skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It absolutely is a screwed-up interaction that everyone would be better off without, but it's one we have to acknowledge while it is still the norm.
> but it's mathematically impossible to prove things about computer programs in the general case.

there is such thing as verifiable software.
Fascinating. I guess there’s an element of aspiration in purchasing things…we are partially constructing the person we want to be
In 2040 we are its support staff. By the end of the century our great-grandkids are basically its pets.

And I'm not even sure any of that is a bad thing. How do we deal with the idea that the AI industry might create a benevolent God?
It wouldn't be an AWS announcement without a whopper of a caveat, it's like the Amazon equivalent of Google canceling things.
My whole career has been in-house industrial stuff. I've never used past trig--and that only to draw a picture of a toilet. (Legitimate--while we didn't do anything with toilets the graphic marked where it would be, thus where our stuff couldn't be.)

I have found a possible use for error correcting codes but that's way beyond anything I ever studied and thus it probably will never be implemented.
Pretty sure it is just CUDA + Lithography.
if we’re all still alive by then
I think there exists room for an intermediate layer, a framework for AI to write code in specifically. With larger "target" code blocks it can stitch together. Code is designed around humans to allow them to write specific, abritrary and precise logic with a lot of minuate, but LLMs might be better off thinking in larger business logic blocks that are testable and "sanctioned" by the framework makers for the specific problem domain.
I have wondered about sensory input being needed for AGI when thinking about human development and feral children[1]. It seems that complex sensory input, like speech, may be a component of cognitive development.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child
Toyota is working on nursing robots that can handle many of the routine tasks like helping people out of bed and walk to the bathroom.
I can't think of a term more opposed to "Free speech" than "Chat control".
Incentives. Plenty of people would go into rural medicine if it wasn't paying crap and dealing with nothing but elderly Medicare patients because of the lack of health insurance for people just marginally above the Medicaid line. Of course this means there's basically no support currently for the hospitals and more than half are being bought up by private equity anyways and shipping it all to the smallest bottom line.

Congress can do a lot.
The Real Reasons for Big Tech Layoffs at Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon
Twitter says parts of its source code were leaked online
This is super interesting, is this generalizable to n-dimensional manifolds?
The problem isn't the screen resolution but operating systems and apps that don't handle scale and layout to usable physical dimensions. Windows is/was notoriously bad at scaling high resolution user interfaces properly.
If I lived in the EU I'd want to know who are proposing this kind of stuff and help with anything that gets them far from public and government -related jobs forever, but hey, that's me. Lots of people like to give up a bit of freedom and privacy in exchange for an increased sense of security.
20k deaths of 70 year olds will have a lot less impact on life expectancy than the same number of deaths in 40 year olds. It's basic arithmetic.

Do you not understand how life expectancy is calculated?
GPT-4 can reverse engineer binary assembly code. Everything that runs locally will soon be de facto OSS.
I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that I find refrigerated rice very unappetizing even if it's rewarmed.
Arduino is also orders of magnitude lower friction than just about any other embedded platform. Baremetal AVR? Set up your makefile, ICSP programmer, and find the right fuse flags or risk bricking your chip with the wrong clock settings. STM32? Set up the whole STM32CubeMx project and export it as a Makefile and remember to only add code in the correct areas? Baremetal ESP32/ESP8266? Doesn't exist, but you can use a FreeRTOS fork with special binary blobs. PIC microcontrollers? Set up Microchip's HUGE IDE and special compilers and programming tools.

A board supported by Arduino is vastly easier to use, especially for someone who just wants their project to _work_, not to learn the deep arcana of baremetal systems.
It's always going to be compatible data that really enables different transforms or systems to communicate. Sending and receiving it is a directly solvable problem.
In my past four engineering positions I have been issued Macbooks. I'm almost exclusively a Linux user for personal machines, although I have an M2 Macbook Air that I like to work on and I love it.

My approach to making MacOS awesome for me, is using Nix on Darwin. I really enjoy codifying my MacOS setup and I have set things up in a way where my MacOS build is almost indistinguishable from my NixOS builds when it comes to the appearance, keyboard shortcuts and overall workflows.
Yeah, just use it if it is useful, don't use it if it isn't. That is the optimal strategy here. Not sure why people think so hard about this.

If you don't find it useful then good, it wont replace you.

If you find it useful then it help you become more productive, best learn how to use it better than your peers so they get fired instead of you.
I pirate and the private usenet website I use has this funky search rules for "sphinx" they call it. Never seen it before.

I copied and pasted the search engine query term rules they have on the page, then said I want to find all American Dad episodes for season 18 with x265 codec. And it gave me the query to use.

This thing saves a bunch of time all over the place. This is truly the bicycle for the mind.
I don't see them as mutually exclusive; I don't think a particular distribution of real property is synonymous with political liberty. I see no reason you can't still have markets, competition, private wealth to some degree, but I think ownership of industrial production should be distributed far more evenly across its workforce and even its customers to some degree. AI could significantly enhance democracy by making it practical to do a lot of things at the local level that would otherwise be enormously administratively and logistically expensive.

No special reason for 25 hrs/week, just a ballpark figure of about how much work should be necessary to support yourself to a median level of economic security. I like the number 5 so 25 seems like a nicer number than 24.
People rate the ESPs from DF robot.

They aren’t cheap but they also provide support and a good to deal with.
https://www.dfrobot.com/
Yep! More specifically I'm basically talking about geodesics on Riemannian manifolds.
Also at formal senior/project lead/management levels myself. I do not find what you are positing to be my reality, at all.

I don't think bullshitting leads to high productivity or task throughput. Anecdotally, I find the bullshitters are the ones holding the 20-40% of productive IC's back because of constant distractions, spec/scope socializing (and subsequent creep), and just general talking while others are trying to work. If there needs to be a meeting to work out spec I'd rather it be on the calendar where it's company sanctioned, has an agenda, and where we can formally gather action items to be delegated and assigned -- that last list of things does not happen with "bullshitting."

> At some point you'll get involved with a project that's so interesting you'll never really stop thinking about it, and then your idea of what someone looks like when they're "working" will change.

I've been very involved and interested in my work and this has not happened to me yet. People socializing in adhoc 1:1 conversations is where the "good ol' boys" comes from, and it has typically been incredibly damaging to my clients, specs, and timelines. My idea of people working is people traditionally working, adhering to the SDLC, and ensuring technical communications are not private.

In my anecdotal experience, "bullshitting" is a negative thing. I'd rather not be a "bullshitter," and I hope those around me don't use such language to describe me -- especially at a professional level.

---

Just to reiterate:

"Bullshitting" != "where a lot of the work gets done." "Bullshitting" is a negative thing.

And, being incredibly invested into a project has not yet changed my opinion on this. I find this comment makes assumptions of future me with the "at some point" language. Using a hypothetical regarding someone else's future self isn't ideal when arguing a point. It feels condescending in a "you just don't know yet" sorta way.
I hope they have, but have they?
It's in the Microsoft paper. We might require the 32k token model to really handle it.
Some of the navigating into a bundle stuff is indeed not presently happening.

But there's a bunch of specs for signed exchanges & subresources that underpin & allow resource exchange, and which do have recent drafts. Webpackage seems to be doing OK ish. But yeah we bundles specifically do seem to be all expired.

https://github.com/WICG/webpackage#specifications
Thank you for replying to my questions in good faith.
Would you mind sharing:

1) sequence in which you gave her tutorials e.g. first tetris, then snake game, etc.

2) sources that you used to guide her through these tasks? e.g. youtube videos or other links.

Thanks.
Sounds awful. Like my life of course and would be bummed if I fell over and died due to organ loss but OTOH I don't share the fondness for immortality or crippling fear of death that seems to affect many technologists. It seems just as natural that things should have ends as beginnings.
We have to win every time, but they have to win only once.
Why do you think "information processing" is what causes consciousness, as opposed to some other process that brains perform?

Do you think a Raspberry Pi, a 1970s electronic calculator, or a simple analog thermostat is conscious? They all do information processing. If they aren't conscious, what is it about the information processing that brains do that produces consciousness?

This is an obvious false dichotomy:

> There's no magic in the goo. It's all information processing

It doesn't have to be magic. Just to take an example, Penrose and Hameroff proposed that microtubules in neurons are structured in a fractal pattern which would enable quantum processes to occur that (somehow!) explain consciousness. This proposal is little more than a guess, but it's an example of something other than information processing, that's not "magic", that could be a cause for consciousness.

> It's all information processing, and we know this very well.

How do we "know this very well"? The real answer is we certainly don't know that, but perhaps if you try to justify your position, you'll realize that.
GraphQL makes it even more fun :)
I seen that said a few time and I struggle to see why a language would be more AI friendly than à other ?
Ah no, that doesn't constitute "proof" of the original statement. However, it does now introduce a burden on me to show one single example to prove that I have not (to date) dismissed everything that everyone said. Prior to this the burden was on the other person to demonstrate that I had dismissed everything everyone had said. And we can be generous and allow that there is an implied "during the period that I was a member of the group", as it is increasingly absurd that he "knows" what I did in a group that he isn't even a member of. Note that his statement is also an active rejection. So if someone said "Ok, I'm going to the beach" and I fail to reply at all, because I have no reason to dismiss that statement, that would also constitute a counter-example. It's quite normal to not make an effort to say "I agree/don't dispute" to every single sentence someone says. So if you give me a time period, I'll post a link to a message where there is no sign of me dismissing what they said.
I happen to be reading 1984 for the first time right now - that book was published in 1949, and gee did Orwell have the EU scoped out - even though he kind of missed by a couple of decades. There's so many real life parallels that I'm getting the chills.
Aren't you embarrassed to field such peurile arguments? Really, that's an insult to everyone else's intelligence.
https://youtu.be/StLtMcsbQes

I think you have your head in the sand and haven’t been paying attention.

The scaling laws are not expected. The capabilities of GPT-3.5 are beyond what even those deeply involved had expected.

I also think the progress is likely going exponential at this point. Multi agent and recursive prompting are coming soon.

This is really not ML at all. I have extensive traditional ML knowledge and background. I know in detail the typical model suspects on a Kaggle board.

LLMs are totally new and surprising relative to my many decades working with ML and traditional NLP.
I hear you. I guess I'd just like to see more hacking and less of the memes. For me I think again that it would help more than hurt.

I'm an old man now and maybe I've gone a bit soft but I don't see much benefit in mocking and am more interested in helping even if that means wasting a bit of time.
Same. Somewhat ironically, my art school vocabulary has come in very handy when writing art generator prompts.
Because European people keep voting for their local parties that nominate these commissioners. Your complaint is ultimately with European voters for voting "wrong".
Not only that, but one of the big successes of chat AIs is their conversation. When a program does something wrong, it's hard to figure out what you said wrong.

When a char AI misunderstood you, it's often quite easy to explain where the misunderstanding happened and the AI will correct itself.
I would say it's applicable to anything with a programming language or DSL for it, which this does.
Have you ever had anything besides a bad cold? Tell me you understand every acronym in this article, and the ability to explain it succinctly to a patient much less to be able to hand off a case to "another" physician https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206714

Doctors and nurses have saved me many times from some very close calls because of decades of experience, training and intuition. That is of course not to mention the friend who beat a deep brain tumor on their brain stem that everyone else told them was inoperable, and now are in medical school themselves for neurology. No LLM is going to pull that out of itself, possibly ever, and certainly not GPT-4 (no one else had ever had the surgery done before, it was novel).
I'll be the first to admit this: All I'm seeing here is the JSON version of the semantic web.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web#Example

Fundamentally, it suffers from the same problems that the semantic web suffers from as well, primarily the top of my concerns being link rot & scenarios involving at least one link in those examples being inaccessible/unrecoverable.

For the Semantic Web / JSON-LD to work, the infrastructure behind it needs to permanently keep all of the necessary sources that a file relies on (i.e. permaweb). Otherwise, the entire knowledge graph suffers from a left-pad style situation, wherein the removal of a critical piece of definition(s) will cause the unparsability of all documents reliant on it for definitions.
Context is everything.

1. How important is it that we get an estimate? Things take the same amount of work with or without the estimate, so how bad is it actually if we don't know how long something will take? And no - a feeling of general anxiety among management/leadership around "not knowing" DOES NOT count as an actual cost! If I can't handle uncertainty, that shows a lack of maturity on my part. If the estimate is not critically important due to factors external to the company, consider using an appetite instead(https://basecamp.com/shapeup/1.2-chapter-03#fixed-time-varia...).

2. If I truly need an estimate, the next question is how difficult is it to provide an accurate estimate? Nobody can estimate how long AGI or flying cars will take. If we need a new field on a form and in the DB - something the team has done many times before, I would require an accurate estimate from the engineers, and hold them accountable if they miss the target. However, if I NEED an estimate for a very difficult to estimate task, it is a RED FLAG that the company is at significant risk. Rather than push the team to provide a more accurate estimate, leadership/management should instead focus on strategic moves or contingencies to mitigate risk. If strategic moves/contingency plans are not realistic, the next preference would be to play it safe: rather than waiting for the estimate, start work immediately and redirect/focus additional resources on the task until the risk has been lowered(get progress updates instead of estimates). If we can't actually start work, we need to have a long and hard think about our core business and work practices because the process is putting massive stress on ICs by making them guess at things which may be outside of their control, leading to decreased performance and increased attrition.
It is EU commissioner Ylva Johansson. Unfortunately, there is not much you can do. She is not elected to this position, but appointed, and in this case by a former government who is no longer in power.
This is only true if you give up once it passes. Then you only have to win once to get it repealed.
Food would be so cheap that watching a 15 second ad that played on the disposable e-ink screen that wraps your burger will pay for it.

Note: I don't think this will happen. I think rich people now would rather let people starve so they could save the price of the 15-Second Ad Burger.

We have incentivized sociopaths to run things in the name of efficiency. We will either realize this is a false goal, remove all those people from power and influence, and live in a post scarcity society... Or we will all suffer the consequences.
I don't lose much sleep over it. They'd be too busy plotting the untimely demise of their other clones.
Yes and no. You've provided an excellent introduction to the problem space, but I think natural language has a larger role in formalisms than you might expect.

The most familiar formal language grammars to most people here are programming languages. The difference between them and natural language has been categorized as the difference between "context-free grammar" and "context-dependent grammar".

The most popular context-free language is mathematics. The language of math provides an excellent grammar for expressing logical relationships. You can take an equation, write it in math, and transform it into a different equivalent representation. But why? Arithmetic. The Pythagorean Theorem would be wholly inconsequential if we didn't have an interest in calculating triangles. The application of math exists outside the grammar itself. This is why you, and everyone else here, grew up with story problems in math class.

Similarly, programming languages provide excellent utility for describing explicit computational behavior. What they are missing is the reason why that behavior should exist at all. Programs are surrounded by moats of incompatible context: it takes explicit design to coordinate them together.

If we can be explicit about the context in which a formalism exists, we could eliminate the need for ambiguity. With that work done, the incompatibility between software could be factored out. We could be precise about what we mean, and clear about what we infer. We could factor out all semantic arguments, and all logically fallacious positions. We could make empathy itself into software. That is the dream of Natural Language Processing.

I think that dream is achievable, but certainly not through implicit text models (LLMs). We need an explicit symbolic approach like parsing. If you're interested, I have been chewing on an idea that might work.
The Diversity of Arabic Scripts
> The protocol of Smalltalk objects communicating with each other has not been implemented between computers in general

Not sure if this fits your conditions, but Croquet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croquet_Project) is a P2P, "distributed computation" architecture based on Smalltalk and the replication of messages (i.e. method calls) sent to object clones on participating nodes. The replication and commit protocol is called TeaTime (https://oneofus.la/have-emacs-will-hack/files/2005_Teatime_F...). Croquet is basically a 3D interactive WWW, but based on synchronized Smalltalk VM execution (distributed computation) rather than downloading data (e.g. HTML).
Questflow – Build Web3-native workflow automation with no-code
Questflow is the Web3-native no-code workflow automation platform. It is an automation solution on-chain, off-chain, and cross-platforms to help teams and individuals streamline processes, uncover efficiencies and provide insights fast and cost-effective.
Hey at least you guys got to vote on it first.
World rank number 8 is not competitive? Lol.

A single experiment getting to 8th ranked player is a major win for his theory. Tens of thousands of players try to get there and fail.
Today I got the first case of something I could not find in Google, that chatGPT found.

It was more an indexing question and a factor of me remembering the concept of a theater play, but nothing else.

I was really impressed when the LLM found the answer right away. Until I realized it was a lie.

I had to made it print a list of 50 plays, and I found what I was looking for.

I realize it’s not a good usage for a LLM but I think it’s how it’s gonna be with those
The lever works the other way. A person who walks for their daily errands or for commuting, will not get overweight. Or otherwise they wouldn't be able to walk. So they won't eat as much. It's not the calories burned by walking that makes them thin, it's the integration of walking into daily life that provides the unconscious cues to eat healthier.
The benefit is that it's easier to request.
> Why do you think "information processing" is what causes consciousness, as opposed to some other process that brains perform?

Because the second part of this question is absurd. There is no "process", biochemical or otherwise, that can't be described in terms of information. Information describes the substrate of the "process". My specific area of expertise is extracellular vesicles, and even that is often described as "enabling the horizontal transfer of information", even in non-brain contexts.

As far as the rest, I never claimed that "processing information" was a sufficient condition for consciousness to emerge. I said that information processing is the thing from which consciousness emerges, and this should not be controversial.

If you understand what "emergence" means (in the context of complexity science) then you'll understand the difference between "conscious" things and calculators.

For more perspective on what things we know about how the brain works and how it's organized, I recommend reading a functional neuroanatomy textbook. You don't even need to go as far as reading research papers to gain a basic perspective. Blumenfeld is a good one.
‘Bonkers’ Bond Trading May Be Sending a Grim Signal About the Economy
I like this solution, thanks for sharing. Just need to swap it with my own OIDC compliant federated authentication server.
ngl, the EU is low key cringe rn
Awesome initiative!
I wish Apple Notes would support Markdown.
This is my go to app for so much of my life, à Notion style editor would be an absolute game changer.