skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I would add that any law passed must have a relatively short sunset clause. This forces us to reconsider laws periodically to make sure they're still relevant.

I like this idea in theory, and I'd love to find a way to implement it. But I think we'd find ourselves in a situation where we either spend a ton of time rubber-stamping all the "good laws", or we end up not having laws for stuff people all agree on and don't waste time rubber-stamping because why bother with the effort if everyone abides by the law anyway ... until decades later we get another guy doing a bunch of destabilizing horseshit because it's not technically illegal.
AGI, by definition, would be as capable as a typical human intelligence. This implicitly includes being able to perceive, and interact with the physical world.

Why wouldn't an AGI be capable of performing a physical task, if given the suitable means to interact physically?
I’d really like to see a comparison someday between Epics weird C# based build system and something like CMake+Ninja.

I suspect there’s compilation optimizations to be made, but I don’t think it would save more than 30% here and there.
With a connected car, the "charging block" can just be software running on the car.

More importantly, the direct payment plan with the utility company (which means waiting for 10,000 different utilities to switch pricing models!) can be replaced by an aggregation company (which only needs a handful of companies worldwide).

On the grid side, the aggregation company behaves just like any other company that owns a big battery, bidding on the wholesale electricity market like a power plant would. But in reality they actually command a "fleet" of smart car chargers and stationary batteries. By splitting some of the profit with these car/battery owners, an aggregation company can magically align the pricing model for everyone, without waiting for 10,000 utilities to get their act together.

If you follow JB Straubel's public talks[0] over the years, none of this should come as a surprise.

[0] https://youtu.be/4hNdbGjZfFU?t=2401
Personally I think MDN is one of the best examples of a really good docs site:
https://developer.mozilla.org/
WP for "Wikipedia" is built into the site; most of the internal guidance pages can be accessed via titles such as "WP:WikiProject".

[Edit] I generally don't use such acronyms without spelling the term out in full first. But spelling things out in full every time comes across as wordy and pedantic.
My 2014 BMW i3 knows to charge during cheaper electric rate times. (Like your Tesla)
Yes, hello?? They often use those registered accounts for malicious purposes which generates income for them?
You can use sqlite[0] to export the database, or if you want a ui, use datasette[1]. On my mac, the database is stored at ~/.local/share/atuin/history.db

[0] https://sqlite.org/cli.html#export_to_csv
[1] https://docs.datasette.io/en/stable/csv_export.html
Surely their oversight will lead to a decision about which usage to sanction.

You can submit your thoughts here!

https://www.apstylebook.com/ask_the_editors#submit_tab
Because nuclear weapons definitely would kill us.
AGI may also help us.

Since we are not helping ourselves and will soon enough suffer climate doom, we really don't have anything to loose to go for AGI. It's the only rational choice right now, the logic is compelling.

(Climate doom sounds dramatic, I know, but it's a fact if you read the latest IPCC report and the Surround science.)
It crops up in machine learning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nearest_neighbor_search
probably off topic, but part of this is "Good luck writing a grant proposal that says I want to reproduce the work of this group and get it accepted". Unless of course you are claiming ground breaking paradigm shift like evidence of unified theory or super-conductivity at room temperature.
> That should be uncontroversial, because in our society that's how the harms generally fall.

This is just talking past the conclusion though. Have you considered that the reason people are freaking out is because this is the first technology directly displacing a bunch of white collar work and not blue collar work?

ChatGPT is much sooner going to wipe out a paralegal than a construction worker.

> E.g., if you look at the stats from the the recent economic troubles

Are you referring to the record low unemployment for African Americans?
> This thread is literally a clout ATM machine for a group comprised of pedants.

That's most high-level Wikipedia editors in a nutshell.
I've found that policy trivial to circumvent in most EU countries I've visited (which is most of them).

Its also a stupid fucking policy.
This deserves its own post, but that aside, please expand.

And take it from the perspective of ELI5 where one needs to basically set this up on a fresh install, what does it take?
Pretty novel approach, well documented

https://techxplore.com/news/2020-08-ai-player-strikingly-rea...

https://cs.stanford.edu/~haotianz/research/vid2player/
How does wikipedia work? How does language work? Linguists have firmly determined that it does not work by a coterie of elites handing down decisions about correctness, regardless of what france pretends their "immortels" do.

That also doesn't mean "anything goes" either, obviously, since we do clearly speak a mutually comprehensible dialect through no intentional coordination. It's an interesting subject! You could stand to have some curiosity about its actual mechanics, there's a lot to be learned that is invisible to you if you've already decided how it should work.
If you consider what is the cost of "adapting" I bet your discourse would change. EVs have massive consumption, way bigger than lights, computers and AC/heating combined. In my part of the world (Eastern Europe) the usual power consumed by a home is 0.5 to 2kW, with short time spikes to 3-4kW. An EV can easily go 12KW, that requires a very expensive upgrade in capacity and load balancing of the grid to accept locally (in a city block) hundreds of cars randomly connecting with huge surges. You need some kind of interface and protocol to coordinate car charging per micro-grid.
I'm not native English speaker, but 90% of my communication happens in English. I've spoken it for more than 30 years but I don't think I've ever had a use for the word "comprised". I do however write the word "composed" a lot since I'm a programmer by profession. I also read a lot of books (in English) and I don't think I've come across it there either. I guess I approve.
> Because nuclear weapons definitely will kill us

I don't think so. Hurt us, sure.

Kill us?

That's bioweapons. ;) Wait until a Plague, Inc.-tier engineered virus inevitably escapes a BSL4 lab and gg. AI might count in that it might help someone engineer such a virus in their home lab. I hope we have offplanet population centers or posthumans by then.
This is retroactive justification for using low-cost sensors. There's a chance they get lucky and pull it off with only cameras, but the chance of Tesla doing that is much less likely than Waymo getting their sooner with more sensors (or even even the Waymo driver achieving it with only vision if they chose. Using a full suite of sensors gives Waymo much better training data if they ever chose to use vision-only.
You are correct. In German, V is F and W is V. There is no W phoneme, except incidentally as in "mauer". I can't imagine a German saying "willage" except perhaps as a joke. In German "willage" would be spelled "uilage" and that would just be really uierd. (Source: I'm a native German speaker, though my family emigrated to the U.S. when I was five so I speak German like a five-year-old who hasn't had much opportunity to practice in a very long time.)
> The above two paragraphs are stating easily verifiable facts. I won’t bother editorializing.

If they are so easily verifiable can you provide some citations?
These ocean-surface temperatures concern the top few millimeters of the ocean. The thermal mass in question is far far lower than the ocean itself.
"No battle plan survives contact with the enemy." (in this case, teaching staff)
Yeah, I see that now. Instead of italicizing the word “were” to place emphasis like you did, OP italicized most of the quote and not the word that needed emphasis. Ha.

For this reason, I thought his “ATM clout” statement meant the opposite of what he meant.
please tell us what changes you would like to make.
It's wild that this editor has edited this out of everything but the Wikipedia Manual of Style: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?fulltext=Search...
I joined the GPT4 waitlist 2 or 3 days after it was released (around mid-march) and finally got access last week. I also applied for personal use and wrote one or two sentences about wanting to experiment / compare it to other models. So they definitely do give the API access to regular folks as well, no idea how they prioritize it though. I've been a paying customer of ChatGPT plus for three months now which might have helped.
Consider moving a 1 lumen Dirac impulse across the screen. It looks like this when it moves perfectly with 1 pixel per frame:

frame=0: 1 0 0 0
frame=1: 0 1 0 0
frame=2: 0 0 1 0
frame=3: 0 0 0 1

Values are in lumens. Now let's do it half as fast:

frame=0: 1 0 0 0
frame=1: 0.5 0.5 0 0
frame=2: 0 1 0 0
frame=3: 0 0.5 0.5 0
frame=4: 0 0 1 0
frame=5: 0 0 0.5 0.5
frame=6: 0 0 0 1

When the impulse falls between two pixels, the amount of light should be distributed over those two pixels, so that the total amount emitted stays the same. However, we use a nonlinear encoding to map these physical values to numbers, which is called gamma compression. So in case of an 8-bit encoding, if 1 lumen is mapped to 255, then 0.5 lumen would correspond to a value of say 186, instead of 128. The display hardware uses the reverse of this mapping to emit the intended amount of light from each display pixel, so everything works fine as long as gamma is accounted for in the whole pipeline.

However, if you have a gamma-compressed image, you must be careful when doing any transformations on this image in the digital domain, because the pixel values live in a non-linear space, and this must be taken into account when transforming them!

E.g. let's say we have our 0.5 pixel/frame animation from above, encoded with gamma=0.45:

frame=0: 255 0 0 0
frame=1: 186 186 0 0
frame=2: 0 255 0 0
frame=3: 0 186 186 0
frame=4: 0 0 255 0
frame=5: 0 0 186 186
frame=6: 0 0 0 255

And in post-processing you resize this video to 0.5x of the original size, with software that naïvely blends the pixel values when shrinking the image:

frame=0: 128 0
frame=1: 186 0
frame=2: 128 0
frame=3: 93 93
frame=4: 0 128
frame=5: 0 186
frame=6: 0 128

Oops! The intensity is no longer constant, which is going to be visible as twinkling when viewing the video.
I'm from Europe and I got several fluoride treatments as a child, with fluoride gel applied for a few minutes. I'm nearly 50 now and I ony had a couple cavities :) So it seems to work. And it's in some toothpastes too. It doesn't have to be in the water.
Gpt3.5 turbo it was like 10x cheaper than a similar version. Gpt4 is like 100x more expensive then 3.5 turbo
QVApay– Compliant USD Financial Services for Cuba-Based Startups
You can't make them wipe.
I'm only a digital packrat. Bits are so much cheaper to hoard, even deciding to throw something away is often more work.
Yes, for whatever reason "is comprised of" feels like a natural, abeit rather technical/formal, expression. It reads clearly, something I'd expect to see in technical documentation or an encyclopedia article or non-fiction book.

Whereas "comprises" feels halfway archaic when I read it, like it's the way an elderly British academic might speak, or something only used in legalese. Somebody using "comprises" in writing strikes me as a little odd, a little bit pretentious.

I'm not saying whether any of this is right/wrong, it's just the connotations I've absorbed.
> I got pushback from several folks at the show, who all agree that we need a common fact base for any successful democratic system, and misinformation throws that off.

No, we don't. We just need to each have a decent true understanding of how policy directly impacts us and those we care about. Then we apply our individual ethical weights and decide how to vote based on that.

> Maybe his suggestions won’t come to pass

Is it just me or are his suggestions never mentioned in this post? I think I read it all (though did not click on any of the links).

Personally I'd like to see the voting power in the house of representatives made proportionate to the number of people who affirmatively voted for each representative. I'd also like to see multi-representative districts so that everyone who got, say, 5% of the vote, is elected, with their voting power in the House proportionate to the number of people who voted for them. Do that and gerrymandering doesn't matter except at the absolute margin.

Maybe do the same with the Senate, except possibly keep it single-senator per state to make the minority party happy. I don't know. I'd also like to see three senators per state, one elected every two years. I'd be in favor of abolishing the Senate entirely, but I know that won't fly.
Is this different from pinecone?
Hands of Gods
Except that this doesn't save commands which haven't finished yet, and it never saves the current pending command when the shell is killed (e.g. the user closes the terminal window or logs out or the SSH connection is broken).

Sometimes the rare, long-running commands are the most valuable.

If I set up history software, it should preserve all history, and as early as possible.
The velocity of change is historically unprecedented and we have a good amount of empirical evidence of what it takes to collapse ocean ecosystems.
A model optimized for inference speed instead of raw accuracy.
While you could certainly argue that “words mean what people think they mean”, that is not a reason to use words in ways that are CURRENTLY considered wrong, especially not in a lexicon.

If you want to change the meaning of a word, that’s fine, and maybe in a few decades you will succeed, but until you get enough people on board you will only cause confusion.
I am recommending that you add more context to your question since it has been posted a couple times but has had zero engagement.

HN is not an AIML discussion forum. Putting 10% more work in the question could yield 400% better responses.

Linking to what BLIP2 is a good start

https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers/main/en/model_doc/b...

https://github.com/salesforce/LAVIS
My main point is only that comparing this to newspeak is totally backwards.
Example? There are plenty of examples where mistakes that Tesla's cameras make (being blinded by the sun, having trouble with emergency vehicles) are no problem for systems with more sensors.
Sure, they aren’t always one-for-one swaps.

To make your “comprised” example correct, I guess it would have to be something like “the alphabet is comprised of five vowels, twenty consonants, and Y, which can be either.”

(Note: Wikipedia lists W as also sometimes a vowel now?)

This is an OK sentence, probably because the alphabet is not very complicated. But we’re basically stuck describing the whole thing in one sentence because of the use of “comprised.”

If we’d gone with “contains,” we’d have more flexibility, we could break it down and do one component per sentence, for example.

It isn’t always wrong, it just makes a lot of decisions for you and they aren’t always optimal.
> as evidenced by many of the modern news outlets folding

Which time frame are you talking about here? I had the impression news outlets folded during the last 20 years because ads went online?
The entire idea that we will have "useless mouths to feed" is making a big assumption. "post-scarcity" is absurd -- the more we get, the more problems we will create, its just human nature.

- Sustain everybody on earth? Focus everything on moving off the planet and colonizing the universe.
- Infinite energy? Don't have infinite vessels to travel.
- Space travel easy? Limited by the speed of light.

And so on... Sure, you may dream that AI will be solving it all and we'll be sitting on our lazy butts, but a society that doesn't have challenge dies very quickly (AI or not), so we've learned to make challenge and grow.

The optimist in me knows that we can't even comprehend the challenges of the future, but the idea that we won't play the pivotal role is laughable.

This is the thing with actual exponential growth -- the curve is so steep that all our minds can do is take the current view of the world and project our fears/preconceived notions into the future.
Suppose today you go on YouTube and see 10 recommended videos.

There are thousands of videos it could put in these slots, so they'll be ranked and only the very best (based on metrics and your interests) will make the cut.

Video #11 might have been great, but wouldn't get suggested to you merely because it had a few seconds lower average watch time. Because of this I'd expect a 10% better video (like %, watch time) would improve its views by some huge nonlinear factor (maybe double?).
If not an automatic sunset, I would propose a different rule: for every law, we stipulate what statistical measures we thought would be improved by the law over some time period. Like "we think if kids are all fed at school, pass rates will increase 5%". Then check after 5 years to see if that happened, and we can decide what to do.

At the moment every law has an imprecise expected outcome and we never go back to think about whether the intervention worked.

I'm not saying use the stats mechanically to cancel the law if it fails, just that there ought to be a post-fact consideration of whether something worked.
It would be more charitable and accurate to read it as a statement of the sad state of review at many journals. Plenty are rubber stamps where the most you might expect from reviewers is an insistence to add citations to their own barely relevant papers.
I might be stretching the terminology here as far as "technical product documentation" but Arch Wiki has been an absolute blast for me as a source of not only specific distro knowledge but general Linux information. Very concise a yet somehow also very comprehensive.
On a small scale this is initiative and referendum. On the large scale this results in a small proportion of unelected people who have a lot of time on their hands controlling things. A large chunk would probably be relatively well-to-do retirees.
Antibiotics don't kill every microorganism. Also, our gastrointestinal tracts are repopulated from food we eat and our surroundings.
Oh yes. It gets backed up along with everything else.
Those facts are not as easily verifiable as you might think. "Some academic articles about exit polls and vote tallies in swing districts" does not bring any relevant on the search engine I tried.

Your claims are extraordinary, so could you duly provide the extraordinary evidence?
I think that typically sysadmin-type people seem to have less customization, possibly because they ssh into so many boxes and dotfiles don't usually carry over.
You don't need 300M EV if you make cars less mandatory for living.
I think Tesla does use Lidar in training for what it's worth (at least I recall someone telling me this - I think it was a friend that worked there but not 100% sure I'm remembering correctly).

It's possible the lidar approach only really works with up to date high resolution maps and without that you end up in a local max you can't really escape with that approach.

That's been Tesla's argument up to this point anyway and I don't think the success in cities really proves things either way.

It may not matter since robotaxis in cities is still worth a lot and highway driving is mostly a solved problem.

True full self driving though will probably require solving vision - in that case I think the argument that lidar is a local max could very well be true.
I'd just like to see GPT4 more available, even on the free chatGPT, although I wonder if that will ever fully come with ChatGPT getting so much use and GPT 3.5 being cheaper to run.

Plus seems expensive to me and it is still rate limited quite a lot.

I guess it's going to take further optimisation to make it worthwhile for OpenAI.
but not necessarily for the better. :)
Again, no AGI needed for biowepons, malicious actors can do that today already. Perhaps not as easy, perhaps not as fast, but they can do it.

What we have shown time and again though is that what we can't do is solve climate change. For that only AGI may help.
It's a pizdezh.
Snakehaus: A puzzle snake game where actions in board will change board itself
I have a curious question, where did the calculator(tabulator) operators go?

Did we suddenly have governments fall when they were replaced by computers?

Did we suddenly have massive unemployment when they were replaced?

AI is a general purpose tool, and like other general purpose tools it expands not only human's reach mind wise it betters society and lifts up the world.

We have been through this before, we will get through it quite well since the last oh general purpose tool will replace us rumor mill reactive noise.
These are retail bank savings rates. Risk free except if the bank collapses, and in some countries customer deposits are backed by state guarantee to some upper limit.
Think of the internal kernel interfaces like a library. The older filesystems were coded against the library as it existed at the time of their writing. Some of the APIs got superseded by newer interfaces which are more recommended for newer code. But a lot of code written against the old interface is still out there. For good measure, let's say the new interface isn't a trivial port, sometimes it requires rethinking larger parts of the caller's code.
Spare gas cans can get you hundreds of miles. When I was growing up this was super common for long road trips just because gas stations usually closed at night and there weren’t credit card readers for 24 hour pumps.
Against GPT3.5 perhaps the gaps aren’t too big for your use cases, but I wouldn’t say it’s in the GPT4 league. It looks close in the benchmarks but the difference in quality feels (to me) huge in practice. The others models are simply a lot worse.
Albedo of the ocean changing over time can mean significantly more heat is absorbed. An example of this would be a loss of ice reflecting light rather than absorbing it. This won’t account for all of this energy, but it’s an example of one non-gas origin of warming.

Evidence of albedo changes impacting arctic ice: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-08467-z (I believe there are more studies like this; I’ve read one before, but it wasn’t this one).
Exactly. It's always weird when current infrastructure gets brought up as an objection against new technology (EVs, clean energy transition etc.). As if it's some unchangeable law of nature. It makes me wonder if, during the industrial revolution, people pointed out that trains could never take off because there were no railroads for them.
Speaking as a California resident, who has to deal with the remainders of the fashion for direct democracy a hundred years ago, I think this is mostly a bad idea.

One, people enact policies, so we still have to choose leaders. Two, rule-by-ballot-prop is a messy business, with many dubious propositions making it to the ballot not because they're particularly good, but because people with money can pay to make it happen. And three, it depends upon people putting a lot of time into understanding complicated issues. I'm a smart, dutiful person who tries to keep up and who spends many hours every election trying to understand. For me it still often comes down to deciding who to trust.

The only advantage I see to it is when it gives politicians cover to do things that they agree with the populace on but don't want to get yelled at about. E.g., legalizing marijuana. Unfortunately, there are also bad examples, like CA Prop 8, which was just trying to put bigotry in the state constitution.
FTS is not the same as regex.