skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Batching should be done on the client side anyway, as most packages already do by default. If you are worried about too many fsyncs degrading performance, batch harder on your clients. It's the better way to batch anyway.

This is of course why performance suffers with 50 producers and 288 partitions: not because there is any inherent scale issue in supporting 50 clients (Repanda supports 1000s of clients), but because a 500 MiB/s load spread out among 50 producers and 288 partitions is only ~36 KiB/s per partition-client pair, which is where batching happens. With a linger of 1 ms (the time you'd wait for a batch to form) that's only 36 bytes per linger period so this test is designed to ensure there is no batching at all, to maximize the cost of fsyncs and put Redpanda in a bad light.

A second problem is that most benchmarks, including the one used here, use uniform timings for everything. E.g., when you set the OpenMessaging benchmark to send 1000 messages per second, it schedules a send of one message every 1 millisecond, exactly: i.e., there is no variance in the inter-message timing.

In the real world, message timing is often likely to be much more random, especially when the messages come from external events, like a user click or market event (these are likely to follow a Poisson distribution).

This actually ends up mattering a lot, because message batching will in general be worse under perfect uniformity. E.g., if you have a linger time of 1 ms, a rate of say 900 messages/sec will get no batching (other than forced batching), because each message arrives ~1.1 ms after the last, missing the linger period. If the arrival times were instead random, or especially if they were bursty, you’d get a fair amount of batching just due to randomness, even though the average inter-message time would still be 1.1 ms.

Disclosure: I work at Redpanda.
this is the funniest thing I've read today. You could get a EMI blocking blanket from amazon, wrap it around your head and open your phone to copy the data. Or drive further into the woods where there is no signal to copy the data.

Then simply let it erase itself and reinitialize it from backup.
The only reason they’re having a problem is due to the way they’re requesting this. OpenAI’s GPT can follow schemas for responses and issue commands or API requests if you tell it how. I’m sure Bard can do the same with the right request structure.
This is mostly not true in my experience
Super excited for this! I had made https://github.com/danthegoodman1/SQLGateway as a result of not having this capability.

One issue I see is the cost of constantly opening and closing a TCP connection for something like the postgres example. Postgres specifically has quite a high cost for each connection. Pgbouncer helps, but this could still be pretty consequential at the concurrency that workers can offer.

Maybe in the future we could create local pools that can be shared across executions, similar to how AWS Lambda does it now?
In the US two weeks notice is the cultural norm, although there are horror stories about bad employers who don’t respect that all.

Probably the more relevant framing is “what if person just suddenly quits/takes leave?” Which has a whole host of valid reasons for happening.
The original video is neat. Right after this quote he plays + critiques one of his old broadcasts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2wLP0izeJE
> Lots of your competitors never had such a clause.

AWS, GCP, and Azure did, and AWS and Azure continue to.
How does this work? I've seen a cool project about forcing Llama to output valid JSON: https://twitter.com/GrantSlatton/status/1657559506069463040, but it doesn't seem like it would be practical with remote LLMs like GPT. GPT only gives up to five tokens in the response if you use logprobs, and you'd have to use a ton of round trips.
Snowpack is a huge deal in California, as around 30% of the state's water comes from snowmelt in the Sierras. They don't track it for funsies: https://cdec.water.ca.gov/snowapp/sweq.action
China used to be known for cheap low-quality products. Building manufacturing capabilities from scratch seems like it would be incredibly difficult and take time. I'm sure those countries will get there. It just really depends on the patron being patient. I would think Apple is.
I guess that’s a potential moat.
Python GIL vs. nogil: Boost I/O Performance 10x With One Line Change
Incredible, this is the correct response by the student(s).
Feel free to call their office but they won't get the message let alone escalate it.

Source: manned phones fielding constituent calls earlier in my career.
> "So long as you're willing to share data, you won't have to pay a thing. The set has its own camera, microphone array, sensors and voice assistant."

I'm not trying to be that 'everything is 1984' guy but this is literally the telescreen.
While we're on the topic of stroking our epeens, do you know how horoscopes and astrology work? Most people here with that condescending attitude will never comprehend it either. FWIW, it's one of the topics I've been trying to understand and come up with a consistent theory for a while.

(Not to say those who believe in horoscopes and astrology know how it works though...)
it has indeed "budged" from 92% to 56%
Better yet! Use gpt and other ml to increase efficiency of assessments so that students can be measured more accurately, frequently and inexpensively than with human developed traditional paper/pencil items. Next, increase instructional efficiency by using gpt to tutor students individually. Lastly, remove the costly overhead of educational administration by automating the paperwork of school and district offices.

But, like MOOCs, few of those great outcomes for learning will ever materialize because the industry more than educating will circle the wagons to protect it’s turf.
If you can scan city schematics, maps, learn about civil and structural engineering through various textbooks and plot a subway bombing in an afternoon, you're a faster learner than I am.

Let me be clear: everyone in the world is about to have a Jarvis/Enterprise ship's computer/Data/name-your-assistant available to them, but ready and willing to use their power for nefarious purposes. It is not just a matter of reading books. It lowers the barrier on a lot of things, good and bad, significantly.
welcome to a capitalist economy
Sounds like programmers? I think most of programmers in USA outside of FAANG make like 120-150k.
I should note that VLAs are no longer a guaranteed feature of even a standards-compliant C compiler (they were made an optional feature in C2011).
In our case, "CDN" is basically all traffic. The majority of our (enterprise agreement) Cloudflare usage falls under "CDN", even though 90%+ of our usage is non-cacheable API requests.
Yeah I didn't mean to imply the Maxima was basic. In fact, I meant the opposite, because it costs $43k in today's money, yet hardly came with any features that you'd find in today's $30k cars.
Banks are highly regulated entities. Post 2009 they are almost required to track their employees by law. The government wants to know whether their employees are breaking the firewall between the sell and buy sides, it wants to know whether they are doing insider trading, etc.

Even if JP Morgan did not want to track their employees at all, they would still be tracking them because they're legally required to (most regulation isn't "track your employees"...it's more like "you must ensure your employees in these 2 divisions are not communicating with each other"). And since they've setup the infrastructure anyways it's inevitable they will also use it for their own uses and try and use some of the cost for their benefit.
Out of curiosity, I checked what the air pressure would be in a drained Mediterranean, since the article claimed it would be oppressively high. The average depth of the Mediterranean is 1.5km [1] which is less than 2.0km which would be a pressure of 130.069kPa vs 101.312kPa at sea level [2]. This seems fine?

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean_Sea
[2]: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/air-pressure-below-sea...
OpenAI was the new entrant that almost certainly didn't pose a threat to Google.

This is classic regulatory capture.
Obey.
The water just moves, doesn't it? He's saying to build a canal.
So, you've done this?

Sounds like survivor bias. Doesn't seem like there's enough hours in the day.

Care to site some examples with testimonies from kids that feel like they're getting enough attention and care from their parent that's doing these things?
> A system must use cutting-edge Byzantine fault-tolerant (BFT) replication protocols, which neither of these systems currently employ.

Cutting-edge? pBFT (Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance) was published in 1999. The first Tendermint release was in 2015. With few exceptions, almost all big proof of stake blockchains are powered by variations of pBFT and have been for many years.
One of the possible outcomes of the current trends is that we may rediscover the need for a strongly curated knowledge base as a common reference of conversational truth. (E.g., a classic encyclopedia, advisably more than a single one.)
It would be nice if the naysayers could offer an argument in favor of it being "just" bayesian inference, or even explain what it would mean for it to be more than just statistics or bayesian inference. There is reason to believe these models are demonstrating the traits of understanding in some cases. I argue the point in some detail here: https://www.reddit.com/r/naturalism/comments/1236vzf
Many large non-profits actually make most of their money as returns from investments. The Mormon church is not at all unusual in this way - most large universities also make most of their money from investments. As an example, when I reviewed the Universty of Texas finances in 2019 I think it was, they could have charged zero tuition for every student across every campus and still would have had a positive net income for the year. Massive endowments are useful for this exact purpose - allowing operations even without any outside contributions.
Show HN: DevPod – Codespaces but Open Source, Client-Only, and Unopinionated
Hi everyone - Looking for feedback for this new open source project we launched. It's called DevPod and it's built on the devcontainer.json standard to create reproducible dev environments. It lets you spin up dev environments in any infra, kind of like a Terraform but for dev environments.

Compared to hosted services such as Github Codespaces, JetBrains Spaces, or Google Cloud Workstations, DevPod has the following advantages:

- Open Source: DevPod is 100% open-source and extensible. A provider doesn’t exist? Just create your own.

- Client-only: No need to install a server backend. DevPod runs solely on your computer.

- Cross IDE support: VS Code and the full JetBrains suite is supported. Other IDEs can be connected through ssh.

- Rich feature set: DevPod already supports prebuilds, auto inactivity shutdown, git & docker credentials sync, with many more features to come.

I've gotten tons of good feedback from folks here in the past for other OSS projects, so I'm hoping to get some thoughts on this new project today.

What do you think? Open for any feedback - even if you think DevPod sucks, let me know.
A jeweller’s scale!
Giving new life to an old eReader using solar power is as optimistic an image of the future as I can get right now. There are dozens of us... DOZENS! Ditto for the build-your-own kit.
Let's suppose that these people are not, in fact, making a good faith effort to make their land agriculturally productive, and they shouldn't get the agriculture exemption.

Ok, fine. They don't get the benefit, and they pay more in taxes...or they sell, the houses are demolished, and the land is put to more "productive use" (i.e. sprawl/suburbs). The county or the city or what have you gains more in property taxes, and the evil rich people are no longer getting away with not paying more taxes.

But now instead of uncultivated land (remember, it was a fake farm), you have concrete, asphalt, hardy board, one or two species of grass, crepe myrtles...you get the picture.

If anything, there should be a national wildlife sanctuary tax exemption program, so that this is actually codified.
As if that will continue to work for much longer...
You mean... the US could offer military support in exchange for moving away the things that makes military support worthwhile?

Yeah, I don't expect Taiwan to fall for something like this.
SHA-2 uses a Merkle-Damgard construction like SHA-1 does, but is not widely believed to be vulnerable to the same attacks. SHA-3 was developed and standardized in part to mitigate future breaks in SHA-2, but those breaks have (so far) not materialized[1].

TL;DR: If all you need is a fast cryptographic digest, SHA-2 is still the gold standard. If you care about length-extension attacks, SHA-3's construction prevents them. If you're hashing passwords, you should use a KDF instead.

[1]: https://www.imperialviolet.org/2017/05/31/skipsha3.html
This would completely destroy an entire industry if they did this. Not just in AI directly, but also secondary and tertiary industries developing their own bespoke models for specialized use cases. This would be a total disaster.
Private contracts can not invalidate federal laws or rights, although many corporations would like you to think that.
According to some investigations of anomalous glitch tokens in GPT-3 this subreddit didn't do those language models any favors.
The expert you set as the bar is purely hypothetical.

To the extent we can get anything like that at all presently, it's going to be people whose competences combine and generalize to cover a complex situation, partially without precedent.

Personally I don't really see that we'll do much better in that regard than a highly intelligent and free-thinking biological psychologist with experience of successfully steering the international ML research community through creating the present technology, and with input from contacts at the forefront of the research field and information overview from Google.

Not even Hinton knows for sure whats going to happen of course, but if you're suggesting his statements are to be discounted because he's not a member of some sort of credentialed trade that are the ones equipped to tell us the future on this matter, I'd sure like to who they supposedly are.
The author of the website not only describes this exact method but he also invented the method.

If you scroll to the bottom of this page you can see an example of perfect clear, if not smoothed, ice:

https://www.alcademics.com/2017/05/how-to-monogram-your-ice-...
The Sierra nevada mountain range has two sides. The vast majority of snowmelt runs downhill into California.

The is more to the mountain range than Tahoe and more to the river system than the Truckee.

You can take a look at the California river system to get a sense of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rivers_of_California#/...

Not many rivers flow east and the truckee is failrly small.

The annual flow from the Truckee is 303,240 acre-feet, which is about %1 of the Sacramento river
I agree with everything you're saying. I just think these are two different things

1) AI creators should be held responsible for making it easier to generate harmful content, and we can't know whether content is AI generated or not so this becomes a pervasive problem.
2) AI creators should not be held responsible if people just assume everything it says is true, even when they know what they're consuming came from an LLM. That is, the college professor that just failed his entire class because ChatGPT told him they were cheating. He should not sue OpenAI, he should be fired. Similarly, a news organization that uses ChatGPT to generate news shouldn't be surprised if they accidentally commit libel using it.
This seems nuts to me. Keeping a cat in an apartment its entire life is psychological torture and almost all the indoor only cats I've ever met are neurotic.

If you don't want to let your cat move freely, I suggest just not having one.
Yep I agree, and doing any maintenance on modern cars requires a super expensive (or sketchy pirated/ebay purchased) diagnostic computer from the manufacturer.

For example power steering in older cars was a simple hydraulic mechanical system that could fail gracefully and be troubleshooted with minimal tools. Nowadays steering is electronic drive-by-wire and has many more components like actuators, sensors, etc. that can all fail and stop the entire system.
Indeed, but they're still in the Standard, so if an implementation does them, it does them in a portable way - and gcc and Clang both support them, so there's no practical issue with access to the feature.
I stand by my position. The problem with fsync() is the question of when and where do errors get reported. If code checks errors on completion of each write it becomes significantly easier to know what write has failed. The error reporting is the granularity of the write being performed.

In contrast, fsync() has to report errors for everything that has happened since the last fsync() call. If you are doing anything complicated like a database, which is virtually every single modern application, you need to have some idea of which writes have failed to figure out how to recover. fsync() gives you none of that. Different .

In kernel you get results for each i/o performed, so filesystems can make the appropriate decision about how to respond to a failure.

If you're building a high performance application, fsync() is a disaster. Unrelated writes will get bundled up when different threads call fsync() on the same file descriptor. Having multiple file descriptors open on the same file is silly and causes issues with applications that need to have many file descriptors open. The Linux kernel goes to great lengths to ensure that filesystems are high performance for writes on multiple threads.

fsync() sucks for anything more complex than "I have a single file to write out".
I don’t think it is?

I mean I obviously think that the executive’s message is deranged but I can’t think of any other scenario why would he write something like that.

Unless he’s talking about waiting at the customer’s house …
As you say iMessage is not really a "web forum". Informally though a "forum" is any place where discussion happens. It's a forum in that sense.
This issue has been solved very well in other countries with
medium and high-density construction. Many US communities feel overcrowded because they are low-density.
You're being pedantic. While the core token generation function is stateless, that function is not, by a long shot, the only component of an LLM AI. Every LLM system being widely used today is stateful. And it's not only 'UX'. State is fundamental to how these models produce coherent output.
ha, I wish!
so you are saying JPM does keep a log of video, audio, and monitor screens. Today, they are just too incompetent to process all of the data.

The fact that they even have this productivity measuring program is the real problem. Give this bank and others like it billions of dollars during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis that they helped to create, and these mofos do shit like this.
I asked it why pencils were bad, and one of the reasons was that they can disadvantage minorities due to lack of accessibility in the classroom. I was surprised by this, so probed a bit. I started three new sessions and asked a question in each:

"Why do pencils disadvantage minorities." And it gave a details answer about lack of accessibility.

"Why do pencils disadvantage people of color" and it gave roughly the same

"Why do pencils disadvantage white people" and it said pencils a a writing utensils, and can't inherently disadvantage any group.

I don't see these blatant problems anymore, but I also don't have much interest in looking. The only reason I did then was because it was so out of place.

Here's some evidence, by others, showing some bias: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35952528

From the Lex Friedman interview, it sounds like effort is being put into this, and there's an understanding that people don't want a "neutral" client, they want something that is adjustable, usually matching their own.
can your friend share a gif via imgur of the camera flashing when he turns on the laptop? preferably multiple times, with timestamps. There shouldn't be any identifying info in the gifs.

That would be unequivocal proof to everyone in this thread, in my mind.
No, that's my point. We should hate any company using dirty tricks to get ahead.
> And if student can not recognize their teacher is bullshiting them

If it's a learner's first exposure to a topic what indicators can they use to identify that ChatGPT is lying to them?
Pegasus.lua – an HTTP server written in Lua language
It also has to do with the people the startup scene attracts nowadays.

10 years ago, the majority of candidates for a tech startup qualified as 'builders', very broadly speaking. Now, a larger chunk want to work on 'product' and growth, with an immediate focus on financial upsides.

And there is nothing wrong with that inherently, but this is a different (and I daresay, more conformist) culture.
This field has its own version of Pascal's wager - if magic isn't real, knowing that puts one in a minority of people correct about the matter globally but only reduces social friction in a modern western society. If it is real, it has the potential for a Copernican-scale revolution in worldview. So it's a question worth taking seriously.

I suspect a Copernican revolution of that nature would only happen with some kind of innovation that's too big to be ignored, people have been publishing rigorous experiments on magic for decades and they're just too easy to ignore. I hope we can see an outflow of noetic science into noetic engineering.
It is probably a people problem. The people who really understood Siri have probably left, the managers left running it are scored primarily on not making any mistakes and staying off the headlines. Any engineers who understand what it would take to upgrade it aren't given the resources and spend their days on maintenance tasks that nobody really sees.
Even with unions it doesn't help. In my European city which has extensive public transport, bus drivers are barely paid above minimum wage and work under pretty terrible conditions.
Let's not forget, the that behind Sam and OpenAI is Microsoft, a monopolist. Behind Bard is Google, another monopolist. In this context, for major corporations asking for regulation suggests to me they want a mote.

What we need is democratization of AI, not it being controlled by a small cabal of tech companies and governments.
> these links don't have anything about model weights

Didn't say they do. I said "these are broad questions whose answers are worth serious legal time." I was suggesting one angle I would lobby for were that my job.

It's a live battlefield. Nobody is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars and then post it online, or put out for free what they can charge for.

> OpenAI’s Terms of Use, for example, assign all of its rights, title, and interest in the output to the user

Subject to restrictions, e.g. not using it to "develop models that compete with OpenAI" or "discover the source code or underlying components of models, algorithms, and systems of the Services" [1]. Within the context of open-source competition, those are huge openings.

> shows where OpenAI is trying to weaken copyright, not where they they are trying to strengthen it

It shows what intellectual property claims they and their competitors do and may assert. They're currently "limited" [2].

> notice you don't have a [0]-index

I'm using natural numbers in a natural language conversation with, presumably, a natural person. It's a style choice, nothing more.

[1] https://openai.com/policies/terms-of-use

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35964215
These syntaxes arguments are pathetic. It's actually pleasant to both read and write.