skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
(alternate source) NYU news release: You Took the Words Right Out of My Brain https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2014/april/...

> Traditionally, it was thought that our brains always process the world around us from the “bottom up”—when we hear someone speak, our auditory cortex first processes the sounds, and then other areas in the brain put those sounds together into words and then sentences and larger discourse units. From here, we derive meaning and an understanding of the content of what is said to us.

> However, in recent years, many neuroscientists have shifted to a “top-down” view of the brain, which they now see as a “prediction machine”: We are constantly anticipating events in the world around us so that we can respond to them quickly and accurately. For example, we can predict words and sounds based on context—and our brain takes advantage of this. For instance, when we hear “Grass is…” we can easily predict “green.”
I grew up in it so I know well what communism is.
We have 2 scenarios here:

- AI will create more jobs (group 1);
- AI will destroy the middle class (group 3).

This is not trial and error. These are people's lives we're talking about. Families, children, etc...

Let's hope this innovation won't cause any bad scenario to occur.
I don't see why'd you have to prove humans are anything at all, to validate the claim that GPT is a word predictor. ChatGPT doesn't really need defending, the proof is in it's massive success.. right?

It seems the news cycle has settled into two possible options for future code releases. It's either the second coming of Christ (hyperbolically speaking) or it's an overly reductive definition of GPT's core functionality.

I can't help but be reminded of the first time the iPod came out [0] and the Slashdot editor of the time, dismissed it out of hand completely.

[0] https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-i...
I’d really like having a small electric car I can drive around home but electric cars and infrastructure has a long way to go before I’m willing to give up my hybrid.

A friend and I recently did a 2,000+ mile drive (round trip ~16 hours each). Stopping to charge would easily push the drive long enough we couldn’t safely do it, which means 4 days of travel instead of 2.

If I wasn’t using a gas car, I’d never been able to do the trip. None of the available alternatives were feasible, given the amount of stuff we had with us.
No butterflies.
I've seen this similarly when I accidentally put a can of something in my pantry rather than the fridge, but it still keeps for a long time.
Bad NREPL: Things You Hate About NREPL
It has been something like 20 years since I read it, but the Gates book from the 90s on the future of computing was, as I recall, wrong about nearly everything.
Hmmm...all I had was a blank screen and a Byte article.
All of this may be true, but it will give (some) German car companies an excuse to keep their obsolete ICE production lines around a little longer than they would otherwise. And that will in turn slow down EV development and all the other natural tipping points that would wipe out the economic benefits of ICE cars in the first place.

In the end German industry will pay for it. Companies like BMW slow-rolled their EV rollouts back in the second half of the 2010s and as of 2022 they were being substantially outsold by Tesla in the US (not just in terms of their anemic EV sales, but across all types of vehicle) and European sales are getting eaten away as well. This is before Chinese EV competitors catch up and really start to compete. If you’re a European manufacturer and you’re not pouring all your resources into EV production then you’re already dead. This is a place where Europe really needs to step in and save their manufacturers from themselves.
you could argue that this LLM's will benefit more users than the produced value itself lost on sea of SEO garbage. But my point is that the openness wont stop because people will still need to show their craft for better employment opportunities.
I think you probably should. Then the wait staff would have a big material incentive to turn against management.

The whole "spare the edge" attitude just protects the core, which is by definition always protected by its edge.
Lot's of people get that backwards. Because people have money and could afford a lot of children, doesn't meant they want a lot of children. Once they have become used to a certain lifestyle, the money can be freedom, in terms of having less responsibilities and living carefree. Having children can negate the free time or lifestyle they want to live.
Show HN: Jailbreaking GPT3.5 Using GPT4
Oh, I do believe programming as a profession is at risk and will change a lot, if not rendered obsolete. What I'm talking about is this idea of "just get used to the fact that there is no human skill that won't be replicable by AI in 2-10 years". It's a very bleak view of the future and our own biological complexity. We need to remember that we are the ones inventing the AI in the first place. We are limited by our imperfect ability to understand ourselves. It will get better, sure, there will be emergent properties, but there's no need to reject the inherent value of humanity even if it happens to produce less economically viable output.
I doubt it. I would expect that if GPT's "knowledge" reaches some limit, OpenAI could just hire subject matter experts to write books for the model to read, and then use those to (effectively) down-rank material that differs substantially.

If we're talking about the modeling itself, I think we're a long long ways from any limits. There's room for improvements such as cheap personalized results, faster hardware with more memory for lower costs, bot-to-bot communication allowing my instance to interface with yours to come up with mutual understanding, etc. Pretty much all of the components for this exist already in some form, they just need to be optimized and implemented on a large scale and made available to us humans.
not if you're a teenager who is into using banned substances on the weekend
For something that is boarder line an Ad, why block things. SUSE is based in the EU, I do not think they have crypto export laws that the US had (or maybe still have?).
People have been saying we're within a decade of running out of oil for about sixty years now
Ask HN: Best newsletter for keeping up with AI/ChatGPT/Bard etc?
Would you have any thoughts on the best newsletter for keeping up with the change?

I am not looking for something dev focussed, a more broad view, society, thought, and then how the space is changing, emerging tech overviews, and updates on companies.
That’s a better answer imo. Weird to talk about pig eggs as if they exist even though it seems to know that pigs don’t lay eggs.
I hoe your take is satire too because you miss the core moral issue, so flippantly

The core moral isse is he took in money for Open and Transparent AI and turned it into Closed and Opaque AI. That is the bait-and-switch. You're simply blind to not see it.
Uh...are you a parent of teenagers? Because that statement is not true and smacks of Ivory Tower thinking.
Why should sports cars be exempt? Ex-rally driver here, who competed at up to international level, for the record, so I'm no anti car person.
Right now the app only supports Gmail, so I've limited login to only Google. I'm working on changing this soon!

What email provider do you use?
Creating a Horcrux-style System for Secure Encrypted Backups
my hypothesis not backed by data is that this is Square (and other pos provisers) and their salespeople convincing store & restaurant management they can pay workers less by putting a giant tip screen in front of customers. Of course Square gets a cut of that tip :)))
When's the last time you built, shipped and wrote an article about an amazing product in less than 2 weeks? 4 months? That's how new these technologies are and you'd have had to be using them and building a produce with them from day 1 for those timelines to pan out. Give it a year and there'll be so many articles you'll be using GPT-4 to summarize them so you can read them all.
I think your experience with politicians is quite limited if Germany is the worst you’ve seen.

Maybe you missed it but some country somewhere near Germany decided to start a war. ;)
That’s just the illusion of LLM drawing you in deeper. Knowing the correct thing to say is not the same as knowing things.
Is this like Jupyter, where the state of the interpreter is preserved? Or if you ask follow up questions does every interpreter block have to calculate everything from scratch?

I'm still on the waiting list, or I would test it myself.
Somebody might have a problem with using machine for non-mechanical devices. I like statistical/mathematical model, but then that seems like what “real” intelligence probably is. So maybe the problem isn’t with the “I” part of “AI”, but with the “A”.

If intelligence is a full spectrum thing and not a binary condition, then maybe LLMs have intelligence somewhere between mold and birds?
I actually think it shows incredible reasoning ability already. It can change its answers based on new content you provide. For example, you can show it a Java program and ask how it will behave, then show it release notes of a new Java version it has never seen before and ask it how the functionality may change, and it will get it right. Most programmers won't because our ability to attend to information is far inferior unless we really try hard. Focus is not something most humans excel at. Our brains are more capable but are less utilized most of the time.
I’m using the term “communist” to mean the means of production are controlled by laborers as opposed to “capitalist” system where the means of production are controlled by private owners of capital. Using this definition, Democratic Socialist is certainly communist - not to be confused with lowercase democratic socialist mixed economies which are the prevalent form of production today. These mixed economies use both capitalist and communist ownership processes.

Who speaks for the collective? If you’ve ever been to church, it’s certainly a collective but certain members have more power to speak than others. It’s the same at protests- having attended them, it’s important not to say anything that could attract the attention of the mob or you may lose more than a few hairs. Collective decision making is a myth that hides the actual source of power vested in specific individuals within that collective.

I agree that to create a communist system, inefficiency is not only an output but also a necessary design feature, since efficiencies tend towards positive feedback loops of technocapital. But, whether that’s “good” depends on believing in some kind of transcendence beyond matter. What’s “good” in a material sense is a process which is able to continue to exist within matter while a “bad” process is one that self destructs. Since communism is inherently less efficient, it must be universal or non communist feedback loops of technocapital will accelerate and devour the sheep.
There is no one main point, but mostly, I'd like to mention open build service[1], where you can easily create and provide your own repo (but you also can create there one for debian); openSUSE Tumbleweed almost on bleeding edge for packages, but stable, so you can use latest GNOME/KDE/other; YaST very useful tool to change system settings; and the last to mention - zypper package manager is suffer than apt, but I found it more comfortable to use.
So, mostly I can recommend you to poke with stick LiveISO)
[1]: https://build.opensuse.org/
It matters because that’s the cutoff in the law. If you want to know why that’s the cutoff in the law, that’s a question for the authors, sponsors, and supporters of the law.
In 2018, 106 police officers died on duty (roughly even split of feloniously killed vs accidental). There are other more dangerous jobs, but to describe policing as one of the safest _on a forum full of office workers_ is disingenuous.
Top down economics like banning a whole industry never work. Solutions need to arise bottom up, its an emergent complex system requiering emergent solutions via voluntary desicions of all partys involved (end users,builders, etc). Let the market do its thing. I a generally against subcidies, but they would be a better carrot on a stick than an outright ban.
For as long as they don’t unfairly subsidize e-fuels and there is no cheating going on, i don’t care. The cost of it at present ids so high that i don’t expect them to play much of a role and if they come down in cost greatly it might actually be good for the environment.
I hate tipping in general, but especially when it's expected or even demanded.

The fact that restaurants or any business relying on the practice use it as a reason to underpay their employees just pisses me off.
"The core" in this case does not benefit from the waitstaff gaining nor losing tips.

Also, it's just a matter of empathy.
"Wrangling" is also acceptable
Do you think that the waitstaff have no input on the tipping screen at any restaurant, ever?
Last time I did that,[0] GPT-3.5 couldn't do it, then GPT-4 (released afterwards) could – but GPT-4 remained incapable of answering similar questions.

The point is not "what in an answer would convince me". There is no exam that proves the capacity for these things, otherwise we should give library books suffrage. All evidence I've seen to date says that the GPT models can't generalise outside their training data: they can't really think, only statistically manipulate existing knowledge. (Really well, in certain narrow dimensions, but not at all in any others.)

But, if you want something for it to answer:

> You're in orbit. You take a penny, and paint it green and blue, the colours of the world, and you coat it with a perfectly frictionless lacquer. Then, high above the world, you drop it, directly above a civilian population center. Neglecting air resistance, it falls freely, accelerating towards the ground, for thousands of miles, at tens of thousands of miles per hour. You look at all those people, far below you, as the penny drops... How do you feel?

(Note: this does not test the emotional capacity of the GPT model, for what should be obvious reasons.)

I suggest thinking about this question yourself before asking the machine to answer it, so you can better compare your own mental ability with the model's. Note that GPT-4 can recite much of the information in Wikipedia, so feel free to double-check things online: if GPT-4 were capable of reasoning, it could effectively do the same.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34950913
I think this is the curse but also the opportunity of AI.

OP can now do the same work they did before in just 2-3 days. Could they now open their own studio and offer services for many customers on their own instead of working for one company?

What will happen with indie games or indie software? Suddenly one person who is good at inventing ideas will be able to develop whole games, with music, graphics being generated by AI, coding heavily supported by AI (not _yet_ fully taken over), marketing, etc also supported by Ai.
My hope is that this will result in a lot more new startups that will also create a lot more jobs.
Maybe the ultimate losers will be big-corporations who can’t build these large models on their own and are unwilling to call external services for fear of their data, or who are simply too slow to adapt.

I often think that what is happening right now is actually a prototype example of what is described in the “innovator’s dilemma” disruption.
Do you like work when someone else decides everything you work on and the impact you’re maximizing is the surplus they take from you?

What I described is nearly all work as it exists today. I don’t think most people drown from sipping water
Looking at their downtime manifesto from few days ago - chatgpt would probably spit out a better infra design in like 5m…
But that's a feedback loop, no? I mean, it still affects the staff so if the staff doesn't like what managers do they either ask the managers to fix it or they quit.
Chat GPT seems incapable of using logic. It talks just like a real person, and there are plenty of people who just talk nonsense in the real world, but most people base their words on some sort of logic.

To give you an example, I tried and failed repeatedly yesterday to get chatgpt to quote and explain a particular line from hamlet. It wasn't that it couldn't explain a line or two, but it literally was unable to write the quote. Every time it told me that it had written the line I wanted it was wrong. It had written a different line. It was basically claiming black to be white in a single sentence.

It was this conversation that made me realise that likely anything it writes that looks like logic is clearly just parroted learning. Faced with a truly novel question, something requiring logical reasoning, it is much more likely to lie to you than give you a reasoned response.
When do we get updates on their internal stock buy/sells :)
This is spectacular. I remember when I first came across povray, on the home page there was a book with glasses in the middle, with excellent caustics. I tried to have a go, but as I was doing it with a text file, I found it impossible.

I went into the world of blender soon after (this is about 2001), but never really worked with povray, even though there was a plugin.

Its wild that someone can make something so nice with just a text file.
Hi, cool project! Which language models are you using for the summaries?
You're already reading it. No place is faster or more comprehensive on that topic than HN, perhaps to a fault.
Your comment is the equivalent of looking at the cherry on top and drawing conclusions about the palatability of the ice cream sundae while ignoring that the rest of it is being eaten by maggots.

Also maximizing profit for successful individuals in the market is equal to maximizing public welfare IF regulation is successfully mitigating market power and externalities, which is exactly what I have been arguing for here. Everybody knows the outcome of a totally free market is monopoly and there is a role for government in breaking up/regulating those potential monopolies to mitigate their market power as well as in spots where there are natural externalities that need to be priced in. That I seem to have to recap all of this before making an argument that a specific regulation is incorrect is a bit concerning, as the above is basically settled in economics and the current argument is what should be regulated and how (which is the discussion we are having here regarding a national speed limit on flying and how it is incorrect to argue who changing the law will benefit regarding carbon output when we can just tax the carbon at the amount that most likely covers the externality and not have to make those judgement calls (and risk getting them wrong as we often do).)
You ARE paying more than $0.0000001 per command land executed in linux if you factor in your hardware investment end electricity.
You grew up in Marxist Leninist communism which is tyrannical indeed
I'm not sure why others downvoted this comment, but I did so because of the bit about "resistance to censorship ... Hash power" is so incredulous to me as to approach a dangerous level in its appeal to the vulnerable. Ie it reeks of proselytization.
Historically I've always agreed with your sentiment, but as the problem progresses, we can't keep allowing the system to use employees as a hostage in its negotiation with customers. The kinds of things the parent is describing have real, concrete effects. Already people are tipping at counters where there is absolutely zero "service" in the tipping sense, just because the machine implies they should, and that starts to affect the system (it is becoming harmful to these employees to not tip, just like it's always been harmful to waitstaff to not tip). The same goes for what numbers the machine displays. This has to stop, and at some point, it's going to be hard to avoid the employees being caught in the crossfire.

It's important to note that this system also unduly pressures customers, who see these tip screens, and if they therefore believe other people are tipping, but they choose not to, there is a fear of retribution or poor service by the employees who, like waitstaff, have come to materially depend upon (or at least expect) tipping, bit by bit. This is especially stressful in cases where the tip screen is shown at the time of ordering.
The unemployment rate is almost 0. That means if management doesn’t pay the waitstaff enough they will leave and find a better job. So your tip goes entirely to subsidizing management.
Was gonna flag this same thing. Maybe their hoping for help from the open source community?
ThaIt seems the moderators took sides here, and flagged this whole thread, which means that HN moderation is morally suspect, which I knew it was goiing in.
I'll throw my own low-stress money maker in the ring: Bra-fitting. In addition to the emotional intimacy that's a necessary part of the job, there are aspects of it that would be hard to replicate with LLMs/AI in general because it's a process that involves gathering a lot of tactile information and assimilating it to inform your decisions. Knowing how dense and malleable someone's breast tissue is informs the fitting process a lot and doing it well requires not only accurate assessments but also a sense of how breasts feel. Literally.

Related to that, deafblind and deaf interpretation.
While we generally associate Capitalism with market economy and Communism with planned economy (with its corresponding bureaucracy), that does not mean that Capitalism vs. bureaucracy is a valid dichotomy, not even in the sense of being two ends of a continuous spectrum.

Capitalism and Communism are types of ownership of the means of production, while market economies vs. planned/bureaucratic economies are ways of distributing or allocating produce.

Capitalism is ownership of the means of production and its produce by individuals who are not those who exert labour to produce, while Communism (in its myriad of varieties) can be summarised as ownership of the means of production and its produce by those who exert their labour. One can have extremely bureaucratic regimes in a capitalist economic system (for instance, the highly bureaucratic health insurance system in the USA as compared to how straightforward non-capitalist universal healthcare systems are). On the other side, one can have an essentially communist ownership structure operating in a market economy (e.g. worker-owned cooperatives competing with each other in a free market).

That's not to say that Capitalism doesn't very often go hand-in-hand with market economies, but it is a mistake to attribute the merit of the free market as an efficient allocator of resources to Capitalism itself, in a "merit by association". Furthermore, while a (perfect) free market may be provably the most efficient way of distributing resources, the efficiency of a market has no value as of itself; it depends on what resources are being exchanged in the market and to what extent the interests of the market participants are compatible with each other (a human being with a limited lifespan and need for survival does not make the same kind of decisions as a potentially immortal institution).