skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure where you're looking but source code is here (not sure why they don't link to it?) and last update was about a year ago and there are recent commits.

https://github.com/alainm23/planner

I just discovered this and really like it, it's a huge improvement over GNOME Todo. My only complaint is that it seems to choke on a large number of (completed) tasks. Though that might be more of an issue with Nextcloud not clearing out completed tasks and a lot of caldav apps have this problem.
Honestly, that's what's so frustrating about the "life goes on" dismissive argument some folks use to dismiss calls for climate action.

Yes, it's true. Not every species goes on, though, and those that do don't necessarily enjoy the process.
A device you must use to authenticate.
I agree that "AGI" and "labor transformation" are two different issues.

I do want to pick on what I think is a bit of hype around the potential to eliminate whole classes of work, though.

First, in the weeds: I keep seeing this reference to script writing, which I assume is a reference to the WGA strike. But as https://www.gq.com/story/writers-strike-2023-wga-explained explains, the big technological transformation driving this dispute isn't the risk of generative AI; it's the changes in royalty payments created by streaming platforms.

I'm pretty skeptical of claims that generative models can replace script writers. Like, maybe for some really, really crappy shows? But I think "My ChatGPT could write that" is the 21st century version of looking at a Rauschenberg and saying, "My 5 year old could paint that." Good luck, I guess?

More generally: Labor productivity growth has remained fairly constant over the last 40 years or so. So anyone who thinks generative AI is going to totally upend productivity and the job market is implicitly suggesting it's a bigger technological change than the Internet--which didn't really do that!

So...dunno. That's a bold claim!
I don't know, but I'd posit that anybody who answers "definitely yes" or "definitely no" doesn't know what they are talking about. And that's because we, collectively, really have no way of knowing how close to AGI we are. We struggle enough to define and measure human intelligence, and adding what is arguably a new "kind" of intelligence to the pot just complicates matters even more.

So as of today, we don't really have any kind of simple metric like "IQ" that we can apply to AI systems, and even if we did have the metric, at this point we wouldn't really know it's range, whether to expect it to be a linear function or not, etc.

That said... does it seem clear that we are making some kind of progress? I'd say yes, but with the admission that that's somewhat subjective. In particular, even though we know that current AI systems are getting better at doing whatever they do, we don't really know if that meaningfully counts as progress towards AGI. It is possible, for example, that LLM approaches will hit a ceiling in their development, and that the much feared "GPT 17" really won't even be a thing. And it may likewise turn out that the progress made on LLM's doesn't turn out to contribute much at all to whatever the eventual mechanism behind AGI turns out to be.

Is that the way I expect things to play out? Not sure. I have a hunch that LLM's will prove to be insufficient to qualify as AGI on their own, but that they may well serve as an element of a modular / hybrid system that includes LLMs, reasoners using deduction, induction, and abduction, evolutionary algorithms, and FSM-knows what else.
You're comparing it to something other than what China is alleged to be doing?
The New AI Moats
The simple answer is “go figure out how solve climate change” is a much easier direction to give an AI than figuring out what to do then building a bunch of little specific ones.

Really all an AGI is an AI smart enough to build and use other smaller AIs, or at least that’s a very common guess as to the architecture that’ll end up working.

I give it till Christmas
> Chile is small producer

Huh? Second largest producer with by far the largest reserves.

https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/stories/2020/03/lithium...
I saw an Eastern Bluebird this weekend!
But what if I live somewhere remote without internet access? Such a simple thing as using the phone shouldn't be impossible.
Virtual personal assistant isn't exactly a narrow definition. I'd expect that's a big role to play and we'll make AGI systems do that too.

The strong AI definitions are also pretty biased towards human experiences. I wouldn't assume future innovations are necessarily human-like. It's hard to imagine a completely new thing until it gets here though.

"Learning any task" is also, uh, quite expansive - does the AI lose its AGI badge if the internet finds something it sucks at? (spoiler: it will suck at something)
I'm not sure if you're joking, but I honestly do think that adaptations of this sort, and zoonotic diseases in general (like Lyme disease or COVID) are the weapons of ecosystems that want humans to stay away.
The push isn't anything to do with stoves, though. Nobody cares about stoves, the primary negative externality is the health of the user, and presumably they made that choice of their own free will. The push is to ban natural gas utilities at all, which are a meaningful contribution to pollution. The idea that it has anything to do with stoves is just politicians & 'media' personalities playing to the fears of their base.
I've reread their statements and I'm certain they mean data series instead of data points. That is, there are 200 different types of data that they can collect from the logs (for as long as you have the storage to keep it), not that they can only store 20 seconds worth of data.
This argument is so common and I don’t get it. It lacks any context to historical advancements of technology.

This will only be good for our economy, any argument against is arguing against the entire trajectory of human technological advancements and its benefits to economic growth. As such, this argument requires a lot more evidence than the plainly obvious: that jobs will be lost.

Seriously, who wants to work a job that a machine can do better, cheaper, and more efficiently? Work for the sake of work is not meaningful.

This is creative destruction and it is the engine that drives economic growth. It can only be a good thing.
“Fenestra” is the Latin word for “window.” It’s very similar in form and usage to “porta,” meaning “door.”

If the word “deportation” means being pushed out the door, then “defenestration” should, logically, mean being pushed out the window.

This is a word which, logically, should exist. And it does. But in practice it is used by Latin students who are looking for an excuse to use it.
What I would’ve preferred in this article which is largely long winded definitions and summaries of computing history that are much better explained on Wikipedia would be a workable, testable definition of AGI. How will we know when we’ve gotten there? Frankly, I don’t care about the Turing test. There’s several versions of it, and it’s not a general test of intelligence anyways. It’s a parlor game.
I think Apple just scrapped it entirely with iOS 16 for a more consistent user experience.

Unfortunately, this also makes it a dealbreaker for me – I want some credentials to be device-bound and non-extractable.
Humans differ. If the information is not controversial most often accept it and move on. If the information is controversial most handwave, but a large group further checks and if they arrive different conclusions they start to get active on replacing incorrect info.
Startups, if successful, grow into bigger companies. But why do you think bigger tech(or non-tech) companies are not entangled in bureaucracy?

A government is far bigger and complex than any big company. So there will be more slowdown compared to big companies.

One example of successful public-private partnership is India's "Digital India" initiative where the government was able to churn out platforms like Aadhaar, Unified Payment Interface and RuPay, with other platforms on the way for digital commerce for MSMEs.
Yes to all of this. And thanks for the links! I hadn't heard of Gemini before. I'll check them out asap.
We are all crafters, and I admire the attention to these presentation points of OP. This is clear in the documentation and explanations at the repository too.

That said, I don't think the questioning of GP was malicious, just a natural curiosity. Yes, a little suspicious, but, well, we are in the internet after all. In the least, it's good to point when someone does the extra work to make a great presentation.

Anyway, great work riter!
Got it on sale a few weeks ago, beat it about one week ago. Linux PC, decent hardware.

Maybe 3-5 bugs, mostly small stuff. Only saw 1 dude randomly t-pose, and another (a civilian hiding from a shootout) slowly fade/sink into the earth. Maybe one hard crash, which isn't bad compared to the issues I'd see with FNV or Skyrim. In other words, played fine.

Cool setting, and the first half of the game is amazing -- blew me away -- but the gameplay is fairly repetitive otherwise; i.e. go here, kill people, collect loot, go here kill people, collect loot, go here don't kill people (stealth mission!), but then get in a shoot-out after you steal the thing and collect loot, etc.

Skyrim and FNV felt like you had more choices as to how you played, while GTA V had a lot more to do, like the silly Yoga minigames, or stock manipulation, or submarines and aircraft, etc. I played a bit of Shadowrun and CP2020 on the tabletop and I remember the old CP2020 Rulebook talking about "style over substance" and that's kinda how the game plays.

I'd grumble if I had paid full-price but am pretty satisfied at half, and I'd consider the DLC as long as it wasn't buggy as hell and got alright reviews.
I think it's pretty surprising, and counterintuitive, how powerful generative language models are. It turns out that a lot of intellectual tasks are sort of weakly simulatable by just doing a great job at next-token prediction.

I don't think that means that "good next-token prediction" is identical to "AGI". As Yan LeCun says, I think LLMs are an off-ramp on the highway to AGI. But they are powerful at specific tasks.

Unfortunately, instead of evaluating their actual utility at a specific task, people just seem to think "if we throw AI at the problem, we will solve it," which is sort of like every other tech bubble ever.
I feel like that is a myth. Most people I know use monospace fonts for programming.
Exactly. For example John Carmack understands AGI as an simulation of 2-year old human brain, which we can teach anything. That's quite a good definition imo, but it seems to me this isn't achievable by evolution of LLMs. Other people thinks that by making current LLMs approach somewhat better, that could be called AGI. To sum it up, AGI isn't anything specific at this point.
But worth trying to guess! I think the only other project similar in character would be nuclear weapons, and I definitely think the world would’ve appreciated a heads up there. Just because it’s hard to predict doesn’t mean we shouldn’t reason about it and get some ballpark estimates, IMO
Or, to put it another way, average commenters are fighting against coordinated groups of state actors just to have genuine discussions. And it would shock me if Vietnam was a leader in this space.

It's like how ads pit big bags of mostly water against billions of dollars worth of psychological manipulation. Us mere mortals have no chance.
The joke is a nerd is rattling on about history and people are bored by it and left the conversation. It's a classic nerd post, where someone tries to show how cool they are to other nerds by showing that uncool they are to "normies"
You can also do bird surveys now with call recognition. The Merlin app (which is free for your phone) has a sound recognition capability. It's cool to stand out in an area with low ambient noise and have it recognize bird calls in real time. It usually gets it right.
I'm from Argentina, I don't think the 3 digit inflation is due to any US sanctions :)
A lot of people like to give you a hard time for using an “old” email address like yahoo, hotmail, or aol.
I had never heard of Anhingas being called devil birds before this morning. I fully agree that the headline was meant to scare people.

I know Anhingas as sacred Water Birds of the Native American Church [1].

[1] https://collections.gilcrease.org/object/843126
The only trick I want to do is not falling off!
I find this posts being word-noise. We can't agree what is "intelligence" and the goalposts are moving depending on who you ask and when. I think then more interesting question would be "If AGI came, would we know?"
RIP Chile's lithium industry...
I'd consider it implicit.

Americans drive cars a lot and they're not all dead, despite having higher accident rates than e.g. Sweden.

It would be fairly... arbitrary(?) to jump in and state that Americans should just restrict their car use purely to keep accidents down with no consideration of what they'd lose by doing so.
Future investors will be wary of the country - long run damage being done.
'Creepy' New AI Traffic Cams Peer into Cars Seeking Violations [video]
Lionel Tiger is a canonical example.
Sandy Munro: Nobody Has Anything Like This – Amprius (Battery) Factory Tour
We hear a lot about AI these days for good reason, but I find this area equally interesting.

It appears to me that humans are creating the Saudi Arabias of the future inside productions labs like this all around the world.

If I was king of the USA I would throw as many tax credits as possible at the entire battery ecosystem.
Extrapolation from known facts of past conduct more than speculation. Either one is a good basis for opinion, since opinion is entirely subjective.
So many things are nowadays technologically possible, but the bottleneck is the bad interface. Kudos to these innovators for removing another roadblock!
> It means that they have the right to share the code of others on GitHub, as long as they respect the terms of license. This is totally legal. But then, Copilot will be able to analyze the code and violates the license terms, which isn’t.

Both claims here are incorrect even though pretty much everyone gets this wrong. When someone who has obtained the right to redistribute some code only under the GPL uploads it to GitHub, that person (and that person only) violates the terms of the GPL. The GPL requires further redistribution only under its own terms, but uploads to GitHub come with a grant of a too-permissive license that a GPL licensee does not have the right to grant.

When GitHub proceeds to use the uploaded code to train copilot, they (probably) are abiding by the terms of this new license they have been (fraudulently) granted. They are not bound by the GPL, that's not how licenses work: they've got the other one. Now, GitHub has a big weakness here which is that they ought to know they're being granted licenses that the putative licensors have no right to grant. But that still would not make them in violation of the GPL, just of the original copyright.
We definitely don't have consensus about either "general" or "intelligence" (and if mind-uploads ever enter the discussion, then also about "artificial").

For me, "general" is a sliding scale, not a yes-or-no boolean, so I think it's fine to say that GPT3, let alone later versions, is "general" in the domain of text — it has more general knowledge than I have, that's for sure!

Likewise "intelligent", though for me that's a vector value: [i_0, i_1, …, i_m] where each i is the ability at some aspect of intelligence.

In fact, I'd go further and say that you can define "generality" with respect to such a vector: if the intelligence vector is a normalised score 0-1 for each value, then generality could be easily defined by the statistics of that array.

As even GPT-4 seems to be better than the layperson and worse than an expert at everything (textual) it has been tested on, I'm not sure if it's more or less general than a human by this standard.

And you may wish to define intelligence by ability to learn from small data sets rather than large, at which point we then need to consider the difference between the initial training, the RLHF, and any fine-tuning; and how this compares to evolution, education, and work experience.
"Defense in depth" applies to crime too. After-the-crime discovery and punishment can only do so much.

It's not that no enforcement happens, a quick search for "phone theft ring busted" returned an article [1] from March of this year. The search results suggest it's far from the only relatively recent bust.

Phones have exceptional monetary value compared to their size/weight. They're easy to steal, and anything that makes wiping the phone easier, faster, or cheaper will be exploited as it increases the value the thieves, fences, etc can extract.

The enforcement scheme needed to substantially reduce phone theft would likely be extremely expensive. It would also likely involve device and purchase tracking methods that many would consider draconic and ripe for abuse by governments and law enforcement.

What would you specifically recommend be done on the enforcement side of things, compared to what happens presently?

[1] https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/Ne...
May the most inelastic commodity win.
> Efficiency improvements are always good for society as a whole, despite it hurting some people who originally was paid due to the inefficiency.

When the economic/capital/wealth 1% end up hoarding all the profitability gains, society as a whole loses. I have come to loathe the term "disruption" as it has always meant externalizing costs to make a quick buck: either by technology replacing actual, real humans with real families who now have to struggle to survive or by breaking laws and regulations like Uber and AirBnB did, with society paying the costs associated with that - in the case of Uber, society picked up the tab for underinsured drivers or for their pension/social security contributions which don't apply for "freelancers", and in the case of AirBnB all the neighbors affected by the noise and literal other disruptions an AirBnB brings with it.
I suppose the answer is to use Apple, then? It sounds like you have something against attestation, which is a reasonable point, and Apple doesn't support attestation in their implementation of passkeys. Given the size of their customer base, that pretty much guarantees that nobody is going to be denying passkeys based on lack of attestation.
Its possible that the AGI obsession will fizzle. The analogy is fruitful to some extent as an inspiration. But it is too remote and ambitious to work as a roadmap.

There is precedence. People called certain algorithms neural networks, but they are very far from real neurons and they are not getting closer. Why should they?

People will keep developing "AI" algorithms but it will be along the natural pathways that underlies these mathematical structures (which are rather simplistic) and focusing on problems that people find important.
On the adding part - have you looked at how it tokenizes that string?

https://platform.openai.com/tokenizer

10011111110100011100011011110010
00111010100101000100000101111011

is tokenized as:

[100][1111][11][101][0001][11][0001][101][11][100][10]
[00][11][101][01][001][01][0001][0000][01][01][11][101][1]

It might be more trainable if the the bits where space delimited so that only the tokens [ 1] and [ 0] were in use.

As it is, it doesn't really understand the contents of the tokens and manipulating [405, 1157, 8784, 486, 8298, 486, 18005, 2388, 486, 486, 1157, 8784, 16] is not easily trained - especially if there is a different bit sequence. Note also the misalignments of the tokens for bit length that can make it more difficult to work with.
Without looking it up, when you see or hear AGI, what definition do you assume most people to be using?
> > Self-Aware

> Why is that a requirement?

Not to mention that this cannot be proven at all, even for humans.
I don't understand how you can write a whole piece on Transformers failing to do arithmetics without mentioning the tokenizer used in GPT, which makes it more or less impossible for the model.

The reason is imo probably more along the lines of that the model can't see the actual numbers you're giving it.

When you provide GPT3 with the number "10011111110100011100011011110010", it actually sees [3064, 26259, 1157, 8784, 18005, 1157, 18005, 8784, 1157, 3064, 940] [see 0].

The number isn't even split up into even parts. Even if it knew the Peano axioms, it wouldn't have a chance because it can't 'see' the actual numbers that you're feeding it. Hence it can only estimate these operations based on combination pairs it has seen in training data, and it seems pretty obvious why this can't be a robust basis for doing arithmetic.

0. https://platform.openai.com/tokenizer
Even if say we are close to “AGI” it’s going to be something significantly different from human and animal intelligence. One of the most obvious differences that I don’t see people bring up:

1. ChatGPT can only respond to an input. If you left it alone it would literally do nothing. It cannot, generate, create thoughts and choose what stimuli to respond to.

This posits that the human brain is like a dynamical system. You switch it on and it keeps going on forever, there is also no hardline between learning and inference like DL. ChatGPT and others etc, feel very much like a digital system. It can only respond to inputs provided, there is a clear demarcation between the learning stage and the inference stage

Note: it is still possible that these AI systems will reach human like performance in a variety of tasks. But they will seem very weird and different from the intelligent systems we are exposed to in Nature
This is completely legal in the US on both recreational and commercial licenses, so long as you have visual line of sight to the drone and the ability to regain direct command of the drone via RC (and are following all other flight rules). It is commonly used for video work, such as programmed aerial timelapses.
I've looked at Nostr before, and I'm confused by how this response came to exist.

I'm describing RSS (read: Atom) with better UX. Nostr is a from-whole-cloth new protocol that's fundamentally incompatible with everything I've laid out.

(The video you linked to is unwatchably obnoxious, by the way.)
Ty for the list including the reddit part. It honestly did not occur to me since I don't use it anymore. But I admit I think I have enough now to throw at her and see how she reacts.

<< Am I tailoring it right?

You did. Thank you. FWIW, she is in Poland now and she can parse basic English, which is why I will probably need to shepherd her a little anyway.
Yes. I think on AI research in particular though, we could show that we're close, but not convincingly that we are far away.

Not in the current world, anyway. With 1950s levels of compute, sure.
Nah. We haven't built Positronic Brains yet.
Not defending Pinochet at all, but the idea that a democratically elected communist government (in full control of a country) stays democratic for long is not borne out by any evidence anywhere on earth. In the middle of the Cold War, with the Soviet Union already shipping weapons in, the economy was struggling, Allende's coalition partners abandoned the communists in favour of a "Confederation of Democracy" (interesting name, huh). An authoritarian slide was not inevitable, but it was the well-trodden path and the default outcome. Soviet-aligned communists don't govern democratic countries for long, full stop.

(Again, is does not excuse overthrowing/murdering him or the US involvement in that).