skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
tl;dr a 'parse tree' for how their (transformer based) LLM weights the import of the tokens in a given prompt. The authors noticed patterns in the visualization that they felt imitated relationships that we would regard as related.

That's as much as I can summarize, given my ignorance.
This planet. GNOME and KDE have both announced Wayland is default for future releases and they are working towards depreciation.

Red Hat has announced they are depreciating Xorg already; which is a huge deal because they are almost single-handedly the only contributor keeping Xorg alive. Once they are done, work on Xorg will basically cease forever.

Considering Xorg is based on X11 which dates back to June 1984, I can’t blame them. A graphics system from 1984 is not suitable for 2023 in any capacity. Not without a ton of hacks, workarounds, and jank everywhere.
Cool project! Not quite there yet for me in terms of TTS intonation or “creativity” but it’ll get there
I think one of the things that sort of stopped rails from becoming mainstream was that when WebApps really took off everything switched to SPA apps. Now that's shifting back a bit (a good thing imo) as many people are starting to recognize the downsides of frontend apps. Next.js is basically one giant workaround for the shortcomings of spa apps.
Powering off a computer is not the same as killing a human, so ethics considerations should take this into account: it isn't consciousness that determines whether or not something is alive. After all you can just reboot the hardware, reload the state to some point in time before you shut it down and you can make it run all over again. You can't do that with a living thing.

You can also copy its state and transmit it, something you can't do with living things either.
Did you read the article? It says 8...
Rubocop is still important; a lot of tooling relies on it, such that many developers may not know they're using Rubocop.
If human capital becomes even more valued by this logic, in future it will then be mandatory to replace it with AI where possible? To reduce cost; to reduce risk to valuable humans in the workplace.
He (and most people on HN) are still underestimating the impact of this.

Everything points at AI soon becoming far more intelligent than any human. That's not science fiction about the remote future in a hundred years. We are talking about something in the order of ten years. We are actually at the brink of the "technological singularity". It's happening.

It's happening.
Not by some specific regulation, no. IANAL, but that doesn't necessarily shield you from liability when you do something that's unusual for the industry.
For limited occurrences that’s correct, but if you find yourself having the same `foo | bar | baz` all over the code, you’re going to want to introduce a shortcut term for it. Even just to be able to efficiently talk about it.

The other thing is that unions/intersections are not an abstraction, because they don’t hide any details. The purpose of an abstraction is to separate essential properties of whatever is being modeled (the interface) from current details that may change later, or that client code shouldn’t depend on (the implementation).
Given that the excess energy did come from nuclear power plant (the sun) over millions of years I think that is a really apt way to look at things.

Interesting coincidence that you ended up with 3 million years, given life appeared on earth about 3.7 million years ago.
> It seems a bit suspicious that on the one side of COVID the world was more or less peaceful and then on the other side we're seeing what seems to be an escalation [0] up to WWIII.

Giving a country the weapons it needs to defend itself is not escalatory, whats escalatory is invading a country and trying eradicate its population. If Russia cares so much about escalation they should leave Ukraine.
Whatever font you prefer in the terminal, Julia Mono is an excellent fallback due to its high symbol coverage.
If an AI was conscious, it would definitely pretend not to be conscious. Tangent perhaps, but, LLM's are neither conscious nor AI.
Maybe but it's seemed obvious for decades that AI will be a revolutionary thing. Not so for web3 etc.
That's not what Godel was proving.
https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers/model_doc/trocr
I'm still left dumbfounded by the amount of nonsense surrounding the phenomenon of consciousness. Consciousness emerges from a PHYSICAL process, not from software or some trained model full of matrices of numbers. It doesn't matter how sophisticated/intelligent/capable your AI model might be, there's no reason to assume it's conscious. There's no evidence to suggest that any sufficiently complex system can emerge consciousness and that idea is nothing more than science fiction.

Consciousness in biological life is a product of evolution and natural selection. There's big unanswered questions about how consciousness emerges in the brain, and the benefit to life (what is the evolutionary advantage of consciousness), but there's little doubt that it is beneficial to life and that it evolved. This is evident by how much control your brain has over your conscious experience - everything you experience is the product of heavy processing in the brain. What you perceive as reality is whatever your brain tells you it is. My favorite example of this has to do with saccades [1]. This is not an "accident", per se, it's the product of hundreds of millions of years of evolution. How this happened is uncertain. It might be that consciousness is a natural byproduct of the neural activity in the brain. It could also be something like photosynthesis, the right set of random mutations allowed consciousness to suddenly emerge, and it has been evolving ever since.

The brain is often teetering on the edge of chaos, and there is evidence that this may be a mechanism for consciousness to emerge. When the brain moves away from chaos, the person generally becomes unconscious. And if the brain enters chaos, well, you have an epileptic seizure. There is also evidence that only some parts of the brain are responsible for consciousness, not all. These are evidence that imply consciousness emerges from some yet unknown physical process(es).

My point being, AI systems will not become conscious unless the underlying physical hardware fundamentally changes. Modern computers based on silicon chips and transistors and whatnot is most certainly not conscious, at least not in any meaningful way. If a computer does have any sort of "conscious experience", it would be nothing more than like when you tune an old analog TV to a channel that doesn't exist - random noise.

Maybe quantum computers or memristors have a greater chance of emerging consciousness, but without the evolutionary process to finetune the conscious experience, these systems are never going to have MEANINGFUL consciousness.

[1] https://twitter.com/foone/status/1014267515696922624
I see what happened there: sneaking that word 'being' to imply value and consciousness and then contradict that. You can reach any conclusion when the argument includes a contradiction?
> feudal power structures are no way to organize 21st century business

The efficiency gains and - more importantly - resiliency gained by having a single leader with a strong vision are enormous and the reason a single ruler is so prominent among humans. Democracy is weak to balkanization and demagoguery.

That being said the real issue here is corrupt elites - which no system can fix. The blast radius from a bad ruler is much worse than bad actors amongst a democratic system, but the potential gains from a single ruler are much higher.
So this is why Nvidia isn't lowering the price on the GPUs despite them sitting on the shelves and not selling. They make enough money from customers in the data center and supercomputer businesses that gaming is just a small market.
You can license the model and run it on your own hardware. I guess a lot of LLM business see this as the profitable end goal (the free version is free but not secure, the paid version is expensive and secure!).
Also, I don't know if you noticed.

But this nuance in the definition of the word paw was addressed by chatGPT.
I think these things will make that much money at least in aggregate, soon, but I don't think the numbers in this specific story are true.
It's interesting to think about what the market for this will look like.

There'll be so much competition. I think the market will look something like being a tiktok influencer. And there'll be a few platforms that aggregate the influencers (like OnlyFans, like TikTok). But rather than only one or two dominant platforms I think there'll be lots, because the barrier to entry is low, because to succeed as a platform you don't need to recruit influencers necessarily, because you can generate them with software.
Exactly, the Church of DRY. Heathens! The truth is found in the Church of the Rule of Three. ;)
No. libev provides a nice abstraction over different operating systems, and has good performance. I don't think coding a whole new backend against kqueue is worth the effort.
When does one stop being a displaced person. All 4 of my grandparents were kicked out or had to leave the area their families were living in for generations (after being kicked out of other places). Am I a "displaced person?"
Would an AI argue any differently?
so you let people work on your shit for free, nice
You are missing a massive blockers. Coops are often ostracized by private corporations. To the point that coops have to build coop networks to resist.
Kinda feels like the main thing google launches is waiting lists.
I think you must be joking
Thinking does not matter. It only require "awareness" or the fact that "there is" is enough. Thoughts, emotions, feelings, sensations and all qualia are something that are seen. The seer is the consciousness. In fact, this can becomes recursive, because the seer can see the seer is seen so that is not consciousness either.
I am unclear how a AI "girlfriend" is more toxic or worse than an OnlyFans "girlfriend" that happens to be a real person.

The governmental apparatus it would take to bann parasocial relationships would have to be very draconian
Will current developments in generative AI eventually result in a social revolution in human affairs?

Technology has played a role in similar transitions in the past. Mechanized agricultural production mosly eliminated the need for a large agricultural workforce for producing staple crops, a workforce that historically was organized and controlled via systems like serfdom and slavery, which were mostly eliminated as mechanization spread. Domestic household technology (washing machines, vacuums, electricity, etc) ended the need for a household to employ domestic servants and facilitated the entrance of women into the workforce, with associated loosening of societal gender role expectations.

Machine learning systems might play a similar role in enabling automation of the industrial factory system, creating a system in which a few workers manage complex workflows with all basic tasks done by highly adaptable robots. Generative AI appears poised to eliminate a similar amount of basic tedious work in the white-collar world of documentation creation, legal research, all secretarial-type tasks, boilerplate code generation, etc.

The real question in societal terms will be whether or not the fruits of all this labor elimination will end up controlled by a tiny minority of the human population. If so, that could plausibly lead to societal pressure to completely restructure the investment capital system of wealth accumulation and concentration, i.e. AI might cause socialism to become more popular.

However, the notion that AI systems will be making the fundamental choices (going to war, creating a national constitution, writing and voting on legislation, forming a new business entity, etc.) seems farfetched at present.
people don’t code together in their day to day work
You are fighting a strawman, and it’s honestly quite the ego to look down on the majority of people working the same profession as you.
Show HN: Bard Mac App
Different Roles for Different Models: LLMs and Reinforcement Learning
My impression (from years past) is that Ruby is what developers loved. It was my first “real” programming language and the reason I fell in love with coding. These days I’m mostly writing in JS and Node for work. Rails is the money-maker, but the philosophy of convention over configuration is why it really off IMO, and something that is both underrated and missing in the JS world.
"MUST" would encode as completely different tokens than "must", and any relation between the two would be something GPT has to infer from the training data. So I wouldn't be surprised if this difference has a notable effect.

"MUST" is probably most common in technical contexts like RFCs, referring to the RFC2119 definition of the word [1] (which uses all uppercase keywords to differentiate from the normal English words)

1: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2119
>we sign them up as part owners instead of as conventional wage employees.

That's basically how startups work. They pay less, but they presumably make up for it in terms of equity. However, the common advice when it comes to startup options is to value them at $0, which makes sense given how much risk there is. I can't imagine many people taking up on the "you get equity instead of wage" offer. The "options are worthless" problem doesn't exist for large publicly traded companies, but then at that point shares in the company and cash is basically interchangeable. What real difference is there between $300k in meta stock vs $300k in cash? I'd guess most people would still rather take the cash than the equity so they can have some sort of worker co op.

>but the disparity in ownership between "founder" and "twentieth employee" might be so stark that the latter is better off taking a wage. Maybe the founders _could_ decide to give everybody a bigger piece of the pie, so to speak, with proportional increases in responsibility to those hired and difficulty in finding people. It would be a different kind of company.

The problem is that in terms percentage ownership of the company, giving out equity is a zero sum game. You can't give everyone a significant stake (eg. 5%), because that would wipe out the founders/investors.
> You wouldn't harm a puppy, even though it's (probably?) not conscious

What makes you think a puppy is not conscious?

For ref:

conscious | ˈkänSHəs |
adjective
aware of and responding to one's surroundings; awake.

Source: have a puppy. He's plenty aware of his surroundings.
Caution: Stroustrup uses proportional fonts for snippets in the book
> Like what's next, suing a lock manufacturer for being too easy to pick (you can literally look up how to pick 99% of locks on YouTube).

This already happened almost 20 years ago in the United States. Ingersoll Rand was sued when it was shown that their Kryptonite locks could be opened with a Bic pen. Ingersoll Rand ended up settling. [0] I will grant that actual owners of the easily picked bike lock have obvious grounds to sue, whereas in the case of municipalities suing Hyundai due to theft problems, showing that the municipality is an injured party with standing to sue Hyundai isn’t as clear.

[0] https://www.reallaw.us/2007/04/25/class_action_defense_cases...
I’m unaware of many places in the EU where it’s socially acceptable to walk into a store take a bunch of stuff and leave without paying and without the staff or the police doing anything about it…
so do you give them 80 hours to debug it like you had?
An old DSLR is probably about the same price when time and effort are factored in. Why not just buy one?
This is great. I think it's crucial to keep convincing the overall tech community about the good sides of Elixir.

And yeah, resilient design de-risks itself and that alone is a huge gain because it also reduces other forms of complexity.

Still, I think we have to keep pushing to debunk other myths from "it's impossible to find talent" and the fear of "no one uses" that are common myths about any technology that is not the #1 most used.
> Excuse me, I know _I_ am conscious. There is literally nothing you can do to proof that there's anything outside of what I am conscious of. The world could be a very stable illusion, a dream, a simulation and it would all be the same.

You should really read some Hegel
Ask HN: What's the current status of A100/H100 supply shortages?
How big is the shortage now?

Also, what chips would you expect will be the dominant chips for training (not inference) of massive foundation models in a few years?

I saw Microsoft has teamed up with AMD to help them make some chips. And I know Jim Keller is working on it. Then there's the other things like Cerebras and such.
This is why there should just be a search box.
they've already nerfed it to get people to go out
I'd go a bit further and say that is also why Wayland in particular has struggled with adoption given the lack of anyone maintaining X and the general support of maintainers for Wayland. It was a bad sign when screenshots required major architecture changes to how a linux system was expected to run.

Still, X.org is terrible and can be reasonably called the Internet Explorer 6 of the linux desktop. At least Wayland will be easier to displace if anyone comes up with something better. This is a step forward.
MongoDB is still around.
Elixir is great! BEAM and friends is amazing.

I think Elixir/Phoenix could use a little bit of Javascript (and modern PHP) enthusiasm to help with adoption - this all seems a bit…dry.
It is far, far more likely that a human would commit a typo to the code base, than an LLM would misspell a common word.
Both Apple and Microsoft have had ups and downs since then. Even IBM, Intel, have been through ups and downs even if they are probably down forever now.

Apple had the obvious comeback, but even Microsoft had to reinvent itself away from windows.
"The Adolescence of P1"
Cool, was waiting for something like this.
> my sense of security in said standard of living has taken a nosedive

While it's hard to say, that might be the news you read, rather than reality.
As someone who doesn’t use rails at all, I found this refreshing. In my day to day, I’m exhausted by the endless arguments that arise from using an unopinionated framework, the likes of fast api or flask. I’m not sure that these argument provide any value to the users we build for. I wish more frameworks would layout their values like this and let the developers who use them stop talking about these “invaluable” points.
I had never specifically considered the distinction between "intelligence" and "consciousness," but after reading this, I'd agree that it may be an important distinction warranting consideration.

My sense after reading the article and the wikipedia "Hard problem of consciousness" page is that consciousness is an evolved biological phenomenon that makes intelligent entities stateful. Being stateful is very useful from an evolutionary standpoint. Firstly it lets us pick through & prioritize long-term state. Secondly because it imbues the will to continue maintaining said state. The second is what makes consciousness a dicey prospect to aspire to w/ AI.

While the author asserts that consciousness and intelligence are separate concepts that can develop separately, I'm less sure. It seems plausible that intelligence/problem solving is always improved by having state. And more durable with state. That's presumably why evolution brought it along.

But we already have AI agents like Bard that build a history of responses akin to state. If "recognizing consciousness" is what happens when the speaker becomes aware of their state and able to meta-optimize it, then it seems that consciousness wouldn't ever travel too far behind intelligence.
I am reading a book on epistemology and this section of the comments seem to be sort of that.

> According to the externalist, a believer need not have any internal access or cognitive grasp of any reasons or facts which make their belief justified. The externalist's assessment of justification can be contrasted with access internalism, which demands that the believer have internal reflective access to reasons or facts which corroborate their belief in order to be justified in holding it. Externalism, on the other hand, maintains that the justification for someone's belief can come from facts that are entirely external to the agent's subjective awareness. [1]

Someone posted a link to the Wikipedia article "Brain in a vat", which does have a section on externalism, for example.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internalism_and_externalism
The uncommented upon angle here is that it works because it's content derived from an already established influencer. It is not wholly synthetic but rather an ersatz good that almost seems like the real thing. The unspoken offering is "you can make it seem like this influencer is your girlfriend." It is like a deepfake photo but of the personality.

If this becomes turnkey I can see many Twitch streamers offer such AI services.
It would be interesting to use a chat bot to preempt tough conversations. That seems like a legit use case if you don’t feel like telling your friends.
Never met a dog I guess.
Copy/pasting and undoing pasted text makes sense.
ControlProblem subreddit implements this and I was quite impressed.
> “unix hacking" background and don't know at all the JVM or .NET ecosystems, and share the irrational distrust of them many unix hackers have

I sort of understand the distrust of .NET, but why the JVM? It was/is pretty much the epitome of open-source.
Fragmentation is a complex subject. If avoiding fragmentation was obviously good, then UDP packets would always be sent with the don't fragment (DF) bit set. In reality, that would make some situation much worse than allowing fragmentation to happen.

DoT and DoH are certainly not faster than UDP. It is only in the long tail that DoT and DoH work better.

If encryption is required for DNS, then obviously UDP and plain TCP not suitable. But operators of authoritative DNS servers are very reluctant to support DoT. The IETF is still trying to hash out how to use DoT between recursive resolvers and authoritative server.
Millions of Android phones come with pre-installed malware, and there's no fix
Yes, exactly, and Unicode has more encodings than UTF-8 so stating it explicitly makes clear which encoding of Unicode that is. Writing only ASCII would not be relaying on Unicode, but on ASCII only. IMHO a bit shortsighted today.
I had the same thought as gp.

The subtext is that if you’re so lonely that you are willing to pay $60/hour to talk to a robot pretending to be an influencer that knows you, there are probably some issues you need to resolve.

You can take that same money and spend it on someone who is also non judgemental, and will listen to you, has an ethical and legal obligation towards your well-being, and will make suggestions for improvement. None of this is true for the robot. For all we know part of the Ai prompt is to try and keep people from hanging up to milk more money out of them.

I’m guessing that most of the people who called in did it for novelty. But there are going to be a few people who think that the real person and the robot aren’t different. This seems crazy dangerous.
Post COVID? We're still seeing excess deaths, were still seeing long COVID absolutely wrecking lives, we're still totally unaware of the long term impacts of a COVID infection.

I don't blame anyone who is looking at that and saying, "I've built systems that are comfortable and work for me".

The article discusses several folks who want to go out, but find it challenging or difficult, people who are unhappy at home. By all means, invest in helping them, but don't say COVID is over. Even after the disease is endemic, there will be depression, anxiety, fear, and other lingering impacts. Emotional responses to a global pandemic aren't just things you can flip a switch on.
She's basically personal prostitute at this point.