skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I believe that is correct.

Upon that the child application closing, you loop reading from the primary using a synchronous but non-blocking read, until you finally get back a zero byte read. Since the child process is now dead, and nothing else should be writing to the TTY, once you get back a single zero byte non-blocking read, you know you have all the data.

Ideally in C on Linux, you would structure this code a bit differently. (I'm only talking about the C API here, because I don't know rust or tokio well enough to have any real chance of knowing how to do this correctly for those.)

To avoid having to use multiple threads, or handle SIGCHLD, you would fork with the clone() call and CLONE_PIDFD, to get back a PIDFD. [1]

Now you can use poll() against both the parent TTY descriptor and the pidfd. Regardless of which-one became ready, you will do the synchronous non-blocking read loop, to get any data available. Then you conditionally run the process exit code if was the pidfd that became ready, including reaping the child process with wait(), and closing the pidfd. Otherwise loop back to the poll() call.

Needless to say this sort of thing is extremely complicated, as there are many potential race conditions, and getting things wrong here is quite common. I've seen multiple languages have bugs in their code for reading just normal process output, and many lack built-in support for running in a pty, which has pretty much all the same considerations.

Footnotes:
[1] You could also do a normal fork, and then get a PIDFD from the resulting PID using pidfd_open(). This also works fine, but the lack of a glibc syscall wrapper for pidfd_open may be annoying, and it is an extra sycall. This is safe though, as we are the parent process and until we reap the child by calling one of the wait() functions, the PID will not be reused.
The problem is that's unilateralism.
For a 'fake' API, I can't overstate just how powerful this is.

I once spent an entire month building a proper API server out of this. Then one day while tweaking some DTOs for some POST endpoints, I realised what I was doing and switched to Postgres.
Agreed. If the risks were real they would just outright stop working on their AI products. This is nothing more than a PR statement
Border dispute? They invaded the country, surrounded the capital and shelled the shit out of it.
This is yet another "We found a community project providing us with billions of dollars in free work but don't find it worth the effort to contribute anything back"
A mystery person who spies on theme parks from the sky
"Open source generates a lot of energy...there's no x86 forum. There's nothing like that kind of energy going into Arm these days. RiscV is going everywhere because it's open source." - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o70yKYWgtVI&t=843s
Has anyone forked the last free version yet?
> I don't understand why languages don't have a 'version' id as the very first thing, and then you can run appropriate interpreter/compiler given the version.

Common Lisp may have that. My Symbolics Lisp Machine runs six different Common Lisp variants and additionally ZetaLisp side by side in one system.

There are often feature symbols which note language versions: CLtL1, CLtL2, ANSI90, ANSI-CL. It also has packages, where LISP will mean symbol table with CLtL1 symbols and COMMON-LISP will mean a symbol table with CLtL2 symbols.

> New versions of the language can drop historical mistakes.

Lisp may not work that way:

Lisp is not just a language, it is a running system. One can load many different libraries and programs into one running Lisp. Some older code will use CAR/CDR and some newer code won't. It still runs side by side in the same ONE environment and will call each other.

I can for example say:

#+ansi-cl (print "this is code for an ANSI CL compatible Common Lisp")

#-ansi-cl (error "this is Common Lisp does not support ANSI CL")

This will check if the Common Lisp has the features ANSI-CL.

Since cons cells and lists made of cons cells are so fundamental to Lisp, that it would be painful to support software where such a core data structure would be changed (for example by renaming the core operators).

Again, code from several decades with different language variants can be running in one Lisp.
I'd say it is less about being a mess and more about the fact that there are 1000 projects that do state management in totally different ways and it is nearly impossible to figure out which one to use. Even if you pick one, you don't find out that it has some critical bug until you're half way through your project and it is too late to swap it out. So, you end up coming up with some hacky workaround that creates a lot of brittle code and breaks every time you upgrade some other non-related component of your application.
You can also say "Hey, Siri, whose phone is this?" and it will lock the phone and a passcode will be required.
How Insects Track Odors
Oh I like this.
As others have pointed out, there are many on this list (Bruce Schneier, for example) who do not stand to benefit from AI marketing or regulatory capture.

Anyone upvoting this comment should take a long look at the names on this letter and realize that many are not conflicted.

Many signers of this letter are more politically sophisticated than the average HN commenter, also. So sure, maybe they're getting rolled by marketers. But also, maybe you're getting rolled by suspicion or bias against the claim they're making.
> a towering plume of water vapor more than 6,000 miles long
So now it's called a "border dispute" and no longer a "special military operation"? /s
Indeed. I would add as well that React (for me at least) went a long way towards erasing the difference between "backend" and "frontend" development. When I was a pup, they were very different things and a "frontend" developer meant basically someone who was really good at CSS and HTML and new all the magic incantations you had to do to create a nice UI with them. There were of course precursors such as AngularJS (and others) but React was really the first one for me where I could see frontend dev as just learning another framework the same as I would learn a backend framework.
Also (FTA): “[this build] has been stable for 90 minutes on the same type of hardware that all the other 6.3 kernels crashed within a couple of minutes after boot. So this seems to fix the issue for me.”

If there’s a metadata corruption bug in a file system, I think I would prefer a rapid kernel crash over a magic change that may or may not fix the issue.
> I don't see a problem with showing mocked up screenshots of an app you haven't built yet

I don't have a problem with showing those mocks.

I have a problem with selling those mocks, for something that winds up being impossible to build in reality because you're being way over-optimistic about your capability.
> The nuclear bomb was also supposed to change everything. But in the end nothing changed, we just got more of the same.

It is hard for me to imagine a statement more out of touch with history than this. All geopolitical history from WWII forward is profoundly affected by the development of the bomb.

I don't even know where to begin to argue against this. Off the top of my head:

1. What would have happened between Japan and the US in WWII without Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

2. Would the USSR have fallen without the financial drain of the nuclear arms race?

3. Would Isreal still exist if it didn't have nuclear weapons?

4. If neither the US nor Russia had nuclear weapons, how many proxy wars would have been avoided in favor of direct conflict?

The whole trajectory of history would be different if we'd never split the atom.
You hear similar arguments from those who believe climate change is happening but disagree with current efforts to counter-act it. The logic being that right now climate change is not causing any major harm and that we can't really predict the future so there's no point in worrying about what might happen in a decade or two.

I don't think anyone is arguing that right now climate change or AI is threat to human civilisation. The point is that there are clear trends in place and that those trends are concerning.

On AI specifically, it's fairly easy to see how a slightly more advanced LLM could be a destructive force if it was given an unaligned goal by a malicious actor. For example, a slightly more advanced LLM could hack into critical infrastructure killing or injuring many thousands of people.

In the near-future AI may help us advance biotech research and it could aid in the creation of bioweapons and other destructive capabilities.

Longer-term risks (those maybe a couple of decades out) become much greater and also much harder to predict, but they're worth thinking about and planning for today. For example, what happens when humanity becomes dependant on AI for its labour, or when AI is controlling the majority of our infrastructure?

I disagree but can understand the position that AI safety isn't humanities number one risk or priority right now, however I don't understand the dismissive attitude towards what seems like a clear existential risk when you project a decade or two out.
The image of some western white guy complaining about unfair it is the China invalidates his ownership in the TSMC following a genocidal invasion of Taiwan is pretty good, I’ll give you that.
Elizabeth Holmes Set to Report to Prison to Begin More Than 11-Year Sentence
Each packet resembles a little Japanese eyeball-bursting webpage. I have to say, just looking at them makes me feel kind of happy – anyone else?
I'd be curious to know what the other a/b testing tools are doing regarding this problem if anything.
New docs don't tell you how to get a minimal start anymore. You MUST fully commit to a create-react-app flow or similar, or they vaguely point you in the direction of Babel without explicit direction.

The formal way of using React and JSX without a full SPA framework is only listed here: https://legacy.reactjs.org/docs/add-react-to-a-website.html
You as a human will also get your ass kicked in court if you are caught copying code from an open-source project without complying with the terms of the license.

>What's the big difference you see between my learning and the automated process for the AI?

The root of the problem is that machine learning community wants AI to be treated as a human when that's convenient for them and as a machine when it's not.
Now that you mention it, what % of YC Startups even "succeed"? Would be fascinating to know. They're public about the companies that get accepted and you could have a few different criteria about what constitutes as success (getting funding? Existing 5 years later? etc)
> borderline offensive to question them

I would be happy to politely discuss any proposition regarding AI Risk. I don't think any claim should go unquestioned.

I can also point you to much longer-form discussions. For example, this post, which has 670 comments, discussing various aspects of the argument: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uMQ3cqWDPHhjtiesc/agi-ruin-a...
On 3 December 2022, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2022/2369 , which established the price cap for crude oil at $60 per barrel.
Concise presentations of Java practices, tasks, and designs
Databricks acquires serverless Postgres vendor bit.io
A test case for integrating audio chat into an online game
Most CO2 footprints are not meaningful, because they are measuring the total and not per capita, and the CO2 footprint is counted against the producers and not the consumers.

Steel- or car-producing countries, like Germany, will always have higher CO2 footprints than the countries, which consume the steel and cars.

Of course, those producing countries shouldn't burn anything to reap the energy from it.
Wow, that's a fantastic exercise for a computer science class. Most classes only work on programs so small that students don't really get a feel for how things scale.
That's why we buy it from countries like saudi arabia, like the guys who had issues flying those planes in 2001.

But since saudis are "besties" with the US establishment, this is a-ok!
This isn't a Google security incident though, they could fix it, but it's not obvious they should/would care to me?

It's the third-party's security team (if there is one, otherwise engineering, contractor hirer, whoever) that should care isn't it?
> we are still seeing exponential progress

I dispute this. What appears to be exponential progress is IMO just a step function that made some jumps as the transformer architecture was employed on larger problems. I am unaware of research that moves beyond this in a way that would plausibly lead to super-intelligence. At the very least I foresee issues with ever-increasing computational requirements that outpace improvements in hardware.

We’ll see similar jumps when other domains begin employing specialized AI models, but it’s not clear to me that these improvements will continue increasing exponentially.
Every time you see one of these articles it's like "but taking money out is a bad idea that can be bad for your retirement" It's so patronizing, if you are eligible for a hardship withdraw you are about to miss a house payment or something, they're not doing it for funsies.
Not too different from France in size but very different in co2 footprint
>Disabled and sick people are all around you.

You are conflating "disabled" with "dying". A deaf person will have a decent chance of coming back to normal if they survive CPR. An 85-year-old with heart disease will most likely not. The parent was a little vague, but if you read the article the context is clear.
You have a yellow metal that's too soft to even make useful tools to tend to your farm. My casino chips are a stake in the future of the world. If they become worthless, I will take your farm by force because no one will be around to stop me.
This just highlights an earlier point I made which is I don't get why people think the flights being banned is "over-regulating"

Its efficient and simple and enforceable.

Carbon taxes on the other hand would be a bureaucratic nightmare as you've pointed out. It would require far more oversight, would be harder to enforce, require so much tax dollars spent to just manage the system taxing short flights etc etc. It reeks of inefficiency and overregulation when I think about it.
Are you aware that debt is a cumulative metric, and GDP is an annual metric? If you want to compare apples-to-apples, our budget deficit (an annual metric, which measures the delta in debt) was $1.4 trillion in 2022, which is 5.5% of GDP.

It's not impossible to balance a budget with 130% debt to GDP.
This is the source of my aphorism "Every Hundred Flowers Campaign is immediately followed by an Anti-Rightist Campaign". Meaning that if your employer is effusively soliciting criticism or "feedback", they probably just want to identify and punish potential troublemakers.
It was impossible a few years ago, when the OSM data wasn't good enough and the cost of acquiring the data themselves was too high.
> And in general, I don't think people take cost into account for children this granularly. Who is looking at $290k over 18 years and thinks "yeah let's do it" then balks at $310k? Nobody.

40% of pregnancies annually are unintended in the US [1]. Poverty is the fourth leading cause of death [2]. Between 9 and 12 million children are exposed to chronic hungry (fluctuates year to year) [3]. High level, the citations and data strongly suggest that no one (or very few people) does the math, and then they're all surprised pikchu when US socioeconomics comes for them.

You'd laugh at someone when they buy a Lambo and can't afford the gas for it, but no one batts an eye when people do the same with kids.

[1] https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-u...

[2] https://news.ucr.edu/articles/2023/04/17/poverty-4th-greates...

[3] https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/child-hunge...
Most of the credible threats I see from AI that don't rely on a lot of sci-fi extrapolation involve small groups of humans in control of massively powerful AI using it as a force multiplier to control or attack other groups of humans.

Sam Altman's proposal is to create precisely that situation with himself and a few other large oligarchs being the ones in control of the leading edge of AI. If we really do face runaway intelligence growth and god-like AIs then this is a profound amount of power to place in the hands of just a few people. Even worse it opens the possibility that such developments could happen partly in secret, so the public might not even know how powerful the secret AIs under command of the oligarchs have become.

The analogy with nuclear weapons is profoundly broken in lots of ways. Reasoning from a sloppy analogy is a great way to end up somewhere stupid. AI is a unique technology with a unique set of risks and benefits and a unique profile.
I’m old school, from the Managing Gigabytes by Ian H Witton era so I have ways of tailoring the data and protobuf schema to suit my application. Large matrices are stored as contiguous chunks, similar to how tensorflow stores tensors in graphs. I work with TBs of data in GB chunks. I used to work with PBs of data but that was a long time ago. Derialization of protobuf messages is so fast that it hasn’t been an issue and I can use it from any language with protobuf support.
>What abilities do humans have that AIs will never have?

I think the question is what abilities and level of organisation machines would have to acquire in order to outcompete entire human societies in the quest for power.

That's a far higher bar than outcompeting all individual humans at all cognitive tasks.
It is not that she is critical of LLMs that is the issue.

Instead, it is that she has strong ideological motivations to make certain arguments.

Those motivations being that her research is now worthless, because of LLMs.

I don't believe the alignment doomsayers either, but that is for different reasons than listening to her.
I should have said: I don’t want VR for metaverse/virtual worlds, outside of pure entertainment. I don’t mind the negatives I mentioned for short bursts of entertainment, but for “serious” use, work/business and multiple hours per day — no thanks.
Do you use git? The git commit graph is a purely functional data structure.
I may get downvoted, but if OSM was not fine with this exact situation happening, then they shouldn't license it the way they do.

Nothing seems to indicate so far that they're not fine with the situation so it looks like everyone is happy.
I've submitted a correction for an illegal turn instruction twice on Google maps. No reply. But my other corrections have been accepted.
Nintendo Solved Zelda's Open World Problem
Yes, because they shelled the minority who wanted independence since 2014.

Nato bombed yugoslavia for months for the same thing, and they still act as a defensive organization.
Free software moves the goalposts of freedom towards "sufficiently clued in user can operate and maintain free software", not "everyone of any skillset has a viable path to control their program". Programming freedom is the harder goal. Anyone can dump source code and say "yeah it's GPL now."

That's how it worked out that so much of the early stuff was, in respects small and large, "software for free, documentation for sale". There's no mandate for usability or conceptual simplicity. And we've only gotten better in the sense of having more developers interested in that stuff.
Saying the new maintainer did not inspire confidence is an understatement. (Since the new maintainer destroyed the trust in the project.)

Saying that the new maintainer did not exude confidence is a completely different meaning.
For many software products User != Customer.
It's actually much better already. Russia is currently getting paid for good part of oil and other natural resources in Indian rupees that are completely useless for Russia.

Since February 2022 India imported products from Russia for $50+ billion - mostly oil.

At the same time India export to Russian is 10 time smaller so there is massive trade difficit of $40+ billions.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-russia-address-tra...

[1] Official Kremlin source in Russian: https://ria.ru/20230311/indiya-1857181972.html
https://www.adyen.com/blog/updating-a-50-terabyte-postgresql...

And that was in _2018_. I wonder how big it is now.
this is the "Digital Twins" story right here - private corporate walled gardens with total control and feeding off of commons.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AtScript
Try writing some code in not just JavaScript but also C, C++, Java, and others. Classes aren't some relic. You use prototypes in JavaScript every single day.
FAANG are the only ones who stand to benefit financially. I'm taking the position that everyone else is simply a "useful idiot" for the likes of Sam Altman, in the most respectful way possible.
Nobody is immune from getting wrapped up in hysteria, so I don't care who they are or what they have achieved when their signatures aren't supported by any kind of reasoning, much less sound reasoning.
Do you believe most 85-year-olds with heart disease are in a hospital and not in public?

Edit: Furthermore the person I replied two defined group 1 as "otherwise healthy". So I think it's fair for me to have inferred they meant what they said and their only other group includes "sick and very sick" people.

Edit2: Realize I had a significant typo. My post was phrased as a statement and not a question. I added the "Do [original]?"
You think they wanted to own more of their product, integrated OSM, and now if there's complaints or things to change they're like "sorry nah"?

That doesn't sound right to me, I'm curious if you have any examples or sources
Too bad it isn’t credible.
Geoffrey Hinton quit google.
WASIX seems to be basically POSIX for WASM (POSIX/WASIX). It is probably an explicit design goal to be able to run POSIX-compliant programs on it.

The fact that POSIX is 1970s legacy, rusted beyond salvaging and an extremely poor fit for modern system designs and expectations is another problem.
Initial block download isn’t the bottleneck for scalability though. You can quite safely import a year-old utxo set, especially if there are utxo set commitments or if you already have access to a running node somewhere.

In my experience when people talk about on-chain scalability, they mean transactions per second of real-time validation. Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think anyone in this thread was talking about IBD / validation of historical data.
>The only remarkable difference appears to be you can target it with existing c++ code?

That changes everything. Coupling the VM and the language was IMHO a huge mistake.

Wasm + WASI(X) + WebGPU is what the Java VM should have been. I guess we were not ready at the time.
For advanced rockets, this is true. But not for first gen. First gen is the same tech for both.

That is why Sputnik was such a big deal: it was not JUST a huge science/engineering breakthrough, it said "you know your huge strategic airforce that means we cannot bomb you? Well actually we can still bomb you, and we can do it faster and more accurately". Older, surplus, ICBMs were routinely used for space launches back in the day (eg the Titan 2 which were even used for manned spaceflight). I think at point point it was a major source of income for early post-soviet russia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(rocket_family)
The implications of this will be felt in 20 years when all those who faced hardships will be unable to retire. Living off social security alone is not enough for the vast majority of Americans.
Japanese families are largely not multigenerational in the same house.

Coresidence of parents and children have fallen in half over two decades from 50% to 24%: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/62/5/S3...

Here's the wikipedia article about elderly dying in Japan and being undiscovered due to being lonely and forgotten: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodokushi