skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are multiple Instagram accounts like this already[0]. The Uncanny valley effect doesn't work any more.

This is because actual humans have been using extensive filters and image manipulation for so long that the overly smooth skin and features aren't a red flag anymore.

So when an AI image generator approaches the uncanny valley from the pure CGI side, not all people notice, especially if the CGI image is attached on top of a "real" background.

[0] (NSFW, no nudity but skimpy clothing - normal Instagram account pretty much) https://www.instagram.com/ambermaxwel/
They can, but you have over a million members of the military who have all sworn an oath that they will "obey the orders of the President of the United States." If they had all sworn an oath that they will "obey the orders of General McEvilFace," it would be a lot easier to maneuver all your coup pawns into place even over the protestations of the president, even without those soldiers needing to fully realize that a coup was being set up.
Please re-read your own comment. You describe two hard things, performance and long-tail compatibility, and literally state that “the team” will have a nightmare left after an initial cruise.
Hey, thank you for the suggestions. I just started learning rust and wanted to build something (useful) to learn more about it and the entire lifecycle of building something with it. Will definetly take your suggestions and add more features in the coming days!
It's worth a loss to protect the environment
There may have been a disagreement, but now they're focused on profit, as everybody else. From the same article:

“Anthropic has been heavily focused on research for the first year and a half of its existence, but we have been convinced of the necessity of commercialization, which we fully committed to in September [2022],” the pitch deck reads. “We’ve developed a strategy for go-to-market and initial product specialization that fits with our core expertise, brand and where we see adoption occurring over the next 12 months.”
To underscore something that might get lost in the wall:

The entire premise given in Reckless, Infinite Scope is that the number of words in the specification is positively correlated with the intractability of implementing a given thing. From this foregone conclusion, it tries to quantify how much worse the task of implementing a Web browser is. The problem is that that the premise is a bad one; even if it takes more time to read a wordier spec, it is easier to implement one that describes well-defined behavior than a terse one that glosses over things and leaves huge gaps of undefined behavior. This is not just conjecture—it tracks with the development and progress of implementing, say, the HTML parsing algorithm; it is easier to implement a correct and acceptable HTML reader in 2023 armed with only the spec than it was to try to do the same thing in 2003 which involved reading the spec and also reverse engineering how other (esp. proprietary) browsers deal with the pages that you find authors actually publishing in the wild. This is a task that was made easier because the standard got bigger.

The point is that its broken methodology doesn't even matter; we don't have to try to come up with better ways of evaluating whether a spec should be included or not because its whole premise is flawed to begin with. Any attempt to produce an input set that you can then use to run a word count analysis is a moot academic exercise at best that will only tell you how many words it contains.
From my perspective, movements need multiple organizations that exist on different levels of the “extremism” spectrum. Just like there are various environmental NGO’s, some very radical, and others more mild and open to compromise, the free software movement needs the same.

The FSF is the extreme org, the canary in the coal mine that is going to alert on critical issues, but also which frankly are going to send out a lot of false alerts. They are the die hards that will get it wrong constantly, but also will be the early alert system for true critical issues.

We need other, more moderate voices they are willing to compromise more and be less extreme. That should not happen within FSF, but as a separate org.
No, this is more "everyone is selling X, let's get in the business of X". On the other hand, yes, some will miss the boat and lose money.
If you're right (and I'm not saying you're not), the FSF is already gone. RMS is 70 years old and will not be around forever.
How is the FSF failing?

There seems to be far more freedom respecting choices nowadays than in the past and we're now entering the dawn of "free" cpus with RISC-V. I'd also consider that Linux is more widely used than at any time in the past as well. What am I missing?
Couldn't have asked for a better response to confirm what I said.
Back when I was a software manager, I had to sequence work into sprints or everyone (up and down) would freak out. The part I relaxed the team on: I didn't care at all if work spilled over into the next sprint. This alone removed the stress of adding mid-sprint activities (which obviously needs to be done from time to time for at minimum reactionary purposes) and allowed more thoughtful medium-term analysis and execution. I was still on-time for delivery (at least above par on delivery timelines compared to sister teams), but with much less burn-out and generally more favorable ratings and well-constructed systems.

The thought that any meaningful work (including components of meaningful work) would naturally fall within a 2 week period of time has always baffled me. That said, I have always been very good at identifying critical paths, minimal requirements, and estimated effort; I'm not sure if this strategy would work well without sufficient planning.
That makes sense. My brother, who has been coding since 1990 and worked his entire career in boring Fortune 500 companies, was wholly unimpressed by chatGPT. It failed pretty miserably whenever he threw any old tech stack at it.
Or ip ban anyone requesting those hidden pages
Maybe make them low enough that details of the worst nuclear incedent in the US don't get covered up for 30 years?
How would you know if you had in front of you an example of the contrary?
This is unproductive. I have significant criticisms of the policy draft, but this is not helpful.
Are they even coming out with any new software? I remember GNU being big in the 1990s and I know a new version of gawk came out recently, but it seems the center of gravity of “free software” (as in beer) has moved in the direction of the Apache foundation (so many data-related projects it is a “big data” problem to keep track of them all), Github, etc.
Yes! You can sign up for Logflare separately actually.
I don't really understand what you mean by 'challenging twitter' in this context. Why does the number of DAU matter? In what way are Mastodon and Twitter competing? Twitter is a business that needs to make money to survive. Mastodon is a federated network of services run by individuals and groups under a variety of arrangements.

I've been on Twitter since the first year. I watched it grow and change for the good and bad. I find I use mastodon far more these days. Pretty much daily. Why? The people I want to interact with are on Mastodon discussing the topics I want to discuss.

For me there is simply no comparison anymore. Mastodon wins hands down because: 1. signal to noise ratio is 1000x better and 2. the responses to my posts are high quality, faster, and 10x more than I get on Twitter (where I have 10x the followers).
Generally a core point is that because you can't really push ads in people's faces, business accounts on Mastodon need to push content people choose to follow. Updates on products and services that existing users of said products and services would want to know about... great. Building a direct connection with consumers through interaction... fantastic.
I have a feeling the same is going to happen with Star Wars films here soon.
Where is the end? And why claim you're doing the impossible until it's done?

It all comes off as puffery to me. Though the vertical slices approach is interesting, so I salute their efforts.
Small objective differences create vast differences in outcomes. Those things where that isn't true have already been automated away or commodified so there's very little margin left anyway.

It might be true in a misleading sense that the AI {product} is some large fraction of a genuine {product}, but that doesn't mean anything because the value is contained in those differences above the AI produced baseline. The value floor, so to speak, is a lot higher, but the ceiling hasn't risen an inch.

Those that move down in quality to preserve margin will soon discover there's not a there there.
So 100 clients you have to bill and administer at $8/hr. You don't have to write it all out, but you do have to maintain all context of all your clients. Good luck at that volume.
Plenty of managers do lack vision and direction (often feels like the norm) so it's not surprising that they lack creativity when it comes to assigning work to be completed within a single sprint. If they were free of that self-imposed creative barrier, they may be better positioned to develop an overall strategy.
Well you can wait a lifetime or you can take control away from them with a couple clicks. The choice is obvious.
I lost all the respect that I had for FSF when they decided to re-elect Stallman. Would love to see a lot of changes in that foundation.
The OSD applies only to open source software. It is nonsensical when applied to non-software works. You can’t release the source code for a language model because they don’t have source code.
> We need more leaders of color, women, LGBTQ representation, and others besides. The present leadership, particularly from RMS, creates an exclusionary environment in a place where inclusion and representation are important for the success of the movement.

I'm not a fan of RMS, but this is the exact kind of left wing platitude that people think will revive an organization, but really just signals thats the organization is more concerned with the appearance of reform, rather than substance. It is the death rattle of an organization which has allowed itself to become ideological rather than pragmatic (which is funny considering how ideological the FSF is)

The problem with FSF is that it either hasn't made its point clear, or has failed to convince people. People are naturally turned off by the GPL because they do not want to give their company's code away; they see it as a risk to their businesses.

I worked for a company which licensed its product as GPLv2. One of our clients (who we trained on the product) saw this and then began competing with us by selling their own version of our product. The company released a newer version of the code and made it proprietary. The FSF answer to this is that this is exactly how the GPL is intended to work, and we should compete on quality of service and frequency of updates rather than having a monopoly on our code base, but that's simply not an argument that businesses buy.

It is an uphill battle convincing companies to give away their code to an ecosystem that they will, in the long run, potentially benefit from. The FSF fails to do this, and usually only makes ideological arguments presented by a long-haired, bare-footed, libertarian hippie with a history of extremely controversial takes on the topic of child molestation.
The Compliance Suites (also linked on the top of the page you linked) are intended to provide some guidance about what's important.

The current edition of those can be found in XEP-0459: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0459.html
> The content for this site is CC-BY-SA. The code for this site is MIT.

This made me laugh a bit, given the arguments being made.

(I'm not calling him a hypocrite; it's fine to use MIT licenses and make these arguments. It was just a funny concluding statement on the blog page)
the point is though the market potential is huge. and it would be a way to grow fast with cash flow. as a side effect you would probably develop the best NSFW filter in the world also.
Origins according to a many-times-over gilded comment on reddit (I forget which sub) went something like this -

subservient office culture in Japan where the big boss was reading it, so it spread to the entire organisation from where it spread to other organisations. It got to a point where no one knew why they were reading it, just that they had to. Around the same time it caught imagination of the Americans because of the Japanese (who were actually pretty efficient at their jobs).

Will look for the comment and post if it takes me less than 15 mins.

Edit: forgot how bad reddit search was. While I did not find what I was looking for, this [0] is one high quality answer you may be interested in. Only top comments are heavily moderated on that sub.

[0]: https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1j37co/when_...
Maybe a dumb question, but how can one distinguish between a genuine article about some social phenomenon, and some attempt to sell/pitch/SEO some product?
Interesting view

It's known that `git` is not entirely friendly, and some of its defaults are not optimal. So to me "zero bullshit" means "no need to learn `git` completely to become productive".

In any case, this tool already saved tons of time for me and will continue paying off, so the time spent on development was worth it for me :)
> Then they can take full control of the FSF, already they have their hands in it.

This is neither good nor bad, so I'm not sure why your whole point seemingly is based on it. Corporations will act in their own self-interests just like everyone else. There are examples of where corporations worked together and it turned out well for all and examples of the opposite happening, so I'm not sure why this is necessarily framed in such a negative way.

EDIT: consider the Linux Foundation. They combine private and corporate interests fairly well, with no corporate capture, and they are succeeding in ways the FSF never has.
It's already here, it's just weak.
That would be the AI version of Pascal's Wager [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager
Instead of "So what do you do" you can always ask "So what do you like doing" ... that might give the person the chance to still talk about work if he/she/they/it/es want to :)
the "problem" with the FSF is the no-true-scottsman license. It just ends with, if you aren't ideologically in line with GNU, you're not free software. It's like debian refusing to package firefox. It lacks the practicality and realpolitick one needs to make free software more widely used and understood.
When you have enough time and the same rock chord progressions, there are going to be similarities. I would be surprised if that song had anything other than a subconscious effect on Harrison’s song writing. Lawsuits over this type of thing are a huge impediment to the creative process imho.
I've got over 20 years of experience and multiple shipped products. Some of which might actually be in the interviewers house.

I'm NOT doing leetcode at this point in my career. Nor will I do hackerrank or whatever is the current thing that "must" be done to get a job.

You can check my LinkedIn account and approach any of my contacts to ask about my skills and character if you must.

I also want a clear plan and timeline laid out during the first or second meeting. "We have a 6 step interview, this is what happens on each step and this is the timeline they will happen if you pass them all".
The Free software foundation needs its Martin Luther and Reformation. Stallman has quite literally become the pope of the Free software foundation and we need to remember that like with the Protestant Reformation, the individual has their own, unmediated relationship with free software.

There are other apt analogies between the Protestant Reformation and the Free software foundation but I will leave discovering that as an exercise to the reader.
Neural Networks are basically a Chinese room and it is not AGI. And there is nothing "humane" in these developments. Yes, they are inevitable, yes we would have to live with them. And maybe they will improve lives of a few millions of humans, while degrading lives of billions of others. Long term effects are particularly interesting and unpredictable.
Yes Dave, that would be a great name. :)
^^^ This.

If I do a weeks work on getting a feature ready, and then product decide to change all the requirements around and it needs redone. Why do I care ? I still get paid for that weeks work...

Next week I'll rework the requirements, and I'll get paid for that weeks work too!
I expect them to change things, too: they will remove 1 or 2 of the most egregious stuff and will leave in the rest, and then celebrating that they listen to the community. I hope I'm wrong, but moves like this really irk me and they shutter the built-up trust immediately.
>It’s time for Richard Stallman to go.

>We need more leaders of color, women, LGBTQ representation, and others besides.

The FSF is dying. What we need is women, people of color, minorities, and other people who have never played a major part in contributing, spreading or practicing free software ethos to lead the movement.

There is nothing inherently wrong with diversity, but this is an attempt to spread an agenda, not save the Free Software Foundation.

A character like Richard Stallman is and have been a necessity for the movement to be what it is. We cannot let people of weak character lead the movement. We must reject non-free, proprietary software, not fall into a spiral of pragmatism until we are OSS.
I think it's equally likely that they just don't want their product to be known as "the porn bot".
Not Forgotten: ChatGPT isn’t the only important trend in technology
Hmm, I can't see the submission on https://news.ycombinator.com/show yet. Could be a sign most upvotes were not counted or the flagged-comment (brand new account who immediately praise how great something is) to upvote ratio is too high now. Best option is to submit again in a couple of hours, same title and text. Try first comment "author/maintainer/creator/team here, happy to answer questions" or a variation, that often works.
crypto + NSFW generative AI = ????

that's not going to lead to a whole lot of black market images.
This post doesn't give reasons to doubt that building a new state of the art browser is basically impossible now. It might well be possible to build a new browser that kind of works on many popular websites, and that would be surprising enough. But the amount of work needed to build something comparative to the rendering engines of Chrome, Firefox, or Safari, something really usable, would probably take decades rather than years. If it is possible to catch up at all. (I remember once seeing a graph which compared software projects by lines of code, and browsers were only topped by a few things like major operating systems.)
Cohesive AI
Experience productivity boost with Cohesive, where the power of human creativity meets the brilliance of AI. Seamlessly create, refine, edit, and publish your work with ease.
From Aaron’s post:

> [T]he question is extremely open-ended. The answer could be a book, a movie, a relationship, a class, a job, a hobby, etc.

Notice how “job” is in there. You can still give a non personal answer if you wish.
> Corporations will act in their own self-interests just like everyone else.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
If the current approach does not change, we'll never ever see that day.
What an interestingly written text. Feels like New Yorker has something special just like nautil.us sometimes and some others. Rare articulate ponderings of and around important topics. Makes me think and also makes for an interesting reading. A journey.
I'm not sure enough people believe that proprietary software is immoral to make the FSF relevant anymore. Rather the Open Source philosophy won out.
Seems we're at the "supplier proliferation" step in the hype cycle.
Next up: activity beyond early adopters -> negative press begins -> supplier consolidation and failures.
I don't believe this works the way you think. Within the same chat session with GPT3 you can ask it to explain addition, then ask it to do addition, and the explanation will be perfectly accurate but the sums it does will be complete rubbish. It's not enough to remind it.

The article og_kalu posted above goes into detail as to what they had to do to teach an LLM how to reason algorithmically in a specific problem domain and it was incredibly hard; much, much more convoluted and involved than just reminding it of the rules. Only an LLM that has gone through this intensive multi-step highly domain specific training regime has a hope of getting good results and then only in that specific problem domain. with a human you teach a reasoning ability and get them to apply it in different domains, with LLMs that doesn't work.

Take this comment in the article "However, despite significant progress, these models still struggle with out-of distribution (OOD) generalization on reasoning tasks". Where humans naturally generalise reasoning techniques from one problem area to another, LLMs flat out don't. If you teach it some reasoning techniques when teaching doing sums, you have to start again from scratch when teaching it how to apply even the same reasoning techniques to any other problem domain, every single time. You can't remind them they learned this or that when learning to do sums and to use it again in this context, as you would with a human, at the moment that flat out doesn't work.

The reason it doesn't work is precisely due to the limitations imposed by token stream prediction. The different tasks involving reasoning are different token stream domains, and techniques the LLM uses to optimise for one token stream domain currently only seem to apply to that token stream domain. If you don't take that into account you will make fundamental errors in reasoning about the capabilities of the system.

So what we need to do is come up with architectures and training techniques to somehow enable them to generalise these reasoning capabilities.
Yeah I've been thinking about that a lot within the context of self-driving cars. What if we could take the rare but significant examples of model confusion, and then... explain to the model what it did wrong just as we would to a human. If it could then incorporate that information into future weights, that would be game changer in a LOT of fields where it's been hard to bridge the gap.
Nothing you'll do will work because everybody will do it. I don't think the market will bear millions of carpenters and plumbers rushing in.

My guess is software and everything else will just explode. For now cheap bosses can use GPT, but again everybody is doing that so you will not be competitive in the long run. At some point, every little shop will produce feature-length movies, have amazon-level webshops and your phone will need 512GB of RAM to boot up its written-in-LLM OS. We will need armies of creatives to direct all this bs.
Microsoft alone spends 20B minimum per year to R&D and OpenAI is going to get lions share from now on so 5 billion for 4 years is peanuts for the current AI market. Maybe too little too late?
If sentryio has a self hosted version and logflare has one too, why would I pick logflare? Are there any differences? I tried sentryio and it's really convenient, at least the hosted version.
The funniest part is that this Devault's argument is the exact opposite of "inclusion and representation".

Make arguments for RMS's removal based on his actions, but wanting him gone because of his gender, skin colour and/or age is just as exclusionary as Ku Klux Klan is.

It's just wrong.
I don't disagree with allowing installing arbitrary OSes, but it seems to me like this fight is already lost because phones (much more important than laptops nowadays) don't even have root.
Miniature Armour
Thanks for sharing this information.
If you don't mind,what about marketing your business?