skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Text categorization for podcasts.

The prompt asks for specific aspects from a podcast - people, dates, locations - score them by relevance and count the occurrences. Now, GPT can't count for a damn, but it is a useful proxy. The relevance score is pretty good.

There are existing services that can do this, but with GPT and the API I don't need to read a manual and I define exactly what format I want back.

This is what is exciting - GPT will format its responses to _my_ requirements, not the other way around.
No, I commented independently about this earlier having noticed it after rebooting (and then again - duplicated again). Must fetch & store menu items on login I suppose, but not clear them first nor check for duplicates.
.. For linux.

I'd really like to see figures for the calculated effective wear-cost of this function against all others, and the speedup. Not that there won't be a benefit, but quantifying it would be interesting.

I think the "innovative use of rsync" thing is a bit breathless. rsync is good but its not the only mechanism to keep filesystems in sync and its not free: it hits the inode file buffer cache hard, and can cause other problems like cache ejection of real data paths. It also has risks, because it can be subverted (there was an analysis of this for it's use in RPKI to secure BGP)

The point here being that the file(s) modified are consistent, cached contents aside (which IIRC have highly deterministic file names in a structured subdir of sharded contents). If this is about backing cached content, maybe that demands a tuned daemon? It should be possible to checkpoint and do partial update without doing backing store checks against each file/block.

You could e.g. use zfs snapshots too. Block efficient.
It's allowed here in Germany. And EU rules demand it, but some countries left loopholes in their implementation.
There's also tons of directly downloadable content from the Insight Meditation Center[1] here: https://www.audiodharma.org/

[1] - which is, to my knowledge, not affiliated with the Open Buddhist University
well, the comment was about "the majority of humans", not even like, specifically "90%+ of humans" or something like that.

I'm pretty sure that the majority of humans would agree that the type of random-murder I described, is wrong. I don't know what fraction of people are moral nihilists or subscribers to more extreme forms of moral relativism, but if excluding those, then of the remaining people, I think the proportion who agree with the value I mentioned, is probably pretty dang high!
No, mercantilist and imperialist societies (Roman Empire, British Empire) did this long before the modern era of private capital. Capitalism is just another in a long line of systems under which wealth and power concentrates into the hands of a few and the many are disadvantaged. The only new thing here is the degree to which technology can extend lines of communication and trade.
They never needed to go to a "next angle"; the "protect children" has almost always worked (with the occasional "prevent terrorism" thrown in for diversity) :)
Couple Goes to Psychedelic Therapy Twice a Year
A cheery declaration. You definitely seem "invested," and I do mean that pejoratively. For everyone "invested" in this conflict, their first thought is to the first-order effects on Russia. Never mind the disastrous worldwide second- and third-order effects the war (and its proxy involvements) are having on the average person in the rest of the world.

And since I can already hear the response that it's all on Putin's shoulders, I should remind you that we're the ones printing hundreds of billions in USD, sending veritable mountains of arms and aid to spin the woodchipper even faster.
I think this is less true than it used to be. At my university, most material is locked up behind a Learning Management System (LMS) like Canvas.
> I can still say that it looks like your arguments say that when Ukraine loses territory, it's a strategic disaster, but when Russia loses territory, it never meant to have that territory. If I can defend that argument, weak as my grasp on this subject is, your own position might be pretty flimsy.

It’s because he’s here to try push public opinion about why Ukraine is losing, he is not here to engage in honest arguments. Look through his post history and you will seem summarily dismiss any evidence Russia has worse casualties or is in anyway losing this war.
You got it mixed up. Yes I can write some code (multiply on paper) without looking it up but it will be slower than asking GPT and then doing cut and paste with maybe some little editing.
Having to connect to a gpu over the internet seems extremely cumbersome.
Stuff like this should be as easy as running a local program with an accelerator.
Linux like OS for Intel 16 bit chips & clones. 8086/186/286

"Development of Linux-8086 started in 1995 by Linux kernel developers Alan Cox and Chad Page as a fork of the standard Linux. By early 1996 the project was renamed ELKS (Embeddable Linux Kernel Subset)," -- wikipedia
Is neutrality essential to your moral philosophy? Please define neutrality.

Do you think it should be essential to someone who works at Wikipedia? Even after they leave? Why exactly? Make the argument if you want to persuade. I think I speak for a lot of people in saying that such a claim is overly strict.

Have you reviewed various forms of moral relativism recently? If not, I think the ideas will be fruitful.

There is an idea that I’ve stolen from Robert Kane (a philosopher) that I want to share any chance I get: a quest for knowledge means starting with an open mind — but it does not mean stopping there. Neutrality can help you weigh ideas more objectively. But the process of weighing them will show that some ideas are better than others. Therefore, neutrality as an end state of knowledge or ethics is not a wise goal. Foolish neutrality is unethical.
> Lots of papers showing strong reasoning across various reasoning types. Couple papers demonstrating the development of world models too

Actual reasoning, or reconstruction of existing texts containing similar reasoning?

> Not how this works. They aren't search engines. and their performance equity with people isn't relegated to knowledge tasks alone.

It kind of is how this works, and most of the source of its ability to beat average humans at things is on knowledge tasks.

> Can a blind man drive a car ? a man with no hands ?

Lack of access to cameras or vehicle controls isn't why it can't drive a car.

> Lol yes

The existence of numerous ChatGPT jailbreaks is evidence to the contrary.

> No. Experts are people with above average aptitude for any given domain. It's not just about knowledge. many people try and fail to become experts in any given domain.

Many people are of below average intelligence, or give up when something is hard but not impossible.

> That's not how intelligence works. Dumb thinking sped up is just more dumb thinking but faster.

If you have one machine that will make one attempt to solve a problem a day and succeeds 90% of the time and another that will make a billion attempts to solve a problem a second and succeeds 10% of the time, which one has solved more problems by the end of the week?

Average thinking sped up is above average.
I was able to get ChatGPT 4 to produce a working websocket server in rust fairly quickly I know rust but had no experience with the networking crates or async runtimes.

Getting it to also serve HTTP, it fell into quite a few issues. Part of it was not telling me I needed to enable a feature, and part of it was that it's knowledge was quite a bit out of date.

I actually filmed that whole interaction here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFsbMGSOeCY

I also was able to get it to make a working (though extremely basic/naive) SAT solver in J. J is pretty far out of the mainstream, so I had to go through MANY rounds of correcting it. (That was the only time I used up all my ChatGPT4 prompt quota for the 3-hour period.)

Since then, I've stumbled on the technique of presenting it with a rough plan or idea and then iteratively having it ask ME questions about what I posted, and summarizing everything we've agreed so far, rather than just immediately writing code. I find that it's actually pretty good at pointing out things I hadn't considered (security and scaling questions, for example), and asking for clarification.

Most recencly, I've started using it to help me get past the learning curve in languages where I'm not fluent at all (making an animation in Mathematica, and discovering how to do some simple things in smalltalk).

In general, I try to ask it for the most minimal/general example it can give me that shows what I actually want to know. For example, building on the rust web server thing, I asked it to give me the structure for building a restful API with certain endpoints (which "we" worked out "together" using the iterative design discussion method) but just leave the implementations blank, because they would be un-necessary detail for it, and I already knew how to do that part.

Aside from that, I've used ChatGPT 3 in a non-chatting context through GitHub Copilot, and that is a whole other ballgame: it's basically a plugin for Visual Studio Code that acts like a super-smart autocomplete.

It doesn't always guess what I'm about to type correctly right, and the wrong suggestions are occasionally annoying when I'm pausing to think through how to word a comment... But very often now when I start to write a function, several whole lines that were just a vague idea in my head suddenly appear on my screen exactly as I would have written them. (And I mean exactly, including my sometimes unusual code formatting choices...)

I'm still on the waitlist for copilot chat, which presumably is just ChatGPT but insta-trained on your codebase... I'm very much looking forward to trying it, though.
all that costs time :-/ When you're finished working, you got to wait for the syncs to finish (or I guess run them all the time?).

For home computer setups, you can simply walk away when you need a break.
I ran vMee which was powered by jitsi for almost 4 years
I don't use E2E encryption to evade my government. I use E2E encryption to protect myself from criminals and malicious actors. Oh, government == malicious actors ??
AI has replaced 90% of my SO searches. I now don't contribute anything back and have to trust unvetted code that tends to have defects

Coincidentally, SO seems to be worse. But then again, I only use it 10% of the time so I might be wrong
You don't need to be shocked, because nobody said this.
Pollution isn't a property right.

Do you feel that way about other property rights such as land and housing?
I've only looked into yrs. Unfortunately copying a js API into rust and using unsafe whenever you get a borrow check error feels doomed.

> Currently we didn't have any known undefined behaviour bugs caused by [casting pointers we don't have exclusive access to to mutable references]. In the future we may want to adopt different way of working with blocks with more respect regarding borrow checker rules, but currently priority was compatibility with Yjs.

https://github.com/y-crdt/y-crdt/issues/233#issuecomment-136...

Edit: I've only played around with my own toy crdt implementations, but I think this is also completely unnecessary. Yrs has a whole transaction API for concurrently mutating the same document instance through a shared handle. Not only is it unsound but there are also a bunch of places that will just panic if called concurrently. But you can just structure your program differently. For example, you could have a single thread/task per document that all the clients connect to.

That isn't to say yrs isn't impressive. It's quite good for someone's first rust project written all at once in a short period of time. But I don't think it's production ready, and I'm skeptical it's fundamental architecture can be.
My calculator has never given me a wrong answer, so I trust and use it. Every time I have used ChatGPT to solve a coding problem it has had missed important edge cases or been flat out wrong. I find most tasks significantly faster to do myself, but I have found inspiration in a wrong answer that ChatGPT has given me.

Maybe it's good at trivial stuff, but then I don't need it for trivial stuff so why use it then. This example is more like saying you'd use a calculator to solve (5 / 10) when it's faster to solve that yourself.

Now if I was just learning my times tables, sure I'd use ChatGPT, but once I've learned them it's not helping me on the basics anymore, and may be actively hindering me.
> Do you have anything you recommend I read to understand how your algorithm works?

Not really, you should already know those. It is just Block-wise RGA with a tree for blocks and a tree for identifiers, also, with split link and insert-in-between optimization from Briot et. al (2016).
How is that L1 solar shade coming along?

> In a decade or two, most of world's electorate, in terms of energy production and manufacturing capacity, will be people from China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Brazil and the like. Iran, Uzbekistan and Tunisia. Maybe Nigeria or Congo. We will have to start climate change debate afresh because post-Christian flagellation is starting on a seriously wrong foot when talking to these people (to whom I am not a complete stranger). The audience who is now receptive to climate change talks (First World middle class) will be largely irrelevant by then.

So, get a better plan, get a durable and realistic solution and quote a price. No CO² pipelines, please.
It's the intermittent reinforcement caused by a useful thread once in a while that contributes to the addiction. You could choose to just check the topics you find useful, using https://histre.com/hn/

For example: https://histre.com/hn/?tags=+programming+python-ai

(disclaimer: mine)
oops. You know, I thought to check before spouting off and then didn't. Edited my post, thanks.
I was gonna for citations too, fwiw, but found this comment and upvoted it instead.
But if I did more work and less ticket-punching, my bar would look worse than my colleagues' bars in the annual layoff decision-making chart.
Before IM, if the boss needed to know something OMFG URGENT RIGHT NOW, they'd pick up the phone and call you--also breaking your concentration. The problem is not the technology, it's people's willingness to destroy productivity just to get some nugget of information synchronously instead of asynchronously.

I have empathy though, because I've had to break people's concentrations to urgently ping for information, too. It's always because my boss needed me to urgently get the information, and he's doing it because his boss needs to urgently get the informational and so on. Some senior VP somewhere makes an offhand remark about the status of Project X, and suddenly, 20 different managers are pinging their underlings for urgent information, breaking everyone's concentration.
Most banks have a 2FA system involved, especially for transactions that fall outside the trend. It's used primarily to combat identity theft. It's no different in the case a kid does it (conceptually, can't speak for legalities).
Our company delivers LiveKit¹-based video conferencing as a part of our EdTech products ecosystem, and, of course, we are rigorously dogfooding on it.

¹ https://livekit.io/
On a 286, Windows 3.1 ran in 'standard' mode, so it had only cooperative multitasking. Preemptive multitasking was confined to 386 or higher, on which Windows 3.1 ran in 'enhanced mode'.
I think your skepticism is warranted; the "rogue bees" seem to be an inspirational essay thing, rather than a scientific thing. The closest I could find was a study that the waggle dance usually had errors of 10–15°. These errors are pretty big when you're foraging, but these errors turned out to be beneficial for finding new food sources. It may be that these "sloppy bees" turned into rogue bees in the storytelling. Coincidentally, the earliest reference to rogue bees that I could find is 2014, same year as the Nature paper. The rogue bees seem to be popularized by Rory Sutherland's 2020 book "Alchemy" and TED talks.

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep04175.pdf?proof=t
Aurora Supercomputer:

- 200Gb dragonfly interconnect fabric

- 10,000 nodes with 2xCPU + 6xGPU with unified memory

- 10PB of agreggate RAM

- 230PB of storage

Scale matters in supercomputing. Keeping latency low between everything allows you to solve different classes of problems that gets no speed up benefit by simply offloading compute to nvidia cards. It makes a huge difference how everything is connected.
Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executor_(software) / https://github.com/autc04/executor
converting code from php to Go
I think that would be reasonable, but isn't it actually a lot less consumer friendly than the current system?
Worker bees die when they sting mammals because mammal skin retains the barbed stinger tip. However, workers are not inherently one-shot stingers in all cases.
Let me put this way: It’s not going to happen, that’s not how it’s done, but pulling a bit back and just doing it again wouldn’t be the craziest thing Russia could do at this point.

This is industrial warfare. The primary (not only) goal is to destroy the enemy army. Ideally with short/long supply lines (“Why are the Dnieper bridges still up?”), in favorable territory. Yes, this is as ugly a thing as it gets. Hundreds of thousands of men are dead and hundreds of thousands more will die in all likelihood. That’s how it is. And no side is innocent in this.

And, again, people don’t want to hear it but Russia is doing well enough.

The original, mostly post-soviet Ukrainian army of 24th Feb. is all but gone. More than half of their officers are confirmed dead (obituary and all), most of their original heavy gear is destroyed. Gonna avoid discussing overall casualties here but it’s a lot. People are going to be shocked when/if the numbers ever come out.

This is why in the West it’s all about begging for and donating of gear, and the training of fresh troops. Because Ukrainians need it.

And their “second army”, post-soviet gear from outside is also mostly gone. Willing donors are all but depleted, too.

And this is why, after much reluctance, Western tanks are now in Ukraine. But the West does not have all that much to give. And they are not really producing either.

So, unless things change drastically soon, there will be no “fourth” Ukrainian army.

And then Russia will cross the Dnieper again.

Or maybe not. Because the situation is much more serious than most of us Westerners realize. Our leaders are playing with nuclear fire, whether they know it or not. But not because Russia is losing. Because the West is all but at war with a nuclear power and when/if that threshold is crossed Russia is not going to wait for US forces to deploy in Poland or whatever, or worse. They don’t want this but they are prepared for it. They want to avoid it but they are not bluffing. As they keep warning us.

Finally, given the complexities and constraints of the system, “F-16s for Ukraine”, if it actually happens, will at very least mean even more NATO crews in Ukraine and in fact probably takeoffs from Poland and Romania. It’s not certain that Russia will consider this the threshold crossed, but you bet they’ll give an unambiguous response.
I'm trying to be constructive rather than panicking, because I do think both global climate/ecosystems and US/Western democracy are in dire urgent danger. That we face a likely dystopic future (not unlike Mad Max or Idiocracy), related to both. Unless and until we can come together and make much bigger changes and fixes than we've deployed so far...

I was fortunate to do some work in the past related to countering democracy-poisoning propaganda at scale (for the US State Department.) Propaganda and chaos-sowing tactics which have been routinely deployed by Putin's Russia, in particular (then adopted, laundered and tuned by the GOP.) And lately I've put time into building a new game/sim [SB: see below] intended to both entertain and educate on these topics (on climate & democracy threats.) To ideally influence and provide further nudges to act.

Because like most of us I cannot simply wave a wand and unilaterally fix the carbon climate crisis. Yet I cannot sit by, saying and doing nothing. The stress and sheer cognitive dissonance would be slowly self-crippling. But I can try to help alert, inform, persuade and motivate others to take action and make better choices too.

----

[SB] - https://synystrongames.itch.io/slartboz
I've been using it to do image processing in opencv, it's saved a lot of time I would've spent figuring out the required transforms and matrix operations
I’m not downplaying, I disagree with characterising it as an armed coup but figured there’s no point in even talking to you about that.

So all you’ve got left is some whataboutery? I’m guessing from your tone you thing NATO involvement in Yugoslavia was bad? And you see Russian involvement in Ukraine as equivalent so…
It should come as no surprise that if you develop a new theory and then proceed to burn it and all evidence of its existence that no one is going to hear of said theory. If you care about your theory prevailing, you need to go out and make an effort to communicate it. Science is meritocratic in the sense that even the small guy has a chance of fighting the machine as eventually things need to be defended on their technical merits. After all, Galileo was able to defeat the Church which was the largest country in Europe at the time. I think its dangerous to conflate meritocracy with not being required to communicate.
Not technically a paper, it's a comment. That doesn't detract from the comments point or validity.
The Pali Wordle also happens to be hosted on the same domain: https://labs.buddhistuniversity.net/wordle-pali/

Doesn't seem very useful (fun?) unless you understand Pali, though.

Tricycle interviewed the creator about it: https://tricycle.org/article/pali-wordle/
that’s what I’m saying, quadruple or 10x their pay to increase the cost of them selling out for corruption but also make them wear 24/7 body cameras, maybe we can get the true patriots who are willing to sacrifice some privacy to do the good work and as a bonus shorter terms will just work themselves out naturally
Exactly. With the added irony that the whole Wikimedia system is based on volunteers who do just that: come and work for Wikipedia for no pay. Gosh, they must be so rich!
It's a far-left government that believes the state has answers to everything. They also want to ban porn, prostitution, etc.
Well, it's to make money by shipping software (or whatever the company does).

If the goal of a company was just to make money, full stop, then all companies would just do the same handful of most-profitable activities. But what we actually see is companies doing an enormous range of different things, with an equally huge range of levels of profitability.

I think it's overly reductive to say that the only purpose a company has is to make money.
They tried to do that in Kazakhstan in 2019. Mandate a root cert installed everywhere, then MITM everything.

Ofc the attempt failed.
The type of person you are replying to has most likely never lived in any sort of authoritarian regime. People like them play these games...almost like the equivalent of a child saying "I'm not touching you".

What happens in authoritarian regimes is that the law is used to justify the actions of the ruling body, not the other way around. So if you just so happen to blast random static and act suspicious, you'll be taken, beaten and either admit to a crime or a law will be made or amended to justify it. And then you'll admit to it.

The price of freedom is constant vigilance. You are correct in saying we could not endure a total strong encryption ban.