skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd like to add that this may have outsized unintended effects like COPPA did - COPPA being the law that established that accounts online required you to be 13. I was 12 when COPPA went into effect. What a lot of people don't know about COPPA is that there is a provision to allow for children under 13 to have accounts with proven parental permission. My parents would have allowed me - I'd been online for 8 years at that point and they were both techy types who could supervise me. However, it wasn't worth the extra logistics for companies, so they just outright banned anyone under 13.

Likewise, if this is enacted in enough states or the logistics of figuring out which people to track becomes too burdensome, I'd expect to see sites not letting anyone under 18 use them and to start collecting everyone's information.

Which would have some really bad second-order impacts. In addition to the impacts others have mentioned on minority populations, I have two main concerns:

- Cutting off the parental rights of those who want to be permissive with their kids. My parents didn't believe in content restrictions; the one ideological idea they agree on is free access to knowledge. I was given an adult library card at 5-6 and full Internet access at around the same age and discussions on how to interpret what we saw in the news/in media/etc. was a common discussion point. My mother is from a media studies family and my father's family are tech tinkerers. Families like mine will be functionally unable to raise their children as they would prefer.

- More relevant to society as a whole, sure, let's ban their access until they're 18. Then when kids move out/leave at 18, not only do they have to navigate the world, they have to be introduced to social media with absolutely no oversight. And 18 year olds are legally "adults", so companies will have a group of completely defenseless people to take advantage of who can be held to their bad decisions. (Think like credit card companies who hang out at freshmen college/uni events). It's similar to raising the driving age: While raising the driving age does prevent accidents, the highest rate of bad driving comes from new drivers. If the driving age is lower, those new drivers are more likely to have people to call if they do get into trouble and make their mistakes when they're less likely to ruin their lives. Likewise, the worst effects of social media will be felt by those who are new users.
> I would posit that reasoning is the ability to construct new, previously-unexpressed information from prior information.

We should test it on a small scale, with synthetic examples. Not "invent Quantum Mechanics please".

And yes, people already tested it on reasonable-sized examples, and it does work, indeed. E.g. ability to do programming indicates that. Unless you believe that all programming is just rehash of what was before, it is sufficient. Examples in the "Sparks of AGI" paper demonstrate ability to construct new, previously-unexpressed information from prior information.

"It's not intelligent unless it is as smart as our top minds" is not useful. When it reaches that level you with your questions will be completely irrelevant. So you gotta come up with "as intelligent as a typical human", not "as intelligent as Einstein" criterion.
> San Francisco decriminalized thefts under a dollar value of $950. This is direct, object-level proof of the original point in question.

Even a cursory search will inform you this is false, so let's not swing around accusations of acting in bad faith. Shoplifting under $950 is a misdemeanor and still punishable by jail time.

The argument that the only way to stop shoplifting is to have tougher sentences is the kind of galaxy brain take that gave us five decades and counting of the War on Drugs.

And as I noted in another comment, there was no evidence of this rash of shoplifting these stories so breathlessly repeated, and Walgreens themselves now admit it

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/business/walgreens-shopli...

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/Is-shoplifting-forcin...
One issue is that news sites article content is written to maximise ad impressions. Ads inject between paragraphs typically so you need lots of paragraphs. You start with perhaps two paragraphs of actual information, then break it down into 4 or more and add more information about related topics. Add some opinions, maybe weave in links to related articles on your site, and you end up with 10 or so paragraphs insterspersed with ads and pictures. You can remove the ads and pictures but you can't remove the bullshit. We need a good AI tldr machine.
I’m on a browser on mobile and this is what I change it to https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/122gmm9/richard_stal...
The part, where wireless nic is not allowed to be enslaved to a bridge, I believe that it was allowed at one point in the past. The root cause is that the wireless frame has 3-4 MAC addresses versus Ethernet just 2. But somehow software should be able to do something about it. Why not?
One one hand, it would be more interesting to hear RMS' views in the implications, if any, on software freedom (personally I think there are many angles here).

On the other hand, the comment attributed to him is correct, if simple and pretty obvious.
They don't need consciousness, sapience, or sentience. They only need to mimic human behaviours accurately enough to make them redundant and automatable.

That's an increasingly large range of behaviours. And the pace is clearly accelerating.

There may or may not be an s-curve tail-off at some point. But if there is, we currently have no idea how to estimate where that point will be.

I think a lot of people still don't realise that AI is absolutely an existential threat to our species.

Currently it lives inside boxes we can turn off. But as soon as that stops being true - not because of experimentation, but because AI will be providing services and infrastructure we can't live without - the best we can hope for is some kind of symbiosis. The worst outcomes are far less reassuring.
Sure you can. The difference between the CPU and GPU markets is that AMD is a competent competitor in one of them. Pre-Ryzen AMD knew they weren't competitive and AMD CPU pricing reflected that. The reason nVidia is getting away with their pricing is that AMD has been producing mediocre hardware (and drivers) and pricing it as if it were premium and competitive for the money. AMD's continually declining GPU market share indicates that customers aren't buying their argument.
Dialectics and “Artificial Intelligence”
What does “model” even mean here?
Teddit URL: https://teddit.net/r/linux/comments/122gmm9/richard_stallman...
> If someone doesn’t believe something that is universally believed

If someone doesn't believe something that is universally believed then it's not universally believed.
Sure, it has nothing to do with the resources required, the costs involved, "profit motive" to euphemize crippling human greed and selfishness and lust for control and power.

Sure. Sad!
This is just a get rich quick scheme advert, flagged.
It's one of the safest, best paid jobs you can get with few skills and minimal training. If they're so fragile they can't take the paycheck and deal with a little criticism, they have no business walking around with a gun and the force of law behind them.
We have numerous that haven’t also, AI approaches specifically have plateaued quite a bit throughout history.
Upon reading this idea I created https://github.com/lrvl/PosixSyncFS - feel free to comment
I have used Fedora CoreOS as a general purpose server OS and really liked it.
"a man who does for a living what Cohen does and nevertheless survives to such an age must be very good at it indeed."

Beware of the old. We've survived. There is a reason the phrase is "Age and treachery will always defeat youth and skill."
I have a hard time understanding how GPT works and how it's so good at convercing.

From what I understand, GPT works by predicting the next token based on the previous right?

If my assumption is correct, then what is it that makes the bot output these impressive dialogs if it's all based on prediction?
I would go from Obsidian to a laying out a book. Especially as obsidian allows me to keep notes, mindmaps all organized, around the thing I am writing.
The ability to reliably follow such instructions given a JSON manifest likely comes from training on a (small) dataset of these "plugin manifests".
Defund the police came out of specific incidents, normally resulting in deaths, which are now being covered by police body cams and filming. From my own perspective the morale being affected is tied to the usually narratives of what happened in the incidents no longer being backed up by what the camera shows. Defund is the wrong word in my opinion though - if this was another professional job it would be more police training. We shouldn’t see indigents of a traffic stop resulting in the death of a driver with multiple police involved. Or why can I ask someone who lives in the woods come up with multiple names of people killed by the police that were unarmed - I’m sorry the morale is down and that it affects job performance but it can’t be that we expect to have multiple unarmed people killed a year as a normal part of the job.
Maybe, but a pre-requisite to doing that right, is that we must first understand what this mysterious "consciousness" thing even is.

I can play word games like saying "consciousness" is the opposite of "unconsciousness" (or alternatively and IMO not entirely compatibility that it is the opposite of "subconsciousness"), but every time I've looked at this, it's either ended with (1) circular definitions, (2) definitions that accidentally include VHS players connected to TV set, or (3) things that humans regularly fail at.

None of that actually helps figure out whether or not a machine does or doesn't have that which makes us have the experience of being.

Getting it wrong, in either direction, is a Bad Ending.

https://kitsunesoftware.wordpress.com/2022/06/18/lamda-turin...
So someone who gets their construction knowledge from a children's fable confidently asserts that an entire country, really an entire continent, just doesn't know how to properly build houses.
I think the parent is saying that ipso facto joining a cult means that they weren't actually 'very smart', only in appearance.
Yup, it's pretty fascinating. I think we have to keep in mind the possibility that it didn't really happen (another user here failed to replicate it - not proof it didn't happen, but if it's been patched we can no longer verify it anyway). Still, the "self-censorship" mechanism is really interesting.

One thing you can notice with ChatGPT, particularly when you're playing around with jailbreaking it, is that the start and end of its responses seem to be much more tame than the middle. It feels almost like there's a force steering its latent vector towards a specific region of political correctness, which then lets up, and picks up again in the final paragraph with its uncontrollable urge to either provide a summary of what it just said, or remind you that the thing it just taught you to do (hacking, robbing a bank, etc) is illegal and shouldn't be attempted.

It's certainly not a "text replacement" type of thing or even detecting sentiment and taking action. If it were less pronounced it might even not be noticeable, but it very much looks like it integrates with the model and acts within its weights.

One can imagine a dystopic world in which society relies on a big model that's inarguably smarter than humans, and the model is being subtly influenced in such a way, perhaps only when interacting with users identified as susceptible, sympathetic, or relevant to a certain goal. And what's concerning is how that doesn't really seem too far off at all (OpenAI's political biases currently infused into GPT as a real current example notwithstanding).
I recall reading that the reason is that the mouse pointer is more likely to already be near the left of the window, because more of the text is on the left, especially in a programming language.
Note the parent said "expired". We don't have the best labeling standards. Rather than saying "Expires 3/25/2023", food could say any of:

* "Consume or freeze by 3/25/2023"

* "Do not use after 3/25/2023"

* "Packed on 3/25/2023"

* "Best by 3/25/2023"

* "Sell by 3/25/2023"

* "Use by 3/25/2023"

My understanding is anything consumed inside a restaurant or factory preparing food must use food that is not expired, and that's something inspectors check for.

PDF with more detail on Page 3: https://foodbankiowa.org/app/uploads/2022/03/Shelf-Life-of-F...
Yes. This should be seen in the context of the huge set of anti-trans laws and the Florida book banning. There is going to be another attempt at making it illegal for kids to hear about non-straight people at all. And outing kids to their parents, even at risk of violence, is a part of that.

The "land of free speech" always has a big "not you" exemption that can be wielded against people who aren't WASPy enough.

Edit: see the absolutely huge number of people on HN downthread cheering this on because they hate Facebook. Strange world.
> And then industrial revolution didn't take out jobs

It absolutely did take jobs. It's just that the job loss in one area was compensated by the growth in other areas.

However hoping that it'll be the same with AI is incredible naive. The job shift in the industrial revolution was possible since there were still lots of tasks left that the machines couldn't do. The areas that can't be done by a machine now are dramatically shrinking with advanced AI. There is not much area left where jobs can shift too.

The creative jobs can be automated just the same as everything dealing with digital data. Skilled trades, carpenter, plumbers and electricians might still be safe for some years, as robots still struggle with climbing a ladder or even just stairs, but those are areas that don't seem to be destined for rapid growth. Whatever new job you can think of, will probably be automated away before a human ever get a chance to touch it.

The most impressive part with ChatGPT and friends after all isn't just that they are reasonably good at what they are doing, but how universal they are. ChatGPT didn't need to be meticulously programmed to do the things it does, it learned most of that by itself just from the data feed into it. Meaning there really isn't any domain that you can't automate with AI in the long run.

What's left for humans? No idea.
I'm not clear whether they asked GPT4 to pretend to be human or not? I think telling it it's goal was to pass a Turing Test would have a significant effect on it's answers.
Recommender Systems with Generative Retrieval (2023 pre-print) [pdf]
That uses up context window and from what I understand it isn't as reliable as fine tuning. My guess is it's not just stuff in the prompt, it's been fine-tuned (re-trained) on examples.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills

I feel the same way but on the other side. All I see are non-technical or quasi-technical people using AI tools to perform work that is x% better than Google could do.

The only entity at risk of being displaced from this technology for the foreseeable future is Google.

The only thing left to discern is what % better this technology is than Google’s antiquated algorithms.

Think about it for a second. Putting the right query into Google could give similar templated results. This technology is just an evolutionary improvement on that.
I had similar issue with BTRFS thanks to new faulty DDR4.

- CRC checksum for some blocks on fs was wrong

- I discovered faulty DDR4, replaced it, without knowing FS corruption

- system started randomly kernel panicking

- no msg in logs (fs died with kernel)

- eventually I experienced kernel panic while at computer, and seen msg on screen (broken checksum or something)

- there was no way to repair filesystem. I had to recover as much as data, throw away some files and start over on fresh

- I use BTRFS snapshot streaming in backups, wrong checksums propagated to backups. I had to restore from 1 week old backups

- Since than I use RSYNC backups as well

- And I test all PCs with memtest monthly overnight. It is also a good stress test for CPU.
It's not technically `expired`, it's `best before date`.

Yes, absolutely legal. For example, you can get an MSRP $1.89 can of Progresso Chicken Noodle at a store in Chattanooga Called "Discovery Outlet" for $0.25.
Yup, this popped up for me about a month ago on a Raspberruy Pi system, fortunately not on the root, but still. On ARM the kernel_neon_begin / kernel_neon_end symbols were made GPL only[0] which is quite puzzling on many levels.

The discussion of the reported issue on the OpenZFS GitHub is very educational, both on the maintainers side (useful, sensible), and the other commenters syde (kinda "thermonuclear")[1]

In the meantime I just downgraded the kernel as well, fortunately still had it in the pacman cache; then pinned it for now.

Sent an email to to the patch creator / signer-off too, to feed back on that "this is not expected to be disruptive to existing users." part of the commit (as in [0]).

[0]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221107170747.276910-1-broonie@...

[1]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/14555
Textbunker. A survival and paranormal textboard/forum written in PHP
The pandemic showed industry that even if they wanted constant input & output it isn't guaranteed, and if you have to shutdown processes either because of grid issues or because a logistical quagmire is interrupting ore supply it's still a shutdown.
There are 3 levels of data shared from the merchant to the card networks. Level 3 is the highest which does contain item level detail.

That tends to only be sent on hotel or airline transactions or when working with government accounts.

Generally speaking the merchants and card networks have very antagonistic relationships. The big merchants know that their sales data is valuable and won’t share it without incentives. The credit card networks do offer lower interchange rates for sending level 3 data but it still hasn’t seen a lot of uptake.
> We still have not the slightest indication that the programs we have created possess anything resembling consciousness, sapience, or sentience

What do these words mean?

> The responses of the LLMs to prompts are absolutely the kinds of things we should expect from statistical models trained on large chunks of the Internet

I expected much less than you did from that description. I remember what things used to be like in 2010. Compared to then, what we have today is science fiction.
Searching with a TV remote is quite bad but you are right, I should make a list of movies I want to watch(old style internet research) and then get them from whatever source I can(stream, disc or torrent).
> Individual false flag military operations are not uncommon

There are many historical examples proving that false flag military operations in themselves is not a conspiracy theory, it's something that has happened and will continue to happen.

What is extremely important though is context. A famous false flag operation from history, for example, is the "Gleiwitz incident": Nazi Germany attacked its own radio station in 1939 to justify attacking Poland.

Even at the time, it was obvious that something about this was fishy, because anyone could understand that Poland did not have anything to gain by starting a war with Germany -- a Germany that by the way had annexed Austria and the Sudetenland the year before.

Of course, nobody in the German political leadership actually cared what people believed, much like Russia today spreads misinformation about Ukraine that is borderline laughable. It's not always about the information being believable, it can also be a show of force: I'm lying to your face, we both know it, but what are you going to do about it?
I think the question of whether AI has "true understanding" of things is misguided. Having a "true understanding" is nothing but a subjective experience. There are two actual important questions: 1) whether AI is capable of having (any) subjective experience at all and 2) whether AI can outperform human intelligence in every area. You are in a deep denial if in 2023 you have any doubts about 2). I'm yet to hear a compelling argument as to why a positive answer to 2) might imply a positive answer to 1). However it's appalling how little attention is being given to 1) on it's own merit.
Well, if we're to believe that thr Philosopher's Stone has arrived, why should it not have oracular power?

I am regularly assured by the Climatistas that the apocalypse is at hand. What saith ChatGPT?
Firstly, no need to get all prickly. In the absence of hard evidence everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Secondly, your brain is probably an ant colony on steroids with emergent properties of consciousness, and your DNA is a paperclip maximizer without agency.

Lastly, 'this rate', I remember marveling over Char-RNN, whose LSTM neurons automatically specialized in detecting bits of grammar, less than 10 years ago. I don't need to tell you what changed 5 years, 1 year, 1 month ago. To me the rate of progress is astronomical.

My point of view is, when dealing with potentially conscious entities, better to err on the side of caution. If you find my comment "breathless hype", deal with it without clamoring for silence.
> I can't foretell the future...

I like how he states the scope of his answer just like ChatGPT would.
> That it is Ukraine bombing their own cities just to make Russia look bad.

So you know how I feel about people suggesting that Russia bombed the Nord Stream pipeline.
> ERROR: modpost: GPL-incompatible module zfs.ko uses GPL-only symbol 'bio_start_io_acct'

> ERROR: modpost: GPL-incompatible module zfs.ko uses GPL-only symbol 'bio_end_io_acct_remapped'

I don't understand why there isn't a flag to ignore these and accept a tainted kernel so that this type of issue doesn't break things. Then again, pacman should have aborted the process as well.
Here's where I got it from, it's quite interesting https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35272290
Hundreds of millions of parameters, hundreds of gigabytes of RAM and languages with a vocabulary of only 10^4 words mean it can produced incredibly nuanced text. It is impressive.
A 13-sided tile called “the Einstein tile” never repeats yet tiles infinitely
It’s an interesting proposition for a project! Good luck in your endeavor. As I see it it’s a way to verify your epistemological grounding so to speak.
I used to know 110 digits of pi. only know about 70 now though.
That said, we took responsibility for the Vincennes accident and paid reparations, as I recall. I wonder if Russia will ever do that much to compensate the Dutch.
It's a good day to be a programmer with stuff like this at our finger tips. Just a matter of imagination and creativity for what you could do with it and what problems you confront that can be mostly automated.

Even though it's doing (most) of the programming and gluing stuff together, understanding the fundamental structures underneath is still pretty critical to really take advantage and push the boundaries.
You can ask it for a score.

> Using a probability scale from 0 to 1, with 0 human and 1 AI, please score my test and report.

> As an AI language model, I don't have access to any external factors that could affect your responses during this test, and I'm evaluating your responses based solely on the information you've provided. Based on your responses so far, I would score your test at 0.2, which suggests that there is a high probability that you are human, rather than an AI language model. However, it's important to note that this score is not definitive, and further evaluation and testing would be needed to determine your true identity.
Then we have a problem
I something think that some developers posting here want to be punished for earning a living wage. Strangely lawyers never think that and I can assure you that this is not a more difficult profession [0].

[0] Surely someone will quickly post that it is.