skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Also, besides the 20 or so copies of this specific pose I see on the first page, I also see numerous others of her either in a different pose or in a different (but similar) outfit -- she's apparently fond of that color combination.

I just put my local copy of Stable Diffusion to work cranking out images based on an "Anne Graham Lotz" prompt. So far, none of them look anything like the original image. It has generated one of her wearing a similar-colored shirt, but the pose is completely different, and as noted above, she seems to like that color.
> pick a different license

Which is exactly what Prusa has done.

Contractually speaking, you're correct. However, there was also a standard social expectation in the community. The sad part of this whole thing isn't the licensing issue, it's the fact that this is marking the end of the "golden age" of the community.
The PRC as a government makes the calls that it does because it is one of the vehicles of power by which the CCP operates. Remember that constitutionally the CCP is above the government, the law and the PLA and therefore the highest offices of power within mainland China are not any of the Executive offices of government but the political offices (General Secretary of the CCP, the Politburo and the members of the standing committee).

The People’s Liberation Army, People’s Armed Police and Militia answer to the Central Military Commission which is subordinate directly to the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.

It isn’t like the United States or Europe or even Japan or Korea. Your basic assumptions vis a vis how we work and therefore how they must work will never work when trying to serve as a proper lens for interpreting the PRC because the PRC is itself an institution subordinate to a Party which considers all aspects of Chinese society both public and private subordinate to the Party including State, Religion and the activities families and businesses of their subjects which in their eyes doesn’t stop at the border if you are of Chinese descent.

So if a business like Alibaba or a businessman like Jack Ma is challenging anything about that framework, or the laws of the PRC and policies of the CCP, they can’t afford to let that stand because the most important thing to them is maintaining their internal cohesion and power. Everything else is secondary or tertiary.
Right now Tesla isn't selling the Long Range model.
That Chromium dashboard is amazing for planning and exactly the kind of thing we need for Safari.
Google Code Jam and Kick Start 2023 Is Cancelled. Is the Trend of Competi (Cont)
Jack Ma truly is clueless in general. There was a talk involving him and Elon Musk and it somehow was Elon coming out as the eloquent one in that conversation.
Another quote: "wealth always consolidates at the top, you can choose private sector or government to do so."
> I think the zero sum, "use AI everywhere" vs "don't use it at all" are both to be avoided. The wise path is somewhere in the middle.

I suspect this is one of those tech Pandora's box moments where it's largely irrelevant what actual tech people think about this; executives will be swayed to the "use AI everywhere" side of things purely as a cost-cutting measure. Any productivity gained via the use of AI will be leveraged not to improve overall productivity (in the medium to long term) but instead leveraged against employees to to shed salaries.
Polars is already built on Arrow and the advantages are tremendous.
Why don't we first automate the jobs that need to be done, but nobody wants to do anymore? One example: sorting mixed garbage and filtering out recyclable plastics (of various types), cans, paper etc. would be a great application for AI, wouldn't take away anyone's job (at least not in developed countries), and would be good for the environment.
And this, is how tankies are born.
I'm due for a new laptop at work. I asked IT why they don't have any of the latest gen Macbooks yet. They're still working through old inventory.
Republican/conservative talk radio is a huge force in American politics, so there’s a lot of incentive to somehow force manufacturers to include the feature.
Yes, exactly.

I don't want a business to make me filthy rich. I want a business that will feed my wife and me.
> without much worry about the consequences

disagree, but the consequences I'm imagining are the consequences of loosing money due to not making those kinds of decisions.

the consequences for the decision makers are very different, the incentives which surround them and the consequences they'll face are not what you seem to think they are.
Seems like a wash overall with how Chrome for Android lacks support for extensions entirely. Firefox for Android supports uBlock Origin, which greatly cuts down on tracking and chances to be hit by broadly-targeted malvertising.
University of Notre Dame | South Bend, IN | ONSITE | Assistant Professor of the Practice - Video Game Development

The Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Notre Dame invites applications for a non-tenured instructor of Video Game Development at the Assistant Professor of the Practice rank. The department is especially interested in candidates who are well-versed in technical game development and have a specialization in programming video game engines or graphics, optimizing software performance, and building complex and scalable applications.

The primary responsibility for this position is to develop and teach a new two course video game development sequence, focusing on the technical aspects of developing video games across a variety of platforms (PC, mobile, console, AR/VR, etc.). Additionally, this position will also have the opportunity to develop complementary electives in the areas of computer graphics, software optimization, scalable or high performance applications, and other topics related to video game development.

Apply on Interfolio: https://apply.interfolio.com/123398

Feel free to reach out to me if you have questions.
I'm sure that all was very rewarding for you. I'm not sure how it translates into a business. We don't want to teach accountants to deploy their own calculator from the command line and we don't want pilots to do math while they're flying.

You act like encouraging people not to think is a problem. Thing is, you'd be wrong. We want people not just to think, but to focus. If I'm a pilot and I have to worry about the runtime environment of the command-line calculator I use to hand-calculate my route and cockpit configuration, is that a good use of my focus? I think most people would say no. We definitely want to discourage the pilot from actively thinking about that kind of stuff. Should they have a grasp of the basics in case of emergency? Sure. Do we have a sustainable and efficient system of transportation if that's how our pilots spend their time? No.
Interesting anecdote: I was interviewing a full stack developer, and I asked him to build a simple react UI. He was allowed to use google, but couldn't come up with a solution. He then said if he had access to chatGPT, he could've solved it..We didn't hire him, but should that be an expectation? Can you use chatGPT on an interview?
A few comments pointed out McDonald's stock price or recent profit, but underneath the hood, their financials aren't great. Since 2010 their long-term debt has grown from about $10 billion to $35 billion. They currently spend about $1.2 billion/year on interest payments, but over time that will increase substantially as their low interest bonds mature.

Here's the recent history of their balance sheet:

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/MCD/mcdonalds/bala...
> you don't need any special tools or DD. Fresh format it with NTFS

Is kinda special tool in non-MS world.
The “true experts” barely know more than we do. They are using black-box techniques to evaluate GPT-4. They have no theory as to why things are working as they appear to.
> maybe if they bought a $1200 windows machine it would have lasted 4 years

Maybe it's different now (I haven't used Windows in decades, so I don't know) but I will say that it never felt that way to me. Perhaps because Apple controls the OS and the hardware, and has the ability to either spend extra time optimizing for older known hardware that falls within a support window or to delay a feature that would be problematic for older-but-supported hardware, but my lived experience with Apple hardware is that I get a lot more practical longevity out of it without having to work to squeeze every last drop of performance out of it.

Yes, I can always take a $1200 Windows machine and put XFCE or Xubuntu or Mate on it and it'll extend its life considerably, but as someone who has always tried to extend the life of my components as long as possible (the server at my feet is an Athlon FX) -- it's always just felt easier on Apple hardware.

It's even easier still with non-Windows PC operating systems, but ... has Windows gotten better on this regard or is that longevity still bolstered by migrating away from Windows?
There is no justification for putting a computer with 8GB on the market. Not even the most extreme budget computer should be built with 8GB, this is just a scam.
> You have been misinformed
> popular protests in favour of the association agreement, on 22 February 2010 the parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove Yanukovych

These "popular protests" were violent. The vote was at gunpoint, that's what makes it a coup.

> the military industrial complex in the USA have been pushing for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine. I'm not sure I understand how that works. Could you explain?

Sure. They lobby the legislative and executive branch to aggressively expand NATO, to send NATO trainers into a military on Russia's border, they lobby to have the US sabotage the Minsk accords, so that anti-Russian forces in Ukraine spend 8 years killing thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.

It's like everyone taking the State Dept/arms industry bait on this conflict hasn't heard of the Monroe Doctrine. If another country did in Mexico 1/5th of what we've been doing in Ukraine for the past 15 years we would have turned Mexico into ashes.
Oh, yeah, that’s a full megahertz here!
The end for me was when I found out my local files were syncing to OneDrive without knowing. Some dark pattern convinced me to opt in. I remember opting out before that. Somehow it must have connected my Hotmail browser session to my PC. I really have know idea how it opted me in.

Lesson: never use an actual active MS account for an OS install. If required, make it machine-specific.

After this experience I will never trust or use OneDrive or any MS-connected account tied to my OS. And I plan to use Linux going forward, with one laptop already migrated to Ubuntu.
I don't know that it ruined it. However it creates a challenge for search which makes previous iterations of SEO spam look like child's play. So the signal to noise ratio is going to get massively worse. And if they don't give strong signal to users and continue with an experience increasingly suffocated by ads, users will go wherever the AI prompt is embedded with the least friction in their UI with the minimum acceptable results.

Which makes Microsoft relevant again because they own the lower level UI experience on a staggering percentage of screens.

I'd expect nothing but aggressively shoving clippy 2.0 into every surface Microsoft owns. And I expect they will be very light with the ads because they have the additional revenue streams to play a longer game on this if it hurts Google's market share.

Google doesn't really have the same luxury.
I meant golfed vs golfed. Eg, this is a pretty typical result (14 vs 38):

https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/258335/shortest...

EDIT: Actually, my memory failed me. I just took a quick survey of some more questions and 4x or 5x seems typical for golfed vs golfed.
Dr. Attia also shared his personal experience similar to @sklargh's grandfather where he suffered a head injury after fainting while standing up from bed. High blood pressure can kill you over years, but excessive low blood pressure can kill you tomorrow.
> So you're expecting them not to do anything whatsoever with animals, because you define anything done with them as cruelty?

No, it sounds like you completely misunderstand my position. I guess I haven’t explained my position very well, because that’s completely incorrect. (I’m honestly a bit baffled by this.)

When I say “unnecessary suffering” I am not talking in some kind of mathematical sense of necessity, but I’m using the term colloquially, as it works in ordinary conversation. It means something like this—the suffering could be avoided without undue burden.

> This is not something that's broken, we want it this way - we wouldn't have spend so much time making regulations about it if we didn't.

I’m not sure I understand the logic for why you say we want it this way—politicians are here to enact the will of the people is a nice theoretical foundation for understanding the political process, but the actual behavior of representative democracies diverges from the will of the people, and it’s also not a moralistic argument—part of the reason that we have a constitutional government in the US is exactly because we recognize that we shouldn’t do whatever the people will.

The idea that I’m not supposed to “fix” the will of the people is kind of absurd anyway—all I’m doing is making moral arguments about what should be done, and the “will of the people” itself is an end product of people making arguments about what should or should not be done.

> If you find developing technologies that could fix epilepsy and ADHD (and potentially many more neurological issues) as well as help locked-in people communicate as unnecessary, I really don't know what to tell you...

You seem to be arguing that the behavior of Neuralink is necessary to achieve its goals, but the testimony I’ve heard seems to contradict this—the experiments are being done hastily, which results in bad data, unnecessary suffering, and then you have to redo the experiments.

There’s a simple formula you can use to get people to do immoral unethical things, if you desire. Create pressure to get results, then create an organizational structure that shields people from seeing the consequences. This is how we have industrial farms the way we do, this is how clothing companies based in the US end up using child labor overseas, and this is how Neuralink appears to be working.

When a clothing company gets caught using child labor overseas, you find some contractor to blame. You terminate the contract and hire another contractor to manage the manufacturing for you. This creates the façade of moral behavior on the part of individuals, while preserving the economic and organizational systems which encouraged immoral behavior in the first place. Neuralink isn’t out there with the goal of causing suffering just like clothing companies aren’t—and the best way I know to counteract it is with regulations.
Can we please adjust the framing about jobs? Another employee will not steal your job.

Your employer may “steal” your job and give your job to someone who convinces them they can do it cheaper.

In the new era of ai-augmented white collar work this process will get faster.

But let’s remember it’s always the employer who makes the decision and stop using language implying the existence of “job thieves” of some kind and completely excluding the employers’ choice in the process.
https://github.com/kholia/OSX-KVM also works (also not very legal)
> without a moneyed elite

Contrast that with

> China’s parliament has about 100 billionaires

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/02/chinas-parliament-has-about-...
One doesn't need to be clueless in order to lose a power struggle. He might have been betrayed, he might have overestimated the resources he could fully count on, he might have simply been backing a faction in the party that ended up losing. Xi Jinping went as far as kicking out of the public congress a previous president, which was unprecedented; who knows what else he's capable of.
Reuters: 'GM Plans to Phase Out Apple CarPlay in EVs, with Google's Help'
This just feels like completely arbitrary divisions based on what sounds good as opposed to any guiding logic around defining a monopoly and breaking it down along systemic lines. Populism, basically.
We're watching history unfold slowly, in real time, as the unipolar world run by the US over the last 30 years is turning into a multipolar world. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, and this was both entirely predictable and widely predicted.
It depeneds on what you are working on and your position. Isn't it a lot of code is repitative? Test cases are mostly repitative. AI can help you with that and your productivity increase significantly.

I write code/program mostly to make my life easier and well I like to write to code. And AI/copilot just helps me write the better code faster.
It’s a good & important question to ask who’s making the choices, and who’s subject to the consequences of the choices. That’s very much one of the reasons I think it’s healthy to view this as a choice. Not necessarily one you and I are making, but it is one being made by someone somewhere, and it will affect us.

In the context of “stealing jobs”, the choice is being made by the people who have jobs to offer, the business owners. In the context of building AI, the choice is in the hands of the researchers and engineers, and the businesses investing in AI. Some of the choice is being made by all of us, via interest in AI, discussion, clicks, Google searching, curiosity.

> If AI is less expensive than humans, then anyone who doesn’t use AI will get outcompeted by those who do. That’s the unfortunate reality of markets.

Generally true, I agree. Though we can and do exercise choices to prevent negative social and economic outcomes. Children, for example, are cheaper to employ than adults, but we don’t legally allow it. We can, similarly, choose whether and what AI we want to allow, if we’re sufficiently motivated, right? The choice in this case is in the hands of the populace and the government.
Honest question, what is the brand differentiation between Kia and Hyundai? They both occupy the cheap economy segment, at least in the USA. Is kia supposed to be mid-market? I guess they have the telluride and stinger…
There are plenty of things that you could do 'on the sly' that are illegal. That's doesn't mean they're not illegal, and that doesn't mean that if you are found out (which is hard but not always impossible) that you will be punished. Given that there are plenty of legal ways of making money, why would you pick an illegal one just because you (think you) can?

The boundaries of the law are rarely set at what you think you can get away with, but are usually set on some other principle and in between that line and the point where you exist there is plenty of room for prosecution. The jails contain lots of people who thought they 'could get away with it'. Don't be one of those.
us certainly profited nicely from this conflict. i also doubt anyone would complain if us suddenly stopped invading and bombing
And yet home schooling is completely illegal in Germany, something that would be a complete deal breaker for me. But perhaps that speaks more to how bad public school is in the US, maybe it's freaking amazing in Germany?
"powers of two became important, getting someone to make you a 34-bit DRAM would be hard, much less getting a second source as well".

I have several pounds of 9-bit memory. It's 'parity' memory, was fairly common back in the day, and adding another bit just means respinning the simm carrier to add a pad for another chip. Of course, I don't know if anyone is making 1- or 4-bit DRAMS any more, so you might be stuck adding a 8-bit or larger additional chip. Memory is probably cheap enough now if you wanted 34 bits to play with and were somehow tied to larger power-of-two, you could just go to 40 or more bits and do better ECC or more tag space or just call the top 6 'reserved' or something. It's a solvable problem.
Just tried this with ChaGPT for giggles. It spit out words, but I wouldn't call it sound reasoning.

__user__:

- A system in composed of two elevators.
- Each have their own unique velocity parameter.
- At each time step in the system, the elevators can move up or down a number of floor equal to their velocity, or change their velocity.
- Assume that both elevators move at the same time step.
- The elevators may never occupy the same floor.

- Elevator A starts on floor 11, and Elevator B at floor 3.
- Both elevator velocities start at 1.

Is it possible for A to ever reach floor 2?

__assistant__:

No, it is not possible for Elevator A to ever reach floor 2 while maintaining the rule that the two elevators may never occupy the same floor.

To see why this is the case, note that Elevator A starts at floor 11 and Elevator B starts at floor 3. Since both elevators move at the same time step, Elevator A can never move to a floor lower than Elevator B without violating the rule that they may never occupy the same floor.

Furthermore, since Elevator A and Elevator B have the same velocity at the start and Elevator B is already on a lower floor, Elevator B will always reach any floor below Elevator A before Elevator A can get there. This means that Elevator A can never occupy any floor that is below the current position of Elevator B, including floor 2.

Therefore, it is not possible for Elevator A to ever reach floor 2 while maintaining the given constraints.

__user__:

what if at the first time step, both velocities became equal to 5?

__assistant__:

If both elevators have their velocities set to 5 at the first time step, then it is possible for Elevator A to reach floor 2.

With both elevators moving at velocity 5, Elevator A will reach floor 6 after the first time step, while Elevator B will reach floor 8. Since Elevator A is now on a lower floor than Elevator B, it is possible for Elevator A to continue moving down to floor 2 without violating the constraint that the elevators may never occupy the same floor.

Specifically, Elevator A can continue moving down at velocity 5, reaching floors 1 and 2 after two more time steps. Elevator B, with velocity 5, will reach floor 13 after the same two time steps.

So, if both elevators have their velocities set to 5 at the first time step, then it is possible for Elevator A to reach floor 2 while maintaining the given constraints.
I was just thinking about this, and the implications it could have on our understanding of the origin and development of human cognitive capabilities, both in the evolutionary and developmental psychology senses.
I think the message here is that you are in control of what happens to you next. In this regard the headline and the post are fine. Well, unless you subscribe to the other philosophy camp (determinism).

The message is not on whether AI will change the jobs or not, of course it will. It may eliminate some, reduce others, change most, and likely create a few new ones instead. The point is about how people chose to react to it, and specifically that "putting the head under the sand" and crying later that AI took the jobs away is not going to help; accepting that the world changes and that you can do something about it and then leveraging it will.

Is it possible that some specific jobs disappear in several years from now, just like it was the case with factories, automation, etc.? Yes indeed it can. They may be taken by people leveraging AI (your boss, your company, your colleague). You can ignore the fact, or accept it and learn to leverage the same tools for your benefit, or better - the benefit of the society.

Lots of "analogies" are given in various threads here, like "Guns don't kill people, people who squeeze the trigger kill people" and "It is not the fall that kills you, but the landing". I do not agree. Sure you can argue any of the two sides, that's the whole point of these statements. They just serve to focus your argument on one side or another.