skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ok, so, at 14:45 in the video she shows some spacetime diagrams. The "normal" interpretation is that the distortions shown, including the event-ordering flip she shows, represent reality. Relativistic motion is actual time dilation and not merely your perception of someone else's motion. This is backed up by evidence in a lot of extreme cases.

I don't have the skills to know if one is really "allowed" to say that there exists some frame of reference that is preferred or if that breaks something else, but I think that any such frame where time must always go forwards would do what she's saying here.

Possibly.

Unfortunately, I know this is an area where not only does my intuition often fail me, but where I can easily have the wool pulled over my eyes with plausible sounding but erroneous maths.
More or less, but I guess this was to be expected. Why would making prompts be difficult when LLMs are already capable of fairly difficult programming?
There are multiple levels to this. One is her attacks on the current orthodoxy around arguments that invoke causality or Special Relativity (as opposed to General Relativity). The arguments seem sound, and I’m sure it will hurt egos and generate controversy (a specialty of this particular blogger/youtuber).

The second is that it reframes the speed of light limit as a “barrier”, and more clearly defines why accelerating mass to the speed of light is impossible (while explaining what mass actually is).

It doesn’t give the answer of “well you just need to do this”, but by removing artificial constraints “causality says no”, it will hopefully allow more young smart people to get interested in studying more in this area.

I strongly applaud Sabine in her attempts to demystify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics (across other videos). We should introduce these (particularly Quantum Mechanics) into the later school curriculum. It’s a shame that the majority of people never get to study this, as it’s so fundamental to our current knowledge of physics.
They have infinite amounts of training data, and probably lots of interested users who also like to push the limits of what the model is capable of and provide all kinds of test cases and RLHF base data.

They have millions of people training the AI for free basicallly, and they have engineers who pick and rate pieces of training data and use it together with other sources and manual training.
It looks like the inside of The Millennium Falcon, but with more duct tape.
In a sense, Yes - to scoring function engineer.

But in seriousness - language models may be scaling in sophistication exponentially with time, but software engineering problems scale in complexity (on average) exponentially with lines of code. The base of this exponential function isn't large, but it's more than 1.

In the end there's a need for someone who understands what they're doing.

Personally, I use ChatGPT to discover libraries that solve my problems and the ~70% success ratio that I'm seeing with this is enough for me for now.
Company of Heroes works like that and it's on iPad.
Yes, an AI apocalypse is not depicted in any science fiction because it would make for terrible fiction. Good stories depict relatable characters engaged in a battle between near-equals that ends in victory after terrifying odds. Not "someone saying 'oops' and then everyone falling over dead", which is the Yudkowsky scenario.
That's from start of "building" not "planning". In the US, getting the permits and handling the planning far exceeds the actual construction.

In addition, there have only been 7 reactors constructed in North America since 1990 and none from 1995 to 2005.

I'm actually a fan of nuclear reactors. However, in the US, we simply don't have the political will to build them.
Does Rust have a template or macro system that would facilitate generating up to e.g. 221 instead?

If I'm understanding correctly, some Regex features may require implementing more than 21 rules for a thorough and complete implementation.
>It makes total sense that with FTL, it would be possible to OBSERVE events in the wrong order, but just this alone wouldn't break causality.

There seems to be a general misunderstanding here. A different order of events can easily be observed without FTL, but only for events outside of our own light-cone. If we could observe events within our own light-cone without causal ordering, they could still affect us and thus would easily create paradoxes. However, if you are limited by the speed of light, this can't happen.
I like how they call this a 'rule' instead just a list of three hard to remember numbers in a row.
It might be the most impractical thing ever done, but it’s also very useful if feasible.
If you feel that this post is inappropriate, then flag it, but that's not a reason for it not to point to the best link.
It's because "simultaneous" is relative in the same way that "in the same place" is relative. You can bounce a ball against the same spot repeatedly, but if you're on an airplane and another observer isn't, the places the ball hits are separated by a large distance in their reference frame.

Most concretely, the FTL-breaks-causality conclusion comes from: If special relativity holds (it does), and you have FTL travel, and there is no universal privileged frame of reference affecting your FTL drive, then it's possible to get back to your starting point before you leave by making multiple FTL hops. You have to be able to make the two hops in different reference frames, that is, you need to do a bit of conventional acceleration between hop 1 and hop 2.

From everything we know about the universe it seems unlikely that there's a special preferred frame out there, but if for example you're developing a hard-science-fiction setting and want FTL without causality violations, you can throw in that background detail to keep the physicists happy.

> it would be possible to OBSERVE events in the wrong order

True, but of course that's possible even in normal earth-bound newtonian physics. All of the discussions about relativity assume that all the observers are taking speed-of-light delays into account when they're observing.
"The sorcerer's apprentice mop scene, but there's no master sorcerer to save us and the mops are making more and better mops."

One of the better non science fiction analogies I've heard.
The blog literally just embeds the video in its post with a paragraph of intro. Additionally it's the blog of the same Youtuber you have so much contempt for.
Everything you say makes sense if you already presume that FTL implies breaking causality, but I'm missing the explanation for why FTL implies breaking causality in the first place.

I mean, it's completely logical that if you get to Mars faster then light, you can watch yourself start the trip, but why does this also mean that you are actually going back in time?

Intuitively it would seem that even if you teleport to Mars with no travel time, observe yourself on Earth, then teleport back to Earth, you should arrive the next instant after you left, not before. So time travel does not follow immediately from the fact that you were able to observe yourself in the past.
maybe something like the BBC Threads film is the way to go?

plot of threads (set in Sheffield, UK):

- russians/americans disagree on something in iran
- initial nuclear attacks around base in iran
- uneasy 2 day ceasefire
- worldwide nuclear exchange occurs (a relativly small one)
- graphic depiction of nuclear attack
- people suffering horribly
- ends with scene in hospital of character we've followed in labour, resulting in deformed stillbirth

plot of artificial super intelligence:

- tech company creates AI
- idiot CEO enters badly thought out goal in an attempt to capture 2% more search market share
- AI begins to executes goal
- idiot CEO initially delighted at results
- at some point AI becomes super-intelligent as it helps it achieve its goal
- all life on earth is casually exterminated by the AI as it becomes better at achieving its goal
- AI acts as a global scale systematic combine harvester
- no humans, animals, bacteria, fungi left... no biological life ever again on earth
- ends with scene of 100% of the earth's surface converted to GPUs, with the NVIDIA logo prominently displayed on each of them
It'd be cheaper to then get rid of the battery. Then 10k can be your new price limit. Even 1k can get a good enough junk car that can go that far.
That and/or means any one or more of the list.
This sounds like amazing work, the best part of software engineering is coming up with a prototype and experimenting. Most of my personal projects are basically “I wonder if X is easy or hard, and if I can make it work”

Do you stick to a particular business domain? Eg finance, transportation, e-commerce? I’d think it would help you to build MVPs if you stayed in a specific domain, but it could be fun to move around a bit too :)

Also: how do you find clients? I feel like again this would come from having connections in a specific business domain? It feels like it should be hard to sell yourself as the “prototype person”, but how do you convince someone to let you prototype for them for a while?
That’s an awesome way to describe it, toxic positivity.
You're describing the desire to avoid protocol compression when transmitting data that grows without bound. That has nothing to do with fixing the backslashes. The problem isn't backslashes. Those are just a symptom of data that can have any length.
> software as a medical device

I had a question about this earlier, if a doctor uses Google to look up something, then is Google being used in some legal or regulatory sense as a medical device?
Uhh... Whut? Special relativity absolutely allows CTCs. It actually provides an exact prescription of how to do it - move faster than light.
In "a real street fight", the person who can extend combat such that they minimize immediate threats as well as deliver maximum damage to their opponents when possible typically will come out the other side better.

These are techniques martial arts teach. A "street fighter" might have some tricks up their sleeve, but a martial artist is better equipped to handle arbitrary conflicts they may find themselves in.

Neither guarantees success in a fight.
And Type 2 have GOT to GO! "Grand sprint opening, grand sprint closing!"
Why would it try to cause harm first of all?

Second of all, it is not even nearly powerful enough to convince anyone to do anything, or anything like that. If it was 100 times more powerful, then maybe.

I can see current problems being flooding spam/misinformation/propaganda on internet forums. But that has been happening for a while and this will make people more skeptical of what they read (hopefully)

But finally, if it does cause harm (don’t think it will. great tool). Then who cares? Why try to stop it. You can’t stop it, nobody can. Why whinge and moan like the luddites? I don’t get it.
When do duplicates/frequencies matter in classification?
Hilarious, that last graph really shouldve been in this puff piece article.
I am citing the actual history of the US public library system, which ironically can probably now be found only with difficulty in actual public libraries. But Wikipedia has a decent overview:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_libraries_in_North_Amer...

As you can see, libraries in the US were founded to advance 'learning' and 'piety'.

Here is the treatise of one of the biggest influencers and advocates for the creation of the public library system.

https://ia600909.us.archive.org/10/items/intellectualtorc00t...

I strongly encourage reading all the citations in the Wikipedia article surrounding the creation of the library system. Sadly, many of them are paywalled and inaccessible via even the Archive project, Google Books [ed - to be clear if you think I am pro-publisher, you are wrong: the former two projects had more potential to do good than I can express], and likely your local library. But you can find enough to prove the point.

There has been a massive shift in the mission of libraries in the past several decades, and the public didn't get a say.
You can have any knowledge you want, if you are lacking motivation, then the knowledge means nothing. What motivates AGI?

AGI does not have self-preservation instinct (frankly any instincts) therefore it can't be afraid of anything. It does not understand pain, it does not have fear and thus it can't have motivation.
Very nice, consistently interesting web site.

I'm on a radxa 4 port card with zfs under ubuntu on a pi4 and I'd certainly consider this approach if I did it again: 5tb shucked mirror pair in zfs is as good as my raid4 over 2tb drives. For some reason FreeBSD on pi4 hasn't eventuated in a form I felt confident about, originally I wanted to run it and with zfs, If I succeed in getting it to boot, I can move the drives over without data loss. (The main issues are pi boot oddities and blobs)

I like that this site helps debunk the "moar gb memory needed" meme about zfs: you really don't need more memory. It just needs tuning.

Fanless is great. Makes reliable filestore in bedrooms possible.
Rosatom builds faster than South Korea, which takes 9 years to build a reactor [0]. For example, the reactor in Belarus was built in 8 years[1]. The first reactor at the Akkuyu site in Turkey is going to be built in 6 years [2].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_nuclear_rea...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_nuclear_rea...

[2] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Major-components...
Murdock? Come now, he's just like any other relatable dude you can hang out and have a beer with while watching football.
Fwiw, a majority at OpenAI believes GPT5 will achieve AGI, depending on how you define it, according to Sam Altman.
GPT-4's release doesn't seem like the relevant time marker, since nothing in the article builds on it or depends on it. The paper for H3 was submitted in December 2022.

The pace the last few years definitely seems rapid, just don't want there to be a false impression.
You can politically thank The Greens for no nuclear power plants in Australia (apart from Lucas Heights, medical).

Ironically, their 100% outright, non negotiable no nuclear policy has pushed heavy carbon emitting coal power plants for the last 30 years until the recent policy shift of winding them down in lieu of solar.
One of the Xeelee Sequence novels deals with this problem specifically: a pilot in an FTL space fighter uses multiple hops to defeat an enemy, and ends up back before he left. It's a Xeelee Sequence book, grimdark of grimdark, so hilarity does not ensue.
> buy less tat

According to the below link, trash per human per day ranges from:

0.74 kilogram but ranges widely, from 0.11 to 4.54 kilograms.

That ship carries more than a human makes in waste in a lifetime, but not by a huge margin (if you are in a wealthy country). That’s rather depressing.

https://datatopics.worldbank.org/what-a-waste/trends_in_soli...
The auditors are appointed by the audit committee which consists of board members who are non executive directors i.e. they are not involved in the day to day running of the company and so theoretically should be independent and interested in uncovering any wrongdoing by management.
Ocean Surface Ecosystem
Well then again theoretical physics was dominated by "string theory" for decades despite a lack of any physical or experimental evidence, so we should take consensus about speculative physics with a grain of salt. This sort of speculation is precisely what physicists should be doing, within measure. At least Sabine appears to recognize her "out there" aspect, unlike say the string theorists that stifled physics for decades. At worse maybe she'll annoy another theoretician to analytically disprove her.

That said of course whatever quantum gravity would bring it'll need to reduce to match known physics. However at the fringes of known physics what will happen as you get nearer to the singularities in special relativity? Generally speaking in the past singularities in physics have been due to incomplete knowledge of the physics in these regions.
> That, or yes - clickbait contrarian. This seems to get a lot of loud followers though.

Which I guess shouldn't be surprising. Loud followings are usually created by saying things that are controversial, or offensive.
I see similarities in this with the accessible naming of recent software vulnerabilities, a la shellshock, rowhammer, and others. I don’t think these would have garnered much coverage in the pop tech press had they been referred to with their CVE designators, CVE-2014-6271 and CVE-2020-10255, respectively.

The naming matters like you said.
I feel like commercial fusion is such a lost cause at this point. For electrical generation, it’s going to have high fixed costs which will likely make it uneconomical for the same reasons fission struggles. The cost of fuel already very low for traditional fission and renewables.

I don’t see what advantages it would have over wind, solar, fission, etc.
I mean, yeah, they could be. Except:

1) Doing that wouldn't be fairly described as "downloading Twitters database".

2) Given the scale of Twitter, there's no way that would be fairly described as downloading a "massive portion" of Twitter.

3) As you say, there's no reason they would be doing that. It's certainly not needed (or even helpful) for launching something like Substack Notes.

4) Just as a matter of how networking and modern cloud architectures work, it would be a bit surprising if the IP ranges that scraping requests were made from would be the same as the ones serving up content on Substack's frontend. It could happen I suppose, but...it'd be weird, even if you weren't trying to make the requests from unrelated IPs (which...you probably would try and do).

5) Elements of the block have nothing to do with IP addresses or domain names at all, eg, the block on results when even searching for the word "substack" (but hilariously, not when searching for common mispellings), or the block on searching for posts authored by Taibbi.

6) Substack has denied doing any such thing, and frankly, their credibility is currently significantly higher than Musk's.

It's certainly possible Substack was doing something akin to scraping which via a game of telephone ended up as Musk's claim, but... I wouldn't bet money on it.
I might've heard of that kind of situation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35344635
I guess I don't understand your intuition.

My intuition:

Teleport to Mars.

Wait 3 minutes to watch myself go poof on Earth.

Teleport to Earth.

If I arrive back on Earth just after I went poof, then I'm pretty sure I went backwards in time a couple of minutes.
It’s really not upsetting that “people exist who don’t agree with the prevailing narrative” especially in science, because the “prevailing narrative” has extremely good reason to exist, and more importantly, especially where physics is concerned, the prevailing narrative almost certainly worked, and gave correct answers to the questions that were asked.

The problem with the “prevailing narrative” in physics is never that it’s “wrong”. It’s that it’s either not deep enough or not wide enough an explanation.

Even Einstein’s upending Newtonian physics abs basically proving it as “wrong” as any prevailing narrative can probably be proven has made little difference in the usage of Newtonian physics, which still continues to be employed for nearly everything it would have been if relativity was never discovered.

It just means that we now have a theory that can answer questions that Newtonian physics could not. And we have a clearer and broader picture of what reality is. It means that we have become aware of unknown assumptions and approximations in our earlier understanding, that we didn’t even know about.
A noble sentiment, but until Western Europe foots its share of the bill of NATO defense, Eastern Europe will stick with America. And if the EU keeps up with insane energy policy and regulating their tech sector out of existence, they will remain reliant on the US. So, for now this is all empty words
It is hard to falsify as they are not very open but I believe the keyword here is believe. It is faith/intuition based. Certainly fertile ground for exploration but people who argue back and forth about it remind of the "are we alone in the universe" conversations.
> Funny article. It talks about time to build nuclear reactors but never mentions Russia.
> ...
> For example, the reactor in Belarus was built in 8 years[1].

Sorry to break it to you but Belarus is still not russia, yet.

If you look again at the article you'll see lots of countries that have nuclear reactors are not specifically mentioned, however in the one section where countries are specifically mentioned a group for all former USSR countries is called out that includes russia and other countries. This will be due to how reactor data was recorded prior to the dissolution of the USSR.

Slava Ukraini
>There is nothing stopping companies from offering the same benefits to union employees that non-union employees are getting.

Sure, but it could be construed as promising benefits to employees to discourage their union support, which violates the NLRA [0] and indeed was cited by Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corp. in the dispute against them back in 2019 [1]. No company with a sane legal department would treat a counterparty differently than the contract stipulates, even if such a treatment could be considered 'preferential.' The legal risk is just too great.

[0]https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/human-resources/article/nation...
[1]https://ogletree.com/insights/nlrb-explains-when-granting-be...
So Macron would rather France decouple from America than from China, then?
Say we're in a universe with a +- metric signature. We're looking at tx, ignoring yz.

Rotating within a 45 degree cone (which hides the hyperbolic geometry of +- space) is easy. That's just normal acceleration.

Rotating more than 45 degrees is the hard part. That corresponds to going FTL. It's hard because of the hyperbolic structure of +-.

Once you're going FTL, changing your direction to point backwards in time is trivial; you just turn your engines on and accelerate.

Read Greg Egan's "Clockwork Rocket" and "Dichronauts" books and support material on his website to develop an intuitive understanding of spacetimes with ++++ and ++-- signatures and (by contrast) our own spacetime with a +--- signature.
I can recommend PBS Spacetime https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7_gcs09iThXybpVgjHZ_7g to everyone who thought this submission was interesting.
Bollinger band indicator squeeze screener
Hello friends, I have developed a tool that you can scan for the Bollinger band indicator in cryptocurrencies. The working logic of the web application is as follows when you write and scan 0.15, you will see coins with a very small bandwidth and ready to explode on a daily basis. On a 4-hour basis, this value is 0.04 on average, so you can easily find the coins that will rise.
It's not that RISC-V guarantees truly transparent firmware and microcode; as you correctly point out, it does not.

What RISC-V offers is the possibility of truly transparent firmware and microcode. This comes as a refreshing alternative to x86, which guarantees that firmware and microcode, including those of security coprocessors (e.g. Intel CSME & AMD ST, formerly ME and PSP) will not be transparent.
So today’s hard problems are becoming easy problems, but this produces a new set of harder problems for tomorrow. Ad infinitum.
At this point I'm weakly convinced that, with high-dimensional enough latent space, adjacency search is reasoning.