skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How do we address the people who live in areas where the grocery store is not within walking/biking distance.

Living car free in a city built for it can be bliss. But tons of people do not live in cities built for it. Do we rebuild those cities? Force them to move?
Sorry for being so precise, but Microsoft renamed Bing Chat to Copilot yesterday, has already rolled it out to all users of Microsoft Edge, and is rolling out a permanent button on the Windows 11 taskbar to access it.

This is what shouldn't add up: Microsoft is literally adding GPT-4, for free, to the Windows 11 taskbar. Can you imagine how much that costs when you look at the GPT-4 API, or ChatGPT's subscription price? Either Microsoft is burning money, or OpenAI agreed to burn money with them. But why would they do that, when that would compromise $20/mo. subscription sales?

Something doesn't financially add up there.
>if

That single word is doing all of the heavy lifting for you. "If" the housing market will never crash, then it's a surefire safe investment! Better buy tons of houses to flip on credit. There's no guarantee that your debt/investment will succeed, which is why banks try (and often enough, fail) to price in risk with things like varying interest rates, collateral, etc.
Correct on Altman, the success belongs to the Internet for its (our) data, code, ideas, videos, content that it subsumed using nothing more elaborate than traditional modeling and a ton of RAM and storage.
Not something you would fire someone on the spot over. This firing is spooking investors and costing them (and partners like MSFT) money
Correct. Strike "buy" and replace with "massive investment"
CyanogenMod and the Death of the Android ROM [video]
cheap, clean, reliable -- under current conditions you only get to pick 2
Joseph Gordon-Levitt played Travis Kalanick in super pumped
Getting a big bag of popcorn, just waiting for the other shoe to drop. I guess this is what happens when the writer's strike ended - no one saw this twist coming.
My question as well. The next sentence says: "In the long term, the truck will also run between Gothenburg and the city of Borås, 70 km from Gothenburg."

So the implication is that it's not being used for that distance yet.

70km is really not very far. Great if you can take some short haul diesels off the road I guess, but that's not even a 1-hr drive on most roads.
I'd like to see some specifics in where you get the $5.7 trillion.

More specifically how was the problem of intermittent power solved? I'm not aware of any grid-scale solution to this problem unless you include vast amounts of hydro to provide power when there is no wind or no sun or both.
That seems like a silly choice, since most diesel trains are diesel-electric... which is a design that can easily be modified to run dual-mode.
I don’t know Sam Altman well but I do not think he’s a particularly good person, so there’s some counter-evidence.

Personally I welcome this shake up. Some of the things I’ve seen Altman write about are troubling.
Not if the underestimation was to such a degree that it showed they could never even plausibly reach a break even point.
I feel the article is pretty clear that it is attempting to
improve the BUSL.

1) It’s a license without any variable substitution (as the BUSL has).

2) It also has a firm change date to Apache 2.0 or MIT after 2 years (the BUSL default is 4, but this is also variable).

The BUSL has seen significant adoption but has a host of problems outlined in the article. But if you believe software should be an OSI-approved-license-or-nothing, this may not interest you.
Or pessimistic, if you think about the future of ChatGPT with the altruistic leader gone.
I wasn't aware of that. Even more reasons to not call it a new thing then.
> How's this for interesting: many people in my field (formal methods) seem to be pretty excited about our job prospects.

Wow, I hadn't thought of it from the generative AI standpoint, only from the standpoint of "cybersecurity is increasingly important, so we need to use proof assistants and verified toolchains more".

What kind of new career prospects in formal methods do you predict will come as a result of generative AI? For example, certifying AI-generated code for use in automobiles?
How does this compare to Ollama
> Imagine if you were the CTO of a company, massively underestimated your AWS bill, and presented your board with something enormous.

Unless there was evidence you had not underestimated but were, e.g., getting a kickback on the cloud costs that you deliverately lowballed in your estimates, they might fire you, but they almost certainly wouldn't put out a press release about it being for your failure to be candid.

That language indicates that the board has a strong belief that there was a major lie to the board or an ongoing pattern of systematic misrepresentation, or a combination.
Seems like, Ilya Sutskever ate Sam Altman.
Surely a timeline altering event.
How is that relevant to the specific things the person I was replying to said?
I recall that the system existed to ensure that cooler heads (in Russia) could have more time to ensure that they were being actually being nuked i.e. it wasn't a false alarm, and that retaliation was guaranteed.
SBF seems close to his family, too...
OpenAI switching back to being open would be one of the best news of the decade!
How an Apostrophe Almost Landed Me in Jail:

https://mu7ami.micro.blog/2023/01/02/how-an-apostrophe.html
Sorry i assumed you were talking about Github CoPilot (also owned by MS via Github)
Yes - https://vast.ai/ is one option.
Tasha McCauley and Helen Toner shouldn't have been on that Board of Directors. Their accomplishments stand in stark contrast to the rest.

But also, a human company operating under the human legal arrangements it's built upon were never going to stand the advent of artificial superintelligence. It would tear apart whatever it needs to, to achieve whatever its initial goals are. The best intentions by Altman and Brockman would be easily outmaneuvered.
Well, I'd say if you want users to depend on your work, you're voluntarily signing yourself up to endless maintenance for little reward. I look at it like this: I built something cool, if it's useful to you, use it. But if you come to depend on it, and doubly so for business use, maybe you should consider being prepared to maintain it yourself. Other people look at it differently, and if it's your goal for the world to depend on your work and you haven't set yourself up to benefit from that responsibility you take on yourself in a way that you like, then I don't really think it's a problem the rest of us have to solve.

Is it unsustainable like the title of the article says? I suppose, but it's not some state of affairs that is unavoidable or that we are stuck with through no fault of our own. A guy wants people to depend on his work that he does for free, a company sees a core component of their business that they can get for free, a few years later the guy is upset that he is maintaining this thing everyone depends on and the company is scared their business will fall apart without him. They each got themselves there, it's a predictable state of affairs, the solutions for each party are very clear. As a developer though, the solution is what I've outlined: take the "no warranty of mechantibility or fitness for purpose" part of your license seriously and tell entitled people to solve their own problems.
I wonder how good their regenerative braking is -- that's a lot of kinetic energy to both have to stop effectively and to take advantage of as, well, energy.

Most diesel trucks use a jake brake / engine brake because the wheel brakes would otherwise wear out relatively fast, or even overheat and fail on longer downhills.

Seems like in-wheel motors are just about perfect for this application, and if they can put a reasonable fraction of that energy back into the batteries, even better.
Wow. They finally made it! Congrats to the team.
GPT-4 prompt:
“Write an essay in 1000 words why Sam Altman should be fired by OpenAI board”

Response:

Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, has been a controversial figure in the AI industry. His leadership style, lack of transparency, and decision-making processes have raised significant concerns among OpenAI's employees and the public. This essay will delve into these issues, arguing that Altman's actions warrant his removal from his position.

Firstly, Altman's lack of transparency is a major concern. He has been known to make decisions without adequately consulting with his team or the public. This has led to a lack of trust and dissatisfaction among OpenAI's employees. For instance, when Altman announced that OpenAI would be focusing on a single project, he did not provide sufficient reasoning or context. This lack of communication has left employees feeling disenfranchised and uninformed.

Secondly, Altman's decision-making processes are often questionable. His decisions have not always been in the best interest of OpenAI or its employees. For example, when OpenAI decided to pivot from developing AI systems to developing AI safety research, many employees felt that this was a strategic mistake. Altman's decision to focus on this area without considering the potential negative impacts on the company's reputation and financial stability was a clear example of poor decision-making.

Thirdly, Altman's leadership style has been described as autocratic. He has been known to make decisions without considering the input of his team. This has led to a lack of buy-in from employees and has negatively impacted morale. For instance, when Altman decided to shift OpenAI's focus to AI safety research, many employees felt that their ideas and contributions were being overlooked.

Finally, Altman's actions have also raised concerns about his commitment to AI safety. His decision to focus on AI safety research, rather than on developing AI systems, has raised questions about his commitment to the field. This decision has also raised concerns about the potential misuse of AI technology and has led to a loss of trust among the public.

In conclusion, Sam Altman's lack of transparency, questionable decision-making, autocratic leadership style, and concerns about his commitment to AI safety are all reasons why he should be removed from his position at OpenAI. It is clear that his actions have led to a lack of trust and dissatisfaction among OpenAI's employees and the public. It is crucial that OpenAI takes these concerns seriously and makes changes to ensure the success and safety of its AI technology.
I worked for a company that used a pattern matching algorithm and further licensed a fingerprint algorithm to do ID Ads and songs. (all pre-shazam) I can confirm we had a footprint in the wild with broadcast radio before 2002 doing the above.
I haven't written any elisp in fifteen years yet I use Emacs every day even though I am retired and no long programming all the time.
This coupled with Microsoft’s recent “security concerns” brings up the possibility this is related to them misusing or selling data they weren’t supposed to?
The OpenAI post, for one: Brockman lost his board seat.
This is my guess too.

This and that the user data was actually being used for training.
Jobs wasn't CEO of Apple.

Apple was going bankrupt.

Jobs hated the only products that made any money (Apple 1 and 2).
I do personally think it's preferable for components to have their dependencies injected in some way, and that it's better to have initialisation logic (especially related to heavy weight components) in one place.

That doesn't mean that you need some huge ass meta-framework for it though. Just have your main function assemble the components together, done.
> Until the old die, which they inevitably do, and then the transfer completes the cycle back to the young.

No, most of the boomer wealth will be transferred to private equity (who now own the majority of long-term care facilities), the hospital executives, the health insurance executives, big pharma executives, and a good number of doctors on the gravy train.

The next generation will get very little of that wealth.

> On an inflation adjusted basis, a good chunk of Soc. Sec. benefit is just the taxpayer's own FICA taxes that have been earning interest over time coming back to them,

When Social Security was created, the first recipient started receiving checks in 1940, 5 years after the program was created (https://socialsecurityreport.org/a-fascinating-look-at-socia...). It may be politically expedient to spread the untruth that it is an investment fund, where the old gets back what they put in after investments. But in reality, Social Security seems to be just another tax system, taxing the young and working, to pay for the old and unhealthy.

Because baby boomers form the largest demographic group in the country, they will continue to extract everything from the younger generations as they grow older, then they will give all that money away to billionaires of private equity funds who own the majority of long-term care facilities in the country.
this is called moving the goalposts. if everyone making electric semi trucks is doing so in low volume and only the last year or two, then its silly people are getting bent out of shape about this
Or maybe the exact opposite? Altman is the one who took it in the profit seeking direction and the statement hints that they don't want to go that way
I’m not a cloud but I’d be happy to rent a 4090 from you now and then :D
I don't get why people get all bothered by this kind of stuff. The reason people make these mistakes is because it's all pronounced exactly the same, and no one is confused by what "It's wrong" and "Its wrong" means, when pronounced or when written.

The "Correct Use of the Apostrophe in the English Language" page claims that the rules are "very simple". If they're that simple then why do you need 8 bullet-points and five screens of text to explain these "very simple" rules?

I wish people were more relaxed about this kind of thing. Just accept "its" and "it's" as correct, and "Two week's time" and "Two weeks' time", etc. No one gets confused by this sort of thing.

Our brains are geared towards spoken language, not written language. My main take-aware from this is that we should change the spelling to be less error-prone, or just accept both as correct. The problem is with the spelling, not the people.
In the context of the US, the vast majority of all infrastructure built or rebuilt over the past century was optimized for cars at the expense of everything else, including demolishing buildings which helped to create the demand for that infrastructure in the first place.

Because car traffic was prioritized over everything else it created a situation where improving any alternative will unavoidably require some sort of compromise.

Although, somewhat non-intuitively policy choices which discourage driving can free up space on roads and create a better experience for other drivers. (I can't find an original source, but I remember hearing about a planning study in some European city which found that about a third of the drivers who contributed to the traffic jams in that city's downtown were just going for a drive and didn't have any specific destination)
SF has bus-only lanes everywhere. The bus is still very slow, even if you don't have to wait, because of all the extra stops. I'm looking at visiting parts of western Europe where supposedly public transit is good, but actually it's far slower than driving. The only way driving ever ends up being less convenient is if there's constrained parking. It's just very hard to beat a car that can go directly from point A to B.

What also beats mass transit is walking, if a city is laid out such that you don't usually need to walk very far.
Relevant commentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUrOxh_0leE
Dave Winer's Manifesto: Rules for standards-makers (2017)
Yeah but the CTO is now interim CEO. Hard to imagine her getting the role if that was the case.
If he was involve with the trail of tears genocide it would also be a fireable offense. Just because your accusation is more believable doesn’t mean you should suggest it.
That's very Fight Club
based on what math? I can see how there can potentially be differentiators here and there to raise value, but I can't see how this statement can be taken prima facie
Well, they must have believed that leaving Sam as CEO was a bigger risk for the company than having him leaving. Or the board had their hand twisted. What is easier the case?
> when they're thriving

Are they?

They are certainly making a large presence of themselves, but last I heard they were also burning capital to keep everything running. I have no idea if that is true or not, or what their current situation is... but if they truly are in the boat of "losing money on every transaction, but making up for it with scale", that is not "thriving", it is speeding towards a brick wall.
I agree with this except for one detail: EarthBound and Mother 3 especially are better written than any Final Fantasy game. (And I love Final Fantasy.)
> Outside the tech bubble everyone hears AI, but not a lot are clued in that hatGPT is even a thing.

The moment people realize that this tool allows you to enhance the volume and quality of your work output with little effort, whether it is authentic or not, it's use will catch on like wildfire.

Arguably it already has with students and knowledge workers, even outside tech centers. Schools and universities everywhere are suddenly contending with how to evaluate students in light of the availability of LLMs.

Why is it catching on? In the best light because it actually is a tremendous productivity accelerator. In the worst light, because we live in a world that incentivizes "fake it til you make it".
I don't think it's silly of you to bring this up. In fact I think it's crucial to reexamine nonconsensual stuff in fiction, even kids' fiction. But I don't think I agree with your conclusion here.

It's true: in the real world a forced marriage is more or less explicitly rapey.

But at some point we as a society decided that in light works of fantasy we don't need to really need to follow every single thing to its logical real-world conclusion.

I mean, was there rape in Super Mario Brothers? The antagonist is quite the princess-kidnapper.
> In general sexual shenanigans in your personal life will get you a quiet departure from the company under the "X has retired to spend more time with family / pursue other adventures / start a foundation".

Dude, where have you been for the past decade?

> Andy Rubin got a $90M severance payout from Google after running a sex-slave dungeon on his personal time.

And hence the colossal blowback caused by that means it ain't ever happening again. Just 2 months ago a tech CEO was forced to resign immediately for egregious conduct, losing 100+ million in the process: https://nypost.com/2023/09/20/cs-disco-ceo-kiwi-camara-loses...
FYI, this creates a perverse incentive for the utility to create as high costs as they can plausibly get away with.

It’s a big issue with military contracts too, or any ‘cost plus’ arrangement.

They are not incentivized to be efficient anymore, rather the opposite.
No. As one of the other commenters mentioned, Sam (and possibly Greg) probably recused himself and didn't vote (likely forced to by the board's bylaws).
Maybe there was a breakthrough, the sort the makes one pause and wonder if it should have been done? Or an application of their current models that crossed hard ethical lines?
it is displayed (or at least it's supposed to be displayed) at the same time that the "enable webcam" button is[1] - if it's not that's definitely a bug! Are you on mobile? Would love to fix whatever you're seeing.

[1] they should both fade in as soon as the facial recognition stuff loads
Better read the privacy policy
This is definitely not helped by Rocket. Even I, knowing Rust well, don't enjoy the way Rocket puts so much logic into attribute macros and function signatures.
This is so true - and thank you for the very important reminder!

As I interview for new roles, it's a timely lesson, suggesting how to test what a new employer is -really- like.
I mean, the wording leaves much to the imagination.

I'm trying to read the tea leaves and there seem to be quite a few reminders that OpenAI is a non-profit, it's supposed to further the goals of all humanity (despite its great financial success), it's controlled by a board that largely doesn't have a financial interest in the company, etc etc.

Maybe Altman has been straying a bit far from those supposed ideals, and has been trying to use OpenAI to enrich himself personally in a way that would look bad should it be revealed (hence this messaging to get in front of it).
Put the pieces together:

Nov 6 - OpenAI devday, with new features of build-your-own ChatGPT and more

Nov 9 - Microsoft cuts employees off from ChatGPT due to "security concerns" [0]

Nov 9 - OpenAI experiences severe downtime the company attributes to a "DDoS" (not the correct term for 'excess usage') [3]

Nov 15 - OpenAI announce no new ChatGPT plus upgrades [1] but still allow regular signups (and still do)

Nov 17 - OpenAI fire Altman

Put the threads together - one theory: the new release had a serious security issue, leaked a bunch of data, and it wasn't disclosed, but Microsoft knew about it.

This wouldn't be the first time - in March there was an incident where users were seeing the private chats of other users [2]

Further extending theory - prioritizing getting to market overrode security/privacy testing, and this most recent release caused something much, much larger.

Further: CTO Mira / others internally concerned about launch etc. but overruled by CEO. Kicks issue up to board, hence their trust in her taking over as interim CEO.

edit: added note on DDoS (thanks kristjansson below) - and despite the downtime it was only upgrades to ChatGPT Plus with the new features that were disabled. Note on why CTO would take over.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/09/microsoft-restricts-employee...

[1] https://twitter.com/sama/status/1724626002595471740

[2] https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/21/23649806/chatgpt-chat-his...

[3] https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/09/openai-blames-ddos-attack-...
I suggest you find a way to deprogram yourself
Unfortunately, the best way to turn diesel into motion is an internal combustion engine, and internal combustion engines have very poor efficiency.
https://openai.com/our-structure
Worth a read, in light of all this. An interesting tidbit that I bet is bouncing around his head right now:

Third, the board remains majority independent. Independent directors do not hold equity in OpenAI. Even OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman, does not hold equity directly. His only interest is indirectly through a Y Combinator investment fund that made a small investment in OpenAI before he was full-time.

I sincerely hope this is about the man and not the AI.
It would be the absolute opposite. Altman was lobbying congress to make OpenAI the sheriff of AI innovation to be essentially able to control the whole ecosystem.
Well, they must have believed that leaving Sam as CEO was a bigger risk for the company (or the members of the board) than having him leaving in the spot. The board may have had their hand twisted.
And "inflation is transitory!" And "the chocolate ration has been increased to 20 grams!"
I said it from memory, but googling looks like meriam webster has a nice article: https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/history-and-use-of-t...
While i agree, I'm curious why you choose this comment specifically to call out. This is the fastest growing hn thread I've ever seen with over 300 comments and 1000 votes in the first hour. Almost every comment is debating some pure speculation or another. The content of the link, the context of the company and individual, and absolute lack of clarifying details while presenting very strong indications that such exists make it so that there's basically no way anyone can do anything other than speculate. No one knows anything, everyone here is guessing
Could this be the reason they suspended new account signups?