skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's missing generality. It can't do basic maths, or even follow instructions. It can't make valid moves in a game. It can only do what it was trained to do: make a good guess at what word should come next.

I don't mean to down-play how impressive models like GPT-4 are - they are very impressive and have great utility.

The problem is we are talking about PR, and when you throw around words like "artificial intelligence" it misleads everyone who is not intimately familiar with the limitations of such models.

> Personally I believe it's possible to have intelligence without sentience/self-awareness

The general public doesn't make that distinction when you throw around terms like artificial intelligence. They hear artificial intelligence and imagine "thinking machines".

No doubt people will say this is just moving the goalposts - that whatever these models achieve it will never be "AI", but that's demonstrably false. The concept of AI has existed in film and other media in the same form since forever, and it's pretty clear if you put those representations side by side with what we actually have today, that we are not even close yet.

For some reason "advances in machine learning" just isn't hip enough to get funding, so "AI" gets thrown around instead.
In my social circle, the only people bothered by the term are tech bros.
> The amount of good and services will always be finite regardless of how they are produced.

So will the number of people.

The point of "post-scarcity" isn't that there are infinite resources; it's that there are more than the people need.
Does this affect MSI motherboards with AMD sockets ?
OP discusses this; the language has not really evolved. Certainly there are some dictionaries that acknowledge the newer confusing usage, but always as an alternate.

Also consider the "why": does this phrase pop up more and more often due to misunderstandings and copy/paste? Or is it because people actually want to change the meaning of the phrase and are doing it consciously? I don't see any evidence of the latter.

Language is important. It's the foundation of communication. I think it's noble to push against inadvertent usage changes that make the language more ambiguous.

Put another way: sure, language evolves as people use it differently. But why is it any more valid to push the language toward using "comprised of" in this new way, than it is to push the language to avoid it?
load balancing doesnt work like that. the draw on a high throughput gas station is hundreds of megawatts for hours. Are you proposing 100MWh batteries installed at charging stations?

Sure people can top up their cars overnight, but what about people who street park? Charging a tesla battery to full overnight (16hr) is still 5kW.

On the other hand in the world where gas is very expensive, and you have a PHEV, you can pkug in most of the time and solve almost all of your gasoline demand, while still being able to fill your car at 20MW in critical situations
It's funny how blatantly the NSA doesn't care. They feign ignorance when asked or FOIA requested about it, but then also ask for a backdoor to opt-out of the Intel Management Engine[0]. It's like there's no coordinated effort to deny that it's an extreme vulnerability.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine#%22Hig...
It was a genius idea - you cannot install Windows 11 on an old computer. So you need to buy a new one.

Monopoly practice hidden as security.
DEF CON to set thousands of hackers loose on LLMs
no. NodeJS is different than NPM (which is often used to install react/vue). NodeJS is the backend technology
At this point there are quite a lot of companies training these massive LLMs. We're seeing startups with models that are not quite GPT-4 level but close enough to GPT-3.5 pop up on a near daily basis. Moreover, model weights are being released all the time, giving individuals the opportunity to tinker with them and further release improved models back to the masses. We've seen this with the llama/alpaca/alpaca.cpp/alpaca-lora releases not too long ago. So I am not at all worried about this risk of corporate control.
This one is much more simple and to the point , without needing sqlite.
https://github.com/curusarn/resh
I would love to see Qubes rebuilt on this
Same experience as me. Scrum is a disease in this industry.
Your areas are off by a factor of 1,000.
Two generations ago we were calling chess programs AI. Last generation it was face detection in images. Each generation makes a new clever thing, calls it AI for a while, puts it to good use and forgets about it for the next shiny thing called AI for real this time.

Don’t get me wrong: the new large models are amazing, and will be useful. Not dissing them. Just observing the history of the term ‘AI’ in popular usage.
Well, Microsoft made some half-assed runs at Orange Book compliance (e.g. Windows NT without floppies/CDs...or networking), but Trusted AIX was a real thing with real users. Having been involved in a couple of MLS Unix implementations, IMO it didn't fall out of favour because no vendor could do it, it fell out of favour because no one could effectively run it in production. The admin overhead of a 'real' TCSEC validate system is formidable, and at some point someone decided 'useable with admins with 6 months of training (e.g. privates and corporals)' was more important than 'checks all the boxes', and the boxes that needed to be checked changed.
Having 1000...0001 represent -1 would be sign-magnitude representation. Having 1111...1111 be -1 is two's complement. Computers usually use two's complement for integers, because it makes addition and multiplication really easy to implement. Floating point actually is closer to sign-magnitude, though.
still have the same syntax.
Language learning via hearing comprehension of content not produced in the target language is almost impossible, because the subtitles never match.

However there‘s s difference between CC (close captions) and subtitles, with the former being the verbatim representation (including sfx, music etc.) in my experience.

I already commented [0] on this 2 years ago.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27420959#27435311
> Because Swedish. IIRC, www is vee vee vee.

I can confirm. I mean, the "proper" pronunciation is dubbel-vee-dubbel-vee-dubbel-vee, but we can't be bothered to say all that so we just say vee-vee-vee.

I also think "double-v" is a better name for the letter w than "double-u" is.
But you did understand him. You’re pretending you didn’t because if that were true it’d reinforce your point, but it’s not in fact true.
Tick tock next block
The problem is that they're making the claim that X is unethical with zero information on what X is. In this case X is undefined and could be anything that is not currently permitted.

If you claim that X is always unethical, and the only fixed characteristic of x is that it's not currently permitted, then there are only two solutions:

(1) You think that the current rules are a perfect match for ethics OR (2) anything that violates a rule is unethical.
California, a state with many EVs, can’t keep its power grid going during high winds, heat waves, etc. PG&E and other power companies are a long way from fixing this issue.
> > I don't see any consensus on nuclear vs renewables. Not even a consensus like "it's the mix, stupid".

What I got is that nuclear (fission v.3/4 and fusion) are the "swing for the fences" technologies, while renewables are the "stuff largely remains what is today but without CO2 so people 80 years from now won't be living in a +3C world"

Personally I am rooting for fission and fusion because technological stasis is a recipe for disaster. Nukes will be flying way before the 3C treshold becomes a concern, people need constant improvement in their quality of life, if that doesn't happen they'll seek satisfaction into subjugating others.
The fastest option in London is somewhere between a motorbike and a bicycle (if you ignore traffic lights). It is not public transit.
There is a better solution already designed into Intel Boot Guard, which avoids the problems of OEM "secrets" and allows an owner-defined firmware root of trust. As described in a 2017 MIT paper from Victor Costan, Ilia Lebedev and Srinivas Devadas, "Secure Processors Part I: Background, Taxonomy for Secure Enclaves and Intel SGX Architecture", https://www.nowpublishers.com/article/Details/EDA-051

> The TPM's measurement can be subverted by an attacker who can re-flash the computer's firmware .. the attack .. can be defeated by having the initialization microcode hash the computer's firmware (specifically, the PEI code in UEFI) and communicate the hash to the TPM module. This is marketed as the Measured Boot feature of Intel's Boot Guard.

> Sadly, most computer manufacturers use Verified Boot (also known as "secure boot") instead of Measured Boot (also known as "trusted boot"). Verified Boot means that the processor's microcode only boots into PEI firmware that contains a signature produced by a key burned into the processor's e-fuses. Verified Boot does not impact the measurements stored on the TPM, so it does not improve the security.

On a related note, some HP devices have a dedicated security co-processor (SureStart) to verify and/or fix system firmware, instead of relying on a CPU vendor root-of-trust like Intel BootGuard. Since HP's proprietary security co-processor can be disabled by a device owner, those HP devices may be amenable to OSS firmware like coreboot.

2017 HP Labs research paper, https://ronny.chevalier.io/files/coprocessor-based-behavior-...

> We apply this approach to detect attacks targeting the System Management Mode (SMM), a highly privileged x86 execution mode executing firmware code at runtime .. We instrument two open-source firmware implementations: EDKII and coreboot. We evaluate the ability of our approach to detect state-of-the-art attacks and its runtime execution overhead by simulating an x86 system coupled with an ARM Cortex A5 co-processor.

2021 HP marketing whitepaper, https://www8.hp.com/h20195/v2/GetPDF.aspx/4AA7-6645ENW.pdf

> Every time the PC powers on, HP Sure Start automatically validates the integrity of the firmware to help ensure that the PC is safeguarded from malicious attacks. Once the PC is operational, runtime intrusion detection constantly monitors memory. In the case of an attack, the PC can self-heal using an isolated “golden copy” of the firmware in minutes.
I see HN pieces on SIMD optimizations for numerical computing every so often. Are these the sort of optimizations that a hobbyist with say a normal laptop (either a macbook air or consumer grade thinkpad) can actually end up tinkering with as well? Or am I going to have to rent some AWS machine and have it run on some specific architecture to be able to mess around with?
1) You won't want to pay a dollar in most cases until you've made sure the article is worthwhile, and then it's too easy to claim that it really wasn't worth that and try not to pay your $1.

2) Agree with another commenter here that for the scheme to work it has to be in the pennies region, so that it's worth you taking that non-repudiatable change on something that you have not yet seen. (Prestel in the UK decades ago made this work, BTW.)

3) My previous-but-one startup was a small e-money issuer, and I really tried to get traction in this area but couldn't. Would still like someone else to make it happen!
Dwindling sea ice and rising Arctic ship traffic may bring unwelcome visitors
The minority wants you to think that the website wouldnt work without them.

Reality is that their rules are only for you. They dont judge their own edits with same standards. If edits were anonymized tons od admins would get banned.
It's proven correct against specification. That's not the same thing as 'secure' (although it helps).
My daughter's name: Albert Einstein.
Tucson-based Raytheon joint venture gets $1B for Javelin missiles
I think that's true only when both people have a certain degree of sophistication, but in the vast majority of cases involving laypeople, basic theory (including semantics / working definitions for basic concepts) and reading comprehension skills are probably limiting factors.
I apologise; I routinely discount anything that is in a language that I can't read, and isn't available in translation, which means an awful lot of stuff from the far-east.

I assumed doctors everywhere had built an informal consensus to use English, with terminology derived from classical greek; rather as pilots and air-traffic controllers all use English.
> However, the EV eats tires like a full-size pickup truck with somewhere to be.

Out of curiosity, why is that?

Edit: I Google’d:

“ Electric vehicles boast instant torque, meaning they accelerate the second you put the pedal to the metal. However, the high instant torque of electric vehicles can also increase wear and tear. In addition to good grip, the rubber compound used for EV tyres also needs low rolling resistance.”

And

“ Teslas are heavier than most other cars because of their battery packs, which can add hundreds of pounds to the vehicle's overall weight. This extra weight puts additional strain on the tires and leads to increased friction between the tires and the road surface, which causes them to wear out faster.”
Perhaps that is the case, but thanks to suburban zoning no one will ever find out.
EU ready to back immediate open access without author fees
This POV stopped being cool 2 years ago, fyi
This part of the editor's process bothered me, too. Overall I agree with his premise and have no problem with what he's doing. In fact, I think he is improving Wikipedia with his edits.

But changing quotations seems like a step too far. I think his practice of changing a quotation to a paraphrasing (where it doesn't really matter if the article includes a quotation or not) is fine (if a little obsessive). But actually changing quotations feels wrong to me.

I do agree with his assessment that including people's grammatical/spelling mistakes in a quotation detracts from what the person said, but I don't think the correct move is to change the quotation to something the person didn't actually say. At most, the "offending" part of the quotation should be removed and replaced with correct usage inside square brackets to indicate the changed/added part was not part of the original quotation. But overall I think he should just leave these instances alone.

> There methods comprise of robbing others autonomy. (Wording chosen purposefully!).

I think you are in a way proving the editor's point, though? Purposefully chosen or not (I did chuckle a little), that sentence is garbage, and if I were to read that in something without knowing or realizing it was a joke, I would take your words less seriously. I would think, if you can't even use language properly, and need to "inflate" your words, maybe your ideas are overinflated too.

On a different note, I don't think we should care about people's "autonomy" when we're talking about a resource like Wikipedia. "Letting people write whatever and however they want" is not a positive trait in an encyclopedia.
The pervasiveness of secure boot has genuinely made things difficult for attackers - there'd have been no reason for the Black Lotus bootkit to jump through all the hoops it did if it weren't for secure boot, and the implementation of UEFI secure boot does make it possible to remediate in a way that wouldn't be the case without it.

But secure boot at the OS level (in the PC world, at least) is basically guaranteed to give users the ability to enable or disable it, change the policy to something that uses their own keys, and ensure that the system runs the software they want. When applied to firmware, that's not the case - if Boot Guard (or AMD's equivalent, Platform Secure Boot) is enabled, you don't get to replace your firmware with code you control. There's still a threat here (we've seen firmware-level attacks for pre-Boot Guard systems), but the question is whether the security benefit is worth the loss of freedom. I wrote about this a while back (https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/58424.html) but I lean towards thinking that in most cases the defaults are bad, and if users want to lock themselves into only using vendor firmware that's something that users should be able to opt into.
Ya we should just say

300M EVs by some point maybe in the future.

That's how you make progress, hopes and maybes.

The whole point of this is to force a change, otherwise it will end up being let's do it tomorrow, and than it's 2050 and there has been zero progress.
If your attacker has root, and your system allows flashing the BIOS from root (many do), he can simply disable Secure Boot, or enroll one extra signature -- his. If the system doesn't allow flashing a BIOS even if an attacker has root access, then Secure Boot makes no difference whatsoever.
So is religion tbh yet here we are.
I think you mean "interlinear" translation. Or aka a "gloss":

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlinear_gloss

Particularly, in the Structure section the Taiwanese example.
Is that supposed to be... bad?

I imagine most suburbanites NIMBY precisely against that, it probably won't happen.
To me democracy is like asking a bunch of 6 year olds what they want for dinner. It’s based in the assumption that people know the candidates and vote for the policies they agree with, a bit of contemporary history can tell us how well that works.
Product Management Books
We both arrived at mostly the same result from the same question of "how many pages of text would 32k tokens be?", they basically did the calculation again albeit in a slightly different way. Just like when researchers try to reproduce the results of other's studies.
Makatea[0] is trying to do something like that.

0. https://trustworthy.systems/projects/TS/makatea
The World Economic Forum, led by Klaus Schwab. Excellent question.

https://youtu.be/0uhiYcG0Psg
This is the base to build super powerful lightweight systems.

A basic LLM that just knows some English

+

A tree of LLMs, each fine tuned in specific topics

The basic LLM navigates the tree and gets answers from the specialized LLMs
> If you left out either of "ne" or "pas" in such a construction, people would either laugh, or assume you were some kind of primitive language generator.

You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. Please learn French before spouting off so confidently about it.
Legacy and Race Preferences at Harvard
Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway dumps billions of dollars of US stocks
Supposedly a part of correcting an overshoot is possibly finding a hybrid.
Classical SLAM by optimizing constraint graphs has little to do with ML. The optimization function is explicit, and there’s no training.
It's because the whole Discord experience is modeled after IRC, which has (literal) servers. In order to get gamers to switch from IRC to Discord, they wanted to change as little as possible, including the verbiage.
And it's going almost unchallenged because so many of those who like talking about not all being rosy in capitalism are blinded by their focus on the robber baron model of capitalism turning sour.

But the destructively greedy corporation is completely orthogonal to that. It could even be completely held by working class retirement funds and the like while still being the most ruthless implementation of soulless money maximiser algorithm. Running on its staff, not on chips. All it takes are modest number of ownership indirections and everything is possible.
I use optimized SIMD instructions on iOS to do on-device linear algebra for the cooking app i work on as a hobby.

https://theflavor.app/
A "systematic" change in the meaning of a word or phrase means that someone used it wrong once and enough people followed them in their wrongness that it became the norm. It's reasonable to say that once a new meaning has been taken up by the majority in this way it's not wrong anymore, but there is also a broad continuum between old usages and majority uptake of new usages where some users of the language in question may reasonably object to the latter.

For instance, I was once CC'd on an email thread at work where a senior leader made an obvious typo in reference to some Thing and everybody else on the thread blindly parroted it. This "alternate" usage was established and used systematically in the local context, but it led to a significant decline in general clarity and interpretability, and it was also not durable beyond the context of that thread. It was a mistake, simple as that.

"Comprised of" is probably past the threshold at this point, much like "rate of speed" and "how <thing> looks like" and so on and so forth. But—and I know this is shocking to some people—"correct" use of language does have significant advantages for communicating clearly, especially in writing. Prescriptivism and descriptivism both have their adherents because neither is right or wrong in the naive absolutist sense—balance is key.
You can't possibly know whether or not I understood them.

I think I understood them, but I can never be sure, because in order to understand something with improper grammar, you usually need to "fill in the gaps" with the most reasonable assumptions possible, and those don't necessarily line up with your interlocutor's beliefs or intentions.

Putting words in other people's mouths is often required to "lubricate communication along", but it should be done as minimally as possible if the goal is for people to understand each other.

See Grice's cooperative principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle
Your argument is so painfully disingenuous it hurts. Everyone from Germany to America to Denmark has democratically elected governments, and you think that the reason they prioritize businesses is “corporate profits,” rather than the things people like that are associated with corporate profits (jobs, material goods, comfortable lifestyles)?

I’m from a third world country. My family that has moved to the developed world has pretty much universally pursued a high carbon footprint lifestyle (big house in the suburbs, SUV, etc., as soon as they could afford it.

If you poll Americans, you’ll see they’re willing to spend an average of $10 per month to mitigate climate change: https://apnews.com/article/8e6baa6c2d3badeb4e91b6e6d078a5c0. Maybe it’s a little higher in Europe but not much.
Almost $2 if you want to use the full context length (32 * $.06). Yikes.
In that domain, also, the Swanson speed square. Comes with a 'blue book' full of all kinds of tips and tricks and measurements.
Not exactly sure why you bring this up but tangentially this is actually a really good prompt to use with GPT. Ask it a question but tell it to list the known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns before replying. The unknown unknowns part usually generates some interesting follow up questions.
It’s interesting that we view the fact that it makes mistakes as evidence it’s not intelligent. By this metric then, humans are also not intelligent.
Suppose Altman is actually doing this. Would he want anyone to know, especially given the ongoing brouhaha over the models that are already public?
The Ich -> ikh transliteration is wrong. Of course there are a bunch of German photetics which you can't translate into direct English transliterations because the sound inventory is different.

That being said, GPT is still pretty powerful for language learning but you really have to verify more than you trust.
“Common” is an understatement. It’s practically universal. You will sound weird if you systematically include “ne”, like you learned to speak by reading books and have never communicated with a real person.
Spotify uses random hyperplanes to produce a hash where each bit is the sign of the dot product of the query and the hyperplanes (ie “is above or below” the hyperplane). Works really well
Even with Kenji's minimal setup he still said recently he spends on average 6-8 hours per video on editing[0].

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxOlI6QB0oI
Can you explain how Intel Bootguard usefully guards against evil maids?