skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Strange; I would have assumed that `dnf system-upgrade` would have made it from Fedora to RHEL by now.

Actually searching turns up https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterp... , which... appears to use a totally different tool? I don't really know what's going on there, but it does looks like they have some sort of support for in-place upgrades now.
I understand your point about supporting old hardware but the economics or the mental health don’t allow to support any kind of hardware forever.

I had to support obsolete computers running internet explorer too many times in my life and I am glad that I don’t have to right now.

We also eventually stopped the Minitel, even though it was still used by a few people.
some things like drug discovery could probably be done with a bounty system rather than intellectual property, and could probably get much better results for a fraction of the cost for maintaining the intellectual property component of the court system
I started mine[1] in earnest in the last few months; it's a mixture of programming and let's plays. I'd say don't overthink it; just start recording and uploading. You'll always find things to improve in subsequent videos and it's a really important part of finding your own voice on video platforms.

Try to make a recording and uploading schedule, don't make too many videos public at once and use the schedule function to spread out when your new videos appear in subscribers' feeds, because people are quick to unsubscribe if they think they see "too much of you" in their subscriptions feed.

[1]: https://youtube.com/@LGUG2Z
Because most work is boring. I'm sure I can work to death if the work is interesting or at least 50% interesting, but reality is it's frustrating and bad for my mental health.
14 doesn’t insane

15 seems spot on to me. It’s definitely how conservatives see leftists.

22 and 35 do seem like rambling
Lots of very fine reasoning when it comes to “provid[ing] support for the military operations of the US.”

Microsoft, Google, and Amazon all have substantial sales to the DoD. Part of the military industrial complex?

What about Uber, Hilton, AB InBev, and Coca-Cola? What about Harvard and Yale? What about White House staffers?
Those “boring franchises” are what bankroll the passion projects, artsy festival bound movies, and experimental content.

As far as content goes, there has been a ton of excellent stuff just this year across movies, TV, and anime. One “organic” way to start is to look for recent recommendation threads on Reddit for a movie or show you really like.
You make it sound like some force of nature is causing this to occur. These things exist because people are making them, despite there no longer being a healthy reason for doing so.

(I’m not saying there’s reason for AI development in general to stop, but these generative things that are designed to slot neatly into the role of human artists specifically have no reason to be developed further beyond proving it was possible, and that happened a while ago.)
Exactly.

What happened to automatic the boring things?

Instead they seem to be all in on washing out any hope in creativity and pointing people to put all their hope in minting and munging “code”.

It’s so myopic and short sighted it hurts my soul. I don’t understand at all. All that money, all that knowledge and talent… and this and stupid headsets strapped to peoples faces is the game? God dammit.
Not really. Temporary insanity maybe but I think that’s harder to prove. Insanity pleas get you sent to a medical prison where they keep you low on zombifying drugs.
Others downvoted you but I think you’re right to link Puritanism to a specific sliver of climate change activist community. There are some zealots who think we must end modernity as we know it, now!, or all is lost. These people existed before climate change, they just used other arguments to back their agenda. It was over population or before that a fear of factories, industry, progress in pretty much any form. The steam engine was a great fear to many. These are the “return to nature and live off the land” types and authoritarian personalities who are bothered by freedom. Ted Kaczynski was one of these. It’s hard to sort through such peoples thoughts to extract much that’s valuable. It’s like they don’t understand that history moves forward.
I think the more horrific ideas of a ”hunter” isn’t really any more different than what a human soldier is capable of. What an automated solution can do better though is enforce rules of engagement and restrict war crimes. Computers do exactly what you tell them to, while humans always have discretion.
> towards the end of his life there was only one person that could understand him, his secretary or nurse or someone like this

> Mao had been in poor health for several years and had declined visibly for at least six months prior to his death. There are unconfirmed reports that he possibly had ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease.[1]

[1] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong
California already has 2% of it's 600 GWh per day consumption covered by batteries soooo around a 1.6 order of magnitude increase to get to 100%. Not that it's even necessary, just an example. Battery production at scale is just beginning right now anyways.
Brilliant responses thank you! Very creative!
There is also a big distinction between fully disclosing that an image has AI vs the non post production edits. So why not just ask people to just be honest and disclose about the means of creating the content and disclose the images as being "AI" created vs telling people they should to be purists in their craft. Is the claim that the art made by AI itself is harmful or that the act of making it causes harm. Where is the real harm in this given people are properly informed as the the type of content they are looking at? The reasons why is because this has nothing to do with art and expression and everything to do with control under the guise of fear.
X86S: A Long Time Coming
It’s fun to drop verbatim quotes from his manifesto into random internet discussions without attribution. A lot of people agree with his ideas without realizing it.
That image was not "created wholly or partly using generative AI". It's merely a photograph that happens to contain an AI generated image displayed on a smartphone screen. Funny how they basically show you how to circumvent the new policy.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that "manifestos" are inherently elitist. I'm only aware of manifestos coming from people who speak with an air of self-importance. Kaczynski seems no different.
It should be required reading in public schools
> How can I incorporate programming, learn programming in my job?

Find repetitive tasks and try to automate them tasks. For simple scripts shell (bash) is great. For more complicated scripts that require error handling, API access, parallelisation, etc. use Golang, Python, Perl or Ruby.
The ads have built quite an encampment on that site.
The Hard Problem
I'm just weirded about the fact that conversation about something AS EPIC AS THIS is so boring and rudderless here on hacker news of all places.

I mean like YESTERDAY I did not have this superpower to summon something as majestic as say https://fb.watch/l4ssOD40M4/ with a simple 'A quirky and skronky Aphex twin sample that just hits you'

Edits:

I woke up to this news delivered from Yann Lecun himself in the morning on facebook[1] and my gaped mouth can still be found for onlookers to witness I suppose!

LIKE THIS IS IT FOLKS!

Edit 2

All those back in my days muzzak folks lamenting about the quality of contemporary music can fuck right off because you clearly havent explored enough of the modern music landscape.

Dont you dare blaspheme saying modern music has stagnated or some drivel like that. It is outright offensive to folks who are pushing the boundaries like say for example The Ex from Netherlands https://www.facebook.com/theexband https://www.theex.nl/news.html

Just because you and the other soulless people you fraternize with are ignorant of all the innovative stuff thats going on, we have to suffer through your opinion on the state of pop culture?
What do you mean? Half of US will like you for doing the latter two.

Ted Kaczynski is more acceptable to like than most terrorists because of MKUltra and since his ideas are more advanced than "my religion is good" or "I hate $minority!". Doesn't mean it's not wrong to bomb people, but he is easier to understand than a guy who brings an AK47 to a concert.
Counterexample: https://on.soundcloud.com/d6rX9goHHrSH3sQY9

I agree with you. When gwern investigated AI folk music in 2019, I realized it could generate a wonderful variety of music, full of soul. Be sure to listen to several tracks before making up your mind. My favorite is “crossing the channel”, since I think GPT made a mistake at the beginning, and then generated the most reasonable sounding not-mistake, which turned out to sound so cool.

My goal was strong, memorable melodies. Star Wars, not Marvel. GPT can come surprisingly close, if the input data format is right. Unfortunately I don’t think anyone except gwern has noticed that the input format is crucial: https://gwern.net/gpt-2-music
The thing is that if they want to operate in the EU then this will have to be solved. The right to be forgotten exists, and saying "it's federated lol" is not an excuse.
I used MusicGen yesterday to create 50 songs or so. Three of them sound pretty good [1][2][3]. MusicGen is definitely the best of four models of the presentation. I used the prompts differently than the article and i think i got better results.

Suppose there is way to measure cardio beats or electricity spikes on the brain, and we configure the machine to generate music to increase cardio beats, or decrease them, or similarly increase electrical activity of the brain or decrease it. Then psychology might be deprecated, mood will be reduced to just a music channel.

[1]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/lounge-owl

[2]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/rock-glass-shatterin...

[3]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/rock-owl-howling
> 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.

Study after study has shown this empirically the be false. It's uncontroversial and established that spreads have significantly tightened (that means it's cheaper for market participants to trade) because of the rise of HFT market makers.
Sure, but that's not going to stop it.
He was literally a murderer... no one like that deserves a black bar here even if they did make important contributions to technology, sciences, and/or engineering
> 77. Not everyone in industrial-technological society suffers from psychological problems. Some people even profess to be quite satisfied with society as it is. We now discuss some of the reasons why people differ so greatly in their response to modern society.

> 97. Constitutional rights are useful up to a point, but they do not serve to guarantee much more than what might be called the bourgeois conception of freedom. According to the bourgeois conception, a “free” man is essentially an element of a social machine and has only a certain set of prescribed and delimited freedoms; freedoms that are designed to serve the needs of the social machine more than those of the individual. Thus the bourgeois’s “free” man has economic freedom because that promotes growth and progress; he has freedom of the press because public criticism restrains misbehavior by political leaders; he has a right to a fair trial because imprisonment at the whim of the powerful would be bad for the system. This was clearly the attitude of Simon Bolivar. To him, people deserved liberty only if they used it to promote progress (progress as conceived by the bourgeois). Other bourgeois thinkers have taken a similar view of freedom as a mere means to collective ends. Chester C. Tan, “Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century,” page 202, explains the philosophy of the Kuomintang leader Hu Han-min: “An individual is granted rights because he is a member of society and his community life requires such rights. By community Hu meant the whole society of the nation.” And on page 259 Tan states that according to Carsum Chang (Chang Chun-mai, head of the State Socialist Party in China) freedom had to be used in the interest of the state and of the people as a whole. But what kind of freedom does one have if one can use it only as someone else prescribes? FC’s conception of freedom is not that of Bolivar, Hu, Chang or other bourgeois theorists. The trouble with such theorists is that they have made the development and application of social theories their surrogate activity. Consequently the theories are designed to serve the needs of the theorists more than the needs of any people who may be unlucky enough to live in a society on which the theories are imposed.

> 116. Because of the constant pressure that the system exerts to modify human behavior, there is a gradual increase in the number of people who cannot or will not adjust to society’s requirements: welfare leeches, youth-gang members, cultists, anti-government rebels, radical environmentalist saboteurs, dropouts and resisters of various kinds.

As I said, a whole bunch of nonsense.
- task

do it

𝗂̶𝗍̶
Yes, Ubuntu is still Debian based with just a little added on top.
I think you pasted @MollyRocket in the middle of @SuperDeclarative to accidentally make @MollyRocketative and @SuperDeclar
I don't think you know what an insanity claim entails. You absolutely give up rights and privileges if you "win" by invoking it.
“lets direct these government resources into research to improve our shared knowledge about them”

Yes, let’s do that! That’s what I was arguing for in my original comment. I was not arguing for only big corporations being able to use powerful AI, that will only make it worse by harming research, I just want people to consider what is often called a “sci-fi” scenario properly so we can try to solve it like we’re trying to solve e.g. climate change.

It might be necessary to buy some time by slowing down the development of large models, but there should be no exceptions for big companies.

“That concentrating more power in fewer hands would make it easier for a hyper intelligent AI to co-opt that power”

Probably true, though if it’s intelligent enough it won’t really matter

“That the act of trying really hard to align AIs and make them “moral” might be the thing that causes a super-intelligent AI to go off the rails in a dangerous, and misguided fashion.”

It definitely could do if done improperly, that’s why we need research and care
Playing individual stocks is a fool’s game. Yes, the random stock you pick could turn out to be a terrible investment for any number of reasons.
All: please either post thoughtful, substantive comments or don't post. We want curious conversation here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ6Mzvh3XCc

This is a great song for contemplating loss of a loved one.

I'm not sure AI music will ever reach these heights because it will have trouble understanding death.
It was not a problem when presenting the EHT results and subsequent "images" - https://www.space.com/first-ever-black-hole-image-ai-makeove...
M2 Ultra Chip Benchmark Results Reveal Impressive Performance Gains
I wouldn't call Ubuntu a flavor of Debian as they have so big differences, but ultimately it's still mostly Debian. You can see a numerical comparison of packages here: http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/mdt/all.html
The title is clickbait, so you're wrong.

DCA is what regular employees do with their 401K, so the title implies that they're doing investing wrong. They're not. The "LS" hypothesis corresponds to virtually no behavior in the real world.
And trying to go 100% carbon free (or die trying) in the next decade or two doesn’t carry risks? Decarbonizing won’t be carbon neutral that’s for sure.
Use 3rd party discovery services.

Reelgood is a good one, sort by IMDB score (which is somehow still kinda working as a metric) or the reelgood score which is a popularity among enthusiasts kinda ranking. You will find tvs gems streaming services criminally and inexplicably never recommend.

But "old school" recommendations from TV /movie buffs (like the tvtropes community or various forums) are still a good source.
3 hours commutes or destroying the environment aren't the only two options. By changing the way we build cities, and by retrofitting the ones we've already built, we can make places where the walked/biked commute is less than a half hour and the environmental impact is slashed dramatically.
A really great intro to these ideas for people growing up in western frameworks is Alan Watts’ “The book on the taboo against knowing who you are”
I don't have a YouTube channel, but if I were to create one I'd probably listen to every single podcast appearance from MrBeast since he's basically become the King of YouTube, and he regularly gives very actionable and clear advice.
It's a Rube Goldberg machine.
This is pretty much by biggest hope for the current uproar.

Voat was almost destined to become a nasty place because of the audience that reddit was disenfranchising at the time. If losing /r/fatpeoplehate was enough to make you seek an alternative platform, then the community you wanted to create smelled a lot like /r/fatpeoplehate. And regardless of whether you think that's a community that should or shouldn't exist, I don't believe it's a solid foundation to attract a wide userbase to.

The communities currently being disenfranchised are power-users, community moderators, developers .. if (Voat equivalent) were to happen today, it might find itself with a much more productive community to build from.
Not mine, but typically some corporations and government agencies block USB ports or have devices that record everything going through those ports.
Aah thank you. Fixed.
> You completely ignored the point about the uniform nature of the cortex. It doesn't make sense to say say "well, ok, maybe this bit works like an ANN, but the rest works differently".

The "uniform nature of the cortex" implies far too much. We know that dramatically different processes happen in different parts of the brain. That needs to be explained and it's where all the interesting questions are. You might as well say every part of the body is made of cells so they all work the same. That might be true at some level of abstraction but it's completely useless.

> No we don't, because we still don't know how human language works.

We do know some ways they don't work: namely neural nets because it can be shown that neural nets can learn languages that human cannot.

> People are still debating Chompsky innate-ism. Again, LLM processing of language offers interesting clues - not just embeddings, but also the fact that language can be learnt with a very simple architecture (transformer) with zero support for "universal grammar" or any such priors.

This tells you nothing about the language faculty just as building a neural net to predict the weather tells you nothing about how the weather operates.

> You seem to be missing the spirit of this whole conversation and the original linked article - it's not about claiming/hypothesizing that the brain works the same as any and all ANN architectures or principles, but rather that one can draw inspiration from ANNs to develop theories and intuitions (which still need to be tested) for how the brain may be working.

People have been making claims that connectionist models will lead to some insight for decades and there isn't much to show for it. No one cares where someone derives their inspiration for their hypotheses, come back when you have some result to show.
How do you know?

When I first started investing and only had a little money, I remember thinking that if I had twice as much, my money worries would be over. Many years later, I have 50 times as much money as then, and part of me still thinks that if I had twice as much as I have now, my money worries would be over.

And the other part knows that I am just the type of person who constantly worries about money.
What's the value of slight variations? Isn't it more likely that the memorized data was already known to be good and effective? It doesn't seem like a useful change unless your goal is to avoid infringement. I don't see how randomly permuting the suggestions improves UX.
I wrote an article about recent data pipelines as well if anyone is interested: https://blog.christianperone.com/2023/06/appreciating-llms-d...
Make the API reasonably priced instead of making it effectively impossible to run 3rd party apps, make 3rd party apps a reddit gold only feature, make reddit gold better in general(the main complaint ive heard is "why do i even buy reddit gold?"). They've got 2000 employees, surely there's enough people to come up with better monetisation ideas than I could in a few minutes that don't involve pissing off a big chunk of the userbase.
That’s not the right way to approach this. There’s no way to subdivide a copyrightable work into portions that become uncopyrightable. Otherwise one could simply split up the work, free themselves of copyright, and reassemble the pieces. A work is by definition an assembly of pieces; it is not meaningful to talk about copyright at the piece level.

The way it actually works is that very small portions of a work are still under copyright but their copying is regarded as de minimis, so small as to be permitted. For example, sampling a single snare dum hit from a song.

Copying a color is even less than that, it’s like copying a single word from a book, it’s a piece from which the work is made up but it’s not a work, it’s not even a portion of a work.
Can Apple Take the Metaverse Mainstream?
It provides the same value as someone who copies and pastes code from Stack Overflow or any of the predecessors without concerning themselves with the license.

I am certain that I can find code from Linux or gcc or emacs on Stack Overflow that is under a GPL license and not compatible with the CC license Stack Overflow uses... and yet it's there. What's more, people will copy that code into their own ignoring the CC license too.

How is that really any different than using Copilot if the original license and attribution are something to respect.

Note that I do think that the original license is something to respect which is why for any of the code that I write that has copyright that matters on it (toy program for home? meh. Hobby project repo that I'm working on that I'll publish? yep. Employer's code for work? absolutely.) I either don't touch questionable sources or run a license check on it when using it.

The key thing is that I don't consider the use of Copilot to be any more controversial than copying from Stack Overflow - which has been done by countless programmers for a decade before Copilot existed and no one got up in arms about it then.