skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't speak Russian so I'm somewhat reluctant to quarrel with someone who does on this point, but the phenomenon of <ч> being used to write an affricate sound that starts with a dental stop is super-well documented in linguistics literature -- on the basis of extensive studies with, and often by, native Russian speakers.

That dental stop might or might not be exactly the same sound as any of those that are written with Russian <т> or English <t> (which, per Wikipedia, are themselves slightly different in place of articulation). English-speakers might be misled into thinking the <ч> is a familiar English sound if it's transcribed as [t͡ʃ]; Russian Wikipedia, for example, suggests it's actually [t̠̪͡ʲɕ̪] (different in three different respects from [t͡ʃ]!). But /t/ is also the closest we can probably get in English to what may be actually be, say, [t̪ʲ], even though it does have a slightly different place of articulation.

I think it would be fair to say, considering evidence from both English and Russian Wikipedias, that the Russian <ч> does start with a "t-like" sound from the English perspective, yet that sound is at least not precisely identical to that written with English <t>.
Childhood trauma bonded acquired taste, like enjoying Surströmming or raw oysters. Same goes for people fondly remembering original Playstation glitchfest.
100% of ML Models Degrade over More Time
I have high hopes in dataset engineering. Scaling the model is already reaching the limits of hardware and funding, the training corpus is almost all the text written on the internet (by some accounts just 10% of it, so maybe we got a couple more years left there).

So then what can we do? We turn to the quality of the data. Input examples can be enriched, facts can be checked for support. Based on existing corpus of text we can generate new training examples. Some of them, like code, can also contain execution data and tests.
There's adventure you fund yourself, and then there's adventure that taxpayers fund to the tune of several trillion dollars.
I'm not generally in favour of elite universities so don't deeply disagree with the sentiment, but is there actually a way to justify more money under the pattern you established in your comment?

I'm guessing your intention was to suggest that in the presence of a large surplus (Harvard's massive endowment etc) it is reasonable to assume this goes unspent because it can't be turned into worthwhile education or research. Is that about the sum of the argument?

Meanwhile, somewhere with high impact research but nearly zero in reserves would presumably be more deserving?
Blog After Death
“In a real life setting, underlying distribution is stationary about 9% of the time”.
Better than I would have expected, actually.
We’re on the zero downside, only upside technology curve to utopia ?
Linux kernel logic allowed Spectre attack on 'major cloud provider'
This is one of the best cat stories ever!

You may enjoy Three Little Kittens:

https://archive.org/details/ThreeLit1938
That's not how you show lower bounds.

The problem is function f that gets a list of words D and a word w of length n and returns a list of indices I where to split w such that each part is in D or "false".

Cleary, I has length at most n and the indices in it are also at most n.
Also, you need to look at every word in D.
Thus, the trivial lower bound of the complexity for an algorithm that computes f is O(n+|D|).

To prove a tighter lower bound, you would need to show that every algorithm that does it in in linear time has a bug - you need to find this "pathological" case for every imaginable algorithm!

Afaik it is still unknown of SAT has a quadratic lower bound! https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/17789/is-there-...
Dan Abramov
The wet codebase
https://youtu.be/17KCHwOwgms
This is precisely why policies such as carbon credits are required, otherwise doing things the "dirty" way is too cheap for the "clean" way to be competitive.

Socialise losses, privatise profits is unfortunately the current norm.
Yesterday it was taking 10+ seconds to load each dataset. Occams razor suggests missing caches in such a case (since the data doesn't change with any meaningful frequency).
No thanks not interested in that tinfoil nonsense. Cows poop, poop is collected by a “honey badger” machine, clogged up … methane.

18,000 dairy cows in cages is economy of scale gone mad. If only cow tears could mix with the milk they sell.
I mostly watch YouTube on my phone and ads are reasonable. Usually 2 short ones at the start then nothing else.
How about this: I've configured Firefox with DNT and frequently, when I land on a site that blocks my view with a modal cookie popup, I just push the back button and try another link. While my browsing behaviour might be less typical than just pressing "OK", I'm sure it's a statistic they are keeping an eye on.

So while the dark pattern approach has merits to sites that want to track you, they must also be aware this is a balance. And a percentage of users will generally prefer to go to sites that leave them alone. That is: the cookie dialogue never widens the funnel.
One of the most "uselessness" useful activity I have experienced is simply watching nature i.e. shape of trees, design of leaves and colour of flowers, behaviour of non-human animals both adult and kids, and birds. It gives the same feeling as in Yoga meditation. Yoga meditation is also a form of useful "uselessness".
> We don't need more tech companies. We don't need more hedge funds.

What we absolutely don’t need, is autocrats dictating what society needs.

Luckily we already have this cool innovation called a market economy. It’s not perfectly efficient (especially in the short term), but pretty damn efficient.

By throwing off price signals, the market allows us to allocate efforts to things society wants more of. Unfortunately, contrary to the wishes of the King, it turns out society wants more tech companies.

But sometimes we do indeed over-allocate resources to tech companies! Luckily we have the hedge funds incentivized to make profit by arbitraging those prices back to reality (As we’ve just witnessed in tech). I guess we also need more hedge funds.
Travel time ~= 750 * distance ^ 0.6
Very interesting! Thank you for the insight.
Tomlinson was not harassed for a hot take, he was trolled because he extremely overreacts to things online in a funny way that attracts trolls. It's obviously not justifiable to take this off of the internet, but I have a hard time taking somebody who tried to sue and ruin the lives of sixty random internet strangers for the crime of making fun of him online (without even contacting him!) as a pure victim who did nothing to provoke people.
This is why I suggested that content generated as AI should be indicated as such with HTML tags, META at the high-level. But perhaps an property/value pair is better, such as aiGenerated=true.

But as the use of AI generated content proliferates, this is unlikely to happen. We might one day assume that most content generated after a certain year is AI generated.

Still, if people don't edit and refine that content enough, it will be considered junk and recommendation algorithms should take care of the rest, so that when GPT-10 crawls the web, it will leave out that junk.
Let's not erase the work of Stonebraker et al whose efforts through the 70s were a lot closer to Codd's relational algebra than SQL. Ingres's query language, Quel, springs to mind: being directly based on the relational calculus it was far more readily composable than SQL (which might be charitably described as "borrowing ideas from the relational model") was or is.

As with the videotape format war, the eventual industry standard was decided commercially: Oracle was by far the most aggressive, and promoted SQL.
Wikipedia says this Mars trip would require a 200MW power source.

That alone sounds way more impressive and difficult than any engine could be on its own.

It’s like making an electric golf cart break the sound barrier. Yeah you did something amazing but maybe that mini nuclear reactor you invented along the way is a bigger deal.
Google Pay mistakenly handed cash credits to accounts
>
I wouldn't say this is an uncommon philosophy. I for one am very aware that Firefox is, for the most part, an objectively worse browser than Chrome;

Maybe it is objectively inferior to chrome, but not enought to make me switch.

IOW, I'm not missing anything by staying with FF because all the sites I use work with FF.

In fact, a site that only works on one browser is probably not a site that anyone goes to anyway, objective metrics be damned.
Didn't current LLMs already gas light their users over the current year? These models don't just degrade, they are already outdated and wrong the moment they get deployed.
> It just doesn't know about the war in Ukraine.

Neither does most of Russia for that matter.
> I mostly just find them to be incredibly noisy compared to a well-written function. I really like Ocaml where it's statically typed without needing to actually specify them.

Yeah; I haven't worked with ocaml but I've done some haskell (where you think about types so much more). Personally I don't mind rust / typescript's approach of needing types at the function boundary (function input & output types must be specified) while doing inference wherever possible inside each method. As an example, here's a very complex function in a project I'm working on chosen vaguely randomly[1]. The function diffs a run-length encoded DAG using a breadth-first search.

Visually scanning for types, there's a couple at the top of the function - both in the function definition and the BinaryHeap:

let mut queue: BinaryHeap<(LV, DiffFlag)> = BinaryHeap::new();

But I think thats about it. Maybe there's more manually specified types in "normal" rust because most functions are smaller than that. But, it doesn't feel so bad. In this case I could probably even remove the explicit type annotation for that queue definition if I wanted to, but it makes the compiler's errors better leaving it in.

[1] https://github.com/josephg/diamond-types/blob/66025b99dbe390...
I see, it's not easy to just call them "server units." Good to get input from those who actually use them.
We use it to select any value from an aggregated list of values which we know are identical. It requires fewer operations than e.g. max.
Nice! These "books-like" lists feel and resonate better with me. From the first list I've read Notes from a Small Island, Into the Wild, and Wild, and now some of the others on the list that I don't know, like Llama Drama, look promising. I think you're on the right track.

I like the idea of pulling as many threads out of a book to drill into why you might like something. Especially if those threads are not necessarily related to each other as that should widen the recommendation pool.

I still think there is something worth doing with author links as well. I played around with gnooks.com after someone else posted a link and within a few minutes found authors I had never heard of that had books that looked interesting.
I'm happy someone did this. People are making rumblings in traditional simulation modeling circles that ML models will replace traditional forward modelling...because I'm assuming a PM who hasn't touched code in a decade was impressed that chatGPT can write their emails for them.

I feel like it was never the case that dumb fitting could replace a first principles model you already have in hand, and I always had the concern that extrapolation with these models is just a prone to error as it is when your model is linear least squares for a scatterplot, you cannot fit to data that just isn't in your initial dataset! Sure you can initially but at some point your model breaks down as any model does, a priori, statistical, or whatever.

I could have always told you that (and I told my peers that for yeara) because the fact is intuitively obvious but it's great someone is actually publishing about it now. Now we just need similar papers for language models, which we sort of already experience when you ask chatGPT about 2023 events but somehow still cannot pierce the minds of the hypemen.
> Append-only databases are acceptable for financial ledgers, contracts, and things we want to be persistent and immutable.

Neither financial ledgers nor contracts are things we should want to be persistent and immutable - as the crypto and smart contract folks have repreatedly demonstrated
The war in Ukraine started in 2014.
The title should really contain (no text). I figured there must be something more as "Tesla spends $2 million" is hardly newsworthy, but nope.
I believe it's all through relays, there's no peer discovery or even inter-relay meshing. So that could very well could happen. Currently it's just each clients multi-posting to dozen relays and receiving dozen duplicates.

What I believe that "censorship resistance" actually means in un-cryptocurrencified talk is, it lets relay operators filter out locally illegal but not globally unethical contents(e.g. political speeches, pornography, certain URLs and strings) without banning users and/or fragmenting the network. And that is an improvement over Mastodon/ActivityPub architecture.

But boy those crypto guys knows how to hype it up...
Local Command is a bit about reversing the usual direction of things on the internet - it allows the website to trigger a command that will execute in the visitor's device. My main use case is extending dashboards with the ability to run (dynamically generated) commands on my device. It can be used to run anything else though, so `cmd://npx http-server` can start a local http server, and `cmd://reboot` could reboot your device (if you approve the command and if your user has access to it).
Information is not just the public internet. Every text message, school paper, phone call, and recording of an individual could be future input. Then expand that to photos and videos. Then consume all of YouTube.

Each of these sources is still rapidly growing. We are far from drying up the well of the human experience.
Anyone who hasn't seen "For All Mankind" should check it out. It depicts a future that might have transpired if the Russians had beaten the USA to the moon.
It strongly suggest that it is a reference to the editor war. Very probable that Stallman hitting on students never happened and it was indeed a vehicle of humor. In any case, if it did happen, there need to be primary sources, not some bad faith rumors.
I think the "looking back on your life" happens in advance as well.

My father has stage 4 cancer, and while he is undergoing treatment and we have hope, he is now confronted with the possibility of death. I've found him recounting stories of his childhood and younger days a lot more. I've never asked him about his dreams, but clearly the possibility of death has changed something fundamental where he's looking back a lot more and thinking about his parents / grandparents and others who've passed on.
I don't even know where to start with C++ stdlib string problems, but being mutable and doing a unique heap allocation (above a certain length - a behaviour which however isn't even standardized) are definitely at the top of the list.

std::string_view would have been a good thing if it hadn't added another memory corruption foot gun.

A universal string type is one of those things where you can either have convenience or performance, but never both.
Overfit in training and then complain that it doesn't generalize well in production, a true classic.
One, I think overlooked issue with AI as ML, is how radically it affords the done-and-finished past over a creative future.

When faced with a blank page some percentage of people will not copy a known solution, they'll draw on their experiences and eg., write a book about them.

For example, I could write a book about software development without research only inventorying my opinions, arguing for them, illustrating them, and so on.

If I were to start with ChatGPT I would, necessarily, only say what has been said.

There are so many dangers with the Eliza-effect, and this is one of them. I think the narrative on how these systems work needs more strongly wrestled from their salesmen -- and the real downsides exposed.

A client of mine seemed quite insistent that ChatGPT was "creative". I hope in a few years that opinion will be rare, as everyone ends up writing the same article over-and-over.

And likewise, in development, using earlier versions of libraries with the most "stackoverflow training data"; using dying languages with the most github repos; and so on.

In other words: what we have written the most about is not what we now need to write the most about. And the former is the training data for modern AI.

It is not in the world with us, with our concerns: it is a statistical average over "done and dead" cases.
Use Synvert to automatically upgrade rails 4.2 to 5.0 (Part 3)
> I think the European Commission did indicate that the UK was an Adequate Country?

Every so often I see something like this:

https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/perspectives-events/publicatio...

I suspect the UK is planning a number of changes that may change this, so even though I'm British, for the avoidance of doubt I prefer companies actually hosted in the EU and that will agree to conduct business in Europe (and thus under EU courts, rather than GB ones).

> 3. On the Data Protection Officer, I think one is only needed if sensitive data on a large scale is processed.

You are totally incorrect about that.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...
Thanks! it actually does that, depending on your configuration. In the video I'm executing `echo`, and `echo` is listed as a preapproved command (in _my_ config.toml). But you can just have an empty preapproved array, and all commands will require approval before running.
I don’t disagree that the boom/bust cycle could be created by centralization, but I also don’t care I suppose. I mean, there’s no perfect solution out there so a boom/bust is a reasonably mild price.

A large reason why crypto, at least in the current implementations, can provide decentralization is by removing discretion from any authority and making transactions permanent. That’s in contrast to our current money system, because it’s merely numbers that ultimately can be manipulated by central authorities and accessible by law enforcement, that ultimately means that transactions are not truly permanent and that allows us to repair mistakes after the fact, a feature not really afforded by crypto. It’s a very helpful feature.

I also consider a consistent amount of inflation an important feature of any successful economy. Without inflation, I would be incentivized to hold my money whenever I expect deflation, which is terrible because it’s basically me hoarding value from society.

Runaway inflation is absolutely disastrous and I don’t see how crypto could have been considered a hedge against it if its entire value is backed purely by speculative demand. Contrast that to the USD or other currency where that is backed by the full faith and credit of a government. Obviously that is meaningless of we’re talking about, say, Argentina but the US has successfully been the same, largely dependable, and boring government for 245 years and through earning a reputation with time that the USD can be treated as a reserve currency.
Yeah, I think you summarized it well.

The fact they kinda work for the first few years are mostly just because in real world data don't/can't change that fast.

(Disclaimer: I only did ML work in academics, so take it with a grain of salt.)
Understanding tracing's macros by rebuilding them from scratch
> the design of fsync is not improvable in any meaningful way

I think fsync should be removed entirely. A completion based API, or simply write barriers like macos does would both be more ergonomic for developers and result in faster software (since you wouldn't need to block your thread waiting for all outstanding writes to be confirmed).
This kind of stuff is likely done without changing model parameters and instead via filtering on the server and prompt engineering. One day is simply too short to train and evaluate the model on a new fine tuned task.
“Someone” wouldn’t. A bot would. Which was implied (albeit maybe not obvious) in my question.
We've gotta start somewhere.
In fact the more safeguards the dumber the model gets, as they published.

Which is very interesting. You already have a model that consumes nearly the entire internet with almost no standards or discernment, whereas a smart human is incredibly discerning with information (I’m sure you know what % of internet content that you read is actually high quality, and how even in the high quality parts it’s still incredibly tricky to get figure out good stuff - not to mention that half the good stuff is actually buried in low quality pools). But then you layer in political correctness and dramatically limit the usefulness.
It is ideal, and there are a lot of assumptions regarding having a sense of responsibility. The trouble becomes when said sense does not exist and there is no recourse. You may very well want to do this:

> I want to be free to risk maiming myself in a vehicular accident, if I choose not to wear a helmet or a seatbelt.

But circumstances and the laws of physics will not always allow this:

> I don't want anyone else to pay for my mistakes.

Your vehicular accident may also end up maiming others. We do not exist in isolated mutually exclusive bubbles.
Classic argument to obscurantism.

I am not even a nihilist, but sure, after nihilism will destroy the lives of people for 2,000+ years, I will agree that it's more absurd than any religion. So far, the great religions of the world, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, needed thousands of years to realize that slavery is not really a great idea, and some are not yet convinced, but are pressured by those dissecting atheists to repress their true nature: oppress, admonish, control.

And to think you can't appreciate the beauty of the world just because you understand it, it's simply mind-boggling. Given how much I appreciate a computer program about which I know every nook and cranny because I developed it from an empty text file, I would venture to say: only if you fully understand something you can start to appreciate its beauty, start to be responsible for its future.

(Also, the expression "it is always nothing" is full of poetic vim given how atoms are mostly empty space and how the universe itself is mostly empty space—unfathomable voids sprinkled with galactic filaments [1])

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_filament#/media/File:Ne...