skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They're probably talking about the TOS a user would've had to agree to when using their services. It's actually a lot more permissive then I expected

> Restrictions. You may not (i) use the Services in a way that infringes, misappropriates or violates any person’s rights; (ii) reverse assemble, reverse compile, decompile, translate or otherwise attempt to discover the source code or underlying components of models, algorithms, and systems of the Services (except to the extent such restrictions are contrary to applicable law); (iii) use output from the Services to develop models that compete with OpenAI;
that’s not what I wrote or implied. the article makes a clear distinction about other game studios and there is a clear reason other game studios act the way they do.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsmTUwHXUAAIQIB?format=jpg&name=...
Hmm, Money in SJIM about 5x that of LJIM.

https://www.crameretfs.com/sjim
https://www.crameretfs.com/ljim
> Nutritional yeast is tasty and naturally has b12, and most cereals/grains are fortified with it.

Taurine, Carnosine, Creatine, and B12 don't exist in significant quantities outside of meat. Nutritional yeast is often supplemented with B12 but the bioavailability of it compared to animal protein is low. You will need to take an actual supplement to get the right amount of B12 your body needs to function optimally.

You'll also probably need to supplement calcium, iron (with kelp-based supplement), omega-3 fatty acids (with algae-based supplement), and Vitamin D because even though many of these are found in plants and even relatively high amounts, their bioavailability is low. Spinach is rich in iron but very little of it can actually be processed by the body.

> This just isn't true, you can get all amino acids from plant-based sources like soybeans, lentils, and peanuts.

The amino acid profile in plant sources do not mirror the needs of human beings. In order to achieve a complete amino acid profile you will need a combination of many protein sources like pea, hemp, soy, brown rice, and quinoa. In order to actually consume it and get what you need you'll likely need to make a mixture of protein powders because you won't consume the right amount just eating plant foods.
In relinquishing our right to violence, we demand both influence over its use and transparent practices. Injustice arises when this exchange fails to be equitable, particularly when the government monopolizes violence without being held accountable to its citizens or offering anything of value in return.

Of course, numerous ethical concerns surround the monopolization of violence, but for I want to focus on on the negotiation of rights for societal benefits.

Similarly, we often surrender our privacy with the promise of protection from criminal threats. However, this bargain becomes unjust and imbalanced when we look at it critically. The map is not the territory as the saying goes, and what are sold as effective measures against crime (on "the map") don't seem like they would be in reality ("the territory"). We risk relinquishing our privacy for nothing of value in return.

This, at least, is my perspective on the matter.
LED bulbs usually use the most basic of power supplies, the capacitive dropper[0], the downside is that they tend to die easily.

Also, the LED diodes themselves will often be multiple in series (a string), or series-parallel (several strings in parallel) depending on the bulb, that end up needing more than just 2V, anywhere from 12V to 60V or so per string of diodes.

Sometimes the high power diodes being used are themselves a series chain of diodes on a singular piece of silicon encased in a blob of phosphor, so that the diode package ends up needing 12V or so. These are often referred to as 'COB' diodes.

(apologies for the RAS syndrome, but saying 'LE diodes' or just 'LED' to refer to the individual light elements when talking about 'LED bulbs' is too confusing otherwise)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitive_power_supply
This is a clever argument
So hopefully we play our cards right, by extracting benefits from AI that overcompensate for the negative impacts like mass unemployment and democratization of intellectual property. If the spoils are distributed in such a way that people's standard of living is maintained or improved, people have more liesure time, which the social sciences have shown will not mean people will just stop working--they'll work less, but with higher productivity on things promising a greater benefit to family, community, and society.

Forgive me if I'm misreading, but I'm having trouble with your line of reasoning. Your first reply to me scarequoting "captive" strongly implies an argument that the imperative to seek employment for survival is not a limiting factor on how people spend their time, and therefore that my suggestion that giving people more choice over how they apply their talents could be a good thing is irrelevant; but your child reply implies a concern that AI taking over some human labor will cause mass unemployment and explicitly states choice is declining.

I'm advocating that, since the genie is out of the bottle, AI could be used to free people from toil, just as other labor innovations like machinery and the 40-hour work week have done. Why the dismissive snark? In the abstract, do we not want the same thing?
we're talking about an llm dude

how am i supposed to have a conversation about someone who is gassing up "not perfect [arithmetic]" (something a wrist watch from the 80's can do) and won't even believe what the creators of said machine say about how it works
>> The problem is that humans aren't machine learning algorithms.

Agreed, and I'd also add that unfortunately many, if not all, in-person language courses also focus on the babbler stage. My personal preference would be to learn all of the grammar rules with some common vocabulary first.
> Without feeling and free will, there is no AI.

That's quite a leap to that conclusion, friend.
The loophole is not telling anyone. People love to make a big deal out of location, but if you can have a remote job and keep the hours they're looking for, just do it, don't tell immigration in the counties you enter, and don't tell your company, and there will be no issue. Otherwise you risk wasting a bunch of time on paperwork for no reason just to satisfy some bureaucrats need to be involved.
The idea the government used to be less authoritarian is fundamentally wrong. Here's a few samples

Founding to 1920: women can't vote

1919 to 1933 - adults can't decide to drink alcohol

1942 to 1945 - Industry lobby group wins executive action to imprison competitors in concentration camps

1964 - Local law enforcement murder civil rights activists.

2023 - Local law enforcement reminisce about how it's harder to murder journalists, sue journalist who reveals their death threats against his family
That’s what I think too, but FWIW, geocrasher is quoting the “see also” section of the article. It doesn’t have a citation and I can’t find any other references to it, though.
I almost always prefer the old school way of prompting, keywords and commands only. Has been working well for fine-tuning Google search results for the last 20 years. Why do I have to Tak with computers with natural languages suddenly?
Then you may be similarly surprised that you're a victim of hindsite bias, and not a super-insightful technorati.
> That’s rich coming from the guy who couldn’t even answer a basic yes/no question by Congress, “Is ethereum a commodity?”

Commodities aren't Gensler's job. It would be like someone asking him about the tax code. It's fair for him to say "I don't know." What he knows are securities.
Logicomix [1]. It's a nice comic book focusing on the formalisation of mathematics, starting at the end of the 19th century. This was a foundational quest to solve paradoxes such as the Russel paradox [2]. This also rised questions such as "can everything be proved"?

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

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox
> That said, I don't believe that statistically significant results can be found that will overturn my own instincts and judgement on any specific project to which I am dedicated. The reason for this is threefold: 1) the universe of software and goals we pursue with is astronomically large 2) competence in software engineering depends on the combination of personal aptitudes and mindsets combined with years of practice and 3) measuring outcomes in software engineering across diverse projects is all but impossible. In other words, you can't equate tools, you can't equate projects, and most of all you can't equate people.

This was pretty much the word-by-word argument against using statistical approaches to price insurance of shipments over the sea back in the 1700s. Yet we all know how insurance premiums are calculates today, and there's a reason for it.
I love “bullshit engineer” as a job description for politician.
For the low price of $42,000 per month, you can access the Twitter API
Just like it is with grading a student’s English class essay, for example.
For megavolts just rub some cats fur over an ebony rod.

Megavolts.

Aka static electricity.
That is not something any of my comments says. On the contrary, I identified it as "incredibly stupid".
> the rook from the original game was a mythical bird of prey called Rukh/Roc. The chess piece was a bird.

That doesn't seem to be the mainstream explanation: the original piece in the game would be a chariot -thought the connection with the name rukh is not clear- and the alternative bird representation would have been an Arab innovation.

----

OF RUKHS AND ROOKS, CAMELS AND CASTLES

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Remke-Kruk/publication/...
> free people up for more valuable pursuits

It won't roll like that. AI will empower people to be more productive but won't free people up because it makes mistakes, can't help itself, and cannot function autonomously. There is no LLM application that is safe for autonomous usage today. How can we go from 0 to 1? I don't see a path. Self driving cars still can't reach L5 to completely remove the need for driver.

But maybe this is a blessing in disguise. It will make AI more like a new ability of humans than of the companies. Companies need people to unlock AI efficiencies. And AI tends to become open sourced so everyone has access to the same. AI is not a moat for companies and human ability to hand-held it is tied to individuals. That would make the transition easier. Solving that last 1% accuracy might encounter exponential friction and last for a while.
An intressting thing with that, is that the side of the brain that controls speech might be completly accurate. It could have said showel cause that side of the brain thoght of its neighbors shovel. The only thing that it would be missing would be that it was influenced to think of that shovel event by input given to the other brain half.
Zoom uses it quite extensively, Figma is built in it.
Калтонай-малтонай, ширин-вырин-мордехай.
Beyond mocking someone who was clearly wrong, is there something to be learned? How can we avoid this in our
own current thinking about what may succeed or not?

Apple is about to launch another product that people are deeply sceptical of -
their VR glasses. Very very few people I know seem to believe this is going to work and become a mass market product in the end (even people inside Apple,
apparently).

Are they wrong? are they right?

What about the thinking distinguishes it from the incorrect predictions of failure
for the iPhone?
Unfortunately real life doesn't work the way you describe. People won't be "free" to enjoy more "leisure" time, by "democratizing" the results of their work. Instead, all of this stolen data, will be used to "free" them from jobs and to consolidate corporate control. Say bye to microbusinesses, to freelancers, to indie developers. You know, those people that have been truly free. Similarly, office workers will be "free" to lose the jobs that they chose to perform, and will have nowhere else to go but unemployment lines. All thanks to "democratizing" ip by stealing data.
There is a "Système D" DIY magazine here in France, since 1924. I don't know if it is predated by the term or originated it. I remember that there is a big pile of old issues in my grandfather attic.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how language works. Determining the etymology of a name is not possible in any language.

What combination of words was "Xerox" derived from? Does that affect the meaning of "Xerox"?

How about "Samuel"?

"Rachel"?

"Ted"?
This argument is disingenuous. Hyperparameter optimization is not in the same category as prompt engineering, like at all.

Also no one claims like half of the things the article claims people clain.
>To conclude: one must have different standards for developing systems than for testing, deploying, or using systems. Or: testing on your training data is a common way to cheat, but so is training on your test data.

Isn't this already a solved problem? Every reasonable paper on ML separates their test data from their validation data already.
I ran into the same issue. Opening the video link in Chrome incognito works. Going directly to the video link after visiting the article (with blocked embedded video) causes a connection refused error to YouTube.

I haven't seen this with YouTube before. It must have to do with the embed settings being disabled for the video and a cookie getting set. If the cookie is present, the connection to the server is refused.
> The argument I always hear against this point is that you can simply continue to subdivide the currency infinitely. We just get into smaller and smaller fractions of "satoshi's" or whatever the base unit may be.

You can subdivide Bitcoin to a very tiny fraction indeed, and in that sense, the supply is quasi infinite.

However, if you own _one_ Bitcoin, you own exactly 1/21millionth of the entire supply of the stuff there will ever be, and that will never change for as long as you hold on to it. In that sense, the supply is absolutely finite.

A close analogy is gold: if you assume for a second that there is a finite amount of gold on the planet (not an unreasonable assumption), then: you could cut up a gold coin down to its individual atoms, and that would be a whole effing lot of them (not practical, obviously, which is why gold didn't last as a currency. OTOH, Bitcoin, being digital doesn't have that problem).

And if you own one ounce of gold, you own a never-changing fraction of the supply.

So: Gold supply, according to definition one (divisibility) is infinite.

But according to definition two (they don't make any more of the stuff), it's finite.

I am of the opinion that the second definition is the one that matters when it comes to understanding the properties of Bitcoin as a financial instrument.
Deterministic processes are great at dealing with objective data, but less great at dealing with free-form text produced by humans.

Each tool should be used for the right job. Until now, we had only cheap plastic tools for language processing. Suddenly, we have a turbo power tool that can parse through pages of English like a hot knife through butter.

We’re all excited by the shiny new tool in the workshop, and we’re putting everything through it just to see what it can do. Eventually the exuberance will subside and we’ll put it to work where it is the most applicable.

That doesn’t mean we’ll abandon other tools and methods.
They're not wrong though, systemd has a whole boatload of related and ancillary tools beyond just its pid 1 process daemon. Stuff like journalctl, systemctl, machinectl, etc.
Japanese homes are disposable like trailers in the USA. They are often demolished and fully replaced after 20 years or changing hands. So yes, investing in a disposable thing would yield poor results.
password sharing has been removed from the mentioned webpage of IPO [0]

[0]https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/meta-counterfeit-...
It's a good point, I'd consider it (overfitting) a pitfall or common mistake in ML rather than the only mode. I'd agree that most ML models and almost all state-of-the-art are over-fit to the point of being useless, but that's not an inevitability.
I find it funny someone submitted an HN account just created. Seems like a good way to possibly get your main in trouble, assuming the moderation tooling links your main and newly created throwaway.
AlphaZero in fact improves based on its own output, but I agree it is a special case and probably not generalizable.
I agree that the fact it only asks you to draw the character once isn’t great. At the same time, I do wonder how much drawing with your finger is going to translate into remembering how to do the same thing when you’re holding a pen (although I suppose you could do the same thing using a pen if you were on iPad or an Android device).

As for the learning notes, they are more thorough on French and Spanish and they could definitely be better. I believe the other languages are still using the original crowdsourced content and that is a major limitation to the app that I have a tendency to forget about (I’m leaning Spanish). I wouldn’t recommend the app for more than the very basics if you’re learning something other than French, Spanish or German.

My hunch from reading the blog posts they put out is that they’re using Spanish and French to try things out and perfect the course structure and content and once they’ve got something locked in they will then replicate that across the other less popular languages. They’ve moved the French and Spanish courses so that they’re now in line with the official EU educational framework guidelines and I reckon their long term strategy will be to offer an official certification on completing a course which holds equal value to one acquired a traditional college or university. They’ve already taken steps in this direction in that non English speakers can take the Duolingo English test and use it as an official qualification to study at English language universities.
I think the post just assumes context that most people don't have.
The article provides abbreviated definitions that might be less confusing to follow than the comprehensive Wikipedia page. But, I agree that calling them out a bit more clearly in the article would have been helpful.
I think you make a valid point. A lot of people today (mostly influencers) increase their engagement through something colloquially known as “humblebragging”. This is bottom of the barrel content that doesn’t inform the reader but entertains them. It’s also been known in the past as yellow journalism.

When the NYT does it I agree that’s a new low. I don’t expect humblebragging from them.
EVs Fall Short of EPA Estimates
From https://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ :

> Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d. And since systemd manages the system, it's called systemd.

> Système D is not an acceptable spelling and something completely different (though kinda fitting).

Wikipedia says that it somehow relates to Systeme D, but they don't have any good references for it.
You can as long as the resulting model does not compete with OpenAI.
Do you not expect a trend of token prices decreasing over time? There will be business using a less cutting edge model and the difference of how many words a prompt is won't be a big contributing factor to the total spend of the business.
First off, props for admitting that LN could get 10 million users on board in 11 days, even with a conservative 10 tx/s estimate. If you look into channel factories, this could scale the potential users to 100 million users in less time than ChatGPT took, which is the most viral product of the past few decades. Is that not good enough for you?

About the whole routing problem and "big hubs" thing – remember, the LN is all about being decentralized. As more users and businesses join in, routing gets better and better, so you won't have to rely on any single big player. Plus, with the LN's atomic multipath payments (AMP), payments can take different paths, making it even easier to send Satoshis around the world. You can run your own node with a 10 year old Thinkpad you can buy on Ebay for $100.

Also anyone with Cash App can send Bitcoin over LN, today. I don't think you would call everyone with that app a nerd, would you? There are farmers, grandmothers and people in the developing world using Bitcoin to survive today, those aren't nerds to me.

Btw it's pretty funny calling other people nerds when you lurk on HN. If you haven't noticed, nerds have been running the world for a while now.
Having experienced a miscarriage personally, I can tell you it is not the same as losing a child. On the other hand, being a parent, I firmly believe that if my child needed to terminate a pregnancy, it is nobody’s business. If your child needed to get it done, would you seek my permission? The way I see it, you lack empathy for women’s issues
What’s worse: My parrot will happily attack the screen when I’m talking on FaceTime and he deems it’s been long enough or doesn’t like the human on the other end.

For example he lets me talk to my sister but attacks my mom’s video immediately.
Yeah, it's not that I think we'll get all the way there, it's a utopia. My expectation is that within 30 years we reduce the work week by a day or two for most people, compensate for our education system's decline, and avoid energy and food crises, and nothing else fundamentally changes
That in no way prevents overfitting though hyperparameter optimization / graduate student descent. All the common benchmarks, by definition of being a common benchmark, are susceptible to overfitting
Unless people are willing to forge "unpublished manuscripts" to gain priority. Need to be careful with that stuff - even when those are legit, the fact that they were not published immensely increases the complexity of priority. Imagine some goat herder invented binary in 4000 BC without telling anybody.
git config --global rebase.autoSquash true
git commit --squash|--fixup <commit>
git rebase -i origin/master # or whatever your remote/branch is

https://git-scm.com/docs/git-commit#Documentation/git-commit...

Works wonders, but occasionally you screw up. To get out of screwup, use `git reflog` and `git reset --hard`.
A few libs come up for “human” format date parsing. The Python “dateparser” below is definitely well known.

https://dateparser.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

https://sugarjs.com/dates/#/Parsing

https://github.com/wanasit/chrono
I can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time: on one hand, yes, there's certainly a lot of Kool-Aid being drank by the AI folks. Even on HN, I constantly argue with people that genuinely think LLMs are some kind of magical black box that contain "knowledge" or "intelligence" or "meaning" when in reality, it's just a very fancy Markov chain. And on the other hand, I think that language interfaces are probably the next big leap in how we interact with our computers, but more to the point of the article:

> To conclude: one must have different standards for developing systems than for testing, deploying, or using systems.

In my opinion, you unfortunately will never (and, in fact could never) have reliable development and testing standards when designing purely stochastic systems like, e.g., large language models. Intuitively, the fact that these are stochastic systems is why we need things like hyper-parameters, fiddling with seeds, and prompt engineering.
so you're taking classification advice from joseph stalin? Maybe reconsider whether thats applicable to the situation or not.
Men of mathematics, by Bell

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_of_Mathematics
It depends on the person. I’d point someone for whom flexibility and service is important towards nursing or firefighting, for example. Detail people towards accounting or banking. Tech people towards engineering.

It all depends - advice for these matters is more about listening. If you’re in a headspace where ChatGPT has you freaked out, pass on giving advice.