skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here’s the thing - John Henry died beating a machine designed only to dig a hole. But JH was capable of almost any task but chose to die to best a machine at one thing.

Thinking machines already blow away humans at most single tasks if they’re designed towards that tasks. There are a few that LLM are assaulting that humans are undeniably better at, some more that aren’t currently being assaulted.

As some point it will be possible to assemble these single task machines into an ensemble. They will collaborate in human superior ways to accomplish most human tasks in a superior way. But there may still be areas we can’t cover with our machines.

More importantly I think for the same reason we don’t build steam drills that also weave cloth we won’t build machines that are better than humans at all things. What’s the point? Other than novelty the only reason I can see to make a machine that’s superior to humans at all things is interplanetary terraforming or other such space operations requiring extreme intelligence and adaptability and capability while surviving a hostile environment. Even then, the act of hardening the complex electronics required might make it easier to just make a nice terrarium for humans.

I don’t believe there’s any argument possible that we are prohibited by physics from creating an intelligence like our own. This would imply a few things. There could be no other intelligence like ours, because we are unique - but already we know of many animals with approaching intelligence, we evolved from animals less intelligent, and it would preclude alien intelligence because somehow we are exceptions. Or, intelligence requires some “spark” from the divine - there’s been nothing that provides any evidence of such a thing and as we whittle top down and bottoms up, it appears more likely that while extraordinarily rare, it’s a naturally emergent phenomenon- and if there is a divine spark it’s the spark of life and evolution that leads human level intelligence. Or, there’s some complex process we haven’t understood that leads to human intelligence (quantum, whatever). Even if true it can be understood and replicated, that’s what science does. Even if any one of these is right the last one holds true. The amazing thing about intelligence combined with the process of science is if there is any mechanism by which intelligence arises, it must be observable, and if it’s observable, it can be replicated, and it must be possible to be created by humans.
How does this follow? I understand that PRNGs let you construct randomized algorithms in practice, but how do you transfer probably polynomial runtime to definitely polynomial runtime?
Because carbon is the religious original sin of our time. No matter what one does (carbon tax, cafe standards, other efficiency standards, etc) one will always be tarnished by committing the sin of using carbon and one must always be looked down on for it, at least to some people. It does not seem possible to have a reasonable conversation with these people along the lines of, ok set a carbon tax for the supposed externality releasing co2 causes and then stop wasting brain cycles on this. Let people choose under the new price regime and mind your own business because you don't know what their utility function looks like, what seems like waste to you is just the delta between your respective utility functions and you need to get along with each other for society to function, which necessarily means mind your own damn business once the harm that wasn't previously in the price is reasonably in the price.
I think you're mixing up "humanity" with "Silicon Valley techbros".

Everyone I've talked to about LLMs outside of this forum sees them as an amusing entertainment, and possibly occasionally useful for a few suggestions. Not something that's going to change their world any time soon, and certainly not anything that we should be trusting with anything sensitive in any way. Literally everyone.

In any case, I think you're really missing what the actual question was that I was responding to: Would conferring legal personhood change my mind about actual personhood.

The ability to do harm is not, in my mind, particularly relevant to questions of personhood. In fact, I would think that a much better indicator thereof would be the ability to choose not to do harm, given the capability, and someone trying to make you do so.
I would assume that security researchers and most attackers go after what the general public has. But I wonder, are there still a bunch of old industrial/medical machines running XP?

Now I have the mental image of some intelligence guy working on a “get into our geopolitical rivals’ grid in case there’s a war and we need to cause a blackout” discovering the author of the post.

Maybe he will meet up with some friends in “assorted fraud” industry at the local after work watering hole and they can nostalgically steal the post author’s bitcoins together. Hacking an XP machine might trigger a midlife crisis though.
> so 100+ people all spend an hour waiting for their 30 second slot.

This is a real issue at big companies. I wonder if there needs to be a standard format where the host starts each issue by quickly saying issue number and relevant people at the beginning. If your working while half listening you can give your full attention from the start of that point.

Something like that gives many people a bunch of productivity back, especially when it's easy to get pulled into a bunch of these type of meetings each day.
Sooner or later we'd have to be more and more precise with prompts. We'd be going from "I want a function that takes anything and returns itself" to "I : a -> a" ... and hey that looks like a programming language
why restrict the user's ability to edit code?

Because funky brackets are confusing.
> I think it stems from the fact that you are only looking at expressions, forgetting that these are just part of, possibly implicit statements.

Pretty close. I’m only looking at expressions because that’s how you can achieve anything declarative. To the point that there are statements (implicit or otherwise), they can’t be declarative whether you have conditions or otherwise. Because…

> Basically, there is always an assignment.

If you’re restricted to only expressions, this doesn’t matter, because assignment is inherently definitional and idempotent. Assignment with that constraint is logically the same as equality assertion. In fact, some implementations of this concept will literally error if you try to change an assignment. As in:

a = b // okay, a is equal to b

a = b // yep, this fact has been established, carry on

a = c // if c isn’t equal, this will fail and nothing depending on a can proceed

> That means that you are effectively writing how something is being built instead of simply describing what it is.

Now I don’t understand. How can you define things without constraining what they are? If you don’t have a semantic “not”, every definition you could come up with is inherently the infinite set, even if you define all of the affirmative facts. Without some mechanism to distinguish Thing A from Thing B, you have effectively arrived at two definitions of Things.
The thing we have to do is innovation. We need cleaner, cheaper tech. There are some regulations we can implement to incentivize that, but we're not going to conserve our way out of climate change with our current technology, not unless you're willing to sacrifice democracy and Western society itself to do it. And even if you are, good luck getting the rest of us to go along with it.

I'd much rather endure the effects of climate change than literally create a dystopian New World Order out of science fiction.
FWIW, there's a lot of people that consider ARM a hybrid RISC/CISC, among other reasons, because of the presence of LDM/STM.

Yeah, it literally has RISC in the name, but the SuperFX is called RISC by it's creators as well, but it's about as far aawy as you can get. RISC was a buzzword to the point that it's still a bit muddled to this day 40 years later.
> But I store some crypto currency on my computer and I make crypto transactions from time to time. If my computer had been compromised by an invisible attacker I figure that attacker would have had an interest in crypto assets.

Well that's an interesting idea for detecting certain classes of hackers.
it seemed that way, honestly it was like 8 years ago and i was mostly reacting to a flock of bicyclists riding down the middle of the street during the morning commute. It made me smile and I wished that Seattle could get it's shit together.
I doubt a single judge had any sympathy for Al Capone though. Even if they got him on a technicality, they were glad to get him. His appeals failed.

Trump will take this all the way to the Supreme Court if he has to. The conservative legal establishment (Federalist Society, etc) are going to be filing amicus briefs in his favour. Decent odds the conservative majority will find the arguments of their old friends convincing, and overturn Trump's convictions. That's if it ever even gets that far.
We'd do the same regardless of their "hand holding." They just happen to be right on this one.
The CIA certainly thinks the US government produced it: https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/the-art-of-simple-sabotage...
That's not what the power law means, though. It's not a thing you 'use' to stay on top. It describes things, it doesn't influence things. Just because 20% earn 80% doesn't mean that you can use the Pareto distribution to keep in that 20%.
They say in the OP that they did this as opposed to database homework.
You seem to be arguing that the existence of one bad diagram and one (related) good text explanation proves that, in general, needing a diagram is bad, and being able to explain something succinctly and clearly in text proves the merit of the thing being explained.

I...do not feel that this follows in any way, either as an absolute or as a rule of thumb.
I long for the white on dark blue boot screen. So stylish!
Lofi Air Traffic Control
I couldn't agree more, these tools are very useful, but interaction is almost just like that with humans, you use a word, they understand it as another. So you have to correct them, to explicitly tell them what you want. They are very good tools when you they and you are talking about the same thing. Indeed just like human conversation.

The instant feedback is better than with humans. Like humans, these models can take one thing to mean another, but because we are still using them for tasks that require instant feedback, we can catch the errors early and correct. It becomes worse if the are to be used on longer lasting tasks. The entire project could be derailed by one misunderstood concept. Just like a human project.

Natural language is a fair interface. But with lots of ambiguity. When I say 'clear', do you mean understandable, easily recognisable or clear like water. I faced that dilemma when I used that word as a design prompt because it can mean things which are opposites of each other. Some languages are so rich they avoid such ambiguities.

A common language can be good. It should not be designed by a committee, it should evolve with these tools naturally.
there was quite a long period of pre-history where homo sapiens were living alongside other branches of humans - around 300,000 years ago there could have been as many as 8 (!) other species of humans running around. I imagine we developed the uncanny valley sense during a period like that.
I tried to do a google search in incognito mode and got a bit pop up first asking if I wanted to sign in for better results.

A later session did the same thing.

I don’t like how companies are interrupting flow and trying to force logins.
Yeah, I highly suggest GP never play Diplomacy if that move caused drama.
>It's not terribly hard to imagine AGI (whatever that is) as a piece of software we control and debug like anything else.

it's actually very hard to imagine. i don't think you realize how little we understand the things you claim a machine can't have.

We are at best decades away (maybe centuries) from codifying intelligence as you imagine. why do you think llms or even just machine learning in general are the revolution they are ? We found a way to create intelligence without figuring out the hard part.
as a result, the creations often become as black box as their creators.
https://taylor.town/-10x
> Hold 10 engineers hostage in a technical discussion.
Back when Brian Krebs was still on twitter, it was a pretty constant parade. New cybercrime site goes up, it's compromised by LEO on week two, they hang out collecting evidence for a year, then roll it up and send everyone to jail. A month later, a new site goes up...
People buy the cheapest shit cable modem/router they can buy and use it until it physically dies or rent a very basic unit for a large space. Because they are unwilling to buy or rent sufficient hardware there is going to be spaces in the house where a temporary drop or dip that is going to turn into a roam on an adjacent network.
What is to stop a future dictator to spead obedient and loyal genes except their family
and "with a focus on workers who are responsible for the "construction and upkeep" of Apple's retail locations and other physical facilities."
> It's also failed to update twice now. I invested hours into debugging the issue the first time. This time it's been days and I'm about to just do a fresh Win 10 install over this nightmare.

My current 11 install has never failed to update, but I have experienced various update failures before on 10. This sort of issue is present in both versions, it's just random whether you'll experience it or not, and I wouldn't be surprised if the stuttering issue is just some random driver incompatibility too.
Yeah, let me be clear, I had access to a car, i had to use one to get there and in case of emergency (not a lot of car share up on mount rainier). I just chose to see what an ebike would enable for me.
I work part time, around 20 hours a week more or less. I would like to work full time but I burn out very easily. I spend the spare time studying, looking for other work, exercising, making food etc. A lot of the time work is at the back of my mind, so I feel like I'm working a lot more than I actually am.
I have to second that thought. This is the most fascinating thing I've read in quite a long time. I don't even know what to comment in response, besides something trite, like "wow!"
Agree that the title is misleading. The article at least has the good grace to correct itself in its subtitle and also quite quickly within the text.
Glad to see someone who doesn't only care about the digital applications of transistors here =)

OP might be closer to "an ideal solid-state relay"
For home use, Logitech have just recently released a webcam for this: https://www.logitech.com/products/webcams/brio-500-webcam.ht.... Built in tilt stand and an internal vertical image flip when pointed down.

For commercial setups (or personal use where money is no object): https://wolfvision.com/en/products/vz-c6.
Cool! I made something similar that lives in a browser extension: https://github.com/cantino/browser-friend
It was a donation with conditions. International aid always comes with conditions as to how the money is used and managed, and donations to third world countries often include conditions relating to tackling corruption. There was nothing nefarious in that case. That prosecutor was obstructing corruption investigations, it would have been irresponsible to allow the money to go into Ukraine without ensuring the Ukrainian government was serious in tackling corruption.

Here's a UN report on aid agencies using their influence on recipient countries to demand better governance and fight corruption. So the answer to your question is, it was responsible aid management in line with international norms.

https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/publications/aid_ag...
A lot about modern proprietary OSes is psychopathic lol
Right the economic one, not the unrelated criminology one:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
What is the python3 thing?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31505739/

This abstract talks a bit about tardigrades DNA repair and radiation damage avoidance, and possibilities of gene identification.
I have a vague memory of this being a story many years ago, where iPhone's were connecting automatically to the Disney resort WiFi and someone realized if you set your hotspot to use the same name all iPhones in the vicinity would auto connect.

Can't find anything online any more though, does anyone remember anything similar?
You’re seriously saying .0084 * (the total carbon emissions) is doing anything useful?
No, it was just intended for western Europeans (primarily the French resistance), as the 1944 date might suggest.
Let's see, a literal fourteen year old found a bug in iOS that let him remotely listen to the microphone on any iPhone with only a phone number. Now imagine what a three letter agency is capable of, or is responsible for.
Nobody said the installation had to happen overnight. A five year plan would be impressive and still feasible.
I think your memory of the Prism program is inaccurate.
Interesting. On an AT&T system, with 2 Passpoints listed. I can turn one off and it stays off; the other neither offers the option to save after the change nor retains the change.
Yeah I made it kinda terse on purpose haha. Wanted to give it a bit of a personality.
So, my anecdotal parental evidence suggests otherwise.

My oldest was upset that her friend didn’t acknowledge a message she had sent and apparently changed the topic. Apparently this friend always does that. My daughter was complaining that it is unlikely that this person didn’t see the message that my daughter had sent.

It is a complex world. I just live in it. I will never understand the subtle nuanced rules. I’ve made my peace with it. I just listen.
Please do this actually sounds fascinating.

What are the pretections against cheating the audit process?

Do you specify a frequency for validations?

What type of pricing model does the service use?

How long can you escrow something?
A giant middle finger to the planned obsolescence frenzy, and also absolutely impractical for anyone.
It doesn't have to be simple. It just has to be more plausible than the alternative. So, which of the following is more likely?

a) Jeanne lived for 122 years.

b) Jeanne died and Yvonne's friends and neighbors allowed her to take her mother's identity.

I'm going with b).
No, it was job security. This happens all the time when incentives are not aligned. Some engineers even have private dictionaries to convert between the obfuscated code and the real definitions.
You can still trade like 8 ore for 1 sheep and a beer though.
this is surfacing again today from the comments on the -10x engineer https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35438414
We shouldn’t blame 5 year olds, sure, but their parents? Fair game IMO.

This is not to say that society is without blame, but I feel that personal responsibility is increasingly left out of the public discourse
Possibilities include:

1. He's a control freak and has to have a hand in every decision.

2. He's opposed to the project and wants it to fail.

3. The previously agreed decision benefits a rival within his organization and he's trying to reverse this.

4. He loves hearing the sound of his own voice.

5. He's incapable of keeping up with the current discussion and only works out what people were saying after the meeting so brings his belated contributions to the next meeting.
Jarvis: Language as an interface for LLMs to connect AI models for solving tasks
It feels like this is happening to the entire country right now.
Great point. The only time I've been required (rather than for fun/hobby purposes) to write assembly was for a controller where we didn't have a C compiler. Like I hinted, I followed the approach of writing in C (including testing it as much as possible on my desktop in C) and then hand-translating precisely because of what you mention -- by default there's no structure. I basically adopted the structures and conventions of the C language and C compilers and imposed them on my assembly code, since I was familiar with those, and know how to make working software using them. You could use another language's conventions. Or you could veer off into the wild, but there be dragons.
Even better is to just do the experiments on the vilified. That's how it was done in most of the cases in the 20th century.

The citizenry does't care of its billed as protection from an enemy or a punishment against the enemy.
I'm really surprised they are still pushing this BAT stuff. Who is willingly going to look at ads?

At least make it possible to do it with money instead.
XL Construction | Mulesoft Integration Developer | Primarily ONSITE (Milpitas/San Jose, CA)

XL Construction is an award-winning Northern California general contractor/builder, consistently voted as one of the best places to work in the Bay Area by the San Francisco Business Times / Silicon Valley Business Journal, and is ranked as the fourth largest GC in the Bay Area as of last month.

We are in the early stages of executing a long-term enterprise-wide data strategy and this role is key.

XL is seeking an individual with 5 years of application integration development experience with Mulesoft or similar, and a commitment to software engineering best practices in a team environment. We run a modern suite of applications so you won't have to fight crusty, antiquated, and temperamental APIs and can better enjoy the satisfaction of getting information flowing.

I am XL's interim data architect and look forward building great things together.

Please review the full job posting [0] and apply there if you are the one. Reply here if you'd like to give me a head's up.

[0] https://www.xlconstruction.com/careers/open-positions/ (under Business Technology > 'Integration Developer')
The solution is to trust the people you hire, treat them with respect and decency. And when they start and don't know what a for-loop is because they obviously gamed the process, you fire them. It's really that simple.

If people complain it's impossible to fire anyone, that's the issue. The solution isn't to implement an insane anti-cheat hiring pipeline that will drive away competent people.
Around once a week in the Bay I'm exposed to severely reckless driving (going 60+ mph downhill through residential stop signs around blind curves, not swerving into any of the 3 empty passing lanes when going 120+ till within spitting distance, actively swerving in front of me to throw trash into my windshield and slam on the brakes while zig-zagging to prevent passing, ...).

Police are sometimes helpful but usually won't bother to even make a report. I take less psychotic roads nowadays even if they're slower. I'm not sure what to do other than stop driving or leave. Do you have any advice for surviving SF roads?
Amazing interfaces for particular scenarios if you look at them from another angle though.

Yesterday I wanted to write a bash script to do a particular task. "

I never properly learnt bash and it takes me a very long time to do something simple, furthermore, in this case, I didn't actually know the particular tools which were needed for what I wanted to write.

After inputting, it correctly solves the exact problem for me which was perfect.

Working backwards, I then asked it to explain what each part of the script was doing -- and learned the syntax for sed etc, along with gaining a better understanding of what what each command was doing.

The point i'm trying to make here, is that it's amazing to tackle some interactions more naturally. Top down, instead of bottom up.

This can help reduce the paralysis that occurs when working with the unknown.
Someone very skilled with photoshop might understand the tool very well and work with particular tools to come up with a result. but Natural language can have you provide the desired end result and work down to fine details.
Substack is also going the Medium way though. Ever more popups and other marketing crap. Soon it will be unusable like Medium has become.