on a 7 and the camera actually beats the 14's in a side by side comparison, at least in some cases). I imagine GPT will be similar.
Ohh, so many reasons.

* Busy people are peaceful people. Idle hands are the devil's playthings.

* Those "arbitrary people" are our neighbors, and prone bodies draped across the sidewalks are bad for property values.

* Allowing domestic industries and expertise to vanish too quickly can have unintended consequences. Try buying a new set of subway cars in the US today...

That being said, nobody suggested forcing employers to keep redundant positions open. There are plenty of other ways to help keep people productive and engaged in a shifting industrial landscape, which could be funded through various kinds of taxes on the use of AI.
I wonder why... Insert eye roll...
The job of the future: butler.
If this is the commitment offered by employees is there an equivalent offered by the employer? I.e. how does that affect lay off decisions? If the assumption is that employee passion will keep the ship afloat, then how is that reflected on compensation and profit shares? I am all for dedication and have mostly been passionate about my work, but with my eyes open that this is a one way game, and I play it to feel better myself with a risk of even bigger disappointment when reality hits.
Theres a differences between caring about me your work as a craft, and caring about the meaningfulness of the work.

I care about the quality I'd work I do, I feel it's a reflection of me, even though it find the product to be pointless
*buy and sell
Likely local: "We build a custom model to predict the future to allow inference on limited compute."
> get in the bandwagon of AI, start using the tools, explode your productivity

I'm reluctant to start using LLM-based coding assistants (e.g. Copilot) in my programming work because I don't want to taint my code with laundered code that was under a copyleft or other restrictive license. Is this a reasonable concern?
It's more like the world is not black and white, engineering problems don't have "The perfect solution, the rest is trash", but rather "this problem has multiple solutions, depending on context, some have these tradeoffs and the others have these".

In this particular case, it might not be worth to trade speed of having to think about SQL for performance (today or tomorrow). Maybe you're building something that will just be used by 2-3 people, so 1+N isn't really a issue.

Or whatever, the conclusion as always is: it depends.
Copy paste the parts of the install steps for LLaMA C++ into ChatGPT and ask it to explain things simply and include any prerequisite steps you might need to do. If you get stuck, just ask ChatGPT and include any error messages.

https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp
I definitely have to tinker with macos.

For example, the scanner in the mfp in my office stopped working after some system update (this one I never got working again, I just rdp into windows machine now and then copy over the scan). Another problem was with flickering display when connected over TB3 dock with M1 macs -- and no such problem with Intel macs in the same dock (it was "solved" by buying another dock). Software-wise, I had to edit /etc/ppp/ip-up & ip-down scripts to get correct routes for IPSec vpn. I had to manually add hunspell dictionaries, if I wanted working spellcheck. For a certain period, smb didn't work in Big Sur out of the box, because installer/updater was putting incorrect owner on a system file needed (/private/var/db/mds/messages/$(uid)/se_SecurityMessages) And so on, and so.

So yes, there is definitely tinkering, unless you have very narrow use cases, that happen to 100% align to Cupertino marketing scenarios.
Show HN: Merlin’s Defense. GPT-4 Prompt Attack CTF
No, in an evolving situation you don't lie, you say "we don't know", or "we are hoping this will help".

When you say "vaccinated people don't carry the virus" and you are the head of the CDC or the President or countless other idiots who repeated the same thing, then you are in fact lying because that statement was never true. It's not that it was true, and then things changed. It was never true and they knew it wasn't true. And the lie was weaponized against anybody who questioned it.

They lied to the public, and there will be no historical revisionism on this.
There are much simpler ways to provide access to those areas.
Hmm, there would be no point at this stage as there are no positions AI is not certain to have found at least as good a move as a human.
It's not ideal, but you can simply log `DeferredAttribute.__get__` calls instead of raising an exception.
Competition will do the same initially, until the growth curves reverses. At that point, when you really need your experienced staff to drive growth, moat of them will be busy finding new positions.
>HN has this weird thing where they tell me "correlation does not equal causation"

Correlation does-not *Imply* Causation : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau...
Thank you for sharing your prompt, it looks great! Other folks: if you take the time to develop prompts relevant to HN threads, please consider sharing them.
Building a DOS ChatGPT Client in 2023
Cost of products made solely by machines will approach zero. If machines take all the jobs, humans will live like aristocrats. Imagine telling farmers 200 years ago, that 95% of the humanity won't be farming at some point. Imagine them making bets similar to yours.
I am glad it's being useful. :)

I used AppleScript for the first two years of this app as well (Can't believe it's been 7 years since I started it). But it's hard to handle complex programs, and handing off data to Swift or Objective-C from AppleScript. So I switched to [ScriptingBridge](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/scriptingbridge). It provides better Objective-C APIs to handle Apple Events.
I'm a Spanish speaker and it doesn't sound funny to me. Slight differences in your native language are very distinctive, so I don't read "Culito" when I see it. Do you think Apple computers is too close to Asshole?
Gotta love adding “you’re just not smart enough to understand it” to the list of ways you’ve shut down conversations. You’re going for a hat trick, aren’t you?
DHTs arent centralized.

As I said there needs fo be a front end that is based on DHT. Freenet. Beaker Browser. IPFS. Why not?
Ah yes, thank god the anticompetitive hiring practices of * checks notes * paying people a lot and treating them really well are finally ending.

Look, we can argue about whether big tech salaries are a good or bad thing, but calling paying people more than your competitors, an anticompetitive practice is absolutely absurd. If anything it’s the most competitive thing a company could do to hire.
ok, which jobs is this one going to steal now?
In short, no. Once you try out the tool you’ll understand this concern never made much sense to begin with for normal usage patterns. Copilot primarily excels in writing very short snippets, far too short to be under copyleft.
> My assertion is simply that the infinity of the positive integers is different from the infinity of the reals in the sense that the infinity of the positive integers can be computed to arbitrarily large measure given enough time.

Again the same issue. You are trying to make infinity finite by reducing it to “arbitrarily large measure”.

> Whereas for the reals, we’ll forever be stuck on pi/4 and never get to e. That given arbitrary time, we can only compute a non-measurable number of reals.

If you generate random reals at each step, you can generate a sequence as long as you want, without ever “getting stuck”.

You are choosing to get stuck.
I went and got a flip phone and trashed my Iphone. So, Yeah i guess. Feels great by the way.
(this is a collection of CSS stylesheets)
>The Constitution does not define rights, rather it defines the limits of the government's power to abridge those rights.

It's frightening that so few seem to really get this.
A good doctor is about asking the right questions.

One of the many problems with self-diagnosis is that people can start asking leading questions to get the answers they want to hear. ChatGPT can be easily gamed to deliver the answer the patient wants if they’re asking all the wrong questions.
I dont wanna take credit or anything, but this post appearing within 24 hours of me posting this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35308954 makes me wonder if I'm partly reaponsible for this post now ^=^`
> Most drive tests really fail to establish whether they are sustained or short tests. Lovely seeing some believable figures, where before & after the cliff are visible.

100% this. I had some discussion about this with a Dutch tech website because their tests ommitted these tests. And don’t show these graphs.
Note that Notes.app can also sync with IMAP.

IMAP syncing supports basic formatting (bold, italic, underline) but not all features supported by iCloud syncing (attachments, checklists, photos).
There are plenty of students who can ace these exams but then utterly fail at getting things done at companies because they lack problem solving experience, a toleration for ambiguity or any number of interpersonal skills needed to complete complex projects. Until AI can just deal with other AI and not messy humans, there will be job security.
DECWindows wasn't just on VAX. It was also used on Ultrix workstations.
Isn't this just assuming the "forced" students didn't in fact want to keep playing?
It's that learning is local and quick that makes it able to be fully general. New environment? It can learn that.
It really doesn't matter if the model is 100x more efficient than doctors, it will go nowhere. Anything that threatens the stability of the medical professionals will face so many legal challenges that even deep pocket companies won't stand a chance. There is a reason medical school spots are artificially limited... programmers seem to be the only ones trying to automate themselves out of their jobs.
The models are trained on Hubble data. It's cheating against the rest of the astrophotography community if you're just replacing your pixels with NASA's pixels. Mcarthy takes a lot of flack for this and has said he'll back off use of the AI models.
We've been re-inventing the wheel for mom and pops for so long it made sense that someone made it more efficient. I used to do it for small businesses and now I do it on the exact opposite side of the spectrum building web apps and my industry is ripe for the same kind of thing.

In the near-term I think we'll see it as an efficiency gain for developers, but longer term we will be able to just make applications on the fly.
> What do you guys think? Is Google in trouble?

Define trouble. They won't lose all their customers overnight, likely not even this year or next, even if AI would deliver for all. But AI and chat-interfaces are new, fresh, hyped, they are also young and not deliver for everyone, and companies have not the backend to cover all of Googles user base.

So overall, the more pragmatic reality is that the market needs time to grow in quality and ability, which means Google has also time to adapt and offer something on their own.
> What is any individual software developer supposed to do to prepare for that scenario?

Do what happened to countless of people in past that gets "automated" away or otherwise encounter shifting times in life, become unemployed until you find a different way of surviving.

The industrial revolution changed the life of a lot of people, making vast amount of people unemployed over the course of some decades. It's not hard to imagine that future changes will happen much faster, as everything happens much faster in modern times. So once it starts shifting, the effects will probably be greater.

But, where there is a will there is a way, and surely software developers would discover this as well if they ever find themselves unemployed because of a shift in the world.
It’s usually not person-specific but domain-specific.

Like, I’m really good at memory management but whenever I go to write a new malloc or GC I somehow convince myself that I’ll Carmack it in a weekend. And then it takes five months.

But if I write a compiler then I’m usually one of those precise estimators. If I tell you a month then it’ll be a month.

So, I don’t try to talk to the Steve as if he’s the problem. He’s not the problem. The problem he’s solving is the problem.

(Or maybe I just make that excuse for Steve because as I said, I’m a Steve.)
All but the most naive (or small) companies will do market analysis on the market rate of labor and have internal churn targets. I'm sure the accountants did the math and upper management decided the expected bump in churn is worth the savings. They probably noticed a recent decrease in churn at the company, and a recent stagnation of tech wage growth and thought this was a fantastic opportunity to manage labor costs. Not giving labor a 5% wage increase now will have an impact on their labor costs for years, as wage growth compounds.

The prevailing engineer perspective is that this behavior causes the smartest engineers with options and ambitions will move on. Other top engineers will leave simply because they prefer working with other great engineers. Three years of small plays like this from management is enough to cause complete brain drain, as even those waiting for more vesting will lose optimism. It's one thing to have 6% churn from engineering/product in a year. It's another if you lose the most qualified and respected 6%.
They are paid to be there instead of somewhere else that would also pay them for the same craft. You can care about compensation and your craft together.

Say you took pride in your skill as a smith. That’s hardly incompatible with finding an employer who will pay for making quality armor.
We did something similar but much simpler in 2009 where the robot learned where its sensors where and which way its motors moved it, and how to use them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk-H--e6PUs
Author here. By all means, go ahead!
Benefits of innovation start with the privileged, but invariably end up benefitting the masses. Cellphones once were once available only to the rich. Poor people have smart phones now.
It's not a charade, it's the looming shadow of Oracle lawyers.
20 years is a long time in an industry with an incredible rate of change. Though I guess if you're in the market now, you're 3-5 years ahead of kids coming through tertiary studies specialising in AI.
For primarily vocal work the Rode Podmic may be a nice and cheap alternative to the RE320 and other big studio dynamics, they look quite nice. They will not make a good general purpose mic since the high frequency response is not great but it should work well for most voices. The Podmic has really gotten my attention lately and I am probably going to order one soon for recording vocals and acoustic guitar, seems well suited for that.
Can’t humans do this with…the internet ?
Still if the end goal is to be able to verify the result, learning the entire process is usually not required. Almost everything we use is a black box and while it's good to know the basics to have a good understanding, it's also not a bad idea to strike a balance when dedicating limited learning time between required background and things that are practically useful.
The topic of discussion is the limits on human rights that can reasonably arise to protect the public from real harm.

What you're throwing into the mix is a suspension of human rights for... unethical research? Failing to see the distinction is really not something I can help you with.
Puts pack mules out to pasture. (Non-trivial application.)
I'll answer this here.

He is not upfront about it. Most lay people think that these amazing shots he gets are what is attainable with a backyard telescope. It's not.

It's bad for the same reason influencers using body filters is bad.
Actually, I think what they're talking about is that VCs have a lot of investments they would not dump more money into. They use these investments as collateral for loans, based on some kind of valuation (which, given the lack of price discovery is arbitrary). Essentially, they're zero value investments. If these investments were repriced, the actual value of the VC fund would fall.

As the interviewee indicates, if the uninsured depositors had not been bailed out, the VC firms would have had to decide to put more of their "dry powder" (on a temporary basis) into these startups until their deposit claims were adjudicated. the VCs would not have done that, even if they knew they'd get all of it back when the dissolution was complete. That means that the 10 million investment in a 1 billion dollar unicorn currently on their books would suddenly be worthless.

Instead, they're going to continue to carry it at $10 million because there's no price discovery on these highly illiquid assets. Essentially, the last price discovery was when they made the investment which caused the value to be set.
Unchecked overregulation once again stifling innovation.
PostgreSQL is Turing-complete, as proven by implementations of a cyclic tag system[0] and Turing machine[1]. The Mandelbrot set[2] and travelling-salesman problem[3] have also been implemented in it.

Transact-SQL is also Turing-complete, as proven by a Brainfuck implementation[4].

With that, you can theoretically compute anything :).

[0]: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Cyclic_Tag_System

[1]: https://blog.coelho.net/database/2013/08/17/turing-sql-1.htm...

[2]: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Mandelbrot_set

[3]: https://web.archive.org/web/20201111224603/http://assets.en....

[4]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/900055/is-sql-or-even-ts...
Comparing this to atheism is very illuminating, actually.

In some ways this topic is very different to atheism/theism. In the ‘belief in god’ debate both sides are trying to take away the other side’s belief; it’s important to atheists to stop people believing in God, while to believers it’s important to stop people disbelieving in God, so there’s a lot of convincing being attempted, people seeking each other out to tell them that they cannot or must not hold a certain belief, and so forth. This topic is very different! If I want to go off and believe LLMs can understand and reason and think, you don’t really care; likewise, when you believe that, although it might be producing a novel rephrasing, the information in that rephrasing is merely reproduced from the training corpus, I don’t really care. (Beyond active engagements in discussion threads, anyhow - not trying to imply either of us don’t care about the discussion we’re having right now!)

But in other ways it is very similar to the atheism/theism debate. For a time I used to argue God exists because the idea of God controls and causes very specific behaviors from a great many people; a naive diagram of the situation has this God figure and He’s telling these little people figures to do certain things and they do exactly those things (which is why “pointing out that certain figures are hypocritically not doing those things” feels important and like it might be evidence against), and the atheist argument that you can’t actually detect God’s existence is like erasing the God figure from the diagram: it leaves a conspicuous hole in the diagram, and the hole is shaped like God, and if you were to naively fill in the hole in the diagram to explain what’s causing the people to behave that way, the precise shape of the hole forces you to end up re-drawing God (this argument was very unconvincing to atheists for multiple reasons and I’m not trying to re-litigate it here).

It became clear to me that atheists were not interested in this level of proof, it had to be physical existence; some ‘God-stuff’ that you could grab a handful of and hold up to the light and say “here it is”. This topic is very similar! For me, it is enough that the diagram of an LLM’s capabilities has a hole shaped exactly like “it understands” and I’m happy to fill in the obvious blank; for you, there needs be an actual process of understanding somewhere in the code and the weights that we could hold up to the light and say “here is the understanding” (and that is how you can claim that no matter how good LLMs get they will never be understanding - all of their processes are already fully described and explained, there’s nowhere for a process of understanding to hide).
Apparently I have an alt account here I didn't know about lol
Before the pandemic the appropriate tip for takeout was 0%
I certainly feel this way regularly and choose not to engage with people when I don't believe it will be worthwhile. The nuance is that, if you tell yourself you have the power to see into people's hearts and understand what makes them tick - rather than you've simply chosen not to engage with this particular person at this particular time - you may exercise bad judgment in circumstances that require you to understand other people.

For instance, one that causes me problems personally is that I'm prone to doubting that people will change their mind no matter what evidence you present to them. And that's not a bad heuristic when you think someone is wrong on the internet and don't think that you'll be able to disabuse them of it. But I've had to learn to suppress this instinct when I get into conflicts with people, because I can't resolve a conflict if I'm convinced that it's impossible to come to an understanding. But this isn't just an irrational idea I've picked up, I have had conflicts that couldn't be resolved because the other party wouldn't give me a fair hearing. But I can't allow myself to believe that no one will ever change their mind, even if I see all the hallmarks of it.

And indeed I've had the experience more than once where I see someone dig in their heels, fully anticipate this matter is irresolvable, and when encouraged by mutual friends to try anyway (or, later, when I tried to be optimistic because I was aware of this pattern), I've gone on to be surprised for the better.
This was in response to your comment about how you can tell that a water simulation is fake by trying to dip a water bottle in there. The distinction between chemical and silicon doesn't matter when the output is text. There's no physical test you can perform in the text, like dipping a water bottle in water, to see if it's chemical or silicon.
You may be interested in the short article by Mortimer Adler, 'How to Mark a Book'[1] (he also expands greatly on this in his book titled 'How to Read a Book').

[1]: https://stevenson.ucsc.edu/academics/stevenson-college-core-...
An Open-Source Espresso
>Visible homelessness you are referring to is generally a drug policy issue more than anything.

Drug and/or alcohol abuse (not use) is often a symptom of an underlying condition, typically associated with despair. It's escapism.

Despair: the complete loss or absence of hope.

I think a lot of people suffer from despair in the US today. I remember in the 1980s, farmers were killing themselves at quite a high rate because of automation and consolidation (big agg) and them losing their family's farms. I think that same thing has caught up with the rest of the population in the last 40 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farmers%27_suicides_in_the_Uni...