skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Idk if they have the “right” to violate privacy (or whatever) I think that the US government just does it and they don’t care.

No, the problem is that the US has specific laws that allows the government to require companies to secretly violate privacy, and punish them if they refuse, or even for just disclosing that the request was made.
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/hiV2z
Temperature rise actually impacts humans overall in a positive way since more humans die on average from cold temperatures vs. hot.

edit: I see people don't believe this which is surprising since it is overwhelmingly true, like not even close: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150520193831.h...
A sneak peak to some future blogpost, this is what happens when "OOD " is inserted into "GG WP" to get "GOOD G WP":

https://appsets.jsonjoy.com/blogposts/list-crdt-internals/wi...
It's like staying so are you banning freight and air travel too to those politicians in order to stop cocaine. When do programmers get it that those analogies don't mean anything in real world.
Correct and same applies to you me and everyone else. The bottom line is you are an idiot if you flat out deny the perspective of people who are more knowledgeable than you are on this topic.
> We are approaching lab-testability, with results from sensitive accelerometers allowed to point at tiny superposed masses.

Do you happen to know of any promising upcoming experiments in particular? Or any groups who are at the forefront of such research endeavors?
Some people just like their privacy, and there's not much to gain from sharing their identity.
Nice, that's simple enough! You may want to try talking to it via the API, last time I checked the web UI doesn't accept prompts >4K tokens while GPT-4 via the API has a 8K Token limit. And then there's the 32K version...
What's the performance hit for doing this? And, the rootkit question, how would eBPF notice you doing this?
But 3000003 is exact in fp32, as well as it is 3000002.5, 3000002.75 before it or 3000003.25, 3000003.5, 3000003.75 after it?

https://www.h-schmidt.net/FloatConverter/IEEE754.html

And AFAIK the LLMs, lacking the ability to actually calculate, can't check which numbers are such?
https://archive.ph/GJncN
There are thousands of sequenced human genomes available to access for research purposes (1000 genomes project, UK biobank etc) so one additional genome adds no marginal value.
It doesn't help that things like ChatGPT and AI in general make things more blurry. People keep hearing about how ChatGPT will replace both writers and programmers. Which path is one supposed to choose? And trade school/physical work isn't for everyone.
IMO there's absolutely something wrong with it, while millions of people don't have access to food or clean water.

Supply & demand is an explanation, not an excuse, and it is a problem that can be fixed (if there's political will).
I find the topic interesting because it also seems to be one of these areas where a metric is being invented with no existing "gold standard", which is a different problem than just validating a new sensor to replace an existing one in the same methodology.

What does it mean to do continuous blood pressure monitoring? Do we have any idea how BP is supposed to behave continuously, when clinical standards are around a random sampling in particular resting postures? And do you have to account for all the fluid movements and pressure changes that happen during activity, with muscles contracting and body parts accelerating?
Fascinating! Thanks for the insight!

Does the up to 60% figure include programs that make heavy use of GADTs, or are those even worse in terms of the proportion of compilation time spent type checking?

I had no idea Swift's type checking algorithm is exponential. How easy is it to run into those conditions?
Great domain name, great article. It makes me want to spend a few nights there, honestly.
This is a false dichotomy.

Regulation is what needs to be done in order to shape the market in such a way it can solve the problem.

"The market" does not incorporate socialized costs when left to its own devices, quite the contrary. That's what got us here in the first place.
https://towardsdatascience.com/stop-duplicating-deep-learnin...

This is basically the building blocks.
It is not pretty simple. A govt can't win a whack-a-mole game. Consider attempts to block Telegram in Russia. They caused so much collateral damage while not even approaching the goal, that the whole effort had to be canceled and swept under the rug.
Deleted tweets on Twitter are reappearing
You just answered without answering my question.
Here's roughly how my conversation with GPT4 went

Me: I want to make an svg editor, give me some suggestions. I mainly want something with mobile support.

GPT4: gives me some options

I look over the options and choose fabricjs

Me: Start by loading an svg at a predefined url

GPT4: <code>

Me: Ok now implement a save feature, send the json to this url ...

GPT4: <code>

Me: The text is loaded as an image, I want the text to be editable

GPT4: <code>

Me: I'd like to add some google fonts to the text editor

GPT4: <code>

Me: The fonts aren't loading, I think we need to load the fonts first before initializing the canvas.

GPT4: <code>

Me: Ok add a undo/redo feature

GPT4: <code>

Me: Let's add some clickable buttons instead of hotkeys, here is the html..

GPT4: <code>

I probably could have done this myself, but frankly it would have taken me a long time to figure out the fabricjs api. It probably saved me at least a week making this thing.

here's the live app: https://tinyurl.com/2dhh58cn

and the code: https://tinyurl.com/2tu4xrtn

you can tell the GPT generated sections by the (overly) verbose comments
Wistron exits Apple India business after tripping over scale, work culture
Indeed -- but even those two or three companies might not compete so hard with each other when they are both controlled by the same investment group, whose interest is in seeing the index go up.
188.5 million chickens are slaughtered DAILY.

https://thehumaneleague.org/article/how-many-chickens-are-in...

Approx 58 million chickens have been culled in the United States due to bird flu.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/avian-flu-summary.htm

The first link seems to be specific to meat birds, but I think the concept stands for layers too.
Off to one side is over-diagnosis. It's good to have ubiquitous sensing, and it will be really good for the detection of issues, but alongside that will be an increase in associated medical "costs" (I don't mean US $ alone: providing health services in an NHS model incurs costs) dealing with false positives.

It's a balancing act. I've now had one, and my partner has had one instance of going to see a specialist who says "you shouldn't have been sent here, this is the effect of improved imaging and diagnostics without updating the criteria for triage" -The imaging and related diagnostic tools now "find" artifacts which are sub-clinical for risk, but the triage requirements on the technician require them to report on, since "it might not be"
https://archive.is/LIJCp
There's a lot of waste based on pure nonsense and most of the public indulge in them. Individuals that actually care and make well-informed decisions form a minority.
It's called being an amateur radio or ham radio operator.

"Oops, sent a funky signal with the wrong configuration, let's try again."

Or

"I messed up the modulation so the message is illegible."

Or

"I just found a funky NASA satellite that is no longer operational. Let me slap it with some messages and see if I get a return."

https://www.science.org/content/article/amateur-astronomer-d...

Or maybe you are an amateur radio astronomer. Built your own radio telescope.
Strongly disagree. I've seen towering giants in their fields that still can develop a "mental block" if you will if their developed notions about how their technology/science should work doesn't pan out. E.g. why you often see scientific breakthroughs among younger scientists (and, yes, while I realize the "average age at Nobel breakthrough" has been rising over the past century, it still skews relatively quite young). For example, Brooks in particular spent his career around the idea that intelligence requires "real world interaction", so it's not surprising to see him pooh pooh the idea that something can become intelligent that lacks that experience.

I would be really interested in examples where Lecun, Brooks, Chomsky, or any others have argued their points in relation to some specific examples like the kinds that are pointed out in this article. Fully admit that I don't have a full catalog of their Twitter posts and interviews, so I genuinely would love to see this. I remain highly skeptical, though, when I only see them argue in generalities, e.g. "LLMs can't be smart because they don't have a model of explanations of how things occur." I mean, fine, but then how do they explain some of the quite frankly amazing capabilities of some of these systems if they're "just doing autocomplete." For example, saw an absolutely mind-blowing example where someone taught ChatGPT an entirely new made up language, and ChatGPT was able to guess at, for example, the appropriate declensions for different words. Would love to see Chomsky's reaction to that one.
I don't think anyone with even the slightest awareness of scientific philosophy or history actually thinks that though. Everyone knows that there are social factors involved to varying degrees in different fields, and that paradigms and research programs often only shift when the old guard in a field dies. The scientific method is a directional force guiding this messy social enterprise in the general direction of truth but if anyone thinks science as an institution is purely meritocratic they haven't thought about it hard enough or done the required reading.
Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons I would never donate to wikipedia financially or with edits / my time.
Instead of manually reordering clauses, etc, you could just run the original essay through another LLM without watermarking capability and ask it to write a new essay based on the original.

Then test the result against your own plagiarism detector and iterate through the watermark-less LLM until the resulting essay passes.

Or just proactively run it through a bunch of times.

Or just use the watermark-less LLM to begin with.. personal, unshackled, powerful LLMs are definitely on the trajectory we're headed in.
You are correct and doing fine.

The authority to check with is Kenneth Frampton and his Modern Architecture. He categorized Safdie as postmodern. I just checked and apparently my copy (some early 90s edition) is awol from the shelf and no pdfs to be found on the net. However found this article:

Grep for safdie:

https://www.stirworld.com/think-columns-the-fifth-edition-of...

He was a great teacher, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Frampton

~

Also not "brutalist" (Safdie meets a straight edge on a hill):

Rokko Housing I, II, III, Kobe, Tadao Ando
https://arquitecturaviva.com/works/edificios-rokko-i-ii-iii-...

https://www.pritzkerprize.com/sites/default/files/styles/max...

Ando used to make concrete sing. Just superb. He also had a dog he named Corbu (its true!) - iirc he claimed (in a lecture when visiting our school) that he followed Corbusier but to me he generously lifted from Lou Kahn.

https://wrightwood659.org/exhibitions/ando-and-le-corbusier-...
You made the ultimate VJ party tool.
Don't forget that an authoritarian state can use punishment as leverage - they don't need to do all the diligence themselves, they can just punish you if you can't prove that your random numbers were generated deterministically.

But I was being a bit facetious. Most likely they would just to punish people who are caught using steganography.
The bigger picture is that only so many resources are going to be devoted to researching fundamental physics (both money and hours of work from human beings). If the majority of those resources are focused on a dead-end theory, then the opportunity cost is quite literally everything else.
I don't think you took more than a passing glance, if any at those papers.

What you describe is impossible with these 3.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.09196 - new evaluation set introduced with the paper. modelled after tests that previously only had visual equivalents. contamination literally impossible

https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.02329 - effect of explanations on questions introduced with the paper. dataset concerns make no sense.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.09066 - new prompting method introduced to improve algorithmic calculations. dataset concerns make no sense.

The Casual paper is the only one where worries about dataset contamination makes any sense at all.
Take ownership of your projects and also suck up to upper mgmt. You'll be the next director.
Universal grammar in the way that Chomsky suggested, a sort of structure all humans must have in there brain, is not a thing. But I believe there is something like the "universality of grammar" where the human vision system or motor system can have a grammatical quality to them. In that sense that there is ambiguity in which tree structure represent the world. I've seen this in many places but I am not sure if someone has put this into (better) writing.
>14.3 litres of pure alcohol a year

To get to this amount of alcohol for reference, a pretty standard bottle of spirits is 750 mL and 80 proof, or 40% alcohol by volume. so if you regularly bought a One liter bottle of liquor you would need to drink 35.75 bottles of Jameson a year, or larger, and pricier, 35.75 bottles of Smirnoff.
That is the average, and from public health studies I've read in the past alcohol consumption by average has a serious barbell effect altering the average.

Personally I have three drinks and think " I should slow down"
> Depp cultists are already cleaning up the Wikipedia page details, such as reports that Depp was a nightmare on set.

From what I can find, this is a single revert[1], and that seemed an appropriate revert as it was a single guy saying it on TV with no real substance to it ("I heard that ...").

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jeanne_du_Barry_(...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoUGiS1LeKU
Bezos' Fire phone is an example of success drives success. Amazon is a success even after Fire phone failed because he could afford to do many things, have some of them fail and some work out well.

It is perhaps classic survivorship bias if you look at Amazon initially, but after it got into a money printing machine the expansion shows how one success can lead to many mores even if some of them fail.
Really enjoying this, thanks for sharing!
Piracy is a moral imperative.
I always think this notion of fairness is perfectly encapsulated by this famous experiment involving Capuchin monkeys:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiU6TxysCg

As that video demonstrates (a Capuchin who was happy to perform a simple task in order to get a piece of cucumber goes crazy when another monkey is introduced who gets a grape for the same task) this notion of fairness is so basic, it is pre-human. According to the video, it's even been replicated with dogs and birds.
Is this just a sorta-movie review / recap that kinda pretends to be about the book The Innovator's Dilemma?
This is a lot of words, but this is also the second time you've tripped over, like, one of the few basic things I think I know and can reasonably research about the conflict: that Ukraine enjoys interior lines, and Russia must defend a long exterior line. Things people have written about interior vs. exterior lines aren't motivated reasoning about Ukraine; they predate Ukraine by decades.
summaries are to real reading what porn is to good sex
I've been using it to refactor Clojure codes and port Scheme examples into Clojure.

Maybe because Lisps have very low syntax, I find I can just copy off function/macro definitions as context and GPT3.5 can rewrite the code into something I can use... And by testing in a REPL (in :dev) I can instantly see which code has hallucinations and which work perfectly.

Tbh I find it hallucinates mainly when dealing with mutable states (e.g. atoms) or with pipelines of complex maps transformed by multimethods -

Just using small data bits and normal pure functions make GPT3.5 work perfectly because it doesn't need to take into account code outside the 2048-4096 tokens it's thinking right now?
Are you sure? I thought that was why it had largely fallen out of favor. The predictions it makes are not testable.
>It doesn't change groundwater rights, but sets up agencies with the power to allocate usage in penalties which ignore the groundwater rights or seniority of rights. A farmers who have been somewhere for a 100 years can and are being prevented from using water, while recently developed communities or other stakeholders get a pass.

Wait till you hear who that farmer took 'his' water rights from! They were there a hell of a lot longer than 100 years.

>What does that mean in this context? All of your property and even your life fall under legal jurisdiction. That doesn't mean the state can ignore the laws it has established and take them away without due process.

You haven't given an example of the State of California taking away someone's rights without due process though.

>I personally think that citizens of California should show some responsibility and buy water from those with rights, instead of acting like petty thieves. If the state is free to systemically ignore its own laws, then individuals should be free do the same. However, that lawless society is not one I would want to live in.

Your claim that California is 'acting like petty thieves' is unsubstantiated. You haven't provided any examples of that. There is a difference between what you'd like the law to be and what it is.

I'm open to reading about examples that support your argument if you have them. The realistic situation on the ground is that ranchers/farmers were allowed to act like drunks at an open bar and now the state is managing water more responsibly with respect to ALL the stakeholders in the community.
Direct link: https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/22/23732497/twitter-bug-rest...
You and me are like the complete opposite. You'd rather your boss waltz on over to your cube and interrupt you instead of a message notification you can put off a while?
It is the same in Spain.

Fun story, I had a professor in university that tried to force us to buy his own book for his course, refusing to provide notes or any other free alternatives, and for the final exam he allowed anyone to bring in his book.

We complained to the school board as this was unfair and there was a conflict of interests, the exam was redone by a committee and a new professor replaced him the next year.
> Give criteria that 4 fails that a significant chunk of the human population doesn't also fail and we can talk.

The ability to respond "I don't know." to literally any question.
Who signs up for illegal services with a school email? Do people not give even an once of thought to opsec?
Hey! Author from the paper here.
The volume of water is dependent on the mass of adsorbent used and the concentration of Pb or other metal in the water. The mg/g values given in a few of the figures/tables for each of the nanomaterial-coated sponges gives the mass of Pb per mass of adsorbent that is the "maximum capacity" for the given adsorbent.
So, if there's a 20mg/g capacity, that would imply 1 gram of sponge can remediate 20mg of metal ion in water, which would be, say, 20 Liters of water at 1ppm concentration of the metal ion.

It was slightly outside the scope of our research to discuss utilization of that metal ion, but it is a mostly solved engineering problem. Ideally, the sponge would be regenerated after it was full/at capacity with a metal like Co, with a small volume of water, to generate a high concentration solution of Cobalt, which could then be precipitated out as a metal or Cobalt salt using a strong base, or utilized in applications that require Cobalt in solution, or, with certain metals, incorporated into another mineral straight from solution for use in, say, a battery cathode or other material.
No, Tesla has not expanded the Nevada gigafactory to its promised size (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigafactory_Nevada). It’s been half built from the beginning. Tesla has another factory in Buffalo which is pretty idle as well. If it were economical to expand production there, they would do so. If anything, they will obsolete some lines to add others (4680), but I’m not holding my breath. It’s just not economical to produce batteries in the US, except to satisfy new subsidy requirements for US EVs.
Judging from the current state of research and education, I think that it will take a lot more than a polite refusal. You will be required to comply if you wish to participate.
They are fine with transport encryption. They want do ban E2E encryption. As long as the companies (and the authorities) can access your data at rest, they are fine.
do you think you'll have issues with rate limiting and security blocks more generally if you are doing lots of polling from your side on behalf of many integrations? One time i wrote a script to poll for changes to my frequent flyer mile account and they banned me and froze my miles. just from a polling script.
> What I believe is happening here is the EU is setting a new standard that the US and UK and others will have to follow if they want to do business in the EU, unless they invest millions in infrastructure and staff.

That’s called the Brussels effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect), and indeed is similar to the California effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_effect)
Agreed. So far I've derived most benefit from ChatGPT by unblocking me when starting tasks and also giving overviews about things (much like an improved search engine).
Ultimately the EU is going to have to come up with a detailed compliance framework. The wording of the GDPR is too high-level and we can't trust companies to self-regulate.
Academy maybe is a preferable term.
> So all you’ve got left is some whataboutery?

The thing that you call "whataboutery" is the basis of the Socratic method that every student who attended Philosophy 101 understands as an essential form of argument-building. Unfortunately to you, the whining of "whataboutery" that you've just demonstrated cannot serve as a rebuttal of anything but your aptitude for argument elaboration.
> What's the performance hit for doing this?

So I want to be clear. This work is very much in the "fantasy" stage. I haven't ran this at scale, and there is a lot I would do before I blindly rolled something like this out. As far performance impact, it obviously would depend on how it's implemented however I think a reasonable amount of "tracer packets" being sent out every 15 seconds or so to each hop shouldn't be too disruptive to the network, or to the host machine issuing the request. In other words if you take the `ptrace(2)` concern out of the equation (this is the big one in my mind) its going to be negligible.

> And, the rootkit question, how would eBPF notice you doing this?

I suppose it would depend on what your strategy with eBPF is and where you were looking. Reminding yourself that the pidfd_getfd and pidfd_open functions are system calls, I think any modern Linux auditing system would see something like this "a mile away".

In other words, I don't see somebody using this tactic to steal FDs in production without quickly alerting most security systems. I suspect there would be ways of hiding this however... https://github.com/krisnova/boopkit...