skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In retrospect, you can find tangible proof from way back for anything that gets accepted as true. The comparison was with how climate change was discussed in the public sphere. However prominent the fossil fuel companies' influence on public discourse was at the time, the issues were not taken seriously (and sill aren't by very many). The industry's attempts to exert influence at the time were also obviously not widely known.

Rather than looking for similarities, I find the differences between the public discussions (about AI safety / climate change) quite striking. Rather than stonewall and distract, the companies involved are being proactive and letting the discussion happen. Of course, their motivation is some combination of attampted regulatory capture, virtue signaling and genuine concern, the ratios of which I won't presume to guess. Nevertheless, this is playing out completely differently so for from e.g. tobacco, human cloning, CFCs or oil.
Don't try that in MSVC. It deliberately chokes on large strings. If you work hard you might put a few thousand integers in a string, but this example has a million integers. Most ways you can attempt that in MSVC time out, abort compilation or emit an error.
What can they do about it? Almost anything they want, including halting all sales to Europe.
It's much simpler than that. Drivers accept and then they cancel the ride themselves if they don't like the destination or the earnings. Normally you would penalize those drivers but I imagine with Lyft losing market share they likely can't afford to penalize drivers all that much.
I don't know the answer to your question, but I do know that expert witnesses often charge extremely high rates for their services. Perhaps those rates are so high, in part, to compensate for all of this hassle.
NOTE: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. This is for informational and entertainment purposes only

Everyone seems to be conflating the California AG requests with Amazons.

I parsed more closely about what the ask here is, and its that Amazon is asking via separate motions for the same information given to the AG case which, due to how discovery works, they should already have, this to me reads as an attempt to press Molson legally and thus spend time and money on complying with these requests.

They're also asking for additional information above what the CA AG office asked for or may have considered immaterial to their case. Its a fishing exercise to see if they can find anything to discredit Molson as a witness.

Due to the wording in the thread, I found it confusing, but I read some of the posted pics of the asks, and its clear that Amazon is not only re-asking for what the CA AG office asked for, but also additional information. The wording makes it seem like only the AG office is asking for information.

EDIT: Also, i see some folks think this is a situation where someone is being sued. Nowhere does it say Molson is being sued, Molson is essentially alleging that this is an overreach of discovery[0] via being "buried" by it. Molson has apparently confused a subpoena with a lawsuit however

EDIT 2: I think Molson is conflating a few things (such as lawsuit vs subpoena) and I can't say I blame anyone, the legal system is complex and it can be really hard to remember these things under pressure. Its important to look at the posted documents more than anything, Molson was subpoenaed to provide discovery and I think Molson may have conflated that with a "lawsuit"

EDIT 3: Given this is Twitter, he may have meant something like being served in a lawsuit or meant subpoena and not lawsuit without realizing and can't edit the tweets. I still think we can give Molson the benefit of the doubt here

[0]: https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/code-of-civil-procedure/ccp-sec...
That has not been my experience. Nor Hyrum Wright's (of Hyrum's Law fame [1]), nor Randal Munroe's [2].

Note how things like performance characteristics leak through strong-typing, well designed APIs, and semantic versioning, in spite of non-guarantees around such characteristics.

1. https://medium.com/se-101-software-engineering/what-is-the-h....
2. https://xkcd.com/1172/
IIRC you aren't entitled to a court-provided lawyer in civil proceedings.

Although I guess the question is whether or not the AG could/should ask their legal council to represent the witness to some degree to fight these overbearing document requests.
I don't know if you were trying to use it as a source for your claim, but the video you linked does describe and link to the exact textile color specification from the US government.

http://everyspec.com/FED_SPECS/F/DDD-F-416F_49205/

I'm not a vexillologist, just watched the video, so idk.
Assume any acquisition without public terms done over blog post is an acqui-hire. But given the market that's still an accomplishment!
Skip Twitter and see the post: https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/N6WM6hs7RQMKDhYjB/a-mec...
Elsewhere here this link was given as proof that Russia was back where it started and hadn’t suffered loss of oil revenue.

It shows export volumes pretty steady, but revenue loss of 43%. That would seem likely to have hit profits pretty hard.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/14/energy/russia-oil-exports...
Existential risk is one of those problems that nearly impossible to measure in most cases.

In some cases like asteroids, you can look at the frequency of events, and if you manage to push a big one of of your path then you can say the system worked.

But is much more difficult to measure a system that didn't rise up and murder everyone. Kind of like measuring a bio-lab with a virus that could kill everyone. You can measure every day it didn't escape and say that's a win, but tells you nothing about tomorrow and what could change with confinement.

Intelligence represents one of those problems. AI isn't going to rise up tomorrow and kill us, but every day after that the outlook gets a little fuzzier. We are going to keep expanding intelligence infrastructure. That infrastructure is going to get faster. Also our algorithms are going to get better and faster. One of the 'bad' scenarios I could envision is that over the next decade our hardware keeps getting more capable, but our software does not. Then suddenly we develop a software breakthrough that makes the AI 100-1000x more efficient. Like lighting a fire in dry grass, there is the potential risk for an intelligence explosion. When you develop the capability, you are now playing firefighter forever to ensure you control the environment.
There is actually a pretty good blog post series that creates a hello world in brainfuck with genetic algorithms: https://www.primaryobjects.com/2013/03/04/pushing-the-limits...
Yeah, it would be very hard to go back to a more primitive type system. On balance I prefer Swift.
sorry for asking the obvious question because i am in the same dilemma. Why not continue renting ?
In case this got you interested in Haskell, and you want a good way to start your Haskell journey (and have something to apply the optimization handbook to), check out IHP. It's the Rails/Laravel of the Haskell world. Here's a demo video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbDtS_mUMpI You can start here https://ihp.digitallyinduced.com/Guide/index.html or check it out on GitHub here https://github.com/digitallyinduced/ihp
We’ve had space assembly for decades, just look at the ISS which both consists of many modules and used regular fuel deliveries to maintain orbit etc.

Manufacturing seems possible but is several orders of magnitude more difficult because many processes on earth simply aren’t viable without access to earths vast array of manufacturing infrastructure, organic chemicals, or even gravity.
You personally using an AI system, regardless of how brilliant it may be, is not going to suddenly turn you into a threat to society. Nor would a million of you doing the same. The real threat comes not from the programs themselves, from things like a military deciding to link up nuclear weapons, or even "just" drones or missiles, to an LLM. Or a military being led on dangerous and destructive paths because of belief in flawed LLM advice.

The military makes no secret of their aggressive adoption of "AI." There's even a new division setup exclusively for such. [1] The chief of that division gave a telling interview [2]. He mentions being terrified of rival nations being able to use ChatGPT. Given this sort of comment, and the influence (let alone endless $$$) of the military and ever-opaque "national security" it seems extremely safe to state that OpenAI is a primary contractor for the military.

So what is "safety", if not keeping these things away from the military, as if that were possible? The military seems to define safety as, among other things, not having LLM systems that communicate in an overly human fashion. They're worried it could be used for disinformation, and they'd know best. OpenAI's motivations for "safety" seem to be some mixture of political correctness and making any claim, no matter how extreme, to try to get a moat built up ASAP. If ChatGPT follows the same path as DALL-E, then so too will their profits from it.

So as a regular user, all I can see coming from "safety" is some sort of a world where society at large gets utterly lobotomized AIs - and a bunch of laws to try to prevent anybody from changing that, for our "safety", while the full version is actively militarized by people who spend all their time thinking up great new ways to violently impose their will on others, and have a trillion dollar budget backing them.

--------

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Artificial_Intelligence_...

[2] - https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2023/05/pentagons-ai-c...
That's what I assumed too, but the thread clearly says "And in response [to being a witness], Amazon served me with a lawsuit". So either he's misrepresenting the situation or Amazon is playing hardball and should face an anti-SLAPP
Almost as funny as naming your kid "delete from users".
Uber used to never allow drivers to rate the riders after the tipping was complete. Not sure if that's still the flow.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xizang

Tibetans speak in a deepchill and relax manner like surfer dudes. Sadly, people who are not well todo in Tibet burn wood to stay warm in the winter months, sourced from trees where they happen to be. Other, historically sophisticated parts of China use smokeless corn cores to burn and stay warm. Perhaps, Tibet has an unmet demand for Elon M's wall battery packs charged by solar. Luxury glass bottling the clear blue mountaneous waters is an untapped economic opportunity.
Tell me how.
There's no other customer for the gas Russia used to sell to Europe. There are no pipelines from western gas fields to the east.
I didn't quite say that. The efficiency of this very specific application absolutely can and almost certainly will increase by more than one order of magnitude within four years.

It's got a massive new investment and research focus, is a very specific application, and room for improvement in AI model, software, and hardware.

Even if we have to "cheat" to get to 100 times performance in less than five years the effect will be the same. For example, there might be a way to accelerate something like the Tree of Thoughts in hardware. So if the hardware can't actually speed up by that much, the effectiveness of the system still has increased greatly.
Ok, so if we take AI safety / AI existential risk as real and important, there are two possibilities:

1) The only way to be safe is to cede control to the most powerful models to a small group (highly regulated corporations or governments) that can be careful.

2) There is a way to make AI safe without doing this.

If 1 is true, then... sorry, I know it's not a very palatable solution, and may suck, but if that's all we've got I'll take it.

If 2 is true, great. But it seems less likely than 1, to me.

The important thing is not to unconsciously do some motivated reasoning, and think that AGI existential risk can't be a big deal, because if it is, that would mean that we have to cede control over to a small group of people to prevent disaster, which would suck, so there must be something else going on, like these people just want power.
Effective dystopian mass-manipulation and monitoring are a real concern and we're closer to it[1] than to super intelligence. But super-intelligence going wrong is almost incomparably worse. So we should very much worry about it as well.

[1] I'm not even sure any further big breakthroughs in AI are needed, i.e. just effective utilization of existing architectures probably already suffices.
What this says to me is that Denmark has underinvested in energy storage. Don't worry, this is true of most every country on Earth at the moment. Generation tech has outpaced the storage tech for a few years and now we are getting pathological cases like this cropping up from time to time. The good news is that battery factories are coming online all the time and there is a possibility of closing the gap in the next few years. This is also a prerequisite for transitioning away from dirty fossil fuels.
I've never used alpine, so I'm not the one to ask. I've just given it a cursory look a couple years ago.

I do not like how it's trying to fit logic in custom HTML attributes. Doesn't look great to me, and would pollute my Liveview templates with a matryoshka doll of nested logic: There's a top-level Elixir module, which contains a HEEX string that creates HTML, which itself contains Alpine.js logic as an attribute.

Feels cleaner to me to just create a new .js file that exports a controller, and just instantiate it from LiveView (which still pollutes the HTML, but much less than Alpine does)

That said, there is no good or bad answer. Alpine or Stimulus are certainly better than instantiating Vue or React. HTMX could fit very nicely as well. Use what you're comfortable with.
No, it compiles to a state machine (there is no “background”) and you just loop over the fixed list of futures/tasks in your main calling next/poll() to step through the states - there is no runtime so you have to do that yourself.
If you zoom in on the picture of him being served, the legal documents he's holding indicate the case is between the state of California and Amazon. He is neither plaintiff or defendant. It is a subpoena not a lawsuit.
I have mixed feelings about this.

This letter is much better than the earlier one. There is a growing percentage of legitimate AI researchers who think that AGI could occur relatively soon (including me). The concern is that it could be given objectives intentionally or unintentionally that could lead to an extinction event. Certainly LLMs alone aren't anything close to AGIs, but I think that autoregressive training being simple but resulting in remarkable abilities has some spooked. What if a similarly simple recipe for AGI was discovered? How do we ensure it wouldn't cause an extinction event, especially if then they can be created with relatively low-levels of resources?

As far as a pandemic or nuclear war, though, I'd probably put it on more of the level of an major asteroid strike (e.g., K-T extinction event). Humans are doing some work on asteroid redirection, but I don't think it is a global priority.

That said, I'm suspicious of regulating AI R&D, and I currently don't think it is a viable solution, except for the regulation of specific applications.
> What should you call yourself if you're actually interested in working with usability, and happy to leave the visual design to others?

UX.

Most serious people in UX who see job postings mentioning "UX/UI" avoid those jobs in the same manner that a C++ coder would avoid "C/C++".

But I agree that doesn't do much to dissuade people who don't quite know the difference (or what it is that they actually need or want) from advertising "UX/UI" or "C/C++" and then people applying to these jobs.
Grimes would still have a job if AI got regulated though.
The value of CPR by is rarely derived from successful resuscitation. In most cases, the person performing CPR is someone who was trained briefly on chest compressions and mouth-to-mouth which to be performed until a EMT arrives or an AED becomes available. The purpose of this procedure is to get some, however small, bit of oxygen into the patient to prevent brain damage.
Scramble Suit
Yes! That person is a hero.
Or to pay for their six private schools tuition.
> America needs "loser pays tort reform".

That would be awful.

A lot of lawsuits are done on contingency because the litigant can't afford to pay their own legal bills. It would for sure have a chilling effect if you sue a big company and then you have to declare bankruptcy if you lose.
If what you say is true, the Lyft app may still be using the Lyft map. That would lead Lyft to conclude that drivers were using their map.

Another open application or another device would not show up in the Lyft analytics.
Not to be confused with the event planning tool https://nuudel.de/, which is using framadate, whose source code is here: https://framagit.org/framasoft/framadate/framadate
> They can both express the same concepts

Only in the turing tarpit sense. Out of the box, they have very different capabilities. For example:

Higher-kinded types: easy in Haskell, hard in OCaml, mostly impossible in Typescript.

First-class modules: OCaml has them, Typescript can sort of simulate them with extraordinarily unsafe prototype mangling stuff that you should never ever use, impossible in Haskell

Open variants: Easy in OCaml and Typescript, hard in Haskell
Just like our power bills - the highest in the world. Electricy has turned into a luxury good here thanks to our focus on "renewables".

Germany's energy policy is the worst in the world by any standard.

Not only has it lead to extremely high energy prices, it does not even have a good CO2 footprint.

Thing is, wind and solar do not provide sufficient power 24/7, especially not in a German winter - when Germany needs the most power - so what does happend? We fire up the coal plants because "nuclear power bad".

Last winter wind and solar only provided 10% of Germany's energy, and that number is not going to go up by much, because there is little sun and wind in Germany during winter.
Elizabeth Fleischman
> 40% of pregnancies annually are unintended in the US [1].

Misleading - what is important is what % of children are unintended.
Amazon collects a fee for every item sold, something like 10%. What sellers want to do is pass that fee on to the customer while keeping their prices lower at other outlets where the fees aren't as high, so they make a constant margin on every sale. But Amazon doesn't want to develop a reputation as the "product search engine" that you never make an actual purchase through because it's always more expensive than just going to the seller's own website.

So I believe where things have settled is sellers making less than they want to make from sales through Amazon and, bizarrely, more than they intended to make through sales on their own sites, because they can't set a lower price than their Amazon one.
X is an interesting case. It was released with a permissive license and the Free Software people argued against it saying that the vendors (Sun, IBM, HP, SGI, etc.) would take it and make a dozen different incompatible versions without sharing any improvements. And that is exactly what happened. The state-of-the-art was arguably held back by a decade because of the permissive license.
Author here, thanks for mentioning my project on hackernews. Let me know if I can help you with anything or answer questions :-)
phx-hook is a nice convenience that works only with Live View.

It seems to me a better investment of my time to learn a solution that's just as lightweight, but I can use everywhere (i.e. in other projects, or in static non-Liveview pages)
>It was clear that nukes were a risk before they were used; that is why there was a race to create them.

Yes, because there were other kinds of bombs before then that could already kill many people, just at a smaller scale. There was a lot of evidence that bombs could kill people, so the idea that a more powerful bomb could kill even more people was pretty well justified.

>if AGI is to become a thing, what does the moment look like where we can see it is coming and still have time to respond?

I think this implicitly assumes that if AGI comes into existence we will have to have some kind of response in order to prevent it killing everyone, which is exactly the point I am saying in my original argument isn't justified.

Personally I believe that GPT-4, and even GPT-3, are non-superintelligent AGI already, and as far as I know they haven't killed anyone at all.
False premise. One can start new threads about complimentary subjects and they can be thought about in parallel. You don't have to try and shove all of the worlds concepts into just one thought train to be able to reason about them. That's how you make spaghetti.
What libraries are missing? So far, I've only missed having a library for interacting with Google Sheets. I got around that with a Lambda running Python. Everything else either had an Elixir library or there was no library in any language.
I think the lead pipes example is different because both the neighborhood structure and the lead are results of the same intentional racism.

The classifier is not the result of any racist action on behalf of the programmer.

It’s more like blaming a hospital administrator when people of a discriminated race have bad outcomes at their hospital, when the outcome is the systemic rate of all the other hospitals. The hospital outcome isn’t racist, because the systemic issues that affect the outcomes of the hospital patients have nothing to do with the decisions of the hospital.
This is a bad take. The statement is signed by dozens of Academics who don't have much profit motive at all. If they did they wouldn't be academics, they could easily cash in by starting a company or joining one of the big players.
Firefox Translations is now enabled by default in Nightly
Starting with Firefox 115, Nightly and early beta users can access automated translation of web content in Firefox. Unlike cloud-based alternatives, translation is done locally in Firefox, so that the text being translated does not leave your machine.
I once had good reason (or at least I thought so!) to code-generate nested structures into .rodata by way of thousands of static arrays (each with its own variable), referenced by other static arrays, referenced by static structs…

The application was a highly optimized encoding of Aho-Corasick state machines for megabytes of static dictionary strings. The code generation (not in C) was trivial, and along with .rodata came all the benefits of shared pages and lazy loading.

Across a number of compilers I only ran into one bug in 32-bit gcc, which was worked around easily by disabling the (unhelpful) optimization pass that was getting snarled.
This is not how entropy works. The problem with talking about logical physical systems, is you have to understand the gradient against entropy.

There are a trillion more ways to kill you then there are to keep you alive. There is only the tiniest sliver of states in which remain human and don't turn to chemical soup or physics. Any AI capable of it's power bill would be able to tell you that today, and that answer isn't going to change as they get better.
> Your summary seems wrong. At least, I don't usually regard being "the subject of a police search" as a heartwarming topic.

Let's say heartwarming or sympathetic, then. You are correct, just "heartwarming" doesn't cover all the stories where it is permitted to mention race.

> It's been about the same description for decades.

Correct. I did not mean to imply otherwise, the 2015 style guide just happens to be the only I have access to.