skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Roll to disbelief. That tweet is precisely about what I mentioned in my previous post that doesn't count: finetuning LAMA derived models. You are not going to contribute to the cutting edge of ML research doing something like that.

For training LAMA itself, Meta I believe said it cost them $5 million. That is actually not that much, but I believe that is just the cost of running the cluster for the the duration of the training run. I.e, doesn't include cost of cluster itself, salaries, data, etc.

Almost by definition, the research frontier work will always require big clusters. Even if in a few years you can train a GPT4 analogue in your basement, by that time OpenAI will be using their latest cluster to train 100 trillion model parameters.
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu has been an awesome venue for finding new friends. I highly recommend, plus you'll gain fitness and confidence.
Yeah, those poor impoverished farmers. When will they learn to just bend the knee to John Deere?
I asked ChatGPT to tell me a riddle.

It was “What is always hungry, needs to be fed, and makes your hands red?” (Or something like that)

I asked for a hint about 5 times and it kept giving more legitimate sounding hints.

Finally I gave up and asked for the answer to the riddle, and it spit out a random fruit which made no sense as the answer to the riddle.

I then repeated the riddle and asked ChatGPT what the answer was, and it gave me the answer (“Fire”) which makes sense as the answer to the riddle.

But it was giving extremely bad hints, like “it starts with the letter P” and “it’s a fruit”.

That was a great way to show my non-tech family members the limitations of AI and why they shouldn’t trust it.

Playing “20 questions” with ChatGPT is another great way to expose its limitations. It knows the game and tries to play, but is terrible at asking questions to narrow down possible answers.

There really needs to be some confidence or accuracy score/estimation displayed alongside its output.

Or, learn how to say “I don’t know”
First see footnote 1 of the first page of the preprint linked at the top. The authors are jumping the gun. That's fine for theorists, but bear in mind that they are literally in the dark on a number of telescopic observables, any of which would shoot down the idea in the preprint. Some of these are achievable by EHT. See e.g. Olivares et al. "How to tell an accreting boson star from a black hole" (2020) <https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10112389/1/staa1878.pd...> [pdf].

The exotic bosons available in a 3+1 spacetime have never been detected at energy levels low enough that one might expect them to be reasonably bound by the weak (yes, weak) gravitation required by the boson star's internal repulsive forces. If the internal repulsive forces are too weak (or their self-gravitation isn't weak enough), the bosons cannot support the star against ultimate gravitational collapse (into a black hole). If the internal repulsive forces are too strong, the bosons all escape rather than stick around in the neighbourhood of the star. The latter is especially acute since the boson masses considered by the paper may be smaller than that of neutrinos.

Until a suitable slightly self-repelling exotic boson is discovered, achieving and maintaining equilibrium between it and gravitation is pretty fatal to the boson star idea.

Cold massive bosons are an idea for particle dark matter, incidentally. An example dark matter candidate is the axion. Axions have not been convincingly observed, and might not exist. A compact object made of essentially only axions could plausibly meet the criteria in the preprint linked at the top (cf their axion-motivated scalar field equation at eqn (9)), depending on details of heating during gravitational compaction. Also see e.g. Mohapatra et al., "Dense Axion Stars" (2016) <https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.00108> which is the preprint version of the PRL letter <https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.121801>. There is as far as I know no clear mechanism to have anything like the axion density required for self-gravitation except in the very early universe, a long time before the first galaxies. So then why would small primordial axion stars be in galaxies, as the binary in the article at the top appears to be? How do you keep them small, rather than coalescing into supermassive compact objects?

The preprint at the top discusses other Beyond The Standard Model (of particle physics; BTSM) possibilities, but they are less convincing than the axion (for starters, such BTSM extensions need to have some non-physical degrees of freedom strongly suppressed, since such BTSM theories are almost always "haunted" by <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_(physics)>s.). Additionally, the axion is motivated by the strong CP problem in the Standard Model, and if there is a lot of them they become gravitationally relevant. The non-axion options in the preprint at the top are afaik only motivated by a lack of knowledge about the microscopic details of gravitational physics. (See Koberlein's 2021 blog entry on Proca Stars <https://briankoberlein.com/blog/proca-stars/> for a brief intro to (light) massive vector boson stars).
Not many! They fired the entire hosted-ui team in 2016 (ref: https://blog.chipx86.com/2016/01/26/a-tribute-to-vmware-work... )
>She's the first author of the stochastic parrots paper,

That alone is enough to disqualify any of her opinions on AI.
My local makerspace[1] for sure.

1. https://protospace.ca/
Cloudhiker
would the 100-mile from the border be next or did that quickly became 2,000 miles (entire USA) from the border before this OP?
No man, the future of trillions of humans is obviously much less important than 1 person getting insulted on the internet.
I'm no astrophysicist, but the paper and some web data show

- Sag A* has a mass of ~4,000,000 times the sun, and an event horizon of approximately 12,000,000 km (0.08 AU). This is just the event horizon; Sag A*'s accretion disk has a diameter of about 150,000,000,000 km (1000 AU). So your intuition would certainly be right about Sag A* - there is a huge disk of gas and other junk you'd be flying through.

- This object has a mass of at most ~12 times the sun, and (if it's a black hole) an event horizon of approximately 35 km. The paper doesn't say anything about an accretion disk given that it's exploring the idea that the object is not a black hole. Regardless, a star orbiting at 1.4 AU would probably clear out everything in the immediate neighborhood.
> a literal 5-20x productivity boost

Not really. See a better way here: https://github.com/wisercoder/eureka
likely just speaking imprecisely
Curious if this also applies to Laptops ? This quote does not mention the scope of the ruling, but to me, the article leaves come confusion to my question:

>The Supreme Court has not yet considered the application of the border search exception to smartphones, laptops, and other electronic devices
Not sure how you got that from my comment. I'm not the one arguing for "payment nuetrality". I'm just saying that such a provision wouldn't apply in the Pornhub case if it allowed for a suspected illegality escape hatch.
That's interesting to hear. I was also a Rotary exchange student to Japan. It was an incredible experience. I've thought about whether Rotary would be a good option personally or professionally but haven't tried it yet.
I can't honestly see how there is grey area, you're at a border checkpoint: show some form of identification either way?

There is no requirement for an agent to assume your nationality and let you through, no? You still need to show your passport even when returning home.

Of course, all this sovereign citizen nonsense ignores reality and tries to pursue (nonexistent) legal 'gotchas' like you're rules-lawyering your way into a 'rules as written' game breaking combo in Magic: The Gathering.
No, they are probabilistic data structures and it’s not immediately obvious to me how to use them effectively for search
You'll find that groups like the Rotary or Knights of Columbus or the Shriners are almost technologically phobic - it's entirely possible that your automated email came from a web form and your interest was forwarded to an email box of a member who had died years ago.

Phone or in person is often the only way to get things done, unless there happens to be a tech-savvy person involved.
>I've come to believe it's simply unlikely that market incentives will ever make housing more affordable

It isn't market incentives here, it's lack of market incentives.

The issue here is that much of this new housing will be turned into rental units. The ideas is to change the paradigm so that people know full well that we will never stop building. So much so that a rental unit will likely not be profitable because so much more housing will come online in future years that income will likely decline over the life of the mortgage.

We don't do this because that really makes existing stakeholders scared for their current property values (and they should be), and try and stop that type of legislation at every corner. This creates an effective cartel of stakeholders (property owners), which maintain it's control over housing availability because people who don't live in a city can't vote there.

This is coming to a tipping point now in CA (where I live) because home-ownership has dropped so precipitously in the last 20 years, that homeowners will soon be a minority demographic, and the ability to control land use on a political level as starting to crumble.

Californians are not living through a housing re-balancing. We are living through the beginning of a housing cascade. As more housing comes online, more people supporting more housing will move to the area. The reason why it doesn't look like market incentives are working is that much of America is on a demographic tipping point. When Prop 13 in CA has already started to crack in elections, you know something serious is happening.
Today a dev in Barcelona makes as much as a dev in London or slightly less. Considering the cost of living and the quality of life, the dev in Barcelona gets much much more.

Among my friends and acquaintances, I’m currently witnessing an exodus from the UK, with people moving to Spain, France, the Netherlands and Germany.
Well, leaving aside whether a lot of people don't distrust and whether a lawyer would or should be among those people, lawyers typically don't cite things without checking them first. I work at a biglaw firm, can't imagine it never getting caught that the cases don't exist. This sounds like a midsize firm, should be fairly similar.

There are a few small law firms/sole prop type guys, however, who I have crossed paths with for whom this kind of stupidity and carelessness would be on brand though.

Guess he was just in a rush and figured this would be one of the 2/10 times he files something without at least taking a look at the opinions first, and it ended up being a massive error.
I hear ya! One of my hobbies is to be a somewhat known stage & exotic dancer / dance instructor in VR using 5-11pt tracking (depending on my mood and production quality). The number of "features" that get in the way, and lack of representation for VR dancers and performers has been frustrating, especially as the world moves more and more towards 3-point robot avatars.

Actually had a chance to provide my perspective to a FAANG Research Group, but I was laid off (and they were disbanded).
If you're a principal, you should be able to keep up with modern tools. Making sure the engineers around you are as productive as possible with their current tools and processes is literally your job!

If as a principal, you are no longer able to keep up with tooling / patterns that everyone else at your company wants to use, its time to take a smaller scope or time to retire.

The job, including mandates (if any are needed) is to empower the people you work with, not to stifle them.
See if you can look for (or create) opportunities for your kids to practice doing service, and support them. It's an important part of life, like exercise or intellectual growth.
> In the end, it’s all about intend

Precisely, and it doesn't matter how you realize it - by hand or with something more automated (digital manipulation), or with matte painting/photobashing (the most recent resentment target), or with any ML tool.

If you don't have the eye, taste, and rigor, you're going to create something boring. If you do, you'll create something interesting. The issue with the examples in OP is not the tool - it's the creators who were sloppy (and also incredibly rushing as it's just a tech demo created in 72 hours).
Something I often wonder about this is how much are the assumptions about the fuel cost of transport based on the current economic mode?

For example, if we outright banned plastic bottles, would that incentivise a more distributed network of recycling and bottling centres, bringing the transport costs back down?

Likewise, I see similar statistics around plastic packaging reducing food spoilage during transport.

To a know-nothing like me, it feels as though the real effect would be lessened by the economy finding a new equilibrium in response to a plastic ban, but I have no idea how much we might expect that effect to be, or what kind of timescale and capital investment it might require.
Great article, the most interesting part of which is that you can lock your self out of your toothbrush head after three wrong password attempts. I didn't dig into the data sheet for the NFC chip very deeply, but I imagine that it's just the default that the chip ships with. Or maybe Philips really wants that $25 for a new toothbrush head. :-)

EDIT: nope, not the default. From the data sheet, last sentence:

"To prevent brute-force attacks on the password, the maximum allowed number of negative password verification attempts can be set using AUTHLIM. This mechanism is disabled by setting AUTHLIM to a value of 000b, which is also the initial state of NTAG21x."

So Philips went out of their way to secure that toothbrush head. That's reassuring.
Market cap isn’t a bad measurement per se, it just doesn’t mean what people think it means sometimes. Or they use it wrong.
This a letter anyone can sign. As someone pointed out Grimes is one of the signatories. You can sign it yourself.

Hinton, Bengio, Norvig and Russell are most definitely not getting prestige from signing it. The letter itself is getting prestige from them having signed it.
The computer idles at 3.5 Watt.

A 1440p video is played at 4.0-4.5 Watt at 0% internal screen brightness.

The same video at 4k uses 4.5-5.0 Watt.

And at 8k, it's 15-17 Watt.

The xkcd is apt, as usual. The last time I felt with Intel as I feel with Apple since the M1 was with Haswell.
> That's the intent of the policy they oppose, so... /shrug

There is a world of difference between "intent" and reality.
> The lawyer's affidavit said he had "never utilized ChatGPT as a source for conducting legal research prior to this occurrence (...)"

I wonder if the court tried to verify that.
> Other than that, prob. lit-dev (with time).

Yes. Nothing excites me more than web components and moving closer back to the browser. Somehow, it feels more exciting than server components, signals, compilers, resumability, etc. etc.
You're off by so many orders of magnitude that I'm forced to ask if you've looked into text-to-image generation prices versus artist commision prices, as well as completion timeframes.

There are a lot of things that AI text-to-image just can't do, like generate really novel or even uncommon configurations of objects that look like they're still obeying the laws of our universe. Plenty of use cases remain, for now, where it's true you do want a human artist.

...But underneath the (expanding) umbrella of things that you can do with AI, you simply cannot compare the costs. Humans are just absurdly expensive and slow compared to GPUs.
More appropriate is an expected value approach.

That is, despite it being a very low probability event, it may still be worth remediation due to the outsized negative value if the event does happen.

Many engineering disciplines incorporate safety factors to mitigate rare but catastrophic events for example.

If something is maximally bad, then it necessitates some deliberation on ways to avoid it, irrespective how unlikely seeming it may be.
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36074093 for a more significant worry. Emulating a CPU is not affected as much as code that would otherwise have still run on the bare hardware.
+1 on the net worth thing too…
Fever: The Hunt for Covid’s Origin
I am talking about the walk from LAXit. This is the parking lot where Uber/Lyft/Taxi pickups are, and you generally have to take a shuttle to get there to begin with.

LAXit is on Sepulveda, but it is safer to cross the street to a parking lot. I'll admit I underestimated the distance. It is closer to 300 yards:

https://goo.gl/maps/DWsk4MSx9HuDJAJz5
Agree with what other commenters have said. Also wanted to say that with Temporal you can code Sagas in Go, Java, TypeScript, and PHP, and they're working on expanding to other languages as well.
The EAS switch was annoying because I finally fixed WebDAV support before Microsoft moved away, and the EAS Android build is a pain in the ass.
Anything that says open core...
Yeah it is, when you’re talking about being a “casual” Jehovah’s Witness.

That’s not a thing. They’re probably among the worst examples of religion as a hobby.
I’ve been doing ground school and getting into flying lessons, but what has been really interesting and surprising was the strong community that lurks just behind the wall you have to climb to enter. It can be a cost prohibitive hobby but a lot of people make it into a career. You get a lot of different types of people and they are welcoming. I’ve done work for people in exchange for for some wet hours on their plane
Or a team.

I joined a rugby team that is open to everyone but highlights lgbt inclusivity in sport. We practice twice a week, have games, and have other events. I've made so many good friends from the team it's hard to keep up with them all.

Staying fit with them is an added bonus.
How do you handle email on other devices?
It doesn't answer that, it can't because the replicator is fictional. McFarland just says he wrote an episode in which his answer is that replicators need communism, and then claims that you can't have a replicator in a capitalist system because evil conservatives, capitalists and conspiracy theorists would make strawman arguments against it.

Where is the thought provoking idea here? It's just an excuse to attack his imagined enemies. Indeed he dunks on conspiracy theorists whilst being one himself. In McFarland's world there would be a global conspiracy to suppress replicator technology, but it's a conspiracy of conspiracy theorists.

There's plenty of interesting analysis you could do on the concept of a replicator, but a Twitter thread like that isn't it. Really the argument is kind of nonsensical on its face because it assumes replicators would have a cost of zero to run or develop. In reality capitalist societies already invented various kinds of pseudo-replicators with computers being an obvious example, but this tech was ignored or suppressed by communist societies.
> It's even less cancelable than telegram channels. There's no app store. It's an audio file.

This is actually my problem with modern podcasting, or at least Spotify's attempt at it.

As fair as I'm concerned, Spotify does not have podcasts because you cannot give it an RSS feed. They want to redefine what podcasts are so they can be that app store, take their cut, and control what was previous a great open landscape.
> mathematicians, statisticians, and yes, philosophers and psychologists — than those who have been involved with it so far.

I think mathematicians and statisticians are hard to flummox but the risk with non-mathematically trained people such as philosophers and psychologists is that they can be sidetracked easily by vague and insinuating language that allows them to "fill-in" the gaps. They need an unbiased "interpreter" of what the tech actually does (or can do) and that might be hard to come by.

I would add political scientists and economists to the list. Not that I have particular faith in their track record solving any problem, but conceptually this is also their responsibility and privilege: technology reshapes society and the economy and we need to have a mature and open discussion about it.
Microcode access on Atom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pq1FmxS6H8
There are zero waste alternatives that don't even need to recycle. You just wash containers when they are returned and then re-use them. I honestly would prefer that to all the junk in weird boxes and marketing that intentionally makes it harder to shop. I started buying spices in bulk lately and it's less than 1/10 the cost of packaged spices...

https://ecocart.io/zero-waste-grocery-shopping/
Accessing software: emulation in information institutions
I think that boat has sailed with javascript. I don't understand why leftpad is a module but much of the community disagrees with me on that.
Might seem like and odd one to some but I became a volunteer firefighter and it has been very rewarding for many reasons but the connection with the community is a big one (most members grew up in the town and a central part of it).
The problem is that even with N years until we reach that point it seems likely that it would take 2*N years to build the proper safety mechanisms because at least currently capabilities research is racing far ahead of safety research. Of course we have no way to know how big N really is and recent results like GPT-4, Llama, Gato, etc. have shifted peoples timelines significantly. So even if 5 years ago people like Geoff Hinton though this might be 30-50 years away there are now believable arguments to make that it might be more like 3-10 years.
Sorry, I don't understand. Why is this a relevant link?

"Lucene based search" vs React ? Seems like comparing trees to tractors.
How exactly do you propose to unit test code that depends intimately on interactions with hardware that you don't control? Hardware does not always behave according to spec. No matter how good your "simulation mode" is, it will not match the behavior of real hardware. That makes your so called "unit tests" useless in cases where it actually matters.

You claim it can be done. Have you ever actually done it? I bet not.
We have different definitions of "independence".
You should be able to abort everything at any time and still revert to the old state regardless of external service failures. Even if the database went down you have the initial state queued to be restored when it's back up.

Instead of untangling the mess, just cut the gordian knot and throw a nice error of what failed and what was aborted.