skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is true for the "raw", pre-trained causal language models that are only trained on predicting the next token.

All these chat models have an additional (or several) fine-tuning steps where they see these kind of "instruction/question" followed by an answer.

Search for RLHF (reinforcement learning with human feedback) and instruction fine-tuning
This has been a fascinating thread and the split contexts of {:system} and {:assistant} with the former being “the voice of god” remind me of Julian Jaynes’ theory of the bicameral mind in regards to the development of consciousness.

This is published, among other places, in his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. I wonder if models are left to run long enough they would experience “breakdowns” or existence crisis’
Bluetooth tags for Android’s 3B-strong tracking network are here
Unit Test Autogeneration: A Tale of Two Models
> AT&T is the only other such example that comes to mind.

If you're talking about the current AT&T, then I'd argue it's not a great example. The relationship between old AT&T and the company currently calling itself AT&T is tenuous. It would be more accurate to say the brand name survived, because it has good name recognition value.
And DEC.
Lexbor: Fast HTML5 Parser with CSS Selectors Written in Crystal
It's a muddy word. We all know what 'unconscious' means: unaware of our environment. Taking the converse of that, every living thing is conscious most of the time.
Mine, obviously.

Like the classic: "In this company we make decisions based on data, so let's use my data."
> lecture.md
For files, it's not that wrong – copying can be seen as a two step process of selecting what to copy and then where to copy it to, at which point the copy is actually performed. Undoing only the first part wouldn't undo the copy. Still, "Undo Paste" would be a clearer name.
You can expect data to be destroyed when automatically parsing csv/tsv (default behaviour), especially because it's dependent on the last settings used in the text-to-columns wizard.

Then there's all well-known bugs like floating point addition and locale-dependent function names and 1904 dates.

Conditional formatting accidentally pasting is all over the place.
Yeah one guy in his garage could create hundreds of “influencers” a day. You could also do variations on famous people etc
The problem goes deeper in that we don’t even have a good grasp on what we actually mean by “consciousness”, and that there are wildly different opinions on what significance it has.
We are asking the wrong questions based on the theory that humans are conscious and think and feel when in fact all animals and all plants in feel and have some degree of conscious, i.e. feeling, conscious and thinking are not fully humans domain entirely.

What we should be asking is what is our caretaker role in this AI as far as how it fits into human society and that relationship with rest of the inhabitants of the Earth that are not human.
I find it amusing when I hear people make statements assessing short durations like 6 years to be significant. Six years in many industries is enough to reach mid-tier level expertise, but it is absolutely not mastery level. I'm making this comment from the perspective of someone who cultivate an engineering management role in high-tech manufacturing over the course of 15 years (where I was reporting direct to C-level when I left, with a team of close to 150 around the world) before joining a FAANG, where I had the rug pulled out from under me (new leadership killed my team in the first six months and I had to find a new role or be on the street, and the new role was unlike anything I'd ever done before). I spent 8 years starting a new career before being summarily dumped in the RIFs of this winter/spring, and have subsequently begun a third career at a different company.

The experience builds, and my experience is that the sweet spot is frequently hiring people in their 40s who have ~20 years of practical experience in the domain or a related area, and who know how to avoid a lot of the pitfalls fresher employees might encounter while also creating a lot of shortcuts by virtue of their experience & networks. It was interesting: over the course of my career, the teams I was managing had ever-increasing average ages, ranging from mid-20s when I was leading my first team of developers to late-40s over the last few years in big tech. Different functions (business vs technical), but while I appreciate the enthusiasm so many new grads demonstrate, the self-sufficiency + competency of mid-career folks is worth its weight in gold.
The difference is that going forward, people will target the latest changes to Windows because the previous versions will decline in usage since they are seeing no more effort put in by MS. With a situation like Xorg vs Wayland people will have two targets going into the foreseeable future because both still have active development.
I think article is a good example that current events and world news is basically bad for you.

What can we say about this article?

- it’s alarming, particularly if you already happened to hold the view that it’s all going to hell

- it’s not actionable, there’s nothing you can or should do differently as a result of this article

- it’s probably not even meaningful, the world is a random event generator and the worse event or piece of news on any given day is terrible! But that says nothing about how things actually are

The last point bears repeating. If you read a news article and update your understanding of the world to think “X is more common than I thought” after reading an article on X - you often end up less informed than if you hadn’t read the article at all. Replace X for any rare event that occurs in the news. The availability of the news on a thing is not the rate of the thing happening.
Interesting, so what is the compute power of the 1000-node A100 super cluster my team has been allocated at work? I was expecting Google to be much bigger than us.
That was neat, though it does mention there are some other creatures that can choose to share the tube and the research about it may be lacking in smaller companion life (bacteria or other lifeforms).
> it's scaleable.

That is debatable. Both GitHub and Hackyderm are large-scale Rails deployments, and both share a DevOps engineer (Nóva) who I've heard complaining about Ruby DevOps at least once. Twitter was forced to abandon Rails (being the poster child for Rails at the time).
Funny, it has the best, most complex syntax I have ever used.

I don't say this to be reductive. I believe there are two ways to approach a programming language: either from the formally-correct, highly-specified point of view; or from the communication and linguistics point of view. Ruby has a terrifying formal syntax precisely so that it can be extremely comfortable if you can get yourself to ignore the formality.

The flexibility fits my brain extremely well, and most of the time the theoretical syntactic complexity just isn't an issue.
Rails isn't mainstream? I'm of the opposite opinion - it's definitely in the Boring Technology† Club. It's well known that it's hard to find a more productive tech stack for building server side web apps.

† https://boringtechnology.club/
How can they have high confidence is the actual prompt, rather than a hallucunation? Is it related to how robust the output is to multiple prompt injections?
Oh you need something more modern, np

$ nix shell nixpkgs#tmate --command tmate
I mean the word “understand” is problematic. Machine and human understanding may be different but the word is applied to both. Does an XOR circuit “understand” what it is doing? I venture the word is inappropriate when applied to non-humans.
Then you actually could provide the most perspective here. I understand the complexities of a relationship so I'm not gonna uselessly drill on saying "then just leave her" but nether the less.

Do you feel like because of your girlfriends attitude you would find an AI girlfriend appealing? Even if there was no NSFT content? I understand as a guy sometimes a few small words of confidence in you goes a long way. If you GF finds you hobbies, work, and friends something to berated you over rather than trust you it can be a sinking feeling.
> From what I understand of the code, you can send fibers to other fibers with the "<<" operator.

You can pass any data between fibers using "receive" and "<<", including fiber refs.

> In my original code sample, my code refers to the children tasks. In your code sample, the parent refers to the children tasks. This seems to be a property of structured concurrency.

In general, yes, but in Polyphony at least you can easily walk the fiber tree using "Fiber#parent" and "Fiber#children".
Sophie Koonin / This Talk Is Under Construction / Ffconf 2022
The thing about building an opinionated framework is that sometimes your opinions suck. I hate using RoR at my job, I curse it every day. How in the hells do you think allowing gems to run their own code without being called is a good thing?
Every major new technology will be used for military, crime, and porn.

AI is no exception to this.
Gaming is a huge chunk of their revenue, around $2B in recent quarters, with datacenter around $3.5B.

Despite the AI hype, Nvidia’s datacenter revenue was down QoQ and only up 10% YoY.

It remains to be seen if the growth trajectory has changed meaningfully over the last quarter, because the stock is priced for massive earnings growth while their revenue and earnings have been actually shrinking.

We’ll find out on the upcoming earnings call

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NVDA/nvidia/revenu...

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NVDA/nvidia/eps-ea...
Honestly though, hardly anything is needed when writing code. Find code, edit code, run code, debug code (step, inspect).

I think something like Blender is a good example of a tool in which many menus are truly needed, but IDEs are simple in this regard.
Oh, I have to put that on my to-read list!
Solipsism can be fun to think about, but it makes no practical difference unless you do "wake up" (in a pod, for example) at least once.
In true leveraged buyout fashion however, those cost savings are going straight back to the banks that provided Musk with financing. Twitter has paid $600m in two interest payments this calendar year.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-03/twitter-s...
This is the thing with Excel. It has such a long history that it had to invent a ton of GUI interactions. A boatload of those interactions were codified in Excel before we created standard ways of doing things that even macOS, Windows and Linux share. In that sense, the modern history of Excel is the slow regression of the app to OS conventions.

For the longest time, Excel had its own windowing system within the app. It's only recently that the Office team saw the light and let the whole OS called Windows control window management in Excel.
is solipsism wrong, or is it just me?
Agreed with the sibling comments, physical violence is an entirely different beast than verbal "violence".
Excited for Google to have gotten this kick in its rear and might finally do some really interesting publicly available things in ML.
this looks like it's for GCP. TPUs are used for most internal workloads.
It's available externally but some of the papercuts and devex without the TPU/TF team helping you can be more painful than using Nvidia/CUDA
This reminds me of a struggle I've run into lately. Can anyone recommend a convenient way to identify an individual Unicode character or string of characters?

Ideally I'd like to be able to e.g. highlight one of these weird ligatures, or a whitespace that I want to identify, or an emoji my font doesn't support and select something like "identity this character" from the context menu to see what symbol or series of symbols I'm actually looking at.
The Internet Explorer 6? IE6 is 17 years newer than X11.
Yesterday:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35920336 ("The .zip TLD sucks", >290 comments)
I've started doing this (materialized views denormalizing data) at work more recently and it's been immensely helpful. Surprised more people don't do this.
It gets the big things really really right but it is missing human character in a lot of ways compared to Ocarina and MM. Not sure if it was infeasible to do both or if they were on principle trying to let the nature elements do 100% of the work.
There's no complete solutions, but there are mitigations.

- Limiting user input

- Decoupling the UI from the component that makes the call to an LLM

- Requiring output to be in a structured format and parsing it

- Not just doing a free-form text input/output; being a little more thoughtful about how an LLM can improve a product beyond a chatbot

Someone motivated enough can get through with all of these in place, but it's a lot harder than just going after all the low-effort chatbots people are slapping on their UIs. I don't see it as terribly different from anything else in computer security. Someone motivated enough will get through your systems, but that doesn't mean there aren't tools and practices you can employ.
Couldn’t the same be said about a ratio between ceo pay and lowest worker?
> (But I really wish Space was split into at least two keys. It’s so stupidly large.)

If you can stand the tiny distant Return, get a Japanese keyboard.
I wish they would invest more time in improving their dark theme. It is OK, but kind of jarring still.
... And yet if you replaced everyone's wages with the average (which is of course the best redistribution can achieve), $97,962, call it $100k whilst that would be an increase of just shy of $30k per year, minus tax on that ($30k), average rent ($30k), transport ($11k), food ($5k), entertainment ($4k) ... which would leave you with $20k.

Note that taxes are progressive, so from a $70k wage you get about $10k "free cash" to spend, whilst a $100k wage gives you the above number of about $20k.

So it takes A little over 2.5 years' worth of average full-time wages to buy a car in the US.

Therefore I disagree, the problem is the average cost of a new car, expressed in labor (2.5 years average full-time labor), much more than the stratification of US society.

I would argue 6 months full-time labor would be quite expensive for a car, and for the value of a car to be that, you'd need to make $170k per year, you'd have to be in the top 10%. Only at a 5% income do the cars this article talks about become reasonably priced. And I do mean reasonably priced. Not cheap.

Second problem is if you look at where the problem is, profit ("capitalism") ... is not the problem. GM makes $2,150 per car, the average car manufacturer half that, according to Google. Whilst this amount would move the needle a bit, it would certainly not solve the problem. That would make cars affordable for the top 11% of the population (and that's taking the GM figures), which would be just the tiniest of improvement.

According to this article:

https://carfromjapan.com/article/industry-knowledge/how-much...

Only raw material cost, labor and (barely) tax would make a decent dent (at least 10%) in the cost of a car.

Note: numbers all just Googled and taken at face value, maybe converting to per year (from per month) but no more processing. Obviously big mistakes could have happened, although I think not. I could do better but back of the envelope this should be about correct.
Allow me to introduce to you, Courier Prime:

https://quoteunquoteapps.com/courierprime/

It's slightly thicker to more closely match what Courier from a typewriter actually looked like on a page with the ink bleed -- Courier New was modeled after the typewriter forms, not the result on the page, which to me has always been a massive error.

And Prime has beautiful, actual italics.
Yes, it’s very disheartening to see math teachers not understand how to check your work.

There are algorithms (and heuristics) that have been known for centuries to verify (or estimate) check most results from arithmetic to calculus.

It’s as if programmers were not taught how to do logging or assertions.

In math there are two types of errors, not understanding the problem and mistakes. Redoing the work won’t help at all for misunderstanding or lack of understanding and has only a marginal chance of catching the mistake.
Sadly, at least on switch, it isn't cheaper. Exact same price as the brand new release.

Nintendo can be very, very cruel with their prices.
Also Railscasts.
It absolutely does not “very easily” make that much money
Yes, and then potentially rebuild it based on what you know now! No one reads that part.
Just an example of course, but we can imagine some `from consciousness import *` line in some undefined future.
Personally I want to move away from JavaScript and its ecosystem. There is https://hexdocs.pm/phoenix_live_view/js-interop.html though. For the record, Phoenix does use JavaScript for its "LiveView"[1], but I think it is optional? At least I remember someone telling me this when I was complaining that generating a basic Phoenix project (using "mix") is too bloated due to JavaScript and such.

[1]

[...]
./deps/phoenix_live_view/assets/js/phoenix_live_view/view_hook.js
./deps/phoenix_live_reload/priv/static/phoenix_live_reload.js
./assets/package-lock.json
./assets/vendor/topbar.js
./assets/js
./assets/js/app.js
[...]
I thought the last paragraph of the main article was interesting. They admit that they chose to default to xorg over wayland in the distro because it worked better without hardware acceleration. Now they're ranting that their users are using xorg?

At work I have deprecated many older software components in favor of implementing newer, less painful to maintain ones. Lots of other software engineers use those components, so a big part of it is documentation or training. Rather than harp on the flaws of the old thing, I try to objectively present the lessons learned from it, with an emphasis on all the good aspects of the original that carried forward into the replacement. That generally makes the transition smoother, especially for getting buy-in from the folk that were involved with developing the original implementation. I also wouldn't tell someone not to use an existing component that works, unless I have a concrete recommendation for a better alternative.
I'm curious whether the developers were pitched this by management as some lofty social goal like democratizing digital relationships or perhaps disrupting OnlyFans DMs?
Not a bad point, but cars, planes, and space rockets are specifically designed for us humans. We have crafted our entire environment for ourselves (building, cities, governments, etc). AI systems will be no different, AI models will be trained to be human-centric. LLMs are trained on human languages, OCR is trained on human text, facial recognition is trained on human faces, it's all human-centric. We don't need to evolve, the AI will "evolve" for us.
Next.js isn’t one giant workaround for anything. People were building isomorphic SPAs using React long before Next was created. All Next.js did is to put it all together in a simple framework.
> I mean if you don't have a ridiculous American tech salary you won't get burned out.

Burnout is a symptom of overworking, which can happen even outside salaried work environments. It's a common thing where I live, where you're expected to do undocumented overtime until you have completed your work in the eyes of your employer. It's certainly illegal, but rarely ends up in court.
I'd disagree. An abstraction is a way to reason about a problem. Often that reduces duplication, but it is a side effect from a better understanding of the problem.
How is this different from .com, which was also a common file extension?
AI GF feels a lot better than a patronizing counselor
This is for Google Cloud users. My understanding is that Google mostly uses TPU internally.
It was only a few years ago that fully self-driving cars were only a few years away.
Also even the admins that could access such data have HUMONGOUS audit footprints.
You could alternatively use VSCode Live Share which is pretty similar.
Ruby was never really the issue at GitHub; there were plenty of other concerns that ranked much higher on the list. Ultimately it scaled well.
> writer anthropomorphizing the fictional ‘ai’ to tell it it’s nature - it relies on the LLM’s world model to then also anthropomorphize a fictional ai assistant

I think it’s a little game or reward for the writers at some level. As in, “I am teaching this artificial entity by talking to it as if is it a human” vs “I am writing general rules in some markup dialect for a computer program”.

Anthropomorphizing leads to emotional involvement, attachment, heightened attention and effort put into the interaction from both the writers and users.
GPS Independence: Japan plans expansion of QZSS network to 11 satellites
> “I think the way you've phrased your question will invite negative responses.”

And?

If you see nuance, and rephrasing the OP can help make your response on point, then please share. Otherwise I find this browbeating and condescending. You’re just telling us how you want to hear the argument framed. Geez.
Here's my understanding of how GPT-4 works.

Imagine you're a supercomputer and someone feeds you billions and billions and billions of pages of text written by humans.

Then they ask you to compress it really really small.

You can't compress it that small without figuring out a lot of the underlying laws, frameworks, and rules that apply to humans, that apply to the world, and so on.

Compression == coming up with powerful frameworks that condense knowledge.

It's kind of like how with a really powerful set of rules or frameworks in math or physics, you can derive many other things.

As a side note, I suspect GPT-4 has inside its neurons a bunch of powerful frameworks about the world that humans haven't yet discovered.
Most of us share the experience of having driven a car from A to B, without having any conscious recollection about the trip. From such experiences we can deduce that our level of consciousness is not constant, but it fluctuates.

Our experience, however, is that consciousness is a constant. The ancient mystics, monks and people studying meditation and other similar practices have made some practical observations. These indicate that such lack of consciousness is actually quite common, we are just not very aware of it. It is also possible to experimentally understand this, although it is probably not possible to prove it scientifically.

In other words, we do not possess meta-consciousness, consciousness about our consciousness. We just fill in the blanks, believe that we have been conscious. To become conscious more often and more deeply, you need to be able to control your attention and not lose it. The modern society does not help you in learning to control your attention, more to the contrary. So we are probably even less conscious than common people at the time that the ancient mystics lived.

We should be less concerned about the consciousness of the AI, and more concerned about increasing our own consciousness.
Exactly. There are so many benefits and zero downsides.

Even if someone follows with "RTFM" anyway, it doesn't automatically create a rude culture so much as it rudely informs you of the etiquette for participating in a helpful culture.
This is the sort of statement that isn't wrong, but which illustrates the echo chamber that is HN (or tech in general). There are plenty of industries and even more companies where "hustle culture" just isn't a thing, and management don't devolve into a default of employee abuse.

Also, besides growing a spine and looking out for #1 increasingly as they gain age & experience, most people also start realizing that their time is finite and they need to actively prioritize where to spend it. For many, this realization comes with relationships & children, something most white collar professionals don't experience until they've been working 7-10 years.
There was no omnibar five decades ago.