skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Hallucinating" (normally) means having a subjective experience of the same type as a sensory perception, without the presence of a stimulus that would normally cause such a perception. I agree it's weird to apply this term to an LLM because it doesn't really have sensory perception at all.

Of course it has text input, but if you consider that to be equivalent to sensory perception (which I'd be open to) then a hallucination would mean to act as if something is in the text input when it really isn't, which is not how people use the term.

You could also consider all the input it got during training as its sensory perception (also arguable IMHO), but then a proper hallucination would entail some mistaken classification of the input resulting in incorrect training, which is also not really what's going on I think.

Confabulation is a much more accurate term indeed, going by the first paragraph of wikipedia.
I think it's too easy to fall into the anecdote trap, and I like the comments with study data, like the Pew Research and Line Research (sequential surveys, even better)...

I also think adoption will depend on "industry." ChatGPT in education for example:

* BestColleges [1] (n=1000) found 43% of college students have used ChatGPT, and 22% have said they used it to help complete assignments or exams.

* Study.com [2] (n=1100) had some crazier numbers. "Over 89% of students have used ChatGPT to help with a homework assignment. ... 48% of students admitted to using ChatGPT for an at-home test or quiz, 53% had it write an essay, and 22% had it write an outline for a paper."

* Interestingly, in K-12, adoption appears to be higher by teachers than students [3]: "Within two months of its introduction, a 51% majority of teachers reported using ChatGPT, with 40% using it at least once a week, and 53% expecting to use it more this year. Just 22% of students said they use the technology on a weekly basis or more."

* In Japan, a recent survey [4] (n=4000) of undergraduate students conducted from Tohoku University showed 32.4% have used ChatGPT. This is compared to about 7% office workers in Japan using ChatGPT on the job [5] (n=13814) in a recent poll by MM Research Institute.

Of course, education isn't the only industry with an outsized impact (although it's interesting in the sense that it's a good temperature check for the upcoming generation, especially if it's something that is so prevalent at colleges/universities).

But there are other industries as well. a16z Games has been doing a game development survey on Generative AI use in games, and their preliminary results [6] are in-line with my personal experience/view into the game industry - that it has already been completely re-aligning/disrupting the production pipeline: "We heard from 243 game studios - large and small - the results were astonishing ... 87% of studios use an AI tool or model in their studio TODAY. 99% of studios PLAN to use the technology in the future."

I think it's worth noting, that while the sources are dodgy, that even if the 100M user number is accurate for ChatGPT, that's only ~2% of global internet users, and <1% of the world population. You could probably confidently say that 99% of the world population has not directly used a generative "AI" product yet (obviously anyone that's used a mobile phone or the internet has been interacting with ML for years). I do think this is going to change very rapidly however, but no matter how fast it goes, it won't be overnight.

[1] https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/college-students-ai-to...

[2] https://study.com/resources/perceptions-of-chatgpt-in-school...

[3] https://www.waltonfamilyfoundation.org/chatgpt-used-by-teach...

[4] https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14927968

[5] https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/Use-ChatGPT-at-w...

[6] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/troykirwin_ai-x-game-developm...
Pay-frozen Microsofties not happy to hear of 'landmark year'
Also freedom doesn't necessarily require privacy.
AI is a profound change for how we will live. It's more a socioeconomic change (loss of millions of jobs) than a technological advancement.

The worst part is the current state though, where all the crypto hype bros have come out of the woodwork and are rebranding as AI hype bros now. My Linkedin feed is sadly now full of idiots calling themselves "AI Expert" and similar such terms with made up resumes trying to sell their 'expertise'.
All of the shops using RHEL derivatives may be looking at their options with Red Hat's forced changes.

SUSE may be a viable alternative depending on the workload requirements and cost. RHEL's push could be Red Hat's loss.

“The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers.”
When in doubt, flat out.
Most companies will at least hire a human to check translation work, or at least contract one. Bad translations are something that can quickly destroy a brand in a market, and translation tools are not so fine grained to take into account dialect.

Spanish, for example, has many examples of words that are innocuous in one dialect and profane in another.
> Case insensitivity is only seen as "rustic" because C is case insensitive

One thing people discovered eventually - case-sensitivity is language-specific. It is easy so long as you assume everything is in English and 7-bit US-ASCII, but once you move beyond that assumption, it becomes significantly more complex. An easy way to avoid all that complexity is to not do it.

People also forget about the related notion of accent-insensitivity - again, if all you support is English, you can ignore that, since English hardly uses accents
Lol indeed, they should spend some time outside. Nobody knows what a yubikey is.

Or what 2FA means, or OTP, or how this type of authentication method is device-bound unless you sync. Or how the same service approached from different devices creates different keys.

So now we'll have classic password logins, social logins, and password-less inconsistently implemented across the internet. Normies will be even more confused now.
Random thoughts.

Theory X is very convenient for those in charge. No need to think hard - just pull out the whip.

In my experience it takes very little application of Theory X to create enough resentment (even if hidden) to make highly creative work impossible. If you want people to do creative work, Theory Y is your best approach.

Those with executive function challenges like ADHD gain increased executive function if doing what they should is also pleasurable. It takes a long time to recondition such people to this, but Theory Y does so. That said, in the short term Theory X may work better. But the long term matters more.

Some of the best advice that I know for moving an organization towards Theory Y is in Tribal Leadership, https://www.amazon.com/Tribal-Leadership-Leveraging-Thriving....
At the end of the day both plug in hybrids and bevs are capable of driving without gas and entirely on electricity. The only meaningful difference wrt electric driving is battery size
> Hoping for one of these with an open API that anyone could integrate whatever they want with, I am not holding my breath here.

OpenAI is already on it. The latest gen of GPT-3 and -4 are finetuned to respond to "do this thing" commands with JSON structured to:

- provide the name of a given function call

- provide arguments to that function call

it's "early stage", which in this case probably means "good enough to be useful within a month or two", given the rate at which these things have been developing.

Anecdotally, I've been playing with giving the models instructions like:

"When asked to perform a task that you need a tool to accomplish, you will call the tool according to its documentation by this format:

TOOL_NAME(*args)

Below you will find the documentation for your tools."

...and I've gotten it working pretty damn well (not even with the JSON-finetuned models, mind you). All you really need is python-style docstrings and a minimal parser and you're off to the races. I recommend anyone interested play with it a bit.
Eva Méndez — an expert in open science at the Carlos III University of Madrid — criticizes the current system and the “predatory behavior” of all scientific publishers. “Paying 43 million euros a year is outrageous. With those 43 million euros, a great alternative system could be made,”

I left academia 20 years ago, back when this was a new (or newish at least) idea. It's sad that after 20 years this is STILL being discussed. It feels like the world of publishing is changing so slow, still.

See Also: https://guides.library.cornell.edu/openaccess
One can conceive of a solution that bisects dependencies independently to find the latest version that satisfies a comprehensive test suite. But that build and test is going to have to be reasonably quick. Even moreso if you take the exhaustive approach and transitively apply the algorithm to dependency dependencies which would also require backtracking.

A more durable approach might be to require every API to formally and verifiably provide precondition and postcondition that can be checked with an SMT solver for every public interface.

With current tech that is pushing a lot onto module authors, but I believe there is some research being done on inferring both preconditions and postconditions from the semantics of the component statements so perhaps we can avoid forcing programmers to carry the intolerable burden of learning the first order predicate calculus.
And yet never the same energy and ire toward legacy admissions, athletic scholarships, Dean's choice carve outs, and donors buying their kids in who couldn't get in on their own academic merits.

Somehow legacies "belong" at Harvard but the black girl who is obviously brilliant at a chronically neglected public school instead of Exeter getting recruited by Harvard is obviously wrong.

What does performance at lacrosse have to do with math and communication ability? Why does someone who worked really hard on their math homework every night have to be excluded from the finest academic institutions in favor of someone who can pull a canoe oar really hard?

How is any of that more fair when the exclusion basically targets black and brown folks?
The belief that your thoughts are constructed based on an understanding of principles such as logic, rationality, ethics. That your interactions are built from a solid understanding of these ideas. As opposed to every train of thought just being glued together from pertinent fragments you can recall from your knowledge in response to a prompt provided by the circumstances of reality.

> that's human exceptionalism and perhaps a belief in the soul.

I would also argue that LLMs are not proven to be equivalent to what's going on in our minds. Is it really "human exceptionalism" to state that LLMs are not yet and perhaps never will be what we are? I feel like from their construction it is somewhat evident that there are differences, since we don't raise humans the same way we raise LLMs. In terms of CPU years babies require significantly less time to train.
I'll ask you what I always ask folks who say that something will never be a thing - do you really think that 1000 years from now, cars won't be able to fully drive themselves under all conditions better than humans? As a reference for the amount of progress we can make in 1000 years, roughly that long ago, someone invented the compass.

If you can agree that in 1000 years, it's extremely likely that we'll have self-driving cars, then to paraphrase Churchill, now we're just haggling over timeline. 500 years from now, will we have self-driving cars? 500 years ago, gunpowder and windmills were new technology. How about 200 years? The big thing was steam power then.

And so forth and so on. Unless there is some natural or physical law that would prevent self-driving cars, it's just a matter of when. And honestly, if you watch some of these Tesla FSD drives that people post on Twitter, it's pretty clear that self-driving is production-ready under a significant number of circumstances.

The problem is, of course, that there are a lot of edge cases, and because the stakes are high, we have to solve most of those to get true full self driving. But given that cars can pretty reliably traverse the streets of SF, I struggle to see the argument that the remaining edge cases are impossible to solve.
And nobody starting web dev now with perl should even consider it. Modifying an existing script that otherwise 'just works' sure. In my various other posts here I've recommended Mojolicious.
No, there will be exceptions for the rich and powerful. The rest of us will still be screwed.
Is nieve and idealistic to think HR is there to help the people.
Yes, that's one of the ways one is supposed to optimize Python. Writing a tiny performance-sensitive part of a Python app in C/C++ is a possibility that many people do not think about when they decide they are going to develop the whole app in C/C++ and can be a much a smarter choice.
Driving through Mount Hamilton I realized this as well, I would never trust self driving to those roads up there with thousands of feet of elevation just over the side of the road and parts which must be shared by both directions of traffic.
Hate towards design patterns is a typical sign of not understanding them. Having a builder class to construct a certain subset of generic objects is a normal design practice, so your irony does not look appropriate and does not contribute to the discussion.
Same could be said about "real gender affirming care".

It's all this pesky society that won't take your word for anything.
The Evolution of Evolutionary Architecture
I don't get why this is supposed to be Google's fault. I mean it doesn't matter of course: this is happening, and the only real question is if it will continue, maybe if something can be done. Who's fault it is ... Google is doing a lot to preserve the web. It's not enough, perhaps. Probably. But it's quite unclear to me what they could do to reverse this.

Plus we've all seen what this has lead to in meat-space. Information is one sided. BBC is supposed to be the paragon of neutrality, for example, and while it is pretty neutral on the situation in many places, it's not exactly neutral on UK and Australia political issues for example. And it suffers from the same problem as pretty much every other meat-space information source outside of libraries: the only information you can get from it is really quite superfluous.

Their recent "is AI evil?" series, for example, is neither neutral nor does it give enough information for people, even if someone wanted to go really in-depth on the issue, and have a really well-considered opinion, the only place where you could collect enough information to do that would be Youtube imho. With some blogs and maybe a scientific paper or two. Oh wait 3 out of those three work with a lot of help from Google (just try finding scientific papers without Google scholar)

I agree the situation is bad. But frankly, while Google perhaps has some blame in this, I'm very sure the situation would be 10x worse without Google.
>I have a newer heat pump that is rated up to 22 SEER2

Can I ask why you got a heat pump with such a high SEER rating? I look at flyers advertising heat pumps near me and the price differential between 16 SEER and 18/20 SEER units just doesn't seem worth it at all even accounting energy savings.
the history and stories around le mans are just amazing.

i have a car that was bought to compete at the ‘63 le le mans. due to a fight between the stewards and and Lotus, it never ran — so they abandoned le mans for decades.

one thing to note that although the engineers of old built amazing things (the car feels incredible to drive) it is important to remember that racing was a blood sport and the safety level was not particularly high. just as a normal course of action, i was told to expect one or two cracks in the chassis annually, i have to have the wheels xrayed annually, etc.
I'm also British, and I found this very exciting. I'm deeply involved in the study and development of FOSS and open culture licensing, and the improvement from CC-BY-SA-3.0 to CC-BY-SA-4.0 can't be overstated.

Roller coaster ride? That's not exciting; that's frightening! I can kind of understand 'getting close to the end of a game with the realization that you might win', but this is more frequently nerve-racking for me.

It's not exclusively an Americanism to be excited about law.
To be fair, commenting on your customer support anecdote, you can get very good quality answers from chatgpt on common knowledge items. You just have to craft the prompt correctly.

I don't even start talking to it without the first instruction being "answer all following questions in the shortest form possible"

This cuts out 90% of the useless output such models generate.
>It doesn't matter if the output is correct or not, the process for producing it is identical

I don't see how this differs from a human earnestly holding a mistaken belief.
It works fine for me on Android, in a private Firefox tab, with uBlock Origin and a PiHole
I agree, and if there were a privacy centric system I may be inclined to support it, however I think with cameras and surveillance it’s akin to give and inch, they take a mile.

We’re already down a dangerous path that isn’t really slowing down. Privacy in the digital age needs to be akin to no unlawful search and seizure.

But instead the ones at the top have us bickering against each other about more mundane issues, in the grand scheme of things
I have a new side project and I started coding it in Deno just to try something now, but not too far from the tree.

Not having to worry about setting up TS, bundling, linting is a breath of fresh air. No node_modules, just a depts.ts file to manage my imports. This also means no yarn, NPM or PNPM to decide.

It still has a learning curve sometimes because some tooling is not mature enough, but it's nice figuring out that I don't need PM2 just a systemd service to keep the process alive.
In my adult life, I've been both a beanpole and a fairly muscled dude(495 lbs squat, 275 bench, 600 DL)

I had women attracted to me both times, but the type of woman was very different. I also got groped and felt up far more and other far more overt displays of interest by women when muscled.
It was a little bit tongue in cheek. But I'm currently in a code base that is almost exactly 10 years old. And of course all of the developers have personally grown in that time. But some of the practices were dependent on the technology choices available at the time.
The CPU She Told You Not to Worry About (Gaming and Windows on Arm) [video]
Point of information: there exist both "combined" and progesterone-only contraceptives, which may be chosen depending on how the user experiences side effects.
Show HN: Pixelma – 8bit sprites and backgrounds from any image
Essentially making a backdoor to a backdoor
There is a large contingent of the doomsayer on AI, where one of the doom scenarios, is that people don't realize they are being manipulated by AI.

So this case where you are talking to people outside the bubble, and they don't realize what is going on, IS THE PROBLEM.

Outside the bubble, people will be seeing images, video, text, voice, that is all fake and manipulated, and THEY ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION, they don't know it is fake. Inside the bubble we are noticing it, outside the bubble, large chunks of population don't know it is happening.
YouTube scammer who stole $23M+ in royalties gets five years in prison
> I don't see a reason why there couldn't exist Google Search Premium

Probably because there would be barely anything left in the results once ads and spam are removed.
It's not a mistake, they do it on purpose. Most tech companies spin up with free offerings to acquire critical mass, and then pull the rug out from under their users once they feel like they can squeeze money out of them without scaring all of them away.

Social media does it (Reddit, Twitter). Video games do it (COD, yearly releases, DLC). eCommerce does it (Walmart, Amazon). IaaS does it (Heroku).

Don't give them the benefit that it's a 'mistake', it's very intentional. CAC is a metric used by all tech companies and is calculated to build network effects and large user-bases. I find it unethical and borderline fraudulent to build these community pillars and then defile them for profit. We'll be left with absolutely nothing free in life, no town squares and no transfer of information without fees.

Whether you or someone else can afford $10/mo is completely irrelevant.
This article kind of gives short shrift to Chuck Burns, who started this ice cream shop in 1976(!) and grew it into an anchor business in Arroyo Grande. It makes a protagonist out of Greg Steinberg, but in 2019, when the decision was made to scale the business up, Burns was like 89 years old.
I am French, living in Germany. From my experiments with ChatGPT (I have access to GPT-4), the French is not going to be perfect, but so good that anyway nobody will ever notice the errors.

ChatGPT is a wonderful tool to improve your knowledge of a given language (at least for the ones having a lot of data on the web, I tested only French, German and English). You paste a mostly good text, you get back a very good one and sometimes it provides you with a description of your errors, why and what it restructured.
Was rereading some stuff about european manorialism (feudal economic model) and a line really stuck out to me. Something like "left to their own determination farmers will optimize for resilience, not surplus production." But surplus production is the resource extracted and used by landowning elites to support their lifestyles. So a lot of the mechanics of that system emerged out of the need to coerce farmers into producing surplus against their own interests. And yes to some extent surplus and resilience are interrelated; but not really if the surplus is going to someone else.

Anyway the words and the details have changed but the fundamental relationship is still the same, and I think fits what you're describing as well. Left alone a worker would optimize for a safer or less stressful environment, or a shorter workday, over surplus production. But that surplus remains the resource that supports the lifestyle of people higher up in the hierarchy. You can only align these interests so far and they will never perfectly match.
They're really not different issues, though. Most men using TRT would cite, in some fashion, wanting to feel more manly. That is gender affirmation.

Testosterone is beneficial for everyone. If a man or woman wants to do TRT, it is not illegal to do so. But if they cite some kind of gender dysphoria, it is suddenly extremely taboo.

It's a bit humorous living in a society where roided out podcasters complain about people not accepting their natural identities or hormones
You can hail a ride in a self-driving vehicle in multiple cities, with any of several companies. Yeah, there's more refinement necessary, but autonomous vehicles are a long way from "perpetually 5 years away" syndrome.
If the fediverse ever gets big enough to be a juicy marketing target or able to sway elections then the same bad actors that destroyed e-mail, Usenet, the open web, and social media will come for it.
The taste thing is a mild issue for me, but the real problem is that they (the artificial sweeteners I have tried to date) trigger my asthma.
Ugh. Exactly how is this an improvement over alternatives either in performance or clarity?

For example:

https://svelte.dev/repl/f5acc8113ec14bc7946eff9687916fa1?ver...
How well did natural gas do when it was unseasonably cold and the wellheads froze over?

I don’t see a single person in this thread commenting in good faith who’s not in favor of a robust energy mix. But you’re deluding yourself if you think that the political body that is ERCOT is acting solely (or even primarily) toward the establishment of a robust grid based on apolitical engineering and a variety of predictably reliable sources of energy without regard to how that power is generated.