skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Exactly. The court would consider other things like the impact of your modified copy and whether it competes financially with the original.
If there were a metric that would make each instance of padLeft worth a tiny amount of money (for such a tiny library), that sounds like a reasonable outcome to me.

EDIT: I may be missing part of the point
Stealing others’ works is legal for me but not for thee.
Vespa vs Harley Dabeeson? nah... I can't see any wannabee pun here

Luring children with those drawings just where you want they to be, and then grab the popcorn and enjoy the cries and sweet drama?... Smart move Slovenians. This is a Dr. Weevil-level move
But in the very first step, the work is copied verbatim into the program, right? Even if it is not reproduced, is it allowed to process a copyrighted work for arbitrary purposes, as long as it is not further reproduced?

In some cases yes, otherwise search engines couldn't exist.
I always felt that if you want fairness and want to rip the full benefits of your creation (here AI) you should also be assuming full responsibilities for it. This is were most organizations fell short as they are always trying shift all responsibility to their users (self driving anyone?).
Same. I have an iPhone now and was annoyed that I can't. I have all "Government Alerts" disabled in settings and I still got the test alert yesterday.

It's going to be interesting times when you both cannot trust and cannot disable these sorts of push messages and alerts.
When generating synthetic data with LLMs (GPT4, Claude, …) or diffusion models (DALLE 3, Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, …), how do you evaluate how good it is?

Introducing: Quality scores to systematically evaluate a synthetic dataset with just one line of code! Use Cleanlab’s synthetic dataset scores to rigorously guide your prompt engineering (much better signal than just manually inspecting samples). These scores also help you tune settings of any synthetic data generator (eg. GAN or probabilistic model hyperparameters) and compare different synthetic data providers.

Cleanlab scores comprehensively evaluate a synthetic dataset for different shortcomings including: unrealistic examples, low diversity, overfitting/memorization of real data, and underrepresentation of certain real scenarios. These scores are universally applicable to image, text, and structured/tabular data!

Check out the blog for more details or the tutorial notebook: https://help.cleanlab.ai/tutorials/synthetic_data/
> You can also get “the whole work” by asking another human to recite the lyrics

Is that human earning money by reciting the lyrics? If so, that's already not allowed. It's called a performance.
New Microsoft Teams Performance Benchmarkv1.0
> Legal uncertainty on the copyright implications of training AI systems imposes substantial costs on AI developers and so should be authoritatively resolved

Why are they writing to the USPTO, when that's the wrong agency for this matter and the US Copyright Office has already authoritatively resolved this as well as at least one lower court in the federal judicial branch
Screenshots include cameo of much-loved (by me anyway) network tank game, Bolo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolo_(1987_video_game)
You are reproducing the abstract content, not the work itself. If your argument was valid, summaries of books and offerings like Blinkist should be illegal as well.
To add some important context, as far as I can tell (I am not very knowledgeable in US filing, so someone please correct me if I am wrong), this was submitted in late 2019, and it stands to reason that a lot of the more recent developments, especially concerning the quality of possible output, may have led to this topic being looked at more intensely by legal experts than four years ago during the era of GPT-2.
Perhaps the year could be added to the title to help put this in the proper context.
I always imagined them as some kind of ancient, secret order dedicated to ensuring that the earth continues to rotate - but also ruthlessly hunting down and destroying any evidence that it once didn't.

Paging Dan Brown...
Also, there's no reason to believe that you're curling the same redirect as you get from clicking the link.

There's this thing compromised webservers do where, if you type in www.example.com into your browser, and go straight there, you get the normal web page. If you click a link from Google, and have a google.com referrer in your request, you get a little bit of JavaScript included that that redirects you to another site to buy herbal remedies or fake watches or whatever.

If you are the business owner and go directly to your home page to see what's what, you think everything is fine; if you are a tech trying to debug it and you curl the webpage, everything looks fine [unless you curl with a referrer set]. You probably think Google has the wrong URL or something.

Likewise -- I don't know what a click-through from an email client looks like, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's an identifiable header or referrer or something. If that's the case, you could write your malicious URL shortener to redirect you to www.example.com/ if you curl it bare, or www.exam.ple.co/m/ if you have the redirect header. Curling the URL in question doesn't necessarily prove it's safe to click on.
The PuzzleFS Container Filesystem
Those arrows also flow in reverse just as well. Whatever arbitrary decisions are made will advantage some other entity which may or may not currently exist.

Different regulations => market power => market share.
The first examples that comes to mind is reproducing an entire copyright-protected article, either a single copy for personal use by a researcher or multiple copies for classroom use.
This is like getting a traffic infraction warning ticket from a police officer instead of an actual summons. If it has the desired effect then it's better than the alternative.
Outputting unattributed copies large passages of text to end customers with the implied okay to use it any way they want, though....that's what these tools do.

The end user often has no idea they just received something with potential IP issues.
Many many thousands of people are doing it every year, you got this!

Reach out if I can help in any way.
Well this is designed for enumerating supply chains in a strict compliance focused environment, not necessarily for giving back to said supply chain.
Installation behavior: Up to 3x faster time to install

Application responsiveness: Up to 2x faster launching Teams, 2.5x faster joining meetings, and 1.7x faster loading chats and channels

Resource utilization: Overall 50% reduction in our tests of disk and memory resource consumption
Holistic tracking implementation with Analytics React Native 2.0
It generally takes longer to become a licensed cosmetician.
"ever" is added for sensationalism and actually means "during the (relatively short) period of climate observations starting from 1991".

PS. September was quite warm, indeed.
AI is creating new value from old assets. Those old assets were already paid for in their original use. It's like saying I should pay Apple a dollar because their inspired me to make my site white and minimal or something.
It looks like what they're describing is implementing database joins in the application: 2 network round trips, first one for ids from a table and the second to get values from another table with foreign keys corresponding to the ids.
Source: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/07/to-defeat-hackers-go...

Eventually I think the endgame here is that you use your own personal BYOD device to browse the internet that is not able to connect to the corporate network.
AIs do not create new works. They merely blend multiple copyrighted works together to create a new derived work.

Depending on your definition for "new works" this is either false, or true and also true of most humans.
You can even use npm to manage and publish Python code, or could a few years ago if they haven't added constraints on the registry since then
> Bluetooth frequency hops, and moves away from channels with interference (dropped frames), doesn't it?

Hops yes, remembers to avoid certain channels, maybe. IIRC the hop sequence is controlled by the master device so that might add a layer of confusion if it isn't experiencing the issue.

> I used an SDR to check my microwave's emissions. They were pretty narrow and stable-ish.

Yes, the issue is it's manufacturing dependent, so a different batch of those same magnetrons the next weeek would have different properties. Hence the wide band.
Covers are generally transformative, right?

Edit: I guess even if they are SCOTUS recently decided that even transformative works can infringe if they compete commercially. So the question is not: “did the reciter make money performing”, it’s “did the reciter’s performance detract financially for the original artist”.
Large corporations who want to make decisions based on a sound understanding of the world around them will often employ skilled individuals who can give them contextualized information used to make business decisions.

In Stripe's case, they have a product called Climate that allows customers to redirect a portion of their revenue to fund carbon removal efforts.

If they did not have a climate scientist on staff to vet projects that would be a mistake.
Yeah according to Wikipedia anyway the USNO is operated by the US Navy.
> And of course carbon removal from burning the natural gas is totally out of the equation.

Sorry for being nitpicky, but burning natural gas does not remove carbon, it adds new CO2 to the atmosphere (if you release the burn products which is usually done).

You probably mean that if you released that natural gas directly into the atmosphere instead, it would have a larger greenhouse effect than the CO2 released by the burning process. This is true, and one should absolutely choose "burn it" when given the choice of releasing only vs burning and then releasing.

But expressing it in the way of carbon removal is misleading. The number of carbon atoms in the atmosphere is the same in both scenarios, they are just bound in a less greenhouse-y form (also, natural gas decays into CO2 plus water eventually, but it's a very slow process). The number of CO2 equivalents goes up in both scenarios as well, just way less if you burn it before. Maybe some people refer to those through "carbon", idk.
https://creativecommons.org/2023/03/23/the-complex-world-of-....

"Style and artistic expression are certainly linked, but they are not the same thing. In some instances, mimicking an artist’s style may constitute copyright infringement, but when this is true will necessarily require a case-by-case analysis. Simply working in a style that is similar to another artist does not automatically mean the work is a copy. Moreover, there may be legitimate reasons to produce works in another artist’s style. The law should allow artists to be inspired by each other, even if that means having similar styles. Doing otherwise would chill expression, ultimately harming human creativity and the purposes of copyright law itself."
Put it on the clockchain
I'm not disagreeing with AI model training fair use, but this isn't the argument for it.

"(new tech) does the same thing as humans, just better" has never been a valid defense. It's like saying a human could explain the plot of a movie and draw the scenes, therefore it's okay to bring a camera into a theatre and record a movie and distribute it. Or that a human can hear a conversation and remember what was said, so there's no distinction between that and recording the conversation using a phone.
I recently hit ctrl-z in explorer after accidentally moving some files and instead of moving back, they just disappeared. I couldn't believe it. I had to recover them from a remote backup.
Spot on imo, although I would probably add another sentence explicitly about correlation != causation.
“Efficiency” for whom and for what? Think deep before you all bow down before our overlords and ditch clear and simple protocols for “efficiency”.

I know what QUIC is for and I know it’s strengths. I just want the web to be simple and accessible. It’s great Netflix and friends can stream content efficiently. It’s another thing to push this to the “open web” and declare it The Protocol.
I had trouble viewing tweets after some changes they made, so eventually I just stopped clicking on Twitter links entirely. It was sufficiently user hostile and hamfisted that I assume driving non-subscribers away was the point; maybe the idea is to make up the extra revenue with subscriptions.
Our CEO's decision was based entirely on "Elon Musk revoked WFH so it must be genius." End-of-argument.

When pressed, he also suggested that new hires need hands-on, one-on-one mentorship to grow and learn the business. At least that's a legitimate reason.

But for mature, distributed teams who already work remotely (COVID or not), return to office is a huge drain of employees time and attention, IMO.
Repairable means I can replace most major components in my laptop (wifi, ram, battery, SSD, BT, etc) with nothing more than a torx and screw driver. No soldering, or specialized equipment.
In a cave with power brought to us by TRANSFORMERS, the real kind, made out of iron and copper.
Friendly reminder that Lenovo has repeatedly shipped laptops infested with malware and backdoors (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenovo#Security_and_privacy_in...) sometimes doing so in exchange for money. They've also hidden malware in UEFI so that even reformatting your hard drive wouldn't help.

In one case, after they were found out they first claimed "we have thoroughly investigated this technology and do not find any evidence to substantiate security concerns" and only after it started being reported by more and more news orgs did they finally admit to what they'd done and release instructions on how to fix it.

Sadly, those instructions removed the bloatware, but left the vulnerability it introduced in place giving users a false sense of security, and only after they were caught out for that in the press did they finally release a "removal tool"

The wikipedia page doesn't even list all their offenses or the most recent events. See also : https://www.zdnet.com/article/lenovo-patches-uefi-vulnerabil...

Repairable or not, use Lenovo at your own risk.
That might be clearer if the header was just 'slides and notes from my talk', instead you actually claimed the opposite, that it's a 'blogified version', but it's not really - I tripped up on the same thing, and then got through several 'duplicate images', 'oh no very slightly different images', before it finally dawned on me that they were slides.
Can AI crave a favorite food?
update: it's actually more like $1500/mon and that includes an RDS proxy, failover instance and online backups with one-click restore.
The article talks about calls tracing to Ethiopian IP addresses. A man was recently arrested in Peru for calling in bomb threats to US schools[1]. This is not a domestic intelligence problem.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/28/peruvian-bomb-...
I feel that way about many of Michael Crichtons books.
I was asked today by someone if I used alternate social networks like Nostr, and my reasoning was simple, I don't, because this wouldn't be the first time I moved away from a mainstream social media and failed to find other platforms useful.

But far more importantly, I love Twitter/X because of the community notes feature. On an average I stop myself around 30% of the time when an unbelievable story gets community notes checked (i.e, 30% of the time a community notes correction, corrects my guess about the story being true, 70% of the time I still get it right).

It's an amazing algorithm, and the catfights in the community notes section (not visible to others, unless you are a part of CN team) are even more revealing and hilarious.
> Completely antithetical to free software. If I want to modify your code or the environment it runs in, I will.

It's fine to politely ask not to modify code in certain ways. It's only antithetical to free software to take away your right or ability to modify it however you want.
The right way would probably be to implement a real TCP replacement. Look at SCTP for inspiration. There are certainly things that could be improved and would be even nore useful than multiplexing, such as working congestion control and multipath.

I understand that HTTP is the new TCP, but I don't have to like it.
I myself appreciate this, but I think HN generally downvotes LLM content /shrug
On the contrary, I thought it was succinct, understandable and fun to read.

...I want to train an LLM to speak grug. Though maybe its not even necessary, as I could use this article in the context.
nice... does anyone remember a K Car with a supercar engine? that was not quite as crazy as this one, no jet engine, but it was nice. i can't seem to find it but i remember reading about this "sleeper car".
I still don't understand how you arrive at this conclusion. I just did a quick pivot table of the data for 1901-2021 for Ft. Pierce, Florida, the region with which I am most familiar regarding the greening crisis. While the mean temperature has been increasing, the days spent between 20-25ºC seem to have no clear trend.
Weirdly: ADL resumes advertising on X after brief freeze amid antisemitism concerns https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-761729
a. X claims he didn't have enough money to live well.

and

b. The only way for X to reach his workplace is to consume a more and more expensive resource.

"Change job", " work more", "live somewhere else" are not good advices because X is often unqualified, works already a lot and cannot afford a place inside the town where he works.

What should X do ?

The necessity of consumption is a bigger problem than "we consume to much hydrocarbon energy".
People don't value cheap hydrocarbon energy over the future of earth, but they value their own life, and no solution exists, for a lot of regions in france, to allow you to cease using your car.

In some places solutions are implemented in a weird manner, I personally had to take the bus at 5 am to go to " Lycée", where most of my courses began around 9-10am (if there were courses the morning) and then at 8pm to go back home (I was home at 9h30pm approximately, depending on the traffic).
Lycée was great, now if I had to do this before and after a day of work, it would highly resemble what I call "a boring life".
But still, while 3 hours or more in my life were dedicated to " transit" and a lot of time in the morning was dedicated to "wait", other people living in the city were just sleeping in the morning and probably reading their lessons or socializing.

Bus was taking a lot more time than cars to commute is these regions because there's a lot of villages to connect to the town. (My village was the last of the line). As of today, there is still only two bus that connects the village to the town, one in the morning at 5am, and one in the night, at 8pm.
This is touched on in Olivier Giroux' talk on forward progress in C++[1]. I've time-stamped the section on the roach motel problem, which ends with the observation that the execution model should capture "as-if isolated for a finite time." But even if C++ were to be improved in this way, you'd still only get the guarantee if you expressed the write as an atomic. There are no guarantees for non-atomic writes and shouldn't be.

But this gets to the deeper problem of the blog. There are three ways you can reason about these kinds of problems:

1. What happens with the execution of assembly language on the chip? Behavior is pretty well specified by the ISA, and you absolutely can reason operationally. The x86 memory model includes TSO, so you get fairly strong guarantees; it's basically acquire/release "for free," so you know you won't get tearing or other such things.

2. The formal memory model provided by the language. In the case of C and C++, it's also pretty well specified, and there's lots of work that's gone into it over many years. Again, it's possible to reason productively in this world, though it's quite different than case 1 - ultimately you've got causality graphs and other things expressed on an abstract machine. Ideally you'd do this work with formal proofs, but model checkers like CDSChecker can help a lot.

3. Informal reasoning based on an intuitive model of what the computer "should" do. This is serious YOLO territory, and basically a guarantee that whatever you write will be broken, possibly leading to serious security vulnerabilities. It's popular among a subset of confidently wrong HN commenters though, who I expect will come out in force in this thread.

[1]: https://youtu.be/g9Rgu6YEuqY?si=ZvKlDnqKOqzfFVSZ&t=4267
IDK if postgres has this problem but mssql does. If you do "Select * from table where ID in (blah)"

it ends up with some pretty terrible performance.

It's often a lot faster to do something like

Insert into #tempTable ids

select from table JOIN #tempTable t on t.id = table.id
States don't trust the federal government, generally. That's pretty much a founding principle of the country.
> Soon AI writers and programmers will be so good, that even if they do not reproduce copyright content verbatim, they will be able to replace large % of the future work of the people that produced the copyrighted content the AI was trained on. This seems like a clear harm.

Note that "harm the market for the original works" is only a part of Fair Use and harming the original work does not necessarily make your use of it 'not fair use'. Movie critics using movie clips can absolutely destroy the market for the original work while still being fair use criticism.

Now whatever the USPTO says/does is important for now, but it's a backdrop to the legal challenges that will arise. Because the USPTO has to adhere to new laws and must follow whatever the courts rule regarding how copyright is defined, if the USPTO tries to say "ai is not fair use" then the courts can disagree with them and issue a Court Order to recognize certain copyrights, whenever someone challenges the USPTO's actions.
Yes, 1946 was when the FCC opened up 2450 +/- 50 Mc (later MHz), for microwave and medical diathermy use. It was later, in the 80s that they allowed intentional emission. Either as CDMA or FHSS. Within a year we had Wi-Fi (CDMA) and Bluetooth (FHSS).
Winter? Winter might be cancelled this year.
I think we should not stop innovation, but let's not minimize the impact on the producers of the content (the whole of humanity).

First of all, even if the models never reproduce any of the copyrighted content verbatim, they will soon be good enough that they will be able to replace the work of the people [1] that produced the content the AI was trained on, like writers and programmers.

Second of all, the nature of the use of the copyrighted content is purely for-profit, and the ability to squeeze the profit out of the best models will stay with the largest corporations -- effectively transferring wealth from the people that produced the content, to the corporations.

We need to find way to make sure the access to this data the models were trained on, and the resulting models, is open and fair. Who wrote which paper [2], or who supplied the initial GPU training, should not really matter that much in the grand scheme of things.

[1] or at least cause downward pressure on their earning potential

[2] you could use similar arguments here they use for using the copyrighted content -- each paper (except maybe the Attention is all you need paper) contributed only marginally
Because it predates JSON by over a decade?