skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Dollar Cost Averaging a lump sum might reduce your risk while you're averaging in, but why weren't you happy with the risk/return profile in the first place? And are you happy with increasingly higher risk/return as you commit more of your lump sum? Isn't it better to pick a portfolio with a risk profile you're happy with in the first place, then commit your entire lump sum?
What would you say the basis of all knowledge you know is? You are a collection of everything you have consumed and the stuff you create is all influenced by that.

Personally this whole llm debate about copyright is quite funny. As someone who very much has skin in the game(my art is trained on midjourney.), and who runs in a circle of artists, it’s interesting to see people’s ego’s come at play here. The ones who are excited about these as tools are the ones who are openly inspired and want to inspire however the ones who claim copyright infringement seem to come off as insecure, almost like they are afraid that this idea of theirs will be the last great idea they have. There’s already a separation happening in the art world of people who are exploding in creative output vs the people who are so defensive and cling to the old way of doing things.

If I had my way, I’d see copyright laws abolished completely. A complete free for all in innovation. And people who claim that without parents and copyright then there’s no incentive to make money seriously underestimate humans and their ego to continually innovate.
It's an artform so its natural for a composer to have the same reaction as a painter would to Stable Diffusion for example.

That being said - it's happening, and nothings going to stop it regardless of which side of the fence people sit on.
It's a generic throwaway statement.
Musicians are trained on everyone's music too
Right. Price should determine what one buys. There is a marginal performance bump between them for the same advertised TDP, and so suppose if price is the same then next gen it is. Otherwise buy what is cheapest.
Say something original and different.

I will put down some YouTube channels I like. See how different they are:

https://www.youtube.com/@BlowFan
https://www.youtube.com/@CBaggers
https://www.youtube.com/@Frankslaboratory
https://www.youtube.com/@QuantPy
https://www.youtube.com/@SuperDeclarative
https://www.youtube.com/@MollyRocket
https://www.youtube.com/@Hyperplexed

What you want to avoid at all costs is a channel which does everything (unless you are a news channel and want to put your own spin on that).
The plaintiffs were granted anonymity due to credible threats against their attorney. Is there any mechanism other than publication ban that ensures the protection? Can't someone just attend the day of the hearing to see who the attorneys are?

EDIT: Apparently the lawyers are attending via Zoom.
Theory is not actually a form of evidence.
The introduction (but nowhere in the rest of the article) makes a distinction between Dollar Cost Averaging (where you spread out a windfall over some period of time) and systematic investing (SI; where you regularly invest income as you get it). I suspect the author would not advocate for saving up your weekly paycheck and investing it as a large chunk.

> The difference between DCA and SI is that in DCA you have all the money available since the beginning, but in SI you have to wait until the next month to have access to the quantity to be invested.
>assumes a company big enough to own a block

You don't have to be a big company to own a block. An ipv4 block is <$10k and the price is on a downtrend now that covid is over. It is risky as a site if you don't own your IP block because false abuse complaints can be sent to the ASN you are renting an IP from and can result in downtime. If you own the IP, the abuse reports for it go to you to handle.

>won't just drop non-Cloudflare traffic

Not all sites do this. Also they likely have other stuff running on the machines that are accessible without cloudflare.
That seems like a pretty bad statistic. No source online, possibly just an oft-repeated estimate from "professional organizer Regina Lark". There are only 100 paperclips in a box of paperclips, so that's not a major source of items. This statistic requires 150 items for every square foot in a 2000-square-foot house. Not even things like my laundry basket or spice rack manage that.
Also in Finland we decided to buy off-the-shelf taxation software from American Gentax. I believe it has VB.net core.
I you talk big, you must act big. You can't go around using a post office and subjecting yourself to prison time and lawyers. It's as simple as that. Otherwise you are not pure and sane and a real naturalist. In fact you're insane and a hypocrite living in prison for ~40 years.
Look at the price of the MacBook Air. Then tell me you can get anything that remotely approaches that level of performance from any other major vendor, at anything remotely close to the same price. Or the same battery life.

You can't, because it doesn't exist. Here's a hint -- the price is much closer to $1000 than $4000.

I've been a MacFanatic since December of 1983, when I saw a by-invitation-only demo of a prototype of the 128k Mac, a month before the Super Bowl commercial where Apple officially introduced the thing. Yeah, that famous one.

It took only five minutes of playing around with the prototypes of what came to be called MacWrite and MacPaint (because those were the only two pieces of prototype software available yet) to convince me that this was the future of computing, and that all computers should work like this.

But I'm also a Mac realist. I fully recognize that there are markets that Mac doesn't serve well, like Enterprise. Apple has always understood the workgroup level and served that market well, but as you scale up, they do worse and worse. The fact that the Mac works well in an Enterprise is in spite of Apple design philosophy, not because of it.

And I also understand that there are markets where Apple makes no attempt to serve that market, because they don't consider it worthwhile -- whether I agree with them or not.

I even did a short six month contract working for Apple Retail Software Engineering, where I worked with the team that developed all the proprietary software that the Apple Retail personnel use, whether that's everyone in the stores, or the people back at HQ that are coordinating with the people in the stores.

I delivered a CI/CD system for them, so that they would no longer have to do all the building of all their software on the laptops of the individual developers.

After six months, I had contributed code to each of their main code bases (iOS, macOS, and Linux for their back-end servers) to get the to compile on the CI/CD system, and the rest of my job was done. And in the process, I learned that Apple is a company I am happy to be a customer of, but I don't ever want to work there again.
> but it's worth adding that Scientific American up till maybe the mid-80s was also more real than standard pop science.

glad that someone also shares this opinion, the articles and the art in those two decades was great
I've tried MusicLM and other Google AI music tools and they sounded very low quality/lo-fi. Seems Facebook isn't much better?
I don’t understand what’s motivating certain types of people to continue working on these types of AI practical implementation projects. There’s nothing good for the world this (type of AI in particular) will offer.

Maybe someone will say this will let people who aren’t musicians express themselves by creating music. That’s not true. It’s as true as hiring a musician to make a song for you, given a description. And nobody would say that the person who hired the musician was expressing themself.
There are five conflicts under "present", none of which are offensive. Two are helping countries put down insurgencies, two are fighting piracy from Somalia and two are involved in civil wars in the Middle East. (They add up to six because insurgents and pirates are allies). Most of them are as part of a giant collation. Only the Syrian one is actually being led by the US.

None of them are to conquer territory or any other description of "offensive war" I've ever seen.
His manifesto is worth reading. Although he was obviously a twisted man many of his predictions for the future were eerily prescient.

http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf
Anyone who disagrees with Kaczynski's ideas because they came from a convicted terrorist should read the works of Jacques Ellul instead, of which Kaczynski's was largely a popular reduction. The Technological Society is the clearest influence on Kaczynski's manifesto, but Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes is possibly more pertinent in this day and age.

Ellul was a professor, a pacifist, and a Christian anarchist. Attacks the ideas, not the man.
https://futurama.fandom.com/wiki/Reverend_Lionel_Preacherbot
This is not the ship of Theseus, the a correct application of that concept would be rewriting the gdb module by module, testing each step of the way, and then falsely pretending that the gpl wouldn't apply even after 100% of the original code is replaced
> If you make a salary from your job, dollar cost averaging makes more sense than saving up your salary and then lump sum investing it at some point in time.

Pedantically, many believe that this is not actually DCA.

DCA is a strategy that is a counterpoint to lump sum investing. From that perspective, the common factor required by both strategies is that you actually have a lump sum to invest.

Investing every month as you earn money, assuming you never had enough to do a lump sum isn’t considered DCA from this perspective because there was no alternative to lump sum invest.

I do adhere to this thinking, and I think it would be useful to have a term for each of these three options. Unfortunately nobody’s proposed one that’s stuck for what you’re describing, so an endless debate rages on financial subreddits whenever this comes up.

I only bring this up because whenever people talk about DCA, there is an implicit assumption that they’re discussing from the perspective of their definition of the term. The article is—I assume—using the definition I described. Because yes, saving up your money to invest in one go at the end is categorically the worst option, and silly enough a strategy that it doesn’t often warrant mention or discussion.
I tried to find out how many "tokens" (I know: depends on the tokenizer) "The Pile" has but couldn't find it.

As far as I understand RedPajama has 1.2T (https://github.com/togethercomputer/RedPajama-Data) and has a table in the readme listing the main parts and how many tokens each part has.
See also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartmut_Rosa

A German sociologist who coined the Akzelerationszirkel (circle of acceleration).
Not when the market is already liquid enough for my liking without them.
Wilson Aerospace LLC v. The Boeing Company Inc - https://dockets.justia.com/docket/washington/wawdce/2:2023cv...
Stated another way, the author believes (probably rightly so) that stocks outperform cash equivalents, and they're pointing out that the "intuition" behind DCA doesn't actually add up when you tally all the contributions.

DCA is just a way to choose your security/cash split at different points in time though. Their relative performance at different points in time greatly impacts the results. Any time you have additional (probabilistic) information to bear on the problem, DCA can start to look a lot more attractive. For example, if you expect that in some time horizon there will be a dip of unknown magnitude and unknown bottom timing, then DCA outperforms many alternatives including buying up-front.

Anywho, just take care to blend what you know about the market (probably approximately nothing) with what your goals are (0% chance of hitting $0 vs a low chance of hitting $10M+ vs highest average yield no matter what vs highest yield predicated on being able to afford an upcoming purchase vs whatever else floats your boat). The right strategy for somebody else is not necessarily the right strategy for you.
PC Gamer: Noctua's fan 8 years in the making could be the last you'll ever need
Talking about kitchens, what happened to the data Uri kitchen at hixie's?
This is why in the post I differentiate between dollar cost averaging and systematic investment. Investing a part of your salary every month is basically the same as lump sum. I don't defend in any moment to save money during the year and invest it after some months. Actually, my advice is to invest the most you can as soon as you can. And in many cases this means to invest a fixed amount of money every month.
Ted Kaczynski was a genius, a mathematical child prodigy, became a professor at Berkeley at 25 and had a bright future. I completely blame CIA experiments for his downfall into radicalism and extremism. His ideas were very valid, but his mind was too tortured to deal with them in a healthy manner.

Rest in peace.
Most of those systems sit at idle, when they are on at all. Idle power is not the same as TDP. The idle difference is not so great that it's a big deal.
Valid question, but ever thought how the production studios got paid before (and still) Netflix existed? Exactly, cinemas, local TV station buying the movies/show while adding some commercials, etc., they will find a way it isn’t yours to worry about, in fact, I think that way it’s better for two reasons:

- Might bring back the quality of movies/TV as it was in 80s/90s, as these movies/Shows sold in cinema/to TV must maintain some quality and put some efforts to get back some revenue, if it was a low quality, they are out of business, only the good survived, natural selection at its finest.

- It might also help to maintain some level of decency without the pile of degeneracy nowadays, as it’s easier to watch that by yourself, it isn’t at the cinema with your family/friends or local TV.

Right now, most of the garbage movies/TV shows are funded by Netflix, and who’s funding Netflix? You. So you are indirectly responsible for the low quality of current movies, and torrenting them might kill that skewed business model and save the huma.. ok not that dramatic to save humanity, but might actually do something good.
There not true. Penrose tilings as a whole are generated randomly, with overall features determined only by the two simple tile shapes.
Another way to think about it is that prices come from a game where one player wants the number to be higher and the other wants it to be lower, and the players can walk away. That's a voluntary exchange.

I don't know why you think the existence of this game needs to be proven when it's a game people play all the time? It's very unlikely that you've never shopped for anything.

Not every purchase is entirely voluntary. Some purchases happen under pressure. The amount of pressure varies quite a bit.
I also love the self-selected aspect. "The people who did X say positive things about X."

There are scenarios where WFH is an excellent away around socially awkward scenarios. If the guy in the next cubicle makes things subtly uncomfortable-- maybe you don't like his cologne, maybe he's just a little too friendly-- being able to just bail and limit your exposure to scheduled meetings in a videochat box can be a huge win. Or conversely, I'd expect WFH to appeal to many people with social anxiety issues and autism-spectrum conditions, as again, you can just exit an environment that makes you uncomfortable on a daily basis.

I'd also be interested to see how many on-premise perks they rolled back when nobody was in-office to claim them. That's a completely quantifiable number-- for the sake of "bringing people back to the office", you have to pay for a lot more catered lunches, probably way more claims for child care subsidies and transport reimbursements.
Hey, I wanted to reply to this, but just didn't find the time. I disagree with a lot of what you wrote, but your arguments are stated clearly. I appreciate that. Cheers :)
Having unit testing built-in to the programming language and tooling is a huge plus, absolutely. I don't know who originally came up with this, but I swear, it would be worth some recognition :) (And thankfully, whoever did originally come up with this idea, it has been copied a ton by the recent crop of programming language designs.)
This line of thinking has always puzzled me. At some point one’s brain must be so compromised that we really can’t expect them to function as a human, but most people’s reaction to that is “excusing” their behavior.

If you’re willing to admit that they don’t really have self-agency at that point, don’t they become an object at that point? Like we would have no problem putting down a dog that bit a child, let alone a dog that blew up buildings. The only reason we’re so accepting of putting down the dog is its lack of human status.

In our courts, claiming insanity seems to give you a defense against crimes you’ve committed but also maintaining all the rights and privileges of personhood.
Five years is a fairly long time to DCA and you would presumably park the rest of the money in a tbill ladder or even something slightly riskier. Not taking that into account is pretty significant considering the time period in question. ex 3 month tbills were yielding 12% at the start of the period.

There is a fairly significant body of work around this idea by professionals in the field and a pretty well established set of trade offs between lump sum and DCA.

This isn't really a "debunking" so much as it's a fairly naïve and uncharitable comparison of DCA vs LS.
Not to mention nearly every prediction in the Manifesto came true. He was a genius broken by the government.

We should blame the CIA, not him. He was just a math nerd in the beginning.
> You do understand how that's different from HFT, right?

HFTs provide liquidity, which by definition is providing what people want to buy/sell, when they want to trade it and it the desired quantity.

> HFT is like hiring The Flash to be your grocery store clerk, who notices you reaching for the milk, and runs in to empty out the shelf and raise the price by 0.003 cents by the time your hand gets there.

This is not what HFTs do. They can't see your "hand reaching", they see your quote hit the book at the same time as everyone else. It's not magic.

They're literally the market makers. Your complaint appears to be that they're good at reacting to new information, i.e. being good market makers.
ReactOS actually got sued by Microsoft for stealing code and one of their proofs was a piece of code (can’t remember exactly what it did) that basically matched the same function Windows code with a few things changed.

It was ASM code I think, and their defense was that there was basically one way to write a function that does this.
“Prompt engineers”… sigh.
Can you zero on a particular espoused belief and how he practiced other than he preached? What specifically should he have done differently that would've made him not a hypocrite?

I'm honestly trying to figure out what your point is.
Ted Kaczynski, known as the 'Unabomber,' has died in prison at age 81
> Presumably you buy all your goods directly from growers / manufacturers, rather than using retailers who are simply there to skim off the top?

Grocery stores to the things that are difficult for me to do, like sourcing and sorting a wide variety of produce and products. Also, they use economies of scale to make it cheaper than if I were to do the same thing myself without an intermediary.

HFT firms neither enable customers to do things they can't accomplish on their own, nor do they save customers money by exploiting economies of scale.
That's pretty terrible. I hadn't realised quite how bad the breach was. Seems incredibly unfair to have got off so lightly.
Certain points in Kaczynski's manifesto greatly influenced how I view the world, and I feel they have positively influenced my life in many ways (e.g., trying to live life less wastefully, using nature to ground oneself in reality, evaluating the true total cost of ownership of products of industry).

RIP.
There are way more Ted K's running around today - it's just that you don't need to kill people to get heard anymore. Nowadays the spectacle of ruining your own life is enough to get noticed. Anyone with an internet connection today has access to world stage provided they are interesting enough. Back then you'd need to catch the eye of a producer for a mainstream news broadcast to get any coverage. Now you can just fire up a camera and there's a 50% chance you'll end up on a podcast circuit and end up talking to Joe Rogan.
How do you envision this AI caused extinction happening?
http://web.archive.org/web/20230610201529/https://www.nytime...

https://archive.ph/e8HVU
But they have tastes and preferences in a way that the models lack — unless, possibly, if you have them retrained sufficiently long by a single individual or small group, I guess.
For TV, hard to go wrong with an HBO series. Most recently, Succession was excellent.
My home server is a small machine with two disks, one for the os and one for data. The disk for data is using zfs, and i take hourly snapshots between 7am and 11pm. I keep two weeks worth of snapshots for each dataset.

I have another small machine (a nuc) with a similar setup at in law’s house, connected to my vpn, and I replicate snapshots over there through the vpn.

Worst case scenario i can go visit the in law’s and get my snapshots.

Zfs is really awesome.

Edit: everything is scripted and ran via cronjobs, of course.
"That being said - it's happening, and nothings going to stop it"

Well, the European Union is already working on a legal framework for AI. It happened with GDPR and it will happen again.
Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski Dies in Federal Custody
So, CC-BY-NC licensed model weights, and they've made sure to license the training data. And some jurisdictions are saying that copyright cannot be claimed on the output of such models.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall in RIAA corporate offices…

Sans schadenfreude, I think this (depending on inference speed) could be perfect for dynamic content in games (including IRL games: LARP, escape rooms, table top games, etc.)
The media will report on this as the death of a terrorist. None of the real terrorists will be brought to justice - the CIA has done so many abhorrent things here and abroad.

We act like the KGB/FSB is this unfathomable, foreign evil. We have the bigger, scarier thing that killed it in our backyard.
vehement oppostion from ms my be one of the reasons for them being optional (and thus worthless) but the main one is that that they are impossible to use correctly. what happens if you make one too big?
The FBI never needed a warrant to get information you give to companies freely. That's why they never needed a warrant for phone records.

You have rights to protect your data, but you (and Tesla, et al) don't have rights or legal responsibilities to protect data you collect on others.
Because contemporary US work culture makes them hate their job.

A less pathologically exploitative work culture would have people never wanting to retire ... because then they'd get bored.
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36272409.
Copyright is a human invention to encourage research and development of art and tech.

It isn't perfect, but we haven't found an alternative system that doesn't punish the first mover who takes on the risk.
Are those "random"? It seems like you chose them pretty specifically, actually. You seem like you're inching towards a point here, but not quite making one. Maybe you can expand a bit?
I could make similar comments about your account being more than 10 years old yet apparently you don't realise there is a preference for informed discussion on this site.

By all means criticise away, by constructing an argument and preferably providing sources.

Saying "X is bad" is cheap and does not further discussion or teach anyone. In fact, that kind of behaviour being normalised is the most susceptible to brigading and bot farms.