skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I care quite a bit about distinguishing whether OpenAI is doing the things it is doing for regulatory capture reasons, or whether they are genuinely interested in reducing the risks around AI. So here are some thoughts on this:

1. It does sure seem like this licensing regime would limit the entrance of new players into the AGI market quite a bit, which would probably increase OpenAIs profits a bunch.

2. However, it also makes sense from a safety perspective to reduce the number of players, since that enables more coordination and reduces race-dynamics

3. OpenAI itself would likely be hit pretty hard by these regulations, though if they are the ones driving the progress they might be able to get some privileged position in the law-making process that leaves them more free than competitors

4. OpenAI hasn't made any kind of costly signal or promise that shows they really care about this kind of regulation, though it's unclear what a good promise or costly signal would be. "We would join any nationalized AGI project" would be something, though I also think it's pretty plausibly a quite bad idea.

5. Altman doesn't have any equity in OpenAI, though my sense is he would still end up extremely powerful and somehow get a ton of resources if OpenAI ends up ahead in the AGI race (before the AGI causes catastrophe that is).
The One Best Way Is a Trap
Mine uses hledger-web, with her own journal file on her laptop. I have installed a bash script that she can find/run from Spotlight Search, or double-click on if she opens the folder, which starts up hledger-web, which in turns opens a web browser tab, for data entry and review.

She has another script which can generate/update/open monthly year-to-date HTML reports.

At end of year (at least), I handle journal file rotation, apply any desired fixups, commit to version control, and produce some checked/cleaned-up HTML reports.

We also track some shared things in a google spreadsheet. I import from there to my own PTA journal each month, as an end-of-month adjustment.
You can buy version with switches not soldered.
I'm not sure Altman/OpenAI know how transparent that ruse was. A bit disappointing witnessing a for-good org, turning into a for-profit one.
selinux isn't used in any meaningful way for desktop software.

The actual solution in that space is Flatpak.
I can do a decent Daniel Gackle (dang) impression:

This looks like an announcement of an announcement, which isn't on topic for HN. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

On HN, there's no harm in waiting for the actual thing: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
What is the space laser / LIDAR for?
Not true. For example we could be surrounded by a sphere of uniform infinite density, in which case our atoms wouldn't be pulled in either direction.
>"That's something the US government has done in the past"

Very recent past and they will do it again no doubts.

>"Forming a third party will cause one of the main parties, probably the one whose voters are least fundamentalist, to lose."

Well it is you country and you are free to maintain status quo.
Zag.js – UI Components Powered by FSM
Oracle listaggs do support distinct, since 19c.
I wouldn’t say they are proven computational, but I would say they can be explained in terms of processes on information. Sense data, body awareness, perceptions, noticing things, evaluating situations and options all seem to me to relate to information and processes on it. We use these experiences to form memories and make decisions. Both these are processes on information. Those are all things that consciousness actually does. Is there any function of consciousness we’re aware of that doesn’t relate to information?

That leaves the experience itself. It’s an experience of informational content, but is there more going on than transformations of information? What could that be? Maybe a physical substance, or a physical structure, in which case we should be able to physically synthesis consciousness stuff, or assemble a consciousness structure. What else is there?
> All of this could have been avoided if USA respected Russia's wishes regarding NATO expansion

No, the Russo-Ukrainian war that has been active since 2014 could not have been, and the reason I know this to 100% certainty is because the US and NATO did accede to Russia’s request to not offer Ukraine and Georgia Membership Action Plans to set the path for NATO membership in 2008, which was followed immediately (less than two months, IIRC) by Russia invading Georgia, and in 2014—with a Ukrainian government that had disclaimed interest in NATO largely because of the 2008 action—Russia following up with an invasion of large parts of Ukraine, starting the war.

If anything, NATO showing it was willing to abandon Ukraine and Georgia is what greenlit both wars.
Its more about marketing and mindshare. What if mcdonalds was on the apps but not carls jr? You'd rather the customer come to you and deny the other business a customer than to not be there at all
Suicide haunted me for years after we lost my brother. It's what spurred me to study secular buddhism which has been an end to so much of my suffering. I was never able to process my emotions and was completely unprepared for him to take his own life.

> Then, we must also realize that sometimes suicide occurs impulsively and there is no [unusual] behavior to detect. But… controlling access to drugs, places like high bridges and access to firearms [can help prevent it].

I can not re-emphasize this enough. If you have firearms in your home I would recommend getting rid of them unless you use them regularly for sport. If you do have a firearm in your home, secure it in such a way that you or your family cannot gain access to it without someone else knowing. Consider storing firearms offsite at a club or firearms locker. ESPECIALLY if you have children or anxious/depressed people in your home.
Many Brits against Brexit and who want to rejoin EU disagree and believe EU wants UK back so much it'll offer the same terms as before.
> Because if they are not marked or restricted then I believe they won't appeal to users who want expert articles.

I believe they will, because the quality will be higher. They shouldn't employ experts as a marketing campaign, they should employ experts as a way to keep interesting entries from devolving into trash heaps. I'd honestly prefer those experts to be research librarians and experts on parliamentary procedure or statistics, rather than subject matter. Instead all editorial decisions are made through trials adjudicated by a few people who happened to walk by, and other people paid to be there by private organizations and/or governments.

A higher-quality Wikipedia needs defenses against paid and deeply-invested mobs.
> Do they genuinely have a mindset that nothing is worth trying if it failed the first time?

No. But the way you first picked to do the thing is very likely impossible to make work. Don't decide on a mechanism, like cookies, and fixate on it without regard for practicality or effectiveness.

Preventing invisible tracking is probably a good goal that's worth iterating on but making sites pop up a list of good and bad tracking and being allowed to track the people who accidentally don't click "No!" seems like an entirely failed way to go about this.

If tracking is bad then stop it for everyone, not just people who clicked the correct thing. If some tracking is generally bad but allowable for certain functionality then mandate that tracking is only applied once the user had opted in, etc. Don't make users mark "Don't steal my organs while I sleep" on the hotel paperwork.
Invest in upstream/ downstream businesses or in capital heavy projects, You could acquire also grow inorganically. R&D in the accounting sense is very different from research as we think. Yes there is diminishing returns for spending cash but I don't think these big companies are anywhere close to that being a real problem.

In a sibling post I talked about Google's inability to spend, this is also true for old school Blue chip companies like say Oil& Gas, they have had enormous record profits last couple of years and while they have for good reasons not doing lot of new wells[1] they have not not also done much green energy investments either.

[1] Financially sound not do so, given the long term prospects of oil are not great, and short term price fluctuations are not good decision basis for 30+ year projects new drilling entails.
You can't look at temperatures like that. 1.5° is a lot but as a ratio it's meaningless (what if the average temperature were 0?). You'd have to convert to Kelvin.

But I'm not even sure ratios matter here. The earth is a sensitive system and the amount of change it takes to knock it out of wack is peculiar to it. I don't think you can just look at ratios of (absolute) temperatures.
Setting aside value judgments on whether this is a good idea or not, it's odd how nonspecific this blog post is.

Metaculus has some probabilities [1] of what kind of regulation might actually happen by ~2024-2026, e.g. requiring disclosure of human/non-human, restricting APIs, reporting on large training runs, etc.

[1] https://www.metaculus.com/project/ai-policy/
I've never been to DC.

I did go past… where was it… Kawangware? I think?

I've never felt so much like a parodic stereotype of my own background[0] in my life as I did that day.

But that, in broad brushstrokes rather than details, is what most people's lives used to look like 200 or so years ago, basically everywhere.

50 years? 1973; back then, even the UK broadly didn't have double glazed windows, cavity wall or roof insulation, even in good middle-class homes. That was only a decade after we stopped calling Kenya a colony.

[0] British
Nobody ever expresses it that way because various sources of that baseline temperature have absolute offset errors and uncertainties, but with consistent methods you can ignore the absolute offset and work with the delta over historical average instead.
Giving Altman the benefit of the doubt would be a lot more plausible if OpenAI actually released their products rather than presenting them as locked down web services [0], and if they didn't continually use this alarmist word "safety" to describe things like preventing an LLM from writing things that could cause political controversy. They're so obviously missing the larger picture in favor of their own business interests, that it's impossible to consider these grandiose calls for regulation to be anything but plays for regulatory capture.

[0] I can't even play with ChatGPT any more, even though I had acquiesced to giving them my phone number. Now they've seemingly added IP-based discrimination, in line with the common lust for ever more control.
Thank you, this bug has been fixed. We recently changed from shuffled distractors to Ai-generated distractors, but as you identified, such a bug could occur.
> employees with internal motivation are miles ahead and more productive than without one.

Isn’t that invariant with respect to (prospective) employer?

I naturally feel motivated to do a good job and earn the respect of my coworkers, and the satisfaction and pride that comes with a job well done. In addition to my work output, the title I hold and the salary I’ve earned are evidence to my friends, family and romantic interests of my drive to generate value and the expertise I’ve tirelessly worked towards developing. This further motivates me do good work.

I don’t see why “internal motivation” would vary between employers. Could you give examples of attributes that contribute to your own level of motivation?
Always fun to spot one in the wild too, like this example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/139kybg...
Incidentally, was Seinfeld ever funny?

I mean I just suspect the people who don't like Seinfeld probably still didn't like it when it was new, and "being done before" sure never was the problem for me.

Makes this trope feel a bit of a misnomer IMO
There are already experiments (and simulations) which show Raychaudhuri focusing and Einstein lensing in purely-quantum analog gravity (see e.g. <https://scitechdaily.com/bridging-quantum-theory-and-relativ...> for something moderately accessible that allows for attaching a causal cone at each point in a relevant analog spacetime), so

> no; I'm saying that if you apply QM as it exists today to describe the motion of light beams around the sun, you will not get any effect similar to gravitational lensing

falls down because we can describe such an effect purely quantum mechanically.

Also, I think you should be put to proof with respect to a claim against quantum perturbative or canonical methods in the solar-mass lensing regime in which perturbation theory works great for classical GR, taking into account all sorts of beyond-leading-order (classical) effects like noncircularity, backreaction, helicity, you name it. The sun is a fixed enough background that it's a linearized gravity problem. What exactly in "QM as it exists today" breaks (or is broken by) this?

> ... if you used the formulae of GR to compute the motion of photons passing through a double-slit experiment ... GR is also wrong.

How exactly does taking the fully Lorentz-invariant QED or Standard Model to local Lorentz-invariance (with the radius of curvature significantly larger than the laboratory experiment) break the picture? We are nowhere near needing to consult Birrell & Davies.

What do you think needs doing here if "you used the formulae of GR", beyond solving the EFEs and the geodesic equations for the whole (region of) spacetime, and then wondering what geodesic any given photon will couple to? What do you think the scale of the correction from Minkowskian geodesics will be? And how much of that do you impute to the apparatus?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/21/business/uber-bo-young-le...

>“We have heard that many of you are in pain and upset by yesterday’s Moving Forward session,” the email said. “While it was meant to be a dialogue, it’s obvious that those who attended did not feel heard.”

>Employees greeted the news that Ms. Lee was stepping away as a sign that Uber’s leadership was taking their complaints seriously.
One employee wrote that the company’s executives “have heard us, they know we are hurting, and they want to understand what all happened too.”

Let me get this straight. Employees are "in pain" and "hurting" and "feeling not heard" because the head of DEI (who happens to be an Asian woman) said that people should be sensitive and not use the term "Karen" as a casual slur against white women who actually represent a broad spectrum of experiences? I consider myself progressive, but it feels like we've completely jumped the shark with some of this stuff.
Appreciate the reply. Did you have a chance to check out the platform? We are always looking for ways we can better tailor the platform to serve the needs of people like you.

Cheers
Sure. Or any country that complies with EU data protection and privacy laws.
Been using them since the 00s, never had that experience, I've got 190 permament installs globally and another 50 or so which come and go as the need arises.
The East Germans tried manual total surveillance. It didn’t work. Like, it was a horrifically oppressive police state, but it fell short of the full potential of horrific police-state-ness largely due to practicalities.

Automating mass surveillance is dangerous; it makes _possible_ levels of societal control which simply weren’t possible for even the most aggressively dedicated police states of the past. It’s a bit of a Pandora’s box, and probably best left closed.
I'd argue the other direction - it's requisite to be greedy in order to be a businessman, otherwise you'd take a vow of poverty, live off charity, and give away your work for free.
hledger can be strict and power users prefer that; like Ledger it's relaxed by default to help newcomers get started.

https://hledger.org/hledger.html#check
Really good points on the angle there, thank you. And important point that it shouldn't necessarily come from you! (that's what's worked better for us everywhere but ProductHunt, reflecting on it)
Sounds more like an issue with your browser.
Well, here's your chance to try the opposite. Instead of tuna salad and being intimidated by women, chicken salad and going right up to them. If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right.
Since it doesn't look like the project has been discussed on HN before, we switched the link from https://github.com/lem-project/lem/releases/tag/v2.0.0 to the project page.

Edit: oops, there was a thread in 2017 (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36035158) - but that's long enough ago that this switch is probably still good.
Actually that's a great analogy. It would be like if the US tried to invade and conquer parts of Mexico and turn it into a new state in the year 2023. You know, that thing that will never fucking happen. We also invaded Canada a couple times back when we were dumber, but notice how Canada and Mexico are actually pretty pleased to be our allies, despite our faults, and they aren't seeking protection from foreign alliances to prevent us invading them again, because they largely believe we would never do that again, because the world is very different and we are very intertwined and wish to be cooperating countries.
> well over a decade now.

3 decades.
In that time it’s become increasingly challenging to contribute anything to The People’s Encyclopedia.

I wanted to update a local wiki page with newer data from its original sources, but apparently I have become blacklisted because I use/used Apple’s private relay and safari’s privacy measures by default in all my browsing. Disabling them didn’t fix it. I would love to sign up as a fallback measure to be able to contribute, and verify my account by whatever means necessary, but apparently in the 2020s that’s just not something Wikipedia supports (as I’m also black listed from signing up despite never contributing to Wikipedia.)

Increasingly I see out of date and opinionated articles and I wonder how many of us have meaningful contributions ready but are forced to sit on the sidelines because there’s no “way in” with this product.
It's obvious that this is beneficial for the population, but is it (typically) beneficial for an individual?

Probably, selfish individuals would only want to try this if they're already well-fed, or if they're confident that there will be some food left over if they don't find any of their own.

So, for the benefit of the population, we should probably make sure that everyone is well-fed, so that everyone feels confident to go and find new sources of food :)
I wonder if this is just some experimentation on customer pricing. For example, my partner and I often compare the prices before ordering. Sometimes, we see different delivery rates (both on iPhone, without promo, as non dashpass subscribers).
I've always found the Tokaimura accidents to be a little "creepier." A vat of liquid can end up in a state of mixture and configuration that causes it suddenly become critical. [0]

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokaimura_nuclear_accidents
Lots.

Most enterprises processes and algorithms are big mosts around small processes really well understood which are tied together and neurotically checked or sufficiently slowed down to ask “are we sure?” enough times before implementing a change.
How do you define "woke?"
> oh, that's not really type annotations; that's just... cli linting?

I think it sort of is, depending on one's point of view. I mean, at the end of the day, a CLI encantation in a Bash script or Dockerfile is not really different from a function call in your Python/Java/whatever code, only that your interface is not an API but an ABI wrapped inside a POSIX CLI. So the CLI takes on the role of the function signature.

The only problem is that a CLI is typically a very soft and error-prone interface. It might forgive errors, it might be inconsistent etc. etc. This is certainly fine when you can iterate quickly on the command line. But for real programming? Not so much. For such purposes, proper (and properly typed) function signatures were invented. Whether or not you call matching/verifying function calls against function signatures type checking or linting is certainly up to you. :)

As for your project: Cool that you're working on this, and that you're using Zig! I'll visit again in a few months. :)
It does seem likely that this is a case of a bit of column A, a bit of column B.

Apple very well may have unrealistic demands, but I believe it's also likely that Wistron may not have dealt with the level of QC, precision, and consistency that is expected of Apple products and based their estimates on experiences of working with more typical hardware companies.
Not a terribly helpful or relevant comment. Maybe reconsider this reply?
This carries the assumption things like "school work" and "business work" are inherently fungible on the basis they are both types of work. Dropping the assumption for a moment, it seems reasonable there may be more than one goal of or type of work, and that these goals/types might not be interchangeable with each other. This view of the difference is only possible if you start with the earnest question of "what's the difference supposed to be" rather than asserting a conversation along the lines of "these are the same, so why are we treating them different".

Taking this approach, many might find school work is, largely, effort done to grade a level of understanding the individual has of the content. On the other hand, one might find business work is, largely, effort done to accomplish a customer's request. Additional less common types of each may come up as well, and there are, of course, exceptions to the main theme of each. In general though, I think you'd agree swapping the goals to say "school work is effort done to grade whether someone understands the content while business work is effort done to see if the particular person you make the request to is able to complete it on their own" seems rather unlikely in comparison. Because of this, swapping who does the work in each case results in different treatments. Not because it's a question of whether work gets done rather what the goal in doing the work is.
You can host your open source AI project in Belarus or Russia or whatever. You can even VPN into the country and pretend you're actually developing it there. And we also have Tor, I2P, etc. to hide where you're coming from. And we will likely have anti-stylometric tools so it will be very difficult to identify the author of the code.

So it's unlikely the government will be able to put a stop to it. Especially given AI is a technology that many will find very useful. They can't even put a stop to child sexual abuse material on the Internet, material which is universally hated. How are they ever going to stop AI development then? It's all going to go underground, on the darknet.

And restricting the development of open source software likely will be found unconstitutional, on First Amendment grounds, in the US. And it's likely to spur civil disobedience as well.
So if they form without mass, why would they bend light like black holes? If they don't bend light, then it seems to me that they would not really appear as black holes.
> I have to admit that I didn't see a recurring subscription pricing model coming at all.

That was extremely obvious from the beginning. They allowed to use the beta for free and never made any promises on licensing model. So, it was obvious that they wanted to force you to pay subscriptions. Actually that was the primary reason for me to avoid getting use to the app.

Someone would pay, sure, but it's cheaper to get Fastmail than to pay that much for GMail client.
>Crimean War was lost.

My point is that the Crimean War resulted in reforms later on.
Yes, it's a bit surprising how much of a meme the demon core is on Twitter. Some other popular radiation memes: "drop and run", LANL plutonium rods, "3.6 Roentgen not great not terrible" and "This is not a place of honor". Am I missing any?