skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> all in the endless pursuit of money

Money is not the goal. Optimisation is the goal. Anything with different internal actors (e.g. a corporation with executives) has multiple conflicting goals and different objectives apart from just money (e.g. status, individual gains, political games, etcetera). Laws are constraints on the objective functions seeking to gain the most.

We use capitalism as an optimisation function - creating a systematic proxy of objectives.

Money is merely a symptom of creating a system of seeking objective gain for everyone. Money is an emergent property of a system of independent actors all seeking to improve their lot.

To remove the problems caused by corporations seeking money, you would need to make it so that corporations did not try to optimise their gains. Remove optimisation, and you also remove the improvement in private gains we individually get from their products and services. Next thing you write a Unabomber manifesto, or throw clogs into weaving machines.

The answer that seems to be working at present is to restrict corporations and their executives by using laws to put constraints on their objective functions.

Our legal systems tend to be reactive, and some countries have sclerotic systems, but the suggested alternatives I have heard[1] are fairly grim.

It is fine to complain about corporate greed (the simple result of our economic system of incentives). I would like to know your suggested alternative, since hopefully that shows you have thought through some of the implications of why our systems are just as they currently are (Chesterton’s fence), plus a suggested alternative allows us all to chime in with hopefully intelligent discourse - perhaps gratifying our intellectual curiosity.

[1] Edit: metaphor #0: imagine our systems as a massively complex codebase and the person suggesting the fix is a plumber that wants to delete all the @‘s because they look pregnant. That is about the level of most public economic discourse. Few people put the effort in to understand the fundamental science of complex systems - even the “simple” fundamental topics of game theory, optimisation, evolutionary stable strategies. Not saying I know much, but I do attempt to understand the underlying reasons for our systems, since I believe changing them can easily cause deadly side effects.
A Perspective on Ethernet in Automotive Communications – Current and Future
Hacker News is actually another great example of this concept. If you plotted the appearance vs. usefulness ratio for 1,000 websites, HN would be one of the crazy outliers.

Good one! Thanks for posting this.
Try OpenAI services in Azure. We were added to a waitlist but got approved a week later. Had 32k for a few weeks now but still on the waitlist for plugins.
> society in which people are getting paid to have more kids

Yes, it's possible there will be more kids than in current society. But it would reduce the problem of having a large generation of retirees who essentially vote everyone else's resources to themselves.

The society where you get votes in proportion to remaining life is also one where the kids have to think about not destroying everything for themselves, after all they have to live in it.

The one where a huge group of old people are in power is where skin in the game is least well represented: if I'm 95 I'd like to vote to have three kids take care of me for my remaining years, thanks, adios.
> Individual vehicles suffer from massive inefficiency compared to nearly any other form of transportation

I though this too until I looked at the true dollar costs or carbon impact per passenger mile. That doesn't even account for the externalities of particulate pollution and road wear. The buses in my city are also filthy diesel, belching thick, noxious, clouds of soot as they accelerate away from the stop, right at crowds of people who just got off the bus. Heavy buses also require special concrete pads at every stop and still do heavy damage to the road surface: rutting and exacerbating potholes.
Well what a coincidence. Chances are there won't be 300M EVs on the streets by 2030 anyways, because by then we will have moved the goalpost far into the future anyways.
Hmmm, not really. There's a bunch of stuff there, but sometimes it's missing needed info.

Wish I could think of an example off the top of my head though, but nothing is springing to mind.

Was doing stuff with (the official) SQLite extensions a few weeks ago, and the docs didn't really cover some of the things I was after at the time. Not the end of the world, just a bit frustrating.
Parts of Belgium have 3 phase power with 220V between phases, and no neutral. And protective earth of course.

The rest of Europe has 230V, 3 phases + neutral, with 400V between phases.
> So where do you think the current research on the negative effects of pornography get it wrong?

This is a contentious issue. There's no consensus on whether or not use of pornography is harmful. Suppose there was consensus. To what degree is it harmful and is it harmful enough to legislate against it?

There's a very low chance that it'd pass that threshold for me, given that I generally prefer people be allowed to make choices over what they do with their body when it doesn't meaningfully harm others.
I guess my point is, I don't think it's helpful to frame antidemocratic practices as errors when they are kept in place very deliberately by the powers that be.
It is a consensus reached by the Wikipedia editing community, or the edits wouldn't be so overwhelmingly accepted. There are probably more than 90k typos in Wikipedia that doesn't mean they are correct.

"Standard English" is a poor choice of words, but I'm not sure how to describe what "I go house" is. Not grammatically correct English?
Thank you for taking a stand against the ever-encroaching scourge of "utilize." That one bugs me almost as much as "in order to" does. (Just say "to"!)
They asked basically "pick me a bunch of stonks based on 10 criteria". They ended up with 38 stocks. If it's to do any selection at all we need to assume the potential possibilties were at least 100. So now you want text about 10 criteria x 100 stocks into one prompt.

You could split it into multiple prompts but that's not what they claimed to have done.
> I'm not sure Apple publishes which variant of L4 it runs on

The SEPOS kernel is an apparently derived from a fork of L4-embedded they used in Darbat (a fork of XNU to run on top of L4). Not formally verified unless Apple internally has done so.
>> The only reason anyone needs a service like this is because of the area’s complete failure in urban planning

By the criteria I would use, Phoenix is a massive success in urban planning. The criteria I would use would be the willingness of people to move there.

In 1950, Phoenix was in the top 100 biggest US cities...barely. It was 99th, with a little over 100,000 people. NYC was the largest, with around 8 million.

In 2000, Phoenix was the 6th largest city in the US with 1.3 million people. NYC was the largest, with around 8 million.

In 2022, Phoenix was the 5th largest city in the US with 1.6 million people. NYC was the largest, with around 8.5 million. And NYC has been losing population for the last few years.

The people who moved to Phoenix didn't have guns to their heads. They moved there because out of all the cities in the US, Phoenix worked best for them. To me that points to an incredible urban planning success. They might have failed at building a city that you like. They might have failed at building a city that was hostile to people who want a single family home with a two car garage. But they didn't fail at building a city that people choose to move to.
I hope "all scales" didn't include modes other than Ionian and Aeolian. And then there's harmonic minors.
What I'd like to see would be transit networks aggressively build out "virtual" and "semi-virtual" routes with capped waiting times. E.g. put a "call" button at bus stops, run anywhere from no to frequent scheduled full bus routes on a stretch, and (EDIT: automatically, on demand) charter ride-share services as needed to fulfill wait time guarantees. Increase the use of actual buses as usage increases.

A whole lot of transit is a chicken and egg problem where people buy cars because the transit options aren't good enough, and so have incentives to use it, and so rider numbers remain too low to justify increasing them and/or it deters people who strongly prefers to use public transit from even moving there.

You need to treat it as a public good not just for those who use it, but for those who might want to use it and even those who don't but end up benefiting from less congestion and the environmental benefits, and be willing to subsidise it more aggressively, and rideshare options, with or without self driving, could help drive down the cost of operating many "bus routes" that'd be particularly expensive to operate with mostly empty full scale buses.
I'm reminded of an old saying, "The world is run by those who show up."
It's exceedingly expensive and must surely come down over time.
i find grammar obsession on the internet to be insane overall. you ever use the wrong their/there/theyre and have some guy reply with some unhinged comment. such odd behavior
Indeed: “The grid isn’t ready for 300M Electric Monster Trucks by 2030” but the grid will have no problem to power 300M electric bikes.
New York AG offers law to crack down on backfire-happy cryptocurrencies
It depends on whether you presume language knowledge to be descriptive or prescriptive. Neither view is right or wrong. For example, I'm a native speaker of C, yet my syntax errors are still errors.
Well, Adobe at least seems headed to fully embrace the generative AI hype now:

https://www.adobe.com/sensei/generative-ai/firefly.html

This sounds all very similar to the Stable Diffusion tool chain, though probably cloud based and with a more intuitive UI on top.
Regarding reduced precision, depending upon what you are trying to do, I think it doesn't work quite as well in similarity search as it does for, say, neural networks.

If you are concerned about recall of the true nearest neighbor (k=1), in many datasets I've seen (especially large ones) in float32 the distance from a query vector to candidate nearest neighbor vectors may only differ by some thousands of ULPs when performing brute force search, which if done in float16 would result in the true nearest neighbor being the same as (or perhaps behind even, due to rounding error) other proximate vectors. If you are performing approximate lookup and you have the luxury of performing reranking (you store the compressed / approximate index for lookup, but return a larger candidate set like k=100 or k=1000 and refine the results based on true distances computed from the uncompressed vectors via brute-force, so you have to keep all the original vectors around) then this problem can go away.

If however you are looking at recall@100 (is the true nearest neighbor reported within the top k=100) or set intersection (of the k=100 approximate nearest neighbors, how much overlap is there with the true set of the 100 nearest neighbors), then this doesn't matter as much.

Certainly a lot of the options in the Faiss library are geared towards compression and quantization anyways (e.g., storing a billion high-dimensional vector dataset in 8/16 GB of memory) so this is a tradeoff as with everything else.

In Faiss there are the scalar quantizer indexes which do store vectors in int4/int8 etc for which int8 GEMM (accumulate in int32) would be great, but using this would require that the query vector itself be quantized to int4/int8 as well. This is the difference between "asymmetric distance computation" (ADC) where you compute the distance between int4 encoded vectors (or product quantized encoded vectors, etc) versus a float32 query vector, where we reconstruct the database vectors in floating point and compare in floating point, versus symmetric distance computation (you have to convert the query vector to int4 say, and compare in the quantized regime). ADC tends to work a lot better than symmetric computation, so this is why we don't use pure int8 GEMM, but maybe in many applications (NN inference, say, instead of image database search) the non-ADC comparison would be ok.
Its like Yelp. You can openly view and search the reputation of businesses/freelancers/restaurants/individuals (but in the form of an eth address).

Or you could add to the database of reviews, either through reporting someone (provided you give evidence) or verifying that they delivered on their promises (same goes).
AI exemplifies the ‘free rider’ problem – here’s why that points to regulation
Agreed, we do have a lot of nimble and low-cost actuators in our body. That will probably provide gainful employment for a while. I just don't see it being a very long-lasting advantage.
Copilot is highly usable and I'm pretty sure it works the same way.
>3) No one cares if you speak it poorly

And this is maybe just a slightly more charitable rephrasing of #3 but very open to loan words and alternative ways of phrasing things.
Unless we are thinking of different technologies, you can use esims for all of that? Just last week I ordered a usmobile.com esim, installed it on my phone, received a +1 415 number and received and sent SMS with it
They didn't give an argument for the status quo, they gave an open-ended argument based on danger being bad. But the correct tolerance for danger is not zero, so proving something is dangerous is not enough.

For a car comparison, it's easy to argue that going faster is less safe, but that's not enough to explain why a speed limit for a road is specifically 35mph, and doesn't tell you if 35mph is correct for that road. Maybe it should be 25mph or 45mph.

The rest of their argument is making a bunch of assumptions with no evidence shown. They're assuming that the current line is exactly enough to determine the level of danger to the point that you can get informed consent. They're assuming that the current line is an exact match to what's ethical.

But maybe that's not true. Maybe the FDA is 50% too lenient. Or maybe they're 50% not lenient enough. This commenter is failing to make a case for the current regulations being just right. They're making a strawman about changing the regulations a huge amount, jumping all the way to nearly unchecked experimentation. Of course that's bad, but that's not what the neurosurgeon actually said.
Use cases for individual people are ok but it's far too expensive to deploy into your SaaS where a large number of users will use it.
I do want to add: you can still add people by their old name#9999 username
Thanks everyone for the invaluable feedback. Changing the font ASAP xD
China has "traditional" medicine, the US has the prosperity gospel

Maybe the human race is fine on average, but the stupid outliers are an order of magnitude more destructive than the average person in unpredictable and ignorable ways.
10% of users intentionally choosing anything besides a default is crazy high
> The first one is that nuclear energy is by far the most expensive form by unit of energy produced.

Now that the world is waking up to understanding the LCOE is a wholly inappropriate metric for systems cost comparisons, this statement is more clearly no longer true.

With the firming included, nuclear is right there in the mix, cheaper than most 100% ___ with storage options.

https://www.ctvc.co/firming-costs-renewables/
YouTube doesn't have to engage in the absurdity at all. They have safe harbor protection. All they have to do is process DMCA takedowns in a timely manner rather that preemptively flagging content on behalf of powerful interests. They do the latter because they're in bed with the corporate media who provide content for their subscription services.
Well, AirBNB wouldn't pass this test in early days since they mostly started to grow after starting making professional photos
If you go around selling micro sized mobile phones close to a prison then you can plead all you want that it’s not fraudulent, it’s just for people with tiny hands and it’s ridiculous to imply that it’s anything other than a legitimate business.

However, it’s not. It’s got one clear use case and one clear market.

We started this discussion on sim farms and your very first point here (and in other places in this post) linked directly to the kind of thing that should, and hopefully will, be criminalised in the UK.

Because it’s quite obvious what it really is, even if you apparently can’t see it?

I find that quite hilarious.
LessWrong Political Prerequisites
why wasn’t it in an HSM?
There is no reason to use a manufacture key anyway, at least for SecureBoot.

Obviously it isn't in everyone's skillset, but if you have the means there is nothing preventing you from generating and using your own key.

Honestly it seems like a good basic security precaution, not only to prevent against leaks like this, but also to counteract any backdoors (although kind of a moot point with chipmakers).
Maybe it's graded on a curve, so you just have to beat the median.

Or hope you're luckily a "C" student.

It is a bit ironic that liberal arts students have to have demonstrated competency, while engineering students who will go on to build things your life depends on just have to do better than other students.
When an eSIM in a phone is provisioned to a carrier, with some plan, usually it does have a phone number and could send and receive SMS.

Though yes you are correct, if you're only thinking of a single chip (eSIM) instead of the system it usually goes in yes, you are be correct - those systems can currently exist.

iSIM, integrated eSIM with SOC (cpu, gpu, ram, wireless baseband, eSIM) will eventually be more common in phones.

Look up: "remote sim provisioning"
I agree, I was thinking the error rates he alluded to were probably logistical or sources of human error.
> There are authoritative guides on English (e.g. the Webster dictionary)

This is exactly wrong. Webster's is not prescriptivist; a dictionary describes a language as it is, not as it "should" be (indeed, there is no such thing).
>> Large families also use more of society's resources, at the expense of others

> They also produce more of society's resources, for the benefit of others.

Not at all.
A recent thesis is a single datapoint at the edge of human knowledge. These bots will necessarily be better at parsing information with more interconnectedness closer to the core of existing human knowledge.
Norway is 148 mi^2 and Montana is 147 mi^2 (and for a comparison on the other extreme Japan is 145 mi^2)

Norway has an overall population density of 38/mi^2 (15/km^2) and a map with that distribution - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Norway_population_de...

Montana has a population density of 6.86/mi^2 (2.65/km^2) - and an interactive map of it: https://statisticalatlas.com/state/Montana/Population

Japan has a population density of 900/mi^2 or 326/km^2

There are large portions of the US that are larger than European countries and have very low population densities in comparison.
I definitely agree there’s a point where it’s easier to run the system directly than to regulate it.

In America, this just isn’t done. I’m trying to think why.

I guess part of the issue is that building/maintaining structures is high risk, while owning land is low risk.

So even if an American city owned lots of land, they would just do a long term lease to a property developer who would take on the risk of developing and maintaining it.

So the tax payers would get revenue, but not be on the book for any losses.

Actually playing the real estate game means making and losing money.

Trump spent decades in real estate, didn’t beat the returns on SP500, and was often bankrupt.

Most citizens don’t want the government engaged in high risk speculation.

I could easily see an American municipality owning lots of land, but not actually developing and maintaining the real estate themselves.

What happens in Germany if real estate falls through?

I had assumed you were Austrian because you mentioned Vienna. Vienna has a reputation for being very affordable, while Berlin is reputed to be expensive. Is that true?
It always seemed a little weird to me that Discord decided to call them “servers” and let people believe things like this (that it’s yours, that it’s truly private even from the company’s eyes) when it’s really more akin to an invite-only Facebook group. It’s hosted by them, so they can shut them down if they wanted, and I’d have very little trust that they can’t see the messages inside.
Whether you're playing by ear or by sight, having the current scale baked into muscle memory makes it a lot easier to hit the right next note on the first attempt. Otherwise you'll be frequently off by a semitone, or end up using non-optimal finger positions (which can be hard to unlearn).

Any given melody will modulate between multiple major and minor scales; see Coltrane's "Giant Steps" for an extreme example.
Grammar and style guides are prescriptive in nature.
This isn't a blow to real security, just to DRM and treacherous computing. There's no legitimate security from "Secure" Boot.
Unity builds mean that you can no longer use internal linkage safely anymore, and that's not something I like to give up. It forces the codebase to follow a certain style that I don't like. Hopefully modules will give the advantage of unity builds without this downside.
Maybe people are staring at you awkwardly because you’re picking fights, and not because you’re walking.
we don't need to make most of the US as dense as London. we need to make the parts of the US where most people live dense enough to support public transit for most trips.

it's fine if people use ICE vehicles now and then to visit family, go to a specialty store, etc. it's the daily and weekly trips that need to be fixed.

and the breakeven point does not need to be quite so dense as London. for example, the DC area has a lot of sprawly (at least by east coast standards) suburbs. the DC metro has some room for improvement, but it is still much better than a car for getting into and out of the city during peak hours. though I'll admit I sometimes splurge for an Uber. cars are much more competitive when you don't need to park them.
https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/version-story
Okay. That's probably the difference between a commercial and a research project.
I guess youtube has the advantage of potential recurring revenue from back catalog so I can see that creating a reliable stream effect. Depends on type of content I think - some types have very spiky first 48 hours. So either you're monetized there or it's a dud video.
Can I take floor plans and get renders from just that?

I'm just trying to design a home right now actually. Played with sketchup to assist, but I'm prly going to try and so sketches and use ai to render for me if that's viable.

But being able to get realistic renders from just floor plans is the holy grail. Please let me know if this is viable at all with rerednerai

Looks great tho, congrats
I don’t know about the unhinged comments, but grammar is important and people who don’t care are wrong not to care.
I feel like human raters at Google ruined my SEO after looking at the graphic design of my website :(

Not only is ranking on appearance faster than usefulness, a rater can confidently do that because their other raters will do the same.

“Tight inter-rater variability” = confidence in rating for some reason, as opposed to consistency in bias.
You want to be able to deploy and execute code outside the control of whoever physically controls the machine.

Either you implement it with security features hidden from the device holder, in which case it will always be broken eventually, or you guarantee the capabilities with mathematics - in which case a security break cannot happen even if the physical machine's description is completely public.

There are certainly layers to this that I'm missing, but I think homomorphic compute is the only unbreakable answer to secure compute in general.