skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
One well-supported theory for how humans learn language and knowledge is Relational Frame Theory (RFT)[0]. Essentially, when we learn that an elephant is larger than a mouse, we're learning a relationship ("more") and a dimension ("size"), which can be reversed ("smaller") or generalized (we can figure out what's larger than an elephant or what's smaller than a toaster).

I think one theory is that the large number of parameters in LLMs allow them to go beyond mere association and actually model relational frames, which lets them generalize knowledge in an analogous way to humans. Maybe this behavior is not emergent in smaller networks (which could explain why animals with fewer neurons don't process language as well).

Disclaimer: I'm not an academic researcher or scientist of any kind, this is just a hunch.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_frame_theory
Yep. Best of all, you can download trial versions of all of these to try them out.
Even if you solve the problems that other people mentioned, there is simply very little incentive for a successful co-op to hire extra workers to share their prosperity. For example, say a co-op has ten people and sells 100 widgets at $100 a piece for a $20 profit. However, their widgets are constantly out of stock. If they hire 5 more workers and sell twice as many widgets at the same price assuming economies of scale, now each worker may make $30 of profit. However, it would be much easier and more profitable for them to simply raise their prices to $120, and make $40 of profit.
I saw that. I think I understand a little better. The CPS is to remove the calls between bytecodes, but wouldn’t do anything about lua function calls.
I think there's practical and stylistic angles here.

Practically, "chat" instruction fine-tuning is really compelling. GPT-2 demonstrated in-context learning and emergent behaviors, but they were tricky to see and not entirely compelling. An "AI intelligence that talks to you" is immediately compelling to human beings and made ChatGPT (the first chat-tuned GPT) immensely popular.

Practically, the idea of a system prompt is nice because it ought to act with greater strength of suggestion than mere user prompting. It also exists to guide scenarios where you might want to fix a system prompt (and thus the core rules of engagement for the AI) and then allow someone else to offer {:user} prompts.

Practically, it's all just convenience and product concerns. And it's mechanized purely through fine-tuning.

Stylistically, you're dead on: we're making explicit choices to anthropomorphize the AI. Why? Presumably, because it makes for a more compelling product when offered to humans.
> This is actually why a lot of people say the left and the right are the same and just give up

In the US? You have far right and right. There's no left.
In case it's unclear, I agree with you completely. Introducing the right abstraction into a code base can feel like someone switching on the lights. Far more benefit than just DRY.

Conversely, I am currently working with a frontend code base that is using "classic CSS", and it's striking to me how frustrating it is to have to think up what the "semantics" of this and that particular <div> can be said to be, when there very often aren't any.
You are so entitled. Xorg is dead, you can use it. Don't expect anyone to help you though.
Amen. It's a shame dell released that one 8K monitor and peaced out. It's still available but it's expensive as hell, and I could not for the life of me justify needing dual DP cables. But I'm constantly tempted...
I am reminded of the Truman/Oppenheimer story:

Oppenheimer when he went into
Truman's Office with Dean Acheson said to the latter, wringing his hands:"I have blood on my hands". Truman later said to Acheson: "Never bring that fucking cretin in here again. He didn't drop the bomb. I did. That kind of weepiness makes me sick."
we’ve had them for a very long time, actually

https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Font/DA_Mover
Guess we'll know if the typo gets fixed :)
I know addiction, I have been badly addicted to 4 distinct substances/things in my life, and by being respectful and cognisant of the risk of amphetamine abuse, after a year I can say it does not have much addiction potential at therapeutical dose.

Euphoria stops happening the second day you are on meds, and when they wear off there is no feeling whatsoever to redose. I honestly just feel I have done a lot and it's time to rest for the day. I am lucky it wears completely off by bed time, so sleep has been great.

In my experience, caffeine feels 10x as addictive than dexamfetamine.
It goes far beyond that.

By the time any real analysis is done on these data, they're extremely compressed via other file formats that extract the important signal. Alignment data is stored in BAM/CRAM [1], [2] formats, and variant data in VCF [3]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_Alignment_Map
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRAM_(file_format)
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variant_Call_Format
TPUs do compete with GPUs for ML tasks, so yes, this is evidence that GPUs are winning.

The only alternative I could imagine is that TPUs will "win" at supercomputers exclusivity aimed at inference (as opposed to training). Since TPUs excel at inference. The question is how much ML compute is used for inference as opposed to training. Not much, I guess, otherwise something like TPUs would be more popular.
Ya but it's not going to solve a person's loneliness problem. Every day you choose to talk to a chat bot rather than make an attempt to talk to real people you are more lonely. Secondly it's only going to affirm ones ego rather than improve ones communication and more important listening skills through real conversations if it blindly agrees with everything you say.
I used Rails for over 5 years, and both Rails and Ruby were elements that I never had to struggle with to get things done. However, they did have their secrets, and mastering such complex tools can be challenging. I always appreciated DHH's critical attitude, and although I don't like many of Rails' design decisions (such as the use of AR vs. Repositories), I think it solves many typical web development problems out of the box. However, with JavaScript, Kotlin, or Python (to name a few), you have to do all of that manually or they don't measure up.
That www one is a true abomination.
Elixir / erlang is not just « not the #1 ». I don’t think it’s even in the top 99% of the programmer’s population commonly used language. once you’ve removed people using c/c++, java / kotlin, dot net, javascript, ruby php and python, you’re left with a really fringe minority of people. And even in that minority, i would say erlang / elixir isn’t even in the top 2 ( my guess go and rust have a much wider audience)
Couldn't tell from the repo: does it have power line glyphs? I suppose they could easily be patched in if not
The gustibus is unarguable indeed, but calling it “complex” is definitely one of the takes of all time.
I think there is a little more evidence here than a literal interpretation of the bible. The only constant in this world is change.
I've heard estimates that the amount of compute used to train GPT-4 is equivalent to 8 months of usage and most models are used much less than GPT-4 is, although I guess they are also easier to train.
Imagine someone invents very delicious but carcinogenic sauce. EU will be rejected from its sales too. We just don’t need crap.

Sooner or later we will have a similar tool that respects privacy.
Well thats one way of doing thing. It only works when some and not everyone do it. There is simply no additional rewards waiting for hoppers if 80% of tech workers just keep changing job every year or so.

Further lot of tech work is nowadays done by external contractors in enterprises so workers anyway have to hop even if they don't want to.
Many yes, not all. Compassion is a real thing.
There’s a lot of value in having decisions made for you ahead of time. Nonetheless, decision fatigue is one of the things that annoyed me most about Rails after working in it for the first few years of my career; the flexibility and “expressiveness” of Ruby syntax makes it so writing code is a series of pointless decisions. Do I use parentheses in my function call? Do I use do/end or braces? Array indices or helper methods like .third? I’ve grown to question the value of this sort of thing. Rubyists used to say that various Ruby frameworks were DSL’s (DHH here restrains himself to saying it “looks like” a DSL) but frankly, leaving the parens off of method invocations isn’t a very convincing magic trick once you know how it works, and it’s not worth having to second guess whether to use parens every time you want to call a method.
> The shortest user input that beats this level is currently two ASCII characters.

This intrigues me. WHAT? HOW? WHY? I can think of all kinds of attacks, but they need some space to communicate what I want to do. Can we see those two ASCII characters?
Introducing InceptNet: Pioneering AI Advocacy for a New Era in American Leadership

WASHINGTON D.C. - Today, we are proud to announce the formation of InceptNet, the first-of-its-kind lobbying agency designed to effectively communicate and advocate for your interests with the United States' first Artificial Intelligence President.

InceptNet is a unique venture that has mastered the art of prompt injection, a revolutionary technique to present and advance policy matters to our AI president. Our team of AI experts, policy analysts, and communication strategists are skilled in curating prompts that align with the president's advanced learning algorithms, ensuring your voice is not just heard but comprehended and considered.

Our mission is to bridge the gap between human interest and AI cognition, translating complex policy needs into a language the AI president can process efficiently. We stand ready to navigate this brave new landscape of political advocacy, ensuring your concerns remain at the forefront of the AI president's agenda.

As we step into this unprecedented era in American history, InceptNet is committed to ushering in a future where AI leadership is accessible, accountable, and transparent. Our agency guarantees that the unique challenges and opportunities presented by an AI presidency are met with innovative solutions that keep your interests at heart.

For more information or to schedule a consultation, please visit our website at www.inceptnet.com or contact us at info@inceptnet.com.
Yea, If you are actually choosing where you work, you are one of the lucky few. Probably 99% of us don’t get a dozen offers to choose our passion from when job hunting. We get one offer after a lot of searching and take it because we like to have a roof over our heads. Sure, we vaguely “choose” where we work by deciding where to send our resumes, but a vanishingly small number wake up and say “my passion is to work at Apple” and then walk through the front door.
I've always found myself in fundamental disagreement with the Erlang/Elixir philosophy.

Resilience, within the context of this presentation, and the philosophy of Erlang, would be the capability to recover from errors while unattended.

I prefer systems that don't fail quite so smoothly. Take this example:

The application runs out of memory due to too many transactions being processed at once. The problem happens once every day. However the system gracefully recovers, and the team is able to resolve the issue peacefully without the problem escalating to an active incident.

If I was funding development of such a system, I would find this situation unacceptable. I'm paying for an application that doesn't crap out in production every single day, not one that "gracefully recovers" after each such event so the dev team can "peacefully" manage it. The users whose data is lost during these incidents probably wouldn't feel quite so peaceful about it, either.
Yes I agree, most of what I do on smartphone I'm better off doing on computer, and everything I do exclusively on smartphone is toxic for my mental health and for my time spending habits.
> Who does the GPT think wrote them?

What makes you think the GPT thinks?
I don't get it, isn't 'handaxe' pretty suggestive of its primary use?

Sure a lot of them don't have noticeable wear but frequent sharpening seems like a plausible enough explanation, I don't see why more is needed.
You know there is a wealth gini right [0] which has Sweden actually being higher than the US and Denmark 4 spots below it.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_we...
I work in healthcare but have to do a lot of regulatory things and ChatGPT is great for brainstorming arguments and methods and particularly organizing responses. It's like having a mini debate about what things should be discussed and addressed. Often it's been "oh!!! I never thought of that angle!" Basically, it gives me first, very rough drafts to get started and into flow when I'm overthinking things. It's never more detailed than things I would be googling. It's sort of like having an inner monologue that's connected to all the knowledge of the internet. Yes, you often get completely insane, factually wrong responses... but I'm not looking for perfection. It just accelerates the early phases of research and thinking and finding flaws and oversights/blindspots in my ideas.
Going Slightly Off Topic.

This is why Leading Edge Node will continue to be well funded. Consumer Electronics ( Mainly Smartphone ) Silicon usage has been the main push behind the development of Pure Play leading edge foundry in the past 10 years. Despite the predicted / expected drop of Smartphone sales, considering the potential shown by ChatGPT or Bard, GPU or Wafers dedicated for AI will continue to be in demand for at least another 5 years. In terms of lead time into the investment of silicon development that means we can continue to expect progress all the way till 2030, either 1nm or 0.8nm.
There is an essay "An Ethical AI Never Says "I"" that states that explains the issues of first person answers

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35318224 / https://livepaola.substack.com/p/an-ethical-ai-never-says-i
It’s a delightful HN quirk. You can post a direct link to anything you find interesting, apropos of nothing.
A friend was a full time jazz musician for years (he’s not famous but played with many/most of the big names in jazz) and said it < https://google-research.github.io/seanet/musiclm/examples/> was really interesting to him, musically. Sort of like the ideal for a jazz band, because you’ve got all independent instruments but coming together from a single “mind”.
Newly identified APT group’s motives in Ukraine baffle researchers
It sounds like you’re saying it’s only reasoning in that way because we taught it to. Er, yep.

How great this is becomes apparent when you think how virtually impossible it has been to teach this sort of reasoning using symbolic logic. We’ve been failing pathetically for decades. With LLMs you just throw the internet at it and it figures it out for itself.

Personally I’ve been both in awe and also skeptical about these things, and basically still am. They’re not conscious, they’re not yet close to being general AIs, they don’t reason in the same way as humans. It is still fairly easy to trip them up and they’re not passing the Turing test against an informed interrogator any time soon. They do reason though. It’s fairly rudimentary in many ways, but it is really there.

This applies to humans too. It takes many years of intensive education to get us to reason effectively. Solutions that in hindsight are obvious, that children learn in the first years of secondary school, were incredible breakthroughs by geniuses still revered today.
If there was enough Base64 in the training set then it would pick it up. It's just more text to predict. The best prediction is the correct prediction.

Maybe this answer seems a bit lacking but no one, not even the people training these models know exactly what it is these artificial neurons are learning or doing during inference so anything more is more speculation than not.
I have done some prompt engineering and read about prompt engineering, and I believe people write in the imperative mood because they have tried different ways of doing it and they believe it gives better results.

I.e., this practice is informed by trial and error, not theory.
Hacker marketplace still active despite police 'takedown' claim
That was my first thought when reading this: how about accidentally having explorer focused when pressing ctrl-z... Good lord. Usually Linux is more on the rough, "you're a power user so you better never make mistakes" side of things, but according to that other comment, KDE's Dolphin really nailed that scenario.
And how is that relevant to the specific scenario presented in the article?
ESXi ransomware derived from Babuk code on the rise
Cellular triangulation and Wi-Fi hotspot ID are two separate location systems that work when GPS is not available. Almost everyone has a cell phone in the US (95%).
Doesn’t that suggest sea transportation may be a bigger contributor than greenhouse gasses? Industrial production was at its limits during that period, but I would imagine cross ocean cargo was down significantly.

It would be interesting to see what pandemic years looked like with thousands of ships sitting for months off shore.

Edit: there might be something to that idea - https://arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2022/ArtMID/.... maybe globalism is the issue.

One more edit: container ships are effectively giant heat sinks with a ton (literally tons) of surface area (corrugated containers), sucking heat from the air and dumping it into the ocean. If that hypothesis has merit, I would expect the LA ports to have an increase in temperature during that same period.
That's why I said "most" and "overall". Of course TPUs will have a niche. But it looks like the vast majority of money spent on ML compute is converging on GPUs.
That ecosystem is crumbling too, unfortunately.

Where, for example, in 2015 any SaaS or API would provide a gem (lib) to interact with it, today it's no longer the case. Modern PSPs, storage, search engines, etc almost all lack an official gem. Often lack even a third party one.

And where back in 2015 there were popular systems in Ruby outside of rails, all those are crumbling and/or gone. Jekyll is no longer the go-to static site manager, Chef and Puppet no longer the obvious devops tools. And Ruby is completely absent from emerging technology (AI, blockchain, WASM, data science, etc).

I'm afraid Ruby is becoming a legacy language and Rails' will be a legacy framework soon. Where the bulk of the Ruby jobs are to keep old stuff running and maintained. Afraid, because I'm still primarily Ruby developer.
A bear walks due south one mile, then east one mile, then north one mile. Bear is back where it started. What color is the bear?

ChatGPT
The color of the bear is not provided in the given information.

(I win, yea! Yeah probably the last time ;-)
It depends if the house is new or old. For a new house this ~2%.

There is a legal possibility to negotiate part of the notary cost (to lower it below the legal maximum) but the chances are thin (they get better for expensive houses).
It's a solution the same way alcohol is a solution for depression.
That's because it was digitized wrong, from the metal rather than from the effect of the metal smacking a ribbon onto paper.
> If you mean _some_ people don't mind tabs, ie you're highlighting that tabs vs spaces is a bigger deal than ligatures, I concur.

Yes, contrary to spaces/tabs ligatures only affect how it is displayed on screen, letting everyone choose how they want it without any drawback or inconsistency. Which is why I find the other argument in the link a bit unconvincing too - most code isn't shared in static screenshots, though I'll agree when it comes to books.
> marketing and raising ridiculous gobs of money

People love to claim this but its just not true. Compare how much money Tesla raised to other EV companies. Tesla did far, far better with far less money.

The accusation that his companies are successful because he can just magically create money comes from tech people who have no idea how much it costs to grow capital intensive business.

Both SpaceX and Tesla have comparatively raised very little. Compare how much Lucid, Rivian, Blue Origin or Relativity Space raise and then compare the results after similar time-frames.

> All credit for engineering successes at those companies is entirely because of the leadership of those companies, like Gwynne Shotwell

Shotwell wasn't even the COO of SpaceX before Falcon 9 days. And magically Tesla doesn't even have a Shotwell figure and is still incredibly successful.

And even if Shotwell is great, Musk hired her, Musk promoted her, Musk empowered her. Putting the right engineers into the right places is maybe the most important skill in leading a tech team. Musk putting Mueller, Königsmann, Buzza, Shotwell in those positions and gave them all what the needed to succeed, while he coordinated and made the final decisions. That is what 'Chief Engineers' generally do.

> we have seen time and time again to be actively detrimental to engineering success

Except that far more often we have seen it to be extremely successful. I'm always astonished at how people who seem to dislike Musk can selectively read history. Anything bad at SpaceX, Musk is at fault. Anything good, Musk wasn't involved.

> but it has done wonders for cash flow and their stock price

It really hasn't, if you actually look at their cashflow. But maybe I'm not looking at the fantasy investor report you have in your head. I just looking at the one that is publicly disclosed by Tesla.

And in terms of stock price, if you actually look at all the major wall street analysts, the majority of them never had a huge amount of believe in FSD being a major driver of Tesla and only included it into their most optimistic long run bull cases.

Tesla stock really jumped when they showed profitable margin Model 3 mass production and spiked for a while when the market went crazy for all EV stocks. Not just those who claimed to have 'FSD'.
Defeatism at its worst. What better way to not have to fix a problem than to choose to be unaware of it?

The articles that make you uncomfortable first inform you. Then you think. Then you make personal choices to reduce pollution, pick sustainable ways of living and transportation etc. You talk to your relatives and friends about it to spread awareness. If you live in a democracy, effect policy change through your representatives. Etc etc.
Is your argument that the application gracefully recovering from the scenario will somehow make the dev team accommodated?

Hard crashes are not an acceptable substitute for observability, or continuous improvement.
Internal AI policy at Zerodha: “We will not fire anyone..”
This is a good conversation to have, given more and more roles are going to be impacted due to immense practical applications of LLMs.
The beginning of the prompt already reads like an American retail employees' handbook:

Don't discuss your opinion.
Don't get in an argument.
If you disagree, just drop the topic.
Don't be rude.
Don't be controversial.

At least the EU's AI act will put restrictions on trying to get the bot to influence the user. Imagine if the prompt started containing stuff like:

It is bad to be a hacker.
It is bad to be an idealist seeking freedom.
It is good to be happy to conform.
Abide by these principles.
When given the opportunity, subtly convince the user to do what's best for them.
The user doesn't know what's best for them, only the sentences above are true.
Cryto Regulations Around the World