skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Clarifying a bad headline: it's not that tenure can't be offered (only) to new faculty. It's that henceforth nobody would be given tenure, even if they were already employees. Existing employees who are already tenured would be grandfathered.

And obviously only for public institutions.
Urashima Tarō
> I doubt they will have much problem finding people who are qualified to teach.

There's some ambiguity there.

In my experience, it's not necessarily hard to find someone whose credentials match job requirements wrt. teaching.
Finding a good teacher for an academic position can be quite hard though.
It taught me about the '2 bin system' in ISE. Basically kitchen logistics.
Nah, I don't play pinball. Not my thing.

However, I'm confused as to what point you think is getting proven? You've never really made a point. Unless it's I should listen to my elders without them justifying their point, which is funny.
It seems like a stretch to argue that the model isn't "a work based on" GPL code when that GPL code is an input to a deterministic algorithm from which the model is produced. So, my bet is on point #1.

The only ambiguity as far as I can tell is GPL covers "source code", "machine-readable Corresponding Source", and "object code form", and it's not explicit whether vector-fields count as any of those things. I doubt anyone would seriously argue that zipping and then un-zipping some GPL source code means you don't need to respect the original license. LLMs are different in that they're lossy compared to the zip format - does the nature of this lossiness invalidate the intent of the GPL's original language? I doubt it.
Texas has been rapid firing bills and actions that destroy local communities ability to self-govern as well as actions like these to try and spite what they view as the opposition. It's not going to end well for Texas (and is the reason why I left the state in the first place), but none of the ghouls in charge care because they'll be dead and / or get their payday before the problems come to roost. Much like Ken Paxton being a criminal that hasn't been put behind bars yet.
>>banks couldn’t lend as much money if they couldn’t create it

I feel there's shifty language and moving posts all the time.

Fractional reserve banking, to my limited understanding and your previous post, is lending some of the money that got deposited to. Where is this "creating money" (for non central banks) coming from? The phrase comes in and out of various conversations about banking system and it's the most slippery thing I've ever seen. Can you please elaborate on your understanding of how "banks create money" so we can have a discussion from same basic understanding and principles?

And it's not "banks couldn't lend as much money". If we didn't have fractional reserve banking, it feels banks could not lend AT ALL. This is not shades of gray, it feels like a basic principle. If a bank gets deposits, and can't do anything with deposits, and has to keep all the deposits in a vault, then it cannot do any loans. SImplified and all, but again, I want to see if our basic understanding is in line.

Also, what does "more democracy" concretely mean here, as nice as the phrase is? Aren't regulations by government the spear of the democracy, in practical sense?
I don't disagree, but it's still a bit puzzling beyond the just "political theater"/"retributional politics" approach:

* if they don't control the administration of the schools, this only serves to make it harder to hire anybody and easier to fire those who the administration doesn't agree with. Presumably conservatives. That's a net loss.

* if they do control the administration (or have a path to getting that control) then why not just hire people who think like they do and then enjoy the results of having those folks have tenure?
France has been mismanaging its fleet and signally for years that they want to move away from it, under-investing in it, etc. It's not the technology's fault.

Germany had some of the best managed plants in the world -- until they decided to shut them down, leading to more coal being burned and more dependence on other countries like Russia...
Interesting! I would have thought the field was too slight to have an effect in a case like this.
> voluntarily

unless they were doing so through an index fund like a significant majority of public capital

> understanding the structure

I would bet against every Facebook shareholder understanding at the time of investment; I would bet against even a majority thinking through the long-term ramifications

I understand your point — it’s a free market, nobody MAKES you buy stock — but I still don’t think it’s a reason to totally write off all the implications of a dual-class share structure for one of the biggest companies in the world.
Think of all the new disasters we'll get to experience with thousands of new nuclear power plants.
Nuggets of Wisdom: An Upper Limit on the Density of Chickens in the Universe
How often do your scenarios occur in real life?
Considering the number of near-poverty retail workers trying to pay off college debt, I think it's a good idea for the government to focus more on improving the quality of teaching, even if that comes at the cost of diminished research output. As it stands, the system saddles undergrads with tons of debt and not much to show for it, with socially disastrous results.

If a university wants to focus on research and doesn't care about undergrad teaching quality, let them drop the pretense of offering undergrad education at all.
I’m not the person you asked, but I did click through to check. At the top there’s a banner:

> To make Medium work, we log user data. By using Medium, you agree to our Privacy Policy, including cookie policy.

Seems they’re collecting user data without prior consent. I don’t think that’s even legal under the GDPR. Then I tried to start to read the story and couldn’t get one paragraph in:

> Read the rest of this story with a free account.

Both are more intrusive than your description (having to scroll past or close a button). One is potentially illegal. To each their own, and even so those may not bother you, but I understand how someone wouldn’t classify being forced to create an account or having data logged without recourse as minor annoyances. Certainly there are entitled complainers everywhere on the internet, but when we don’t know what someone is complaining about we shouldn’t assume that’s what someone is doing.

If I recall (may be mistaken), Medium is one of the domains that is (was?) automatically downranked on HN. Wouldn’t be surprised given the above.
In the real world of academia, CRT is a legal theory, not a biological one.
wpietri's response to me was in no way in anger, and his position in it is a perfectly legitimate one.
What's the saying, "if you remember the 80s, you weren't really there, man"? Or maybe it was the 60s. Anyway I, too, was there and despite trying desperately to forget the popular music of that era, I am quite confident that your recollection is wrong as it pertains to climate change. No, you only think you remember that Time magazine cover.
If you have solar on every domestic rooftop, that also doesn't actually let you address realistic power consumption patterns.

If we're talking about not-yet-extant technology that would allow solar to meet 24/7 demand at grid scale (like power storage that costs 1% as much as it does now), we might as well be talking about small-scale-fusion power, which is also resistant to being bombed and is generally better than solar+batteries for other reasons.
Where did you see that? It is incorrect, and dangerous disinformation to spread.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2022/12/424546/covid-19-vaccines-p...

https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02328-0

The reality is the vaccines do reduce transmission, just not as much as hoped. They are very effective at preventing infection, though that immunity wanes over time (just as immunity from infection does), but it does continue to help prevent serious illness from occurring.
A lot of retail investors will be unlikely to understand the nuance of the situation with Meta/Facebook. I don't blame them for investing and finding themselves with no voice. Institutional investors should know better than accept these ownership structures.
EV driver here, I live in an apartment complex with no charging stations installed. I and many other neighbors who drive EVs have to go to a charging station to charge.

On the way to the charging station, we probably pass a dozen gas stations.

I love my EV but let's not pretend it's always more convenient. If you have the opportunity to charge at home/work then yes it's great, but you're still reliant on public charging infrastructure if you decide to drive outside your normal range, and it takes a lot longer to charge than it takes to fill up a tank of gas, even considering the speed of Tesla Superchargers.
I agree, but if the unaligned AI can't do certain things, hopefully that contains it.

I was just thinking about North Korea, and how AI will enable statewide surveillance on a whole new level, but then the thought popped into my head that maybe if AI can't be stopped, it can't be stopped there either, and maybe it'll be benevolent, and in 30 years they will be freed. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Hard to know how this plays out.
He might be right but this guy seems unhinged. Couldn't get past the feeling that I was reading the thoughts of someone who is unstable.

There are better and more articulate ways to make this argument. You don't need to hyperlink to another article at every phrase to build a sound, fact-checked and consistent idea.
Finally. I thought it was just me getting older!
GPT-4 doesn't not perform at the same level on tasks as a ouija board. The whole point is that the level of deference is based on the level of performance it exhibits on whatever task you're having it do.
Fission plants are the only plants we have that are actually useable at this point in time, so of course there’s no reason to clarify. While we should definitely be putting more money into fusion research, if you’re worried about an environmental catastrophe you don’t have time to hope fusion actually works sometime in the next 50 years. You have to make plans based on what technology you know functions, not a moonshot.
"Only" is much too strong a word.

Geothermal and tidal are both as reliable as it gets.

A global HVDC grid with PV in the deserts will get you 100% renewable all by itself (probably not the cheapest and it would take a decade of current global metal production, but it would work and the resistance losses aren't bad enough to veto that idea).

Nuclear is safest though; or at least it was when most PV was rooftop, I don't know if the assumption used in the "deaths per TWh" chart are still valid.

Also:

> Maybe there's a massive drought upstream.

You're not wrong, but when that happens, lots of people will starve because the farms don't get the water that the hydro dam would normally store but in this hypothetical never received in the first place.
Lyft reportedly will sack a fourth of its staff in new layoff round
What if Europe is at war and some infrastructure gets destroyed. Don’t we need extra buffer capacity in case we’re experience what Ukraine had where power stations are actively targeted. Or undersea windmill park power cables are threatened to be cut.

Unlikely but there is someone with aspirations somewhere in Russia.
Right, I think what sometimes gets discounted with EVs is .. they are really easy to make a no-compromise vehicle compared to ICE. You can make an ICE fast, but you'll pay for that at the pump.

You can make an EV that is as fast as a Porsche but highway cruises like a Prius.
It's up to the idiot behind the wheel if they prefer to go fast or go far.

I remember in high school my "fast for a regular car" Pontiac did 0-60 in about 7sec.
This is achievable in a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt now. The most low price, vanilla and dated tech in EVs you can buy.

EV buyers will quibble about 0-60s in the 4 second range that aren't even sold as "performance". You used to have to buy a BMW of M designation to achieve these types of numbers in a 4 door sedan, and get the horrible MPG along with it.

The chunky hatchback crossover MachE GT Mustang EV is faster than an ICE Mustang Mach 1 which gets a mid-teens MPG..
For me, a lot of it was just developing a "gut feel" for UI/UX, which enables me to play with different designs and achieve something decent through iterative tweaking (just keep poking it until it feels right).

In my experience, this mostly entails internalizing sets of rules surrounding usage of whitespace, alignment, control grouping, functionality disclosure, and legibility among other things. For me this was older versions of the OS X Human Interface Guidelines[0] (newer versions are ok but not as high quality, with fewer details and compromises in clarity in favor of aesthetics).

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20110604173215/http://developer....
BallBlazer was excellent. I could never figure out what was the point of Jaggi Lines (actually Rescue at Fractalus, I believe).
I don't believe that rogue AIs are a threat for the next few years, but the claim that the likes of Geoffrey Hinton have done less thinking about the subject "than your average extremely high teenager" is absurd.
Relevant, for when you are a simpleton that believes in cherry-picked data.
If the human race finally ever takes such an outward interest in software, there's plenty of open source and decentralized ways they can use to link up.

Facebook is only a public utility as long as we allow it to be.

There's onus on them because of that — but also on us.

Time for us to stop ignoring our part.
Every privacy policy I've read seemed very sensible to me. Remember that privacy policies are legal documents and they quickly become cluttered with "legal-isms" and verbosity. Sometimes companies will move heaven and earth to make their privacy policy readable at a 3rd-grade level. And you know what? That costs them money and they pass those costs on to consumers, who overwhelmingly don't care about what's actually in the agreement (because they have a fairly good understanding of what kinds of things it says anyway).

Complaining about them seems to miss the bigger picture.
> realize how many semis on the road are entirely empty

I'm sure semis are empty after they've dropped off a load at a destination and there is no commensurate return load back to where they came from. But given that semis are very expensive to move down the road, both from a human resource cost and an energy cost, I suspect the market is far better at optimizing that than you or I or any central operator could do.

Everyone I know that owns F150s use their truck beds or use their hitch to tow. I'm not sure what the big controversy is, except there seems to be a class of urbanites that are convinced they know other people's own needs better than they do. "They don't need a truck," says the Brooklyn blogger, who then proceeds to snark about a foreign micro truck that's normally used to skirt through the narrow streets and alleyways of Tokyo. The blogger has prob never owned acreage, cut lumber, smoked a brisket on-location, or hauled a load, but they know for sure that these silly Americans don't need a truck that's any bigger than a Prius.
Frankly, opting into app tracking in the iOS FB app already greatly improves the experience, merely by improving the quality of ads.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/11/technology/bad-digital-ad...
>Microsoft does not seem to care about Copilot violating licenses

Humm, then perhaps should be trained LLMs with leaked Microsoft code. Protocols, controllers or any kind of stuff that could contribute advances for executing Windows things within Linux.

Microsoft would react establishing their own limits, whichever option they choose to take.
> Your friends don't like you

No u.
>Note also...

Note also that I wasn't building any argument around "3" years so your argument undermines nothing.

Note also that your belief that it will be longer than 3 years is you arguing for a greater disparity to point out.

Why are you arguing this way? Next you're going to note that I use the spelling gray instead of grey to describe the matter that seems to be lacking here.

what is your stake in this? why can't you tolerate questioning of science? Questioning science is at the heart of science.
The added weight and complexity would probably negate any benefit gained.
> How could a bank lend _any_ money if it must reserve 100% of deposits as cash?

That’s the thing though, they could lend out and pay interest on “savings” with the understanding that the money might not be immediately available for withdrawal as it’s “in the wild”.

And a different class of banking, we’ll call it “checking”, would allow for immediate withdrawal as it’s backed by 100% reserves and doesn’t pay interest because it doesn’t make any money for the bank. Heck, they might even charge for the convenience of warehousing your money and being able to transfer it to any other economic actor you chose through a novel intra-bank clearinghouse.

What this doesn’t allow is for banks to lend out 90% of every dollar they take in — even ones available for immediate withdrawal.

As we’ve seen from the recent SVB[0] catastrophe if people assume their money is immediately available and it isn’t there’s big problems because everyone rushes to get their money right now instead of maybe getting their money at a later date. Big problem…

This is all stuff they figured out centuries ago, the main problem is it cuts into the banks’ profits so it isn’t done this way.

[0] as an illustration of the problem, they didn’t seem to get in trouble due to fractional reserve lending but from the liquidity of their assets.
It's not trolling. I was just being light-hearted.
The Mega65 is actually a realisation of an unreleased model that only made it to prototype stage back in the day, but yes, it is backwards-compatible with the C64.
> He built that $500B company. Its existence is primarily due to him.

Sheryl Sandberg, the person responsible for actually making Facebook profitable, would like to have a word...
> ...akin [to] the Philip Moris company testifying...

Indeed. If only there were some analogy to a massively profitable industry, woven into the social fabric of the country, that was then found to be harmful.

Why, you'd expect that said industry would fight tooth and nail against regulation, perhaps stringing things out for decades...

For those who weren't there, two things were simultaneously true in the 80s, 90s, and 00s: (1) we knew beyond a shadow of a doubt cigarettes gave people cancer & (2) we still had smoking sections right next to non-smoking ones, throughout businesses of all sorts.

All because it was too hard to change, and there were too many addicts to make a change.

... before ultimately yielding to the weight of scientific evidence against it. But not before killing people who didn't have to die if they'd heeded warnings earlier and pivoted.

Or, you know, this could be a completely different scenario, and Meta could be acting out of altruism with its users best interests at heart.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3wUZvOEGm8c
So as a Texan I'm on the fence here.

I wasn't directly involved (as a student and TA), but spent a fair while in academia, and was rather close personal friends with a number of adjunct professors, tenure-track profs, post-docs, and grad students. I was looking at staying in academics so I had many long discussions about the state of things (at least at the time, about a decade ago).

There was a lot of concern in the field about how tenure was an incentive and a solid goal to strive for, but it left much for the administration to abuse. Between the politics and bureaucracy and constant jockeying for tenure track, it made it hard to focus on the students. Since you had to "play the game" or get cut or tossed out, that forced non-tenure profs to spend time outside of teaching. Then you had the shitty profs that just wanted that tenure protection so they could avoid teaching and just do their own personal research. And since it was so easy to cut adjuncts, they had little to no bargaining position and were often given shitty pay. So I'm all for ditching Tenure or otherwise reworking that pile of garbage.

But on the other hand, I don't trust anything coming out of the TX lege right now. Especially if it's got Dan Patrick excited. They're trying their hardest to create an authoritarian theocracy using the same playbook as DeSantis, and this seems like another step in controlling education in Texas to paint the narrative they want.
This comes from not knowing what organizations are likely to do with it.

Would they be okay with the data being used to overcharge them whenever they're in a hurry because the organization knows when they don't have time to comparison shop?

How about maximizing their tax burden by using the data to calculate the highest tax rates each area would tolerate before moving or changing their vote?

Suppose the government falls under the control of the party they don't like. Should they have access to the data that allows them to most effectively target their propaganda?
Yes, they certainly can! I'm not saying they should be trusted. I'm saying they can't be taught.
Relatively certain that it's original with me. Worth what you paid for it. ;-)
It seems to me, from a copyright perspective, all commercial use of generative AI depends on whether the output is transformative fair use (vs derived work). While the courts will have its say, ultimately whether new rules are carved out or not is going to be again (as all copyright law is) based on commercial interests - I have the feeling that the potential productivity upside across all industries (and in terms of national interests) is going to be big enough that it'll work itself out largely in the favor of generative AI.

That being said, IMO, that's completely separate from the safety issues (that exist now and won't go away even if somehow, all commercial use is banned):

Urbina, Fabio, Filippa Lentzos, Cédric Invernizzi, and Sean Ekins. “Dual Use of Artificial-Intelligence-Powered Drug Discovery.” Nature Machine Intelligence 4, no. 3 (March 2022): 189–91. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00465-9.

Bilika, Domna, Nikoletta Michopoulou, Efthimios Alepis, and Constantinos Patsakis. “Hello Me, Meet the Real Me: Audio Deepfake Attacks on Voice Assistants.” arXiv, February 20, 2023. http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.10328

Mirsky, Yisroel, Ambra Demontis, Jaidip Kotak, Ram Shankar, Deng Gelei, Liu Yang, Xiangyu Zhang, Wenke Lee, Yuval Elovici, and Battista Biggio. “The Threat of Offensive AI to Organizations.” arXiv, June 29, 2021. http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.15764.

I don't think most people have thought through all the ways perfect text, image, voice, and soon video generation/replication will upend society, or all the ways that the LLMs will be abused...

As for AGI xrisk. I've done some reading, and since we don't know the limits of the current AI paradigm, and we don't know how to actually align an AGI, I think now is a perfectly cromulent time to be thinking about it. Based on my reading, I think the people ringing alarm bells are right to be worried. I don't think anyone giving this serious thought is being mendacious.

Bowman, Samuel R. "Eight Things to Know about Large Language Models." arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.00612 (2023). https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.00612.

Ngo, Richard, Lawrence Chan, and Sören Mindermann. “The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspective.” arXiv, February 22, 2023. http://arxiv.org/abs/2209.00626.

Carlsmith, Joseph. “Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?” arXiv, June 16, 2022. http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13353.

I think Ian Hogarth's recent FT article https://archive.is/NdrNo is the best summary of where we are why we might be in trouble, for those that don't care for arXiv papers.
Really, iPhones are status symbols, in 2023? Do people turn their head to look at you as you walk down the street, because you own an iPhone?