skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This article is a hammer looking for a nail. The solutions suggested as reasons private company can do this cheaper expresses a clear favoring of increased privatization. NASA’s 2022 economic output was +71B with a budget of 24B.
Look man, in my opinion, in the current political climate this is clearly on the short list of possible bad takes for this tech scandal (hate the phrase, but it fits).

That is why this thread even exists in the first place.

That was my whole point.

You calling me "shamefully delusional" is definitely an ad hominem no matter how many words you try to stuff in my mouth.
"Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."

Is it debunked that the name came from this Simpsons quote?
You would need each MacBook to have an internet connection capable of multiple terabytes per second, with sub millisecond latency to every other MacBook.
Satirical ad for “wood milk” violated federal law, a new complaint says
How is that idea any more concerning than a regular human-drawn police sketch?
Tips and tricks for diagnosing test failures
Yeah, although the stuff I saw first-hand around vaccine distribution in affluent/elite circles was mind blowing.

People found so many ways of gaming the system and getting the vaccine instead of the prioritized elderly/immune-compromised. I knew rich college kids with parents who had ownership stakes in elder care companies so they got the shot early, etc. etc., in SF many seemed to get hold of the special codes that were given to communities with low vaccine uptake, etc.
There's really only one solution to this. Luckily it is the same solution to a lot of other things. Unluckily it is the same solution that no one has sought to implement for decades. Reviewing takes a lot of nuance, care, and time. You're not going to get this when all the incentives for the reviewers are currently to reject works. You can only get a group to work on ethics alone when that group is small and accountable. Incentivize the reviewers to be high quality and worthwhile work. Incentivize the chairs to review the reviewers and force high quality reviews. An expert paying close attention to a work makes the papermill's job exponentially more difficult. It also just makes the review process actually useful in the first place, as it ensures authors get actual feedback.
> There's a popular argument about freedom of speech that comes down to "the solution to bad speech is more good speech, not limiting bad speech," but that only works (assuming it's true at all) when there's some way for a listener to discern truth with some research or effort.

Yes exactly. If it is too hard for a group of scientists to figure out a flaw, then it is also too hard for two peer reviewers to figure out a flaw. Only time can detect all errors in science, assuming that nonconformist papers are allowed into the conversation.

> Good papers are good when they collected data correctly and then presented the results fairly.

This is only true for empirical papers. Good data is a part of a good argument in the case of empirical papers.
For me it's the other way around.

"Next Action" never worked for me because some things are only a few actions total, but others are hundreds and need to be done sequentially all before the end of next month. By looking only at next actions the difference wasn't clear enough.

Whereas weekly / monthly reviews work very well for me to see patterns in what works and what doesn't, see where I need to spend some time planning, etc.

But I do this in a "bullet journal" type of setup, not the "getting things done" method.
> The fact that they don't have bureaucracy is a direct consequence of them not doing any work right now.

Is “bureaucracy” a euphemism for Diversity, Equity And Inclusion busybodies, in this case?
Nikon and Canon both have "image authentication system" features; unfortunately the easiest to find articles are about them being broken... back in 2011.
I clean my own toilet now, I’ll clean my own toilet then.
Multiple one-shot prompts with no history. I don't have the exact prompt handy but it was something like "Create a short biography of a family, summarizing each person's age and personality".

I just ran that prompt 3 times (no history, new sessions, that prompt for first query) and got:

1. Hard-working father, stay at home mother, artistic daughter, adventurous son, empathic ballet-loving daughter

2. Busy architect father, children's book author mother, environment- and animal-loving daughter, technology-loving son, dance-loving daughter

3. Hard-working engineer father, English-teaching mother, piano- and book-loving daughter, basketball- and technology-loving son, comedic dog (!)

I'm summarizing because the responses were ~500 words each. But you can see the patterns: fathers work hard (and come first!), mothers largely nurture, daughters love art and dance, sons love technology.

It's not the end of the world, and as AI goes this is relatively harmless. But it is a pretty deep bias and a reminder that AI reflects implicit bias in training materials and feedback. You could make as many families as you want with that prompt and it will not approximate any real society.
businesses, states, markets, any organization or other system that incorporates super-human agency is already AI, so far performed manually

the progression of technological "AI" has just been the automation and acceleration of their logic and operations

what paperclips are the police maximizing?

everything the alarmists are afraid of has already happened
Meanwhile: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36135241
Show HN: Brave Search API
Today, we're releasing the Brave Search API for public access.

The Brave Search API is the backbone of our independent search engine, and we're excited to provide a competitive alternative to Big Tech. We hope to serve customers ranging from independent developers to large companies.

Brave Search recently became 100% independent for Web search (https://brave.com/search-independence/), removing any remnant calls to Microsoft Bing in order to rely fully on our own index.

Our search index is updated with millions of new pages from the Web every day. Search results are of high quality, surfaced from a clean and independent index. The Web Discovery Project (https://support.brave.com/hc/en-us/articles/4409406835469-Wh...) helps ensure real data is being added, not dead links, SEO spam or other content.

The Brave Search API offers plans for projects of all sizes. Developers making less than 2,000 queries per month can use the API for free. We've broken down subscriptions into 3 categories:

* Data for search - for traditional search-related use cases

* Data for AI - for training AI models for inference

* Data with storage rights - for caching or storing data to train AI Models

All subscriptions include access to Web search, video cluster, news cluster, Goggles, autocomplete and spellcheck. Pro-level subscriptions will also include extra Web or AI snippets, schema-enriched Web results, Discussions and more.

If you're a large company and think you may need a custom, enterprise-level subscription, please reach out to bizdev@brave.com. As always, feedback on this is welcome, whether that's via Twitter, https://community.brave.com or support@brave.com

Register now for API access: https://api.search.brave.com/register
Eventually what was a best practice in one situation turns into an average practice for the industry.

#friendgineers #bestpractices
> It’s very clear useEffect was created with a certain purpose and then the React folks realized that was a terrible use of it and changed the purpose of useEffect.

I've compared the docs, and I don't think that's clear at all. They definitely refined their messaging, but the legacy docs show the same sorts of examples that are either shown in the new docs or described[1], such as subscribing to an event system or updating a bit of non-React UI. Could you give some sort of example usage that they encouraged before but don't now?

[1] https://react.dev/learn/synchronizing-with-effects
If you're running a community funded website, you don't need any of this overhead. In the 90's, pretty much the entire internet ran without these jobs.

Sure, they're necessary if you have an actual company, but the point is that you can run a website without a company.
The main part of the policy seems to be the following:

"We've reminded moderators that suspensions (and typically mod messages as well) are for real, verifiable malfeasance only, and should not be enacted on the basis of hunches, guesses, intuition, or unverified heuristics."

While I understand that StackOverflow does not want false positives, the only kind of AI generated text that is truly verifiable, is the one that still contains "As an AI language model..."
It's hard to find stuff on Usenet. I subscribe to two different paid (and not super cheap) indexes, and it's still routine that I can't find stuff. If I look over at pirate bay, it will be there about 50% of the time
Some of the internal tools at meta have a feature kind of like this. Personally I don’t use it, but I bet some people like it.
If you're not an official company with a legal presence, yes.

A lot of seriously dense replies to my comment, seemingly wilfully misunderstanding.

_Obviously_ the legal department at an actual company is not bullshit.
Rocket Carrying North Korean Spy Satellite Crashes into Sea
make the system output a sketch. boom - problem solved.
If everyone else is hunkering down while they traipse around, then they have less of a chance of getting infected by the rabble.
Do you ever use a toilet that you do not own? Do you plan on always being physically capable of cleaning your own toilet?

Point being, lots of life is messy and rote, and presuming a fantasy world where the messy and rote parts do not exist or are taken care of by robots is a waste of time (in the near future).
No, it was widely know. I'm sure you didn't intent this but this 'excuse' is the talking point of neonazis here in Germany to deflect guilt and relativize what happened.
They're a think tank. They think up "concepts" and then rally influential people around them. Just like concept cars and high fashion, they don't intend to bring that stuff literally to reality, but it absolutely does mark out the direction in which they intend to move things.

Besides, this lenience of "don't take everything so literally" might equally be applied to whatever the swivel-eyed loons are saying, but somehow in that case any surface-level weirdness is seen as grounds to dismiss their subtler points entirely.
A good movie about the Residents is “Theory of Obscurity” : https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2833768/
To me, it doesn't feel like the gpt-4 in the playground (and in the API) is the same as the model used in chatgpt. It's hard to prove though since both are nondeterministic.
Augmented Reality – A Skateboard for the Mind
I always prefer a model that can be prompted to say anything I want over a model that can only say things that a centralized corporation with political ties wants it to say.
Additionally, I'd like to know how they corrected for this:
"In a creative twist, many people pretended to be AI bots themselves in order to assess the response of their chat partners"

Assuming it actually was "many people", then whenever they have a human conversational partner (who also would be voting at the end), that person is going to have a hard time and skew the results.

Like imagine playing this game as a lay person after having used ChatGPT a little bit and then getting a response to your question that says "as a large language model ...". Depending on how well the game was explained to participants, it's possible that some people even did this intentionally to fuck with results.

In a proper Turing test there is supposed to be 1 bot and 2 humans, where one human is incentivized only to demonstrate they are human and the other human is the one asking probing questions and needing to guess which is which (but is already known to be human).

Anyway I've only read the linked article and played the game a couple times, I didn't look through the original research publication. It's certainly possible they did address some of these issues, but it is such a buzzword topic at the moment that I have my doubts. And regardless the linked article should cover limitations. For exactly this reason it is important that we have higher expectations for the quality of general audience writing about AI.
I guess you can take photos of the world and turn everything into a giant NeRF.

https://www.plainconcepts.com/nerf-3d/
You could clone the doc repos and just open with Obsidian to get nice rendering.
To be clear, this is not the Auschwitz museum. Point still stands.
It's also worth comparing process nodes.

The Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 is on TSMC 4nm compared to the A14 on TSMC 5nm.

Also, the Cortex X4 spec projections are based on the second gen TSMC 3nm process node that isn't in volume production yet. If the M3 is announced (as rumored) next week at WWDC on the first gen TSMC 3nm, we'll have some basis for comparison (at least as far as projected specs go).
Yeah we need a new church that’s non-religious. I’m okay with having roman style statues and shrines though
Welcome to America!

ISPs do that, but it's a lot worse if you consider your mobile provider to be an ISP.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamtanner/2013/07/10/data-brok...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hunte...
Love that you excluded HR
Education, in the broadest sense, is what makes people think they want what they want.
i'm not really sure what your metric is here, or if you're talking about their on-prem version. but the jira hosted by atlassian seems like it runs at about the same speed as most websites. i'm not going to say it's blazing fast, but it's acceptable.
Even this would require somehow verifying the raw data. It's plausible a bad actor could "reverse engineer" their data from a pre-determined conclusion.

But yes, overall more openness is good. Still, the cost losing trust in society is very high (as you need to verify everything).
GPT4All-J-v1.3 Groovy [1] gave me the following answer (no idea if this is good or not, but keep in mind that the model comes in a 3.8Gb file and is released under an Apache 2 license, freely available for use and distribution):

To join a column with SQL in Postgres to a string separated by a comma, you can use the STRING_AGG function. Here's an example query that demonstrates this:
SELECT STRING_AGG(column_name, ', ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY id) AS joined_string FROM table;
In this query, we're selecting the joined_string column from a table called table. The STRING_AGG function is used to concatenate all values in the column_name column into a single string separated by commas. We use the WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY id) clause to specify that we want to group the results by an integer value called id. This ensures that each row of data is treated as a separate entity, even if it has the same column_name.
The resulting output will be a single column with all values from the joined_string column concatenated into a string separated by commas. You can then use this query in your application to join multiple columns together and store them as a single string value.

[1] https://gpt4all.io/reports/GPT4All_Technical_Report_3.pdf
The Auschwitz museum would probably not have complained about death camp analogies when the comparison was an actual genocide. But that was very far from the case.
Cutting and defunding education seems such a prevalent global trend, I find it hard to believe there is no hidden agenda.

At least here it seems to happen with the clear political agenda. Who needs evolution and democracy anyways other than those inconvenient to the indian government.
It's exactly the same as climate change.

It doesn't matter if one of us drives a pollutey car. It matters if millions or billions of us do.

The entire concept of being elite is manipulating others into having and doing less.

I mean, quite literally not everyone can have the life of someone who has significant wealth even.
Employers don't need their graphic artists to be able to use git and navigate Python dependencies. That's why they have IT.

The mistake companies make is in not fully embracing this.

Alright, once you get it running the UI for generative fill can be used by a graphic artist, and now you're several months ahead of your competitors, but still the UI is a little rough. But it's open source, so you have your techs make it a little better.

Now your company needs to make it easy to submit a pull request, or you're suddenly maintaining your own fork, which you're going to want out of as soon as you have an alternative, and soon your company is paying $$$$ to Adobe again.
I think it is a combination of issues (from most unlikely to most likely):

- They might've not been prepared for the growth;

- They were prepared, but decided to focus on the 95% of "regular people with easy questions" that treat it as a curiosity instead of the fewer people with difficult questions. Most regular people have no idea who is OpenAI, what a LLM is or how a GPT works, but they know "ChatGPT, the brand". Since it became a household name so quickly, it would be far better that the AI is just a little underwhelming sometimes than for it to not be able to serve so many people.

- The corpus used to generate it was trained on a staggering amount of content. This includes fringe and unmoderated content. Imagine you asked a question about WW2, and being trained, lets say on 4chan, the model responds with a very charitable bias about the solid reasoning behind the reich's actions at the time... It does not look good for investors, for the company, and attracts scrutiny. Even more innocuous themes are enough to invite all kinds of bad faith debate, radical criticism and whatnot... and the darling of the "IA revolution" certainly does not need (or want) coverage outside of their roadmap wishes.
> it will preserve the value proposition of AI while avoiding a machine just being milked

What's the point of a dairy cow that can't be milked? The whole point of AI is to milk it.

> the user is doing more thinking and due diligence and asking more precise questions

If I need to do "due diligence" and learn how to ask exactly precise questions to get useful answers, why am I using the AI at all? The actual "value proposition" of AI is that I don't need to learn how to use it. I'm not going to learn Structured Prompting Language just to being the process of having an AI show me how to learn some new programming language; it's easier to just learn that programming language instead.

> Someone who is non-technical should not be given a firecracker before they've ever even just turned on a microwave or a stove.

"We found a next-level genius Einstein physicist, but we have to make sure the public is not allowed to ask him any questions! He must be kept secret at all times! It is too dangerous to allow any fool with a high-school physics textbook to ask just a powerful genius a question!"

See the problem?
The Netherlands is very cozy with the US and yet enforcement is pretty lax, so I don’t think that’s the deciding factor.
This doesn't really make sense outside of "JS suxx amirite fellas?"

JS had modules before ESM. ES modules try to solve different problems and offer new solutions with browsers fetching modules themselves, something other module systems don't even do.

Whether a language has modules or not is just a design / ecosystem decision, not a technological one. Swift is a modern language (2014) that doesn't even have modules comparable to what Node.js introduced a 14 years ago. Yet it does little to hamper the quality of apps people are building for the Apple ecosystem.
nyaa has already died once, and this replacement is nowhere near the old one wrt peer counts and content availability (the old one already wasn't great). I wish torrent trackers had kept their databases open, maybe by regularly publishing encrypted dumps with a dead man's switch on decryption keys. At least the new nyaa is FOSS, although the code isn't very useful without data.
> The thing is, the UK government has a long history of abusing this kind of power. The Metropolitan London police ran a 40-year covert operation to infiltrate, track, and disrupt trade union organizers and activists, from students to Members of Parliament. The Met also colluded with large construction firms to maintain a secret blacklist of union organizers who were denied employment and had their lives ruined.

And yet, people right here on this platform routinely imply that there's no risk of such technology being abused (e.g. [1] but that's far from the only time I've had to read such hot takes)...

> Our computers and phones – often devices that we ourselves were expected to pay for – were enlisted to the corporate IT system and then enshittified with bossware that spies on our keystrokes, plunders our filesystems, monitors our network activity, and for some workers, watches and listens to them constantly through their devices’ cameras and microphones.

Corporate owned devices are one thing (and bad enough), but who the hell onboards their personal devices onto corporate MDMs? If corporate wants me to be reachable out of working hours they better provide me a corporate phone.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36060471
yes, blair's first labour government. things did go off the tracks later.
It's been iterated on. Kinda like saying Office has been here for twenty years, it's probably not a flagship anymore.
> There is also no such thing as "running out of entropy".

Hear hear. There is, indeed, no such thing as running out of entropy in a modern PRNG's state.

> I don't think this "PRNG" vs. "RNG" distinction is doing us much good.

But it's still nice to seed and periodically reseed a PRNG w/ entropy from an RNG. So there is a distinction between PRNG and RNG to be made, and we should make it. What we really want is to always have an RNG-seeded PRNG, and to always use the PRNG not the RNG.
Marx always preached that the way to go is for the working class to become owners of the means of production. The only logical way to achieve exactly this is to participate in the stock market and own company shares.

I still don't understand how the communists managed to convince people that Marx saw things exactly in the opposite way.

Even now, you hear left leaning parties telling that "stocks are evil, one can lose complete retirements on the stock market" and in the same time "rich are rich because they earned everything in the stock market".
At some point (and it seems we are getting close with chatGPT), we aren't going to be able to reliably tell the difference between AI and non-AI generated content.
Interesting article except that it doesn't provide any new information, as far as I can see, for why the year 2025 is special; other than just "[...] a top U.S. Air Force general recently predicted America and China are likely to go to war over Taiwan in 2025" which has been widely discussed.

I would prefer the title to more accurately reflect what the article is about, namely, the importance of foreign and Chinese parts in the iPhone supply chain.
or copy editing, apparently
Another First Things reader on HN. Nice!
It is far more common in India to go to a private school. As a rule of thumb, if you know an educated Indian, they went to private school.

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/in...

This makes this decision both more and less outrageous. On one level, it had less effect than a similar decision than the US. On the other, it helps cripple the poor in India (who are actually poor, not American poor).