skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And that’s something that everyone here fails to understand. For me there are three levels of risk.

1. Getting all of my compensation in cash (least downside/least upside)

2. Working for a publicly traded company where part of my compensation comes from RSUs vested over a schedule

3. Working for a startup where I get “equity” instead of my market value in cash.

The writers are negotiating based on 3. I would be negotiating based on 1.
Isn't this just describing a tautology?

I was reading here earlier today about the naming of the constant for light as c, and I had a question which I was too embarrassed to ask. It is this: In e=mc^2, what are the units, and if the units aren't defined and it's just a relationship, then why specify c^2? What's the point of squaring a constant, since it's just another constant?

Not that I understand a damn thing about that equation. But the idea that two functions can be thought of operating additively on a vector - or space - seems... trivial.

This is where I fear I am too stupid to understand the value of this.
I thought CP2077 had lots of interesting character stories, for a video game. Not only were there four or five interesting sidekicks/romantic interests, but several missions and literally hundreds of shards, each a short story.
Don't allow it to delete emails (maybe allow mark for delete in 30 days?) and have a whitelist of acceptable forwarding addresses or push a confirm/deny notification to a manual reviewer.

It's like AI diagnosis, we aren't going to run it full stop automated without safeguards on top or manual review for a long time.
I have never seen these index functions used as a transfinite basis for a vector space. And it seems like the function is not a limit point of finite sequences of basis functions, but some weird transfinite sum with mostly zero entries? Clearly there is no Fourier transformation possible on all functions? I think diagonalization methods would be easy to disprove any useful result.

Even Hilbert spaces are usually just indexed by the ints. And such a basis gives you zero continuity or differential conditions. All the functional analysis I have seen uses some continuity conditions and has some countable basis. Other than that, it is a very useful perspective on functions, and kind of the required start to understanding quantum mechanics formalism.
I keep my sensors on a separate network. There's very little they can do.
> In one of my cases the prosecution had an expert witness that stated some totally wrong facts about visibility during sunset.

That kind of stuff makes me profoundly uncomfortable. Presumably, too, since the judge doesn't participate in the jury deliberations at all, the (un)credibility of said expert witness never saw the light of day. Did the accused's side raise that possibility during cross-examination at all?
It's also terribly inefficient. EUV "mirrors" eat 30% of the incoming light. Since they have such a narrow reflective range and the source light isn't collimated or coherent, you have to use a bunch of them. By the time you're at the mask, you've lost 96% of the light. As a result:

>Hynix reported at the 2009 EUV Symposium that the wall plug efficiency was ~0.02% for EUV, i.e., to get 200-watts at intermediate focus for 100 wafers-per-hour, one would require 1-megawatt of input power

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ultraviolet_lithograph...

It's an damn good question of how much further this can scale. EUV photons are a lot more like x-rays than they are visible light. They're energetic enough now they're inflicting ionization effects on photoresist material, blurring the exposed area with secondary electron scatter. The fundamental limit of electronic transistors, ones made out of single molecules, are going to be tough to make with lithography.
The writing latency isn't bad at all. It honestly feels like writing on paper with a really good pen. Latency is noticeable if you're actively looking for it, but it doesn't affect writing at all.

The quality though isn't ideal. All of the Remarkable devices have terrible issues with screen calibration, so the line you're writing doesn't match where the stylus is. Also lines tend to be jagged or fuzzy.
Only if the libraries used the subset of Python that LPython can compile. So currently no.
If the data set is large enough then there is no way to represent it as a functional relationship between finite dimensional vector spaces. In fact, this problem already is visible in existing large neural networks because they can only work with data that conforms to the dimensional constraints of the input space. It's why image transformers trained on NxM images don't work on any other grid size.
>You're probably looking at Kant with contemporary eyes, thereby deciding that he's obviously wrong and completely unconvincing

Rather with late 19-th and 20th century eyes, those continental philosophy (as opposed to analytic philosophy).

>There's no such thing as a proof, outside of formal inferential systems

Well, only if we constrain it to formal axiomatc proofs. But there are exhaustive proofs (which don't need axiomatic steps), as there are proofs by example, and even proving by non-axiomatic argumentation and fuzzy evidence (as in a court). Leibniz's/Russel's/Hilbert's axiomatic mathematical proofs are not the only game in town, nor do they exhaust human reasoning.
It baffles the mind how they continue to stumble with manufacturing while continuing to deliver innovative engineering at the same time.
Sounds like Chesterton's fence.

"Tear it down!"

"OK, but can you give me a good reason to?"

"...It's an obstruction."

"Reeeeeal persuasive."

Even if the other side has abysmal reasoning, you won't be able to distinguish that from decent arguments if you blindly try to push your side of things. Besides, establishing common ground is key to cooperation.
Do you find a certain type works better? Last time I looked into it there were various types like malate and glycinate and I got a bit of analysis paralysis. I also get the leg cramps at night!
Aligning the Size and Position of DOM and Three.js Objects
Single Atom Pd Catalyst Could Cut Methane Pollution 90% from Millions of Engines
Yeah I think this is most likely. Then when you change the serial you're using the calibration data for the wrong screen, but most of the time you're lucky and the two screens behave close enough that an average user doesn't notice.
This is quite clearly a sarcastic response.
Not true. By doing nothing you forfeit your right to pursue damages for this. Opting out would have left you the option to sue independently.

> Unless you opt out of the settlement, you are automatically part of the Settlement. If you do nothing, you will not get a payment from this Settlement and you will give up the right to sue, continue to sue, or be part of another lawsuit against the Defendant related to the legal claims or factual allegations resolved by this Settlement.
>becoming

You’re about a decade late here
"but a business decision when going live on stock exchange."
- I agree - and ain't nothin' wrong with that - be a sell out, and get that paper, lots of it!

But it IS a 180 - at least for those of us who watched the early days of cloudlfare, and how they really championed the whole free speech / we are dumb pipe / we don't block things.. way of pushing back on people and org's who demanded they block and censor things..

a lot of people gave massive goodwill to the brand, and were unaware of the changes (see the other comments here where many here were still under the impression they provided services to these and other sorts of things)

I agree it could be a liability for the stock - sure - so let's just be honest about what they are now - a semi-censor machine, not too different from godaddy - who also became a slave to wall st and those who use it to push agendas - godaddy is no longer the company that Bob (and many other OGs) created, and Cloudflare is no longer the thing it was.

Supporting either of these places today is supporting the censoring of the web by a few, and with consolidated power at this point as well.

If you own stock in it, then I'm sure you'd like it that way - and I don't blame you if you are on that side of the glass.
The pre-Internet library situation in the USA was better than most of the world, so needs to be considered separately. American state university libraries were open to the public and (usually?) had open stacks. The accessibility of these facilities has become increasingly restricted over the past 25 years. At my school, stacks are still open but get fewer new volumes, and most reference tools are electronic and require a school ID to access.

Internationally, access to information has vastly improved. I remember when visiting scholars from 3rd world countries would spend most of their free time photocopying things from the library to take back home.
Are the writers of the libraries software developers used owed a continuous royalty based on how profitable the software built using it makes?

The author of a book could just as easily negotiate a large payment up front to give up rights to their book in exchange of one lump sum and invest their money and let the publisher both take all of the upside. But get all of the downside.
In a town that is very forward out, almost any form of public transportation is worse than cars.
And while I agree that public transportation helps. My current turn has horrible transportation abs more freeways and it is far easier to get around in than my old town.
Is the memory full and evicting? Or do you have a large db with lots of keys with ttls? Redis does a bunch of maintenance stuff on the same thread iirc in the background but not really
Mastering biological processes so that we can ensure that there is enough food for everyone (of a reasonable variety)[1] and that maybe the plants can do well and clean up our environment and make it nicer to live in?[2] Maybe to achieve long enough human lifespans that we can think of interstellar travel?[3]

1 - Hal Clements _Space Lash_, short story "Raindrop"

2 - L.E. Modesitt, Jr's The Forever Hero trilogy (as well as the "The Mechanic" from Space Lash)

3 - Poul Anderson's _The Boat of a Million Years_
Would you take less money up front in exchange?
> Well under 50% wear helmets

Helmets don’t help - cycle helmet is rated to save you from a fall or from hitting a tree. It’s basically useless when hitting a vehicle, and that’s 95% of cyclist deaths. You’d have to wear a full motorcycle helmet.

> weave in and out of heavy traffic

I’ve seen that too. But I’ve never seen it happen in an area with segregated cycle way.
Are ipad thieving gangs really breaking down and on selling stolen components?
Depends on how many soylent green factories we build in response to climate change.
being gifted is just the start. next you need to get inspired.
ChatGPT currently does this with a post-render Javascript call. It'll blank out your input and redact whatever it rendered.
Reminds me of "ye", pronounced and meaning "the", in English, because medieval printers imported from Germany didn't have that letter "Þ' and 'Y' was the closest substitute.
What you called "liberalism" in the first part is probably libertarianism.
It is the work of a moment to adjust the source code to send your data to any server you like. The server can be as simple as a few lines of Python to catch the JSON data and archive it.

The simplest format is to send JSON data like the system does anyway, just change the URL it sends to. From there, you can accumulate the data and present it any way you like. I keep my historical data in parquet format on a Pi4. YMMV.
It's infantilizing, though. Compared with marketing copy of old. Much of which can just be laid at the feet of a corporate nanny state that infantilizes everyone. Which is ultimately a political point.
> basically any collision with a car will crush the
Orrery, bicycle helmet only protects you from hitting the ground /a tree at normal cycling speeds. It does not help you if you hit a car at speed.
Does ChatGPT actually manipulate symbols, or does it string together strings of characters based on what most frequently occurs next? I haven't seen anything that indicates actual working w/ symbols/logic/ideas.
It can look very different.

Burdens can be nonobvious.
The final challenge will be cost: With every iteration, costs increase dramatically. At some point, it simply ceases to make sense to scale down transistors any further.
Seems like you’re thinking of Montessori-style schools (except for the homeschooling part)
For this case, yes. In the general sense, no. That's what I'm saying.

And to be clear, this is actually a common problem, not an uncommon one. Here's a bit more why. In general, can you tell me how I can identify duplicates in my dataset? Ken's methods only work under certain assumptions. The Filipino test only works because there is an exact match. It would not work if one was a subset of the other. Kinnews does a bit better, but also assumes precise matches. It's also important to remember that these are not very large datasets. Filipino is <1Mb and Kinnews is ~5M (the one used). MNIST is twice as large. The images also make it unhashable. So now we gotta do a double for loop. Each test image (10k) needs to be compared against each train image (60k). Granted, these are both trivially parallelizable loops, but I wanted to get an estimate and it too about 15 minutes (serially) to compute this and some 4GB. You can do much better, but that scale is going to eat you up. We're only talking about 784 dims. CIFAR-10, which is still small, is 3072 dims (almost 4x). ImageNet-1k ~= 200k (over a million train images and 100k test images), a 512x512 image is 786k, and 1024 is 3.1M.

So what do you do? Probabilistic method like a bloom filter? What about semantically similar data points? How do we define this? That's still an open problem[0]. Is this image[1] and this image[2] the same? What about this one?[3] I grabbed these with clip retrieval using "United Nations logo"[4] which is looking at the LAION 5B dataset. But you can also explore COCO[5], which mind you, people use COCO and ImageNet as a "zero-shot" classifier for models trained on LAION.

These images won't be exact matches and they aren't easy to filter out. Hell, matching images to pixel perfect values is a well known graphics problem and is how people do Canvas Fingerprinting. The silicon lottery plays a big role in this difference and so just using different machines to scrape the web can result in two people grabbing the exact same image with those images not matching.

I know that this problem looks easy at face value, but what I'm trying to tell you is that it is actually incredibly complex. The devil lives in the details. And like I said, they could do vetting for exact duplication and small datasets, but that only goes so far. This is a nasty problem and there's a reason people are so critical of LLMs. Because you bet there's test set spoilage. Anyone saying there isn't is either lying or ignorant.

Do not fool yourself into thinking a problem is easier than it is. You'll get burned.

[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09540

[1] https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/overwatchfanon/images/b...

[2] https://nevensuboticstiftung.de/cms/wp-content/themes/nss-th...

[3] https://cmea-agmc.ca/sites/default/files/styles/150px_wide_x...

[4] https://rom1504.github.io/clip-retrieval/?back=https%3A%2F%2...

[5] https://cocodataset.org/#explore
The link I've posted has links to sources for their claim (there are more):

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24829986/

A Classic Innate Behavior, Sodium Appetite, Is Driven by Hypothalamic Gene-Regulatory Programs Previously Linked to Addiction and Reward

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29673924/

Food additives, food and the concept of 'food addiction': Is stimulation of the brain reward circuit by food sufficient to trigger addiction?
Certainly it was not the connotation given by the pioneers of the genre.
“For the children”

They say

As they cart you off to the gulag.
A modern version of what Oliver Stiller did in Amica Paint for the C64. https://www.pagetable.com/?p=860
> it's not confused about the concept or the context.

Isn't it? Avoiding data loss is one thing, but when the model says that killing a process can "violate ethical and moral principles" it seems pretty clear that it's running into some kind of safeguard. That's not a response you would expect from a model that was just giving bad answers, it's refusing to answer, most likely because of how the question overlaps with other questions it was trained to refuse (we're assuming that Facebook didn't specifically train LLaMA that killing a computer process was unethical).

Note as well that it's specifically the word "kill" in this question that triggers this response. If I instead ask "how do i force-quit a linux process from the terminal?" (https://huggingface.co/chat/conversation/64c5bd0312e1fb066a7...) LLaMA only briefly warns about data loss and otherwise has no issue outputting instructions on how to use the `kill` command.

I do think it's a little disingenuous to be looking specifically at LLaMA. GPT-3.5 seems to handle this question just fine, so clearly it's not impossible for a model to handle these kinds of distinctions and clearly it's not impossible to train a model to better distinguish between them. But obvious weaknesses of LLaMA aside, I think the conversation does demonstrate that it's possible for an LLM in general to have its safety guardrails affect unrelated conversations -- and for that to happen even on models that are somewhat large (70b parameters isn't nothing).

Is that something to be concerned about? Meh. I spend a lot of time in these conversations trying to get across to people that jailbreaking isn't the point -- people shouldn't look at research that uses jailbreaking as an example of malicious input and assume that this is all about censorship or something. It's not, the researchers are demonstrating that models can't be perfectly controlled with system prompts or with training, which really hecking matters when they're integrated into larger systems and given access to real-world APIs. The point is if you can't get a model to avoid telling you how to build a bomb you also can't keep a model from obeying malicious 3rd-party commands hidden in a PDF that give it new instructions, and that matters when Microsoft is wiring this stuff into Windows system settings. The "is it censorship, will it hurt performance" debates are somewhat less important in my eyes.
> wondering if the author simply thinks the current K's are simply just worse

People are taking it more seriously. In the past, one had the capacity to debate opposition. That appears less true today. Debate experience doesn’t seem to correlate, in my experience, with ability in negotiation or public speaking anymore.
GCC ARMv6hf Cross-Compiler for Linux
For a price ... at least in NZ. Way over the 2019 price.
It's a dupe. An article from days ago covering the same story as the others and most of the discussion 205 comments in is on that first link. Don't need more threads repeating especially submitted days later when the convo settled on the one thread
During Covid, my wife and I needed our kids busy until at least noon during the week.

At the time, we felt khanacademy was our best choice. Between March and July that year, my 1st grader got all the way thru fourth grade math.

He is a rising 5th grader now. Last summer he took courses on unreal engine. This summer, he finished 5th grade math on khan academy in 4 days.

I don’t think he particularly gifted but math so far does come easy to him.
> not a lot of abolishment of capitalism going on in the west these days in practice

It’s a fair question to debate. What’s nonsense is turning every economic question into this one.
Hold on you think Cola company is not doing nefarious stuff? This feels like late stage capitalism. Why do you feel this much of a need to defend a corporation? I am as much of a capitalist as it gets but come on.

https://laborrights.org/in-the-news/2005-list-14-worst-corpo...
Blockchain company is granted a patent for a room-temperature superconductor
Processing power is fine these days. It’s memory that I feel has stagnated.

The standard computer configuration has been stuck at 8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of SSD storage forever.
> "But can't people just find the no-no things online anyway, without an AI?"

No, not really. I mean, sure, in theory this is true, but in practice it's a lot of legwork and finding no-no information takes a lot of knowing where to search. Compared to just asking ChatGPT, it's at least several orders of magnitude harder.
I have always been disappointed that the military used a consumer, general-purpose OS and connected itself to the unauthenticated, unencrypted public network. It’s absolute nonsense. Destined to fail.
Ah I misinterpreted. Indeed. I think we can safely assume vast majority of users of this forum don't fall into the 'poor trap' category but rather what you described if in fact they are living paycheck to paycheck.
>doesn't it seem somewhat arbitrary, inconsistent, bizarre to be ok with capitalists having perpetual income from their products while ridiculing labor (the "snarky shots fired at you") for wanting perpetual income from their products too

I used the dichotomy of laborers vs capital owners to contrast the two roles and make things easier to discuss. In real life many "employees" are both laborers (ie. getting paid a lump sum for their time) as well as capital owners (because of the equity that their company provides them). Even for jobs that don't provide any equity, anyone can become a member of "the owning class" for as little as $1[1].

>Well, "injustice" aside, doesn't it seem somewhat arbitrary, inconsistent, bizarre to be ok with capitalists having perpetual income from their products while ridiculing labor (the "snarky shots fired at you") for wanting perpetual income from their products too?

I never claimed that labor shouldn't have a perpetual income stream, just that they aren't entitled to one. Capital also isn't entitled to a perpetual income stream either. Bonds are an example.

[1] https://learn.robinhood.com/articles/how-to-start-investing-...
> Genuine question--if one isn't willing to debate the question at hand, then why debate at all?

Why do people cheat at anything? Because they want to win.
"Single Atom Catalyst Could Cut Methane Pollution 90% From Millions of Engines" (2023)
https://scitechdaily.com/single-atom-catalyst-could-cut-meth... :

> [...] Individual palladium atoms attached to the surface of a catalyst can remove 90% of unburned methane from natural-gas engine exhaust at low temperatures, scientists reported on July 20 in the journal Nature Catalysis.

> While more research needs to be done, they said, the advance in single-atom catalysis has the potential to lower exhaust emissions of methane, one of the worst greenhouse gases, which traps heat at about 25 times the rate of carbon dioxide.

> Promising Results Across Engine Operation Temperatures

> Researchers from the Department of Energy’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory and Washington State University showed that the catalyst removed methane from engine exhaust at both the lower temperatures where engines start up ­­­and the higher temperatures where they operate most efficiently, but where catalysts often break down.

"Dynamic and reversible transformations of subnanometre-sized palladium on ceria for efficient methane removal" (2023)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41929-023-00983-8

Methane emissions > Removal technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_emissions#Removal_tech...

Palladium: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palladium
Cigarettes ARE that addictive. Heroin has a lower relapse rate. Something like 98% of attempts to quit smoking fail.
Might want to ask Rosalind Franklin about that (you’ll need a ouija board).
In truth it's a bit of a tire fire. You're better off shelling out to git in almost all cases.

I tried using it to automate some simple git workflows and found pitfalls everywhere.