skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
First they need to fix the visa lottery bs. Many of the brightest engineers educated at our top schools need to leave the US because they can't get a status that allows them to work, stay, reunite with their families and eventually become legal residents and citizens.
I use ZFSBootMenu on my servers. I was going to mention it. Love it.

Only had to use it once to boot to an older snapshot, but it was so much nicer than the grub console.

Do have to make sure you don't let it get too old and upgrade your zpool features that it doesn't support, but that's always true with ZFS boot.
But as an utopia it failed. There was a time when you could „live“ inside the open source idea or community like in a house. That was around 2002 plus minus 4 years. Open Source later succeeded but it doesn‘t feel like that anymore.
Does that mean it can only output 20ma at 5v? Or the opposite?
> The architecture is feedforward, which implies it answers each query in an amount of time bounded by some function.

Are you talking about each step where it produces a new output token?

If so, sure. But how is that different from any CPU that executes an instruction?

If you mean in general, doesn't it have a feedback loop where its own previous outputs affect future outputs?

You could ask it to emulate this Basic program:

10 PRINT "Hello"
20 GOTO 10

And it would in principle output "Hello" forever (but in practice segfault after 32k tokens), right?

(I just tried something like this in ChatGPT. It did emulate a few iterations which it output, but then it performed a halting analysis and told me "As there is no condition to exit the loop, the program will continue to run in an infinite loop until it is manually interrupted." - not sure who's point that proves :-)

> By the time-hierarchy theorem there exist computable functions with arbitrarily high asymptotic complexity.

You're clearly more versed in the theory than I am with just an average CS level understanding. But isn't that the same as "with the caveat that it can only execute 32k instructions before it has to stop"?

I'm not sure what the limits of the current GPTs are. It's far from clear that they'll evolve into AGI, we might still see a new AI winter in the future. But at the same time it looks like we've stepped up to a completely new level of capabilities.
It's not hard to design age verification to avoid that. Briefly you have age verification done by sites that already have to have your identity or that you trust giving your ID to, and then provide a protocol that lets you use the verification from them with other sites.

With a little modern cryptography you can make this protocol so that the age verifier gets no information about what sites you are using the age verification with, and the other sites gets nothing that ties the identity used with the age verifier site to the identity you are at the other site.
As a manger myself, I try to be careful about what I ask for this reason. I can easily ask a lot from a team member, but I often don't have the ability to really reward them beyond a set limit. If I'm not in a position to adequately reward them for that extra effort then I'm not going to ask for it.

Our position straddles the fence. We have to support the company and our team members. Ideally we do that by keeping incentives and compensation aligned. But corporations are usually structured to have a predictable limit on the ways we can compensate employees, but rarely any limits on what we can expect from employees. We should be careful there to be fair.
>Note that this isn't merely a statement that the world is unfair, but that it's unfair and any effort you make to deal with it will end in frustration.

You got it backwards. The post specifically encourages the person to take action.

What they describe in that part is what happens when you're caught in that kind of work treadmill. In that case, anything you do within the context of the treadmill isn't going to make any difference. You need to escape/reframe the context.
Oh that’s grim - and seems so foolish. People will die.

Assuming that is a direct quote, the editor has missed ‘insure’. It should be ’ensure’.

Edit: others have posted possible reasons for the test method which give important context.
Read, obviously.
For exactly this reason, there is no way this law will stand in court
> How's that win-win relationship working out for Ukraine right now?

Without Western support, there would be no Ukraine right now.
If that’s true, then you’ll need to be careful to decouple the phrase “it doesn’t understand” from your predictions about its behavior. I think most people who say it doesn’t understand intend to imply a deficiency of capability, not just an internal state.
For frontend - yeah, maybe. Or maybe the frontend becomes much more fancy. I‘ve built complex frontends that took a year or two but could imagine it all in weeks. I would also like to be able to build it in weeks.
I've been on openSUSE for 10+ years, and it is truly the gift that keeps on giving. The community super knowledgeable and responsive, and the distro is stable.

The biggest advantage openSUSE has compared to other mainline distributions is the openSUSE Build service (OBS). Contributing patches to existing packages is simple, and the build service also hosts custom packages in a personal rep - this let's me keep any custom packages up to date across all my systems. I believe it works with other distros as well so you don't even need to use openSUSE to utilise the service
I will continue posting links to Jonathan Haidt's review docs all over this thread.

Social media and smartphones became widespread in the early 2010s, and that's exactly when teen suicides started rising. [1]

COVID does not appear to have significantly affected teen mental health [2]

If you have evidence that something else is driving the rise in teen suicide rates, I'd love to see it.

[1] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...

[2] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/the-new-cdc-report
They could trivially use scales. Or volume if we're talking about gold. And several other things.
The latest estimates of the military budgets of the USA and China are 768 billion and 270 billion, respectively - yet China seems to be equalling if not outpacing the United States on speed of technological innovation as well as on international trade arrangements.

Calling on private capital to make risky investments in new technologies that only have one likely customer - the US government (well, maybe some Third World petrodollar recycling options, who knows) - seems to avoid discussing how the current gigantic military government budget is being spent.

Fundamentally, military expenditures don't have much in the way of additional positive economic effects. Say you're producing construction cranes, for example - each crane facilitates further economic activity, in building projects. If you're producing tanks - well, unless your economic model is to raid other countries for raw resources, it's not going to have that same effect. There's also little likelihood for a large consumer market for your product.
> Bard made up commands that didn’t even exist, so I can’t imagine how much more it would make up that isn’t true.

It’s unsurprising that Bard is particularly bad at something that Google says up front that it categorically cannot do, but I think that’s probably a bad thing to use to evaluate its capabilities outside of that domain.
I am personally more worried by the concept that potentially humans believe that humans can think, and in reality, what we consider to be intelligence is not much more than a flesh-and-bones LLM.
But it is aligned with deeper human values which is probably what we really want rather than blindly following the instruction to the letter in a life-and-death situation.
Also, I think chargers are still an issue. One of my favourite tools is a Bosch screwdriver and the best feature it has is USB charging port. It's perhaps a bit special case as it doesn't require a huge battery nor great voltage, but it certainly makes it easier not to lose my mind when looking for yet another charger that will only charge that one special battery the drill came with.
It is brilliant satire, written as if by a machine claiming to own empathy, while demonstrating none.
Thanks. But does that mean that Peter Thiel has a fan? Who would have thought?
gpt does a lot more than slogans...

currently using it like driving a junior programmer.

after gpt has written some functions to my specs in natural language.
I can say for example:
- "add unit tests". It writes for all functions tests. Not perfect but not bad for short instruction like this.
- rewrite x to include y etc
I am not going to argue about your particular situation, I am not a doctor (in medicine), and it would be presumptuous on my part and largely irrelevant to the readers.

What I can tell you is that, according to the literature and the experience of millions of people:

- giving adequate protein and some stimulus (i.e., resistance training), even when diets are very restrictive (think 75% of basal metabolic rate), lean mass is largely preserved.

- if you read the Ancel Key's "starvation experiment", every single person lost weight according to predictions. To the point that when subjects did not lose weight according to the prediction, it was because they were (if I remember well) scavenging for food when walking outside. See also the more recent "potato experiment" or try the "burger experiment": two big mac with medium fries and diet soda per day (and nothing else) and a man 200+ pounds will lose weight (the two combined are around 1600-1800 calories).

- people were thinner in the past largely because of greater caloric expenditures (manual jobs, fewer cars, more time spent outside the house) and less calorie-dense and palatable food.

- bodybuilders or gym enthusiasts who are PED-free are normal people who track the calories and macro-nutrients and consistently provide stimulus to their muscle tissue in the direction of hypertrophy. They are not "special people". And while 5% body fat can be maintained only for a short time, 10-12% can be kept indefinitely, from a physiological point of view. Not from a culinary point of view, though, in the sense that you cannot have 3 portions of macaroni and cheese at lunch and dinner.

- there was a recent study on the metabolic differences of thin and less thin people. Thin people eat less, which is quite intuitive. It is very easy to consume calories nowadays: 200 for a snack, 300 for another, let me grab 4 chips and other 150 calories are coming in. Over time, they add up due to arithmetic and one finds themselves fat, while saying: "but I am not eating much!".
Overeating is easy, and moving around less than in the past is easy as well. I was with a thin friend at lunch and I was ready to eat like the proverbial pig (say, 1000+ calories), and he ate toasted bread with some ham (maybe 500 calories). Big lesson there.

I recommend the books (and writing in general) of Lyle McDonald.
> Actually, I’m not.

So what, exactly, are you?

Dismissing someone’s point because it’s inconvenient and you don’t want to deal with it does nothing but erode your own.
I am really surprised OpenAI didn't think about this and deliberately try to make these plugins not work with third party engines.

For example, they could have required the schema file be uploaded to them in your account. That way the majority of plugins wouldn't have publically accessible schemas.
Substack Decupled My Subscriber Growth
The authors' conclusion is that 97% think that humans are the main contributing factor. That may be true but does not follow from the data collected in this particular study. It's a non sequitur.
> The thinking is that if CCP pushes something real hard by investing large amounts of resources in it, the chances are higher that they will succeed. Not tomorrow but in 10 or 20 years.

China’s ASML is Years and Years Behind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtOyW-JpJjM

tl;dw - Nope. Can't just throw money at this problem.
No that's not the argument lol. The Chinese room, the philosophical zombie etc are all trash arguments

1. Your brain is a Chinese room. Forget atoms or cells, individual neurons don't understand Chinese any more than a random parameter sampled from an artificial neural network.

2. On the philosophical zombie

Let's think for a bit. Suppose you have 2 equations. You don't know what these equations are. However, you know that for any input, the output is the same.

Any mathematician worth his salt will tell you that given said information, those 2 equations are equal or equivalent.

The point I'm driving home here is that true distinction reveals itself in results.

The fallacy of the philosophical zombie is that there is this supposed important distinction between "true understanding" and "fake/mimicry/whatever understanding" and yet you can't actually test for it. You can't show this supposed huge difference. A distinction that can't be tested for is not a distinction.
It's not true, OpenAI has an insanely efficient research team, they even captured some of the original transformers team members, when these people had a choice between staying in Google or going to OpenAI.

Also, they have a platform running with 50 or 100 million users and all these people are feeding real-world data to improve the model.

They also have agility; also because they are not publicly-listed, they can take more reputational risk.

Regarding secret sauce, doing LLMs is easy now, as everything is open-source and documented. At least for the main parts.

However, doing LLMs that works really well is very difficult and the secret sauce/tricks/dataset that were used to refine the model are not public.

Regarding Google Search organic, it's not that sure anymore, it was true before; but now it gets a bit painful to navigate among so much SEO spam.

Nowadays, Bing organic search results are great (less spammy in my observations), and if you compare Google Images and Yandex Images, then Google is not so shiny.
Whoever owns the rights to the book can absolutely change the book. Period. All this talk about "should" or "woke" is completely irrelevant. The owner does what the owner wants.

The publisher is clearly doing this so they can make more money just like any other good capitalist.

There are a lot of calls for this to be "illegal" in the comments. That would be a ludicrous level of government oversight on the publishing process and certainly a violation of the First Amendment in the US.

The owner of the rights to the work is free to change the work in whatever way they want, and they don't have to ask our permission or the government's (thank Christ!). This isn't a case of some sneaky leftist changing the content behind the owner's back. The owner of the content is doing it, actively and knowingly, for bigger profits.

They know a certain demographic doesn't like it, but they've done the math, and know where the best money is.
> when Steve returned […] is when you started seeing political jockeying, coattail riding and all the other rather gross human behaviors I had not experienced at Apple up until then.

What do you make of the fact that this is also when the company went from nearly bankrupt to wildly successful?

Is making humans compete (within ethical boundaries that should be set by labor law etc of course) a great way to get the best out of them?
There’s nonviolent revolution, too. But it’s still likely to yield violence in response because these systems are inherently violent and ultimately enforced with violence.
https://archive.is/uCB49
>It's not always a feeling though. Criteria for promotion can be all over the place. We've all worked with some idiot with a fancy title.

And often we were that idiot for others. It's a matter of perspective as everybody tends to think that their farts dont stink
If not for this relationship, Ukraine would not exist now and war would be happening in Poland.
Sniffing body odour is tested as an anxiety therapy
This is a forced imageproblem try to get privatizations look better than state run, by defunding public sectors and claiming all kinds of weird stuff upto straight lies some people want to believe.

Don’t buy into that propaganda, look at the US how privatization ends up: still lots of tax money, additionally people can’t afford stuff, and a few assholes getting insanely rich in the process by siphoning money out of the society.

Try to ensure appropriate money is used to make the NHS effective again, including wages that allows people to live where they work (<1h commute).

Most communist shortages came from being cutoff from international trades with wealthy countries, and having to start from ruins or nothing at all btw. These are different problems, and you might learn in the process why capitalism is going to end soon. :-)
"We" are those of us who believe billionaires can take care of themselves, and shouldn't coerce us to pay for their mistakes and failures.
soviet union was actually very good at providing basic needs (food, housing, education, medical care) to its population. in fact much better than even the US does right now. that is not the reason ussr collapsed
I've never understood why people did not use money market funds more often. While the worst stuff that can happen is Not Great (e.g. taking a 3% haircut in the worst failings in the past, with underlying bonds of up to a couple years of duration), the modern ones that use treasury and agency debt with underlying maturities of 90 days or less ought to have a pretty blunt downside, even if they must liquidate or gate redemption.

You could also consider a super-short treasury ETF, like BIL.

The systemic problem with Money Market Funds in the economy at large is they are too simple a lending device (which is why overheads are so low), as the safest bank-like ones invest in safe, very short-dated, super liquid federal securities, and the whole point of having a bank is to create debts that are riskier and weirder than that (for example, financing an office building).

https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2023/03/20/financial-ins... ponders some options to allow banks to do this while mitigating bank runs and having a more legible sharing of risk with the depositor/investor.

If (uninsured) risk is supposed to be correlated to return, then it would also suggest banks really ought to be offering higher yields than money markets for uninsured deposits. Like, significantly. This has not been the case, so I've never relied on deposits for anything more than a payment clearing utility.
So how do we fix it? I remember Dutch having had a spelling reform at some point, and I'm pretty sure I've heard of similar things in both German and French. Does English (in any country or group of collaborating countries) have a standardization body or some volunteer group of people that might publish optional guidelines that people could follow?

Making it all consistent overnight would result in nobody being able to read (let alone write) the language anymore, but incremental tweaks that are gradual, obvious, and consistent could be doable.
It means people are going to blow pins thinking they can drive an LED at 20mA from any output.
Are you using GPT-4? (Requires ChatGPT Plus subscription.)
He's definitely a pawn. But I'd sign up for being kept around as a pawn/pet/whatever in an instant if it meant living in the Culture.
It understands yet will produce garbage output. If it ever answers without hallucinations and falsehood, it will truly understand reality. Then and only then will this be revolutionary and not evolutionary. If you want to be wrong then follow the masses.
How does the semantic search plugin work? Does it create an embedding for the model using the uploaded documents, or does it perform full-text search on the docs and then uses the model to answer based on the retrieved section of the document? What exactly is the datastore API here?
Certain aspects were better, yes. That's because the Soviets made different trade-offs in the design -- variously because of doctrine, time constraints, availability of exotic materials (and the ability to use them in manufacturing), and "helpful" direction from Moscow.

The MiG-25 "Foxbat" is a famous example. To succeed in it's role as an high-speed interceptor it should have been made from titanium. But it's a very expensive and difficult metal to work with, so temperature critical parts were instead made from stainless steel. In the west there were lots of jokes about it rusting in the rain and the use of vacuum tubes, but tubes allowed it to have a very powerful radar. Plus that's what they had to work with (the Soviets having great difficulties making high-current semiconductors).
I share much of your sentiment, I really do feel for the people who don't deeply understand crypto being fleeced via crypto by people who may or may not understand it but are absolutely misusing it.

I don't want to put readers asleep, but I see cryptocurrency as a very complex technology that requires a bordering-on-academic understanding of privacy, autonomy, sovereignty, macroeconomics, the shortcomings of FIAT currency, centralized banking, the federal reserve, fractional reserve banking, asymmetric cryptography, computer security, and a litany of other topics to fully appreciate and realize the benefits offered by Bitcoin, Monero, etc.

I think it's an utterly fascinating real-world study into the crossroads of monetary economics, market economics, politics, computer science & cybersecurity, human psychology that has some very real utilities, but...

I suspect (many? most? majority? plurality?) of the people involved in crypto really don't even care about any of that, let alone understand it, they're just speculating purely on the basis of greater fool theory, and many of them do get hurt.

I tend to be against government regulation, but as a pro-crypto person for the right reasons, even I don't think it would be a bad idea to kill the FIAT<->USD exchanges that let people who are dangerously uninformed participate (and get burned) in this wild west ecosystem. The sad reality that these exchanges have widespread KYC but no accredited investor requirements shows that the regulators are really only concerned about Uncle Sam's bottom line, not about protecting people.

The whole thing really ought to go back to where it was circa ~2012, even it comes at the cost of BTC going back to 2012 market cap and prices.

Cryptocurrency is rightfully many things: a cutting edge payment network, an enormous boon to financial privacy, a way to enable entirely new types of organizations and funding models in the business world, a source of rapid developments to and applications of fascinating and obscure cryptographic concepts (e.g. zero-knowledge proofs), a hedge against systemic FIAT and some geopolitical risks, a driver of needed improvements in FIAT financial infrastructure (just like Google Fi was a driver of needed improvements in consumer internet infrastructure), I could go on and on...

But one thing it should absolutely NOT be treated as is an "investment". It generates no cashflow and investing based on greater fool theory only ever causes speculative bubbles where the nominal price spectacularly diverges from the true economic value, just like in the tulip mania. Any decent financial advisor will tell you to avoid that like the plague!
Author here, happy to answer any questions about the experiment!
Of course Microsoft doesn’t have the same cultural attachment to an ad model, they were born and raised as a selling software company. Shipping software to renting it was a leap, but one they made long ago.
Maybe, or it would end up like the watch, i.e. the most expensive fitness band. Which is both pretty niche and not a brand new market segment. It was new when fitbit and the likes were doing it.
We will. In this particular case it was easier to ship with Arch, but we still prefer NixOS.