skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> ..is necessary because an AI could hack it's way out of a laboratory. Yet, they cannot explain how an AI would accomplish this in practice.

I’m sympathetic to your position in general, but I can’t believe you wrote that with a straight face. “I don’t know how it would do it, therefore we should completely ignore the risk that it could be done.”

I’m no security expert, but I’ve been following the field incidentally and dabbling since writing login prompt simulators for the Prime terminals at college to harvest user account passwords. When I was a Unix admin I used to have fun figuring out how to hack my own systems. Security is unbelievably hard. An AI eventually jail braking is an eventual almost certainty we need to prepare for.
I have a google account I haven't been able to log into for some time, because even though I know the password, it flagged "suspicious activity" at some point and has required me to verify with a phone number I no longer have, from when I lived in the U.S. (I now live in Canada, but it did let me log in from Canada when I first moved here)

I was hoping that some day, someone would register that phone number and I'd be able to convince them to give me an authentication code, but it sounds like now the account will be deleted before this happens.

This really sucks because I think that email was used to register with a bitcoin exchange that I may have some (formerly) tiny balance on. So effectively google has locked me out of an account that could have financial consequences, with no way for me to recover it.
We could write a python package that could? A codegen tool that generates codegen that will then generate code? <insert xzibit meme here>
It's a large nation-wide industry, so I imagine at some point during the business's growth, the founder may be bought out, or the oversight of corporate management lets profit drive the decisions in its various departments.
wow, not one comment here seems to address the first sentence of the article:

the use of artificial intelligence to interfere with election integrity
is a "significant area of concern", adding that it needs regulation.

Can't there be regulation so that AI doesn't interfere with the election process?
> Do you plan including AWS Polly in the speech generation?

I wasn't, but it's not that hard to integrate a new TTS service. You can copy e.g. AzureService and adapt it to work with AWS:

https://voiceover.manim.community/en/stable/services.html

> How do you approach aligning the words with animations? Is it possible to align it for a specific word?

Indeed, the feature is called "bookmarks". You can see a demo here:

https://voiceover.manim.community/en/stable/quickstart.html#...

> Did you already describe it somewhere?

I did not do a detailed write-up yet, but you can search the repo for "word_boundaries" and "TimeInterpolator". Services like Azure return timestamps for the beginning of each word, and for those that don't return, I integrated Whisper to generate them from the audio. Then, it's a matter of mapping the string indices to audio time via some sort of interpolation (I used linear).
If we accept that, then we have to accept that complex things can be created by simple things, which means that we have to accept that the complexity we see is not evidence of a creator.
Historically, efficiency increases from technology were driven by innovation from narrow technology or mechanisms that brought a decrease in the costs of transactions. This saw an explosion of the space of viable economic activity and with it new classes of jobs and a widespread growth in prosperity. Productivity and wages largely remained coupled up until recent decades. Modern automation has seen productivity and wages begin to decouple. Decoupling will only accelerate as the use of AI proliferates.

This time is different because AI has the potential to have a similar impact on efficiency across all work. In the past, efficiency gains created totally new spaces of economic activity in which the innovation could not further impact. But AI is a ubiquitous force multiplier, there is no productive human activity that AI can't disrupt. There is no analogous new space of economic activity that humanity as a whole can move to in order to stay relevant to the world's economic activity.
Ledger introducing recover seed feature
Ledger is now introducing a seed recovery feature that splits the key using Shamir's secret sharing and sending parts to third parties. They are currently answering questions on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/13j5cna/intro...
And their grandkids (and you) don't know a thing about a federal regulation.
KDE is highly recommended.
I agree with the OP.

People who haven’t been personally involved with it tend to think science and technology progresses exponentially but if you have been personally involved you went through uncomfortable lurches divided by long periods of little or no progress.

For instance supersonic transports, fast breeder reactors, space travel, neural networks and many technologies have been through waves of fast progress, even being areas of major international competition, followed by long periods of collapsed interest. If you get a PhD in the subject for a range of years you might get tenure, otherwise you wind up doing something in industry or driving a cab. (One of many realities that makes a mockery of ‘meritocracy’; you could just barely get a PhD when a field is hot and you will become a titan of the field, but Einstein, Feynman or somebody like that could work as hard and as smart as they can in theoretical physics in 2023, come up with many ideas about what the dark matter particle is, but no Nobel Prize because they can’t do an experiment to prove it.)

In the late 1960s and 1970s for instance there was impressive progress on symbolic A.I., people found that logic-based methods could be used to make ‘expert systems’ covering limited domains, but those weren’t really competitive with MATLAB, programmable calculators and other tools experts could use to put their skills on wheels. ‘Business rules engines’ are still around and actually orders of magnitude better performing than expert system shells at their peak but outside of banks, nobody cares.

I don’t think we’re done with LLMs yet, i think there is going to be a lot of progress on reducing their resource consumption. They will be used for many things but 20 years from now people might be looking at them the way we look at ELIZA today.
Apparently a hello world is like 90MB.

https://twitter.com/jarredsumner/status/1657765876085690368
Youtube is a defacto time travel machine when it comes to culture as video. You can watch videos from 2004 and earlier.
It's the only platform that could allow itself to act against copyright laws.
It's part of the cultural heritage of humanity.
Management Prospects
unvote for me.

"Fundamentally LLMs are brute for counting", this qualifies as an absurdly reductionist statement delivered with distasteful bluster.

"I see no reason ..." is not argument one should put forth in company you respect.
Yeah I agree. And I'm pretty sure online ones are more useful. But it's just the concept of something as heavy as a brick that intrigues me. Maybe I can take all those online docs and print as a pdf and then into paper.
Same here. The two also conflict on iPhone.
I thought I read in the Rails docs somewhere that HTTP2 and import maps rescued us from bundling JS
lol I read the whole post and it does not refer to any research or books for its assertions
When the post-modernists lose arguments because their ideas lack merit, they attack the very concept of merit in a desperate attempt to remain relevant.

Unfortunately, this is a plan that works when you infect the institutions of learning with it by misaligning incentives.
But at least Alexa will be able to order ten rolls of toilet paper instead of ten million reams of printer paper
password: infected
I'm guilty of putting a JSON language in production.

In my case it's just an if this then that rules engine with a backend that looks kind of like lisp, [eventName, [[action, param]]] is pretty much the whole language, except for a few bits of special syntax in the eventName (=variable>6 to trigger on greater than 6, @every five minutes to trigger every five minutes).

It lets people edit rules visually in a way that anyone can probably use if they can use a spreadsheet.

Sometimes the task needs some hackery to shove it into such a limited language, but I'd rather have boring hacks than elegance backed by lots of in house novelty to maintain.
TSMC is owned by the state, they can have their cake and eat it too. Send low nm process to the US in exchange for military hardware and continue to own the IP which means they could withhold it from the United States during time of war unless they have the support of the United States. It’s not clear why this can’t work, it’s what they are currently doing…
With carve-outs for national security and privacy sensitive transactions, most government transactions have long been public.
I think in this respect it is already safer than human driving, my point being.
I'd argue that you're right that there's nothing intrinsically disparaging about ilk as a word, but in contemporary usage it does seem to have become quite negative. I know the dictionary doesn't say it, but in my discussions it seems to have shifted towards the negative.

Consider this: "Firefighters and their ilk." It's not a word that nicely described a group, even though that's what it's supposed to do. I think the language has moved to where we just say Firefighters now when it's positive, and ilk or et al when it's a negative connotation.

Just my experience.
You're not missing anything if you can and don't mind building a framework of tools that run long running processes, handle the start up, failure and state of those processes and be able to introspect the status and internal state of those processes in a standard way.

The way isolated processes can be created and managed allows for the "let it crash" ideology in Erlang. For example, when you visit a Phoenix Framework site, you have your own process. If I was visiting the same site and encountered a state that crashed my process your process would be unaffected. The "exception" would only affect me until you ran into the same state that caused the crashed.

If I reported the crash to the developer, the developer could fix the bug and soft start the entire application without affecting your process. This isn't possible because of the language per se but really because of the entire Erlang ecosystem around fault tolerance.

*edited for more stuff
Are you suggesting that OpenAI is a ponzi scheme where early investors are being paid with funds from later investors?
Yes and it's part of a larger trend in tech and computing.

As it becomes more lucrative, more people get involved for the primary reason of making money, whereas formerly a larger proportion of people were involved because they found it interesting.

Both are legitimate reasons to be involved in tech in my opinion, but it's definitely a shift in demographics.
Love the Constraints
I agree and I don't.

All the anti-depressants come with a warning label that says may end your life, yet they have no street value and I've never heard them referred to as addictive (although they seem to have withdrawal).

Ketamine, mushrooms, LSD, etc. have street value and you hear way more "mushrooms helped my depression/ketamine is like a light-switch for depression" on the internet than you ever hear positive stories about SSRI's and the like which is more likely to have stories around sexual dysfunction or withdrawal syndrome than glowing reviews. Nobody says psychedelics are addictive.

Street value represents demand and lack of street value represents lack of demand and lack of demand represents lack of effect.

So I think the idea that potential for abuse is what drives street value is wrong, wrong in the sense that there is an element of truth, but it isn't the truth.

I think that reasoning is sound.

I think there is a fine dunning kruger line to be walked here and as I admitted (in the context of what you quoted) that I think there is truth to what I just wrote, but I don't think it is the truth.
Trees and grazing animals collaboratively replenish aquifers. Meadows, being porous, guide moisture downwards, preventing floods and evaporation. Animal droppings enhance soil bioactivity, boosting water capture. Moreover, this process, free of fossil fertilizers, sequesters carbon. Areas abandoning cattle operations or imposing 're-wilding' often face desertification and flooding. Similarly, grain plantations that exclude animals share this issue. I've personally seen a parched, over-fertilized grain field transform into a vibrant savannah with natural springs within five years due to herd migration. The soil is now a joy to walk on, spongey and soft. Next farm over they still plant grains, and it's hard-pan and salted.
Standing close enough to a crossing that you appear to be preparing to cross is easily enough for drivers to stop and wait in some European countries, e.g. here in Denmark.

If the pedestrian remains still, but the driver sees no reason they shouldn't cross, eventually the driver might well gesture, honk etc.
You would want a dealer, and there are only a handful of machines in production at a time.

Stern is the main one since Williams gave up. There are others, but Stern is the one people consider the most lately.
Seaman for dreamcast utilized a microphone in which you would talk to your fish (that also would develop to grow a human head). It relied on voice commands. You could praise it, scold it, order it to clean its tank. In response it would insult you or ask you trivia facts.

The game also used the dreamcast clock to age the fish even when the game was not running. It had an anti-cheat mechanism where it would detect if you altered the clock and would punish the cheater accordingly.
It's shipping the recording to get recognized, interpreted, and mapped to commands.
Growing among who? The more I learn about and use LLMs the more convinced I am we're in a local maxima and the only way they're going to improve is by getting smaller and cheaper to run. They're still terrible at logical reasoning.

We're going to get some super cool and some super dystopian stuff out of them but LLMs are never going to go into a recursive loop of self-improvement and become machine gods.
But bundling doesn't
alcohol might help balance out the "pinball wizard hogging the machine all night" issue. :)
So... he wants the government to enforce a monopoly? Um...
I miss raganwald, I loved it when their posts and comments were blowing up HN.
You can download youtube videos
It's time for IT teams, vendors to prioritize clean compute
Is it very different from their previous desktop lineup? I'm under the impression that Intel Macs can also run ML models with acceleration.
Okay, what does that have to do with Google not maintaining history of the videos you watched? You can still bookmark links, download videos for offline use?
The noble toe nail cell feels it's every bit as critical to the whole as the neuron -- who's to say?
This is theoretical and not the case in practice. Meat companies are an Oligarchy in The United States which is the largest world meat producer. There are four massive meat companies and if they existed at the onset of anti-trust they would have been broken up long ago. The miracle of the market to competitively decide on a price relies on competitive market environments which do not exist in the largest meat market in the world, The US.

You're saying a lot of stuff and I'm going to need more evidence to be convinced as to your position. For what reason would meat prices increase if people ate less meat?
It may be necessary to drive a little more „human“ to improve the overall FSD experience. But once you start blurring the line of lawful/unlawful you get yourself into muddy waters. Seems as if Tesla is pulling out of their robotaxi/FSD plans without admitting so. Not good. Nonetheless i think they are doing some things right. a) they make quite an effort to visulize the mind of vehicle and b) they do not try to pretend safety by stacking up all sorts of limitations (geofencing, highways, top speed). If oly they marketed the system as ADAS and designed the UX as such and would not have made these silly robotaxi claims…
The problem I ran into with minimal WM setups is keeping the farm of various daemons required for various bits of functionality all happy and healthy took more thought and effort than I cared to put forth. It wasn't uncommon for some random thing to break after updating which got tiresome.
> Also it is just me or do pinball games just never seem to get the physics of the ball right?

There are plenty of "real" pinball machines out there, seems that they keep making them.
Nice idea but without worldwide availability and and Android version there's no chance for it.

Here in Spain Android is about 70% of the mobile market.

But nice idea in general. It would also be nice to be able to unshare or blacklist contacts (like pushy sales guys that keep bothering me for stuff I have nothing to do with)
If this is a joke about overthinking, well done.
Yes, and from being somewhat familiar with the behavior of elephants. I'm not saying my hunch has any basis to it, but if I was thinking about investing in Colossal Biosciences, calf rejection from the birth mother would be very low on my list of concerns.

In that alternate universe, I suspect that 99% of mothers would not just leave their newly birthed baby out in the elements to die if it happened to be a homo habilis
Looks like it's being treated as a dual use weapon. Pretty sane to me.
Yes, because we're not in the 80s anymore. There are virtually no COM files around anymore. Compare that to zip files, which are still widely used in all kinds of jobs.
Your argument could just as easily be applied to human cloning and argue for why human cloning and genetic engineering for specific desirable traits should not be illegal.

And it isn't a strong argument for the same reason that it isn't a good argument when used to argue we should allow human cloning and just focus on regulating the more direct causal links like non-clone employment loss from mass produced hyper-intelligent clones, and ensuring they have legal rights, and having proper oversight and non-clone human accountability.

Maybe those things could all make ethical human cloning viable. But I think the world coming together and being like "holy shit this is happening too fast. Our institutions aren't ready at all nor will they adapt fast enough. Global ban" was the right call.

It is not impossible that a similar call is also appropriate here with AI. I personally dunno what the right call is, but I'm pretty skeptical of any strong claim that it could never be the right call to outright ban some forms of advanced AI research just like we did with some forms of advanced genetic engineering research.

This isn't like banning numbers at all. The blame falling on the corner-cutters doesn't mean the right call is always to just tell the blamed not to cut corners. In some cases the right call is instead taking away their corner-cutting tool.

At least until our institutions can catch up.
It looks like the web interface is not E2E encrypted, the server decrypts the card info and sends that decrypted info to you.
Note that this is not an official EU website, but by a non-profit organization https://futureoflife.org/
> "Made-up race categories" are visible to the naked eye, to principal-component analysis of alleles, to measures of genetic distance, to surveys of visible and invisible traits, to even the smallest child who's only begun to speak.

Initial definitions of white, didn't include Scottish and Irish people.
I know this is HN but the first reaction to a broken system should be to fix it, not build a business on top of it.
Quantum Thief has as 3.8 on Goodreads. Worth reading?
The problematic scenario is described here: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/13fsvl5/the_zi...
See also: "Building Fizzbuzz in Fractran from the Bottom Up (2016)" [0]

I'll repost my comment from that thread:

>For some reason this makes me imagine an alternate history sci-fi universe where Pythagoras (famous for his love of fractions) invents FRACTRAN. Then Archimedes builds a mechanical computer to execute those programs, and one of the successors of Alexander The Great puts the computer to use in warfare and conquers the world. Science is accelerated so that nuclear physics are invented by the time Jesus is born...

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28448283
Well, I do appreciate the transparency to be honest.
Follow-up: the display on this tablet is not as good as I initially thought. It's great for media consumption but not great for text. Seems to have something to do with the subpixel layout required by the OLED display.
I'm curious why that would be so big. Even my python3.10 binary + /usr/lib/python3.10 is only 30MB
There's also this guy who purchased a plot of land in the middle of nowhere, West Texas who's trying to terraform it into a forest.

No idea how feasible it is, but interesting to watch! https://www.youtube.com/@dustupstexas
> companies are not publishing anything because they have nothing to publish

This is just very uninformed. Before GPT-4 and the 'AI race' the various LLM-adjacent research was usually done by teams with members in both academia and industry and they published all their details as a point of pride and to get prestige and high value publication venues. After GPT-4 and the 'AI race' this immediately stopped.

Here is one example where OpenAI deliberately didn't publish details of GPT-4. Instead of publishing a 'research paper' they published a 'technical report'
https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08774
"Given both the competitive landscape and the safety implications of large-scale models like GPT-4, this report contains no further details about the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar"

When Google published their rival PaLM 2 results, they followed the OpenAI GPT-4 lead by publishing only a 'technical report'
https://ai.google/static/documents/palm2techreport.pdf
that looks mainly at the capabilities of the system and not at the details of 'the architecture (including model size), hardware, training compute, dataset construction, training method, or similar.'
Same story here, but less wealthy. All I can say is forgive and move on. Your dad stuck around, which is something. They delivered the material goods, which is something. And most valuable of all, they provided a valuable counterexample. Stay away from the shrinks. They pour salt into the wounds, prescribe pills, and hardly any of their "research" replicates. Forgiveness is where it's at.

> answering here since I'm rate-limited:

Took maybe a year or two. I see them a couple times a year. Not saying to ignore facts and forget what they are, but to stop holding the grudge and move on.

For the shrinks, I wouldn't call it a "bad" experience, but an unfruitful one. Lots of words, terminology, techniques--just to dig the hole deeper. Better and simpler to just chalk it up to their own limitations as human beings and forgive. You don't get pissed at the dog for not knowing how to use a toilet. As the child, you are made from the same stuff. Without their counterexample, you probably would have settled into the same error.
> majority of the EU Council of Ministers seem to favour expanding the scanning of private messages to audio communications to detect child sexual abuse material

Please think of the children

Oh well
> The point of elected representatives is to represent the views of their constituents, not to obtain special advantages for their constituents.

A lot of said constituents' views are, in practice, that they should receive special advantages.
It bundles an entire JS engine with it. I think JSC in Bun's case. V8 for Deno and Node.