skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To be fair, I think the 250k mark usually implies some kind of specialization.
You are saying these two facts like they are separate.

That's a bit flippant but its no surprise to me that that there are people who know Sam personally and are supportive of him, that's pretty much how people work. Especially when working and living in SV bubble and Sam is a person who had seemingly mastered that world, as someone who can raise billions of dollars etc. Even if they don't consciously associate him with monetary success, they certainly would associate him with success generally.

From my very outside and mostly uninformed perspective, Sam just seems like a very good salesman (some would say grifter) and is far from infallible.
I visit often but I am so glad I never moved there.
His do. I'm proclaiming with no evidence that he buys twitter bots/shills to hype his brands.
I guess I just don’t like BS in all its forms.

I don’t like nonsense PR stories or myths about people’s extraordinary prowess.

I just respond badly to BS and these statement have obvious BS if you stop for even a second to think about them.

On some level too, it offends me when I see right minded intelligent people in my community lapping it up.

So a couple of things.

Say I were to tell you that he was the President of openAI but he also did 80 hours of janitorial work per week.

Would you say that was a good use of his time?

Would you say that maybe he should be spending his time on being president of the company and not mopping up? You would be right.

Now substitute programming for janitorial work.

Now be a little more critical about things you see online.
All the time, every time the experiment is run in all the locations that it has been run in?

Where would we have run the experiment to confirm/deny the association you're describing?
I think we need to read this carefully.

"Venture capital firms holding positions in OpenAI’s for-profit entity have discussed working with Microsoft and senior employees at the company to bring back Altman"

"The playbook, a source told Forbes would be straightforward: make OpenAI’s new management, under acting CEO Mira Murati and the remaining board, accept that their situation was untenable through a combination of mass revolt by senior researchers, withheld cloud computing credits from Microsoft, and a potential lawsuit from investors"

This is not saying that Microsoft has threatened to withhold the compute credits. It is saying that VC firms are hoping to use that as a strategy for force their hand. Microsoft may or may not agree to this.
> The push for the bomb was an international arms race — America against Russia

Was it? US (and initially UK) didn't really face any real competition at all until the war was already over and they had the bomb. The Soviets then just stole American designs and iterated on top of them.
Only a small fraction of the $10b was delivered and is apparently largely in azure credits.
You cannot pick only Star Wars from Disney+ either. Or Orange Is The New Black from Netflix.
deserved_trust_and_deference >= ChatGPT.answer()

— OpenAI/Wall Street, definitely
Don't worry, we now have a drug for that.
Good thing alternative engines exist
That discussion is based on the earlier version of the article which has a different headline. This is a new piece of information that is significant and should be surfaced.
They laughed at Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown, etc.
Sort of. The board also answers to two other groups:

• Employees

• Donors or whoever is paying the bills

In this case, the threat appears to be that employees will leave and the primary partners paying the bills will leave. If this means the non-profit can no longer achieve its mission, the board has failed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Does_exactly_what_it_says_on_t...
Top comments aren’t stable. Just give it a few minutes to reach obscurity, or bounce back again some tens of minutes later.
Science journalists really need to start replacing the word mysterious with unexplained or anomalous.
That's how viruses work
Ozempic is going to require a pandemic vaccine like rollout.
Just a quibble, but that usage of “theory” is entirely correct. Nevertheless the point is taken that often in general usage “theory” means “scientific theory.” Anyhow, with some small consideration it should be clear that the latter is merely a subset.
Maybe they and it didn't help them. Guardrails for chatgpt will prevent it from predicting outcomes, or providing any personalized advice. I asked it and just said to consult with counsel and have a succession plan.

>Predicting specific outcomes in a situation like the potential firing of a high-profile executive such as Sam Altman from OpenAI is quite complex and involves numerous variables. As an AI, I can't predict future events, but I can outline some possible considerations and general advice:
> AI safety people are insane

maybe, but are they right?

by definition we are already doing the Skynet. as software ate the world we kinda forgot to add QA to the mix (economic necessity just means endless dark backlogs are where the exploding complexity goes to die)

and now we are doing it with even more klunky jury rigged crazy probabilistic shit. the chances of systemic ooppsiies are increasing.

yes, I agree, LLMs with this small contexts are very unlikely to move the needle, but we are working day and night on amplifying whatever effects it can and will have on our future. (not to mention that the AI-powered corporate hellscape achievement is already out of Pandora's box since everyone and their dog started using "data driven" fraud detection shit.
If Sam starts a competing company and can pull a large chunk of the researchers and engineers over (if I were an OpenAI employee, I would be interested in following a proven success story like Sam), then Microsoft's $10B investment would be down the drain. Obviously Microsoft wouldn't want that, and I'm sure Satya has got his hands around the nuts of the Board members and is squeezing them hard (well, figuratively speaking, since there's Toner).
> Microsoft doesn’t have ownership rights to OpenAI IP. They license it.

Honest question, do you have a source for that? Is it conceivable that Microsoft has some clause that grants them direct access to IP if OpenAI does not meet certain requirements. It is difficult to believe that Microsoft handed over $10B without any safeguards in place. Surely they did their due diligence on OpenAI's corporate structure.
> He did not found Tesla, did he?

There was a legal agreement that allows him to call himself that:

> The company was incorporated as Tesla Motors, Inc. on July 1, 2003, by Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning.[12][13] Eberhard and Tarpenning served as CEO and CFO, respectively.[14] Eberhard said that he wanted to build "a car manufacturer that is also a technology company", with its core technologies as "the battery, the computer software, and the proprietary motor".[15]

> Ian Wright was Tesla's third employee, joining a few months later.[12] In February 2004, the company raised US$7.5 million (equivalent to $12 million in 2022) in series A funding, including $6.5 million (equivalent to $10 million in 2022) from Elon Musk, who had received $100 million from the sale of his interest in PayPal two years earlier. Musk became the chairman of the board of directors and the largest shareholder of Tesla.[16][17][14] J. B. Straubel joined Tesla in May 2004 as chief technical officer.[18]

> A lawsuit settlement agreed to by Eberhard and Tesla in September 2009 allows all five – Eberhard, Tarpenning, Wright, Musk, and Straubel – to call themselves co-founders.[19]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003–200...
No, you shouldn’t. When someone sounds smart, that means they are an effective communicator and have good media presence. Those are valuable skills but don’t indicate whether the underlying ideas are accurate.

Eliezer is filling the traditional doomsday prophet archetype, of which there have been thousands in history. That doesn’t mean he’s wrong, but should immediately raise questions.

A deeper analysis of his ideas shows there are fundamental problems in his reasoning.

First, He’s been consistently wrong about the future development and results in AI research so his understanding of AI is proven to be superficial.

Second, His doomsday scenarios are based on a fundamental fallacy; that a GAI smarter than humans would be insanely stupid, unable to self reflect or solve moral quandaries. That’s not to say AI cannot be dangerous, but the types of doomsday scenarios he presents are unlikely. For instance because of acausal trade, Rokos Basilisk is a serious risk that should be treated properly, but Elizer denies it.
I would be surprised but not shocked if there’s some leaks in the next few weeks.
How do you work with so much python code with no type annotations? I get it for smaller projects but isn't half this stuff meant to be library code?
Yes but HN doesn't really work by 'every hourly development in a story gets its own frontpage thread' because then it wouldn't work at all. In fact, the story linked is in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38325552 is more up to date than the submitted tweet.
Yes, all the time and every time, that's how relativistic time dilation and length contraction works. Time dilation and length contraction are predicted by Maxwell's electromagnatic theory, it's no surprise they happen.

EDIT: not sure if you are familiar with relativistic length contraction and time dilation or not
> The sycophantic worship of Sam

I don't think the support for Altman has much to do with that. There are a lot of people building companies and investing a lot of time of money into OpenAI products. They want to work with a company that they can do business with over the long term and isn't going to rug pull them.
From Microsoft? My point is that companies that are serious about making money (even at some indeterminate point in the future) are much better at attracting investment than those which have publicly declared it's not their goals.

Nobody is throwing billions around without expecting anything in return.
Can you explain the third point a little more? If Altman has no meaningful economic interest in the company, what was his motivation for being involved at all? Why did he choose to spend his time this way?

I'm aware that Altman has made the same claim (close to zero equity) as you are making, and I don't see any reason why either of you would not be truthful, but it also has always just seemed very odd.
The Republic of longjmp() isn't going to help you out much, though.
If the non-profit cannot fulfill its mission, wouldn't an orderly winddown be indicated?
Right, the Python interpreter is written by someone else. We agree. But the script is not.

ChatGPT understood the algorithm, produced it on its own, and offloaded the execution of that program to CPython. I don't think that that's actually so significant - like I said, parts of our own brains are hardwired to do certain things and the interesting bit is that we know to offload work to those parts.
You already do, a good chunk of videos have sponsored segments.
If i'm logged in it fails constantly when i'm logged in (a few videos daily seem to work ok, after that it refuses to load a video, even though a "anti adblock" popup is still blocked)

...but it seems to work ok in incognito tabs, so youtube gets even less data on me now.
A Møøse once bit my server
Not denying it took a lot of money, but the scales are different. I think they've raised $14b or so and all but 1b of that was in the last 10 months
The New Rules of Mobile Eitquette
https://archive.ph/A3zll
After a month they wouldn’t know much, so the firm would just let them go. The firm picks the leave duration, not the employee.

And after only a month their sign-on would be subject to claw back.
interesting. I have always wanted a language with s-expressions that pretty much maps 1-1 to javascript in a way that makes macros possible and usable. maybe this brings us closer to that.
We can argue semantics all day, "not quite right" is equivalent to "incomplete" to me, which I hope we are in agreement with.
They also won't have a company if they resign. Not much benefit to them here, is there?
>I know a good number of OpenAI people, and every single person I know is supportive of Sam.

FWIW: I spend an insane amount of money with OpenAI each month, more than the average income in the US. I'm not a Fortune 500 or anything, but I emailed my OpenAI enterprise account rep and let them know if this ends with Altman _not_ the CEO I'm terminating our account.

I had always had "alternatives" on my list of to-dos, and now I'm losing my whole weekend to this garbage thanks to the morons on the OpenAI board.
I wish we randomly picked 5 people in the country to be in office.
Pretty incredible incompetence all around if true.

From the board for not anticipating a backlash and caving immediately... from Microsoft for investing into an endeavor that is purportedly chartered as non-profit and governed by nobodies who can sink it on a whim. And having 0 hard influence on the direction despite a large ownership stake

Why bother with a non-profit model that is surreptitiously for profit? The whole structure of OpenAI is largely a facade at this point.

Just form a new for profit company and be done with it. Altman's direction for profit is fine, but shouldn't have been pursued under the loose premise of a non profit.

While OpenAI leads currently, there are so many competitors that are within striking distance without the drama. Why keep the baggage?

It's pretty clear that the best engineering will decide the winners, not the popularity of the CEO. OpenAI has first mover advantage, and perhaps better talent, but not by an order of magnitude. There is no special sauce here.

Altman may be charismatic and well connected, but the hero worship put forward on here is really sad and misplaced.
What are the odds we have a repeat of a substantial celestial object hitting Earth? Like devastatingly so, can that be quantified in some sense?
Maybe much longer. The mass of infrastructure and data housed at OpenAI will be difficult to reproduce from scratch.

Especially considering OpenAI has boosted the value of the masses of data floating around the internet. Getting access to all that juicy data is going to come at a high cost for data hungry LLM manufacturers from here on out.
Non-competes (with three narrow exceptions, none of which apply here), are void in California (and the practice of making employees sign them even though they are unenforceable, a historically common way of making workers think they have less rights than they do, will become an actionable tort itself, on top of the agreements not being enforceable, due to a law going into effect January 1.)

Obviously, anything that Altman does that would compete with OpenAI will have OpenAI lawyers circling around looking for indicia of use of trade secrets or other IP, but non-competes aren't an issue.
This just shows there is no way you can have a non profit board with a profit cap structure. The capitalists always will push through and "exert pressure" one way or another if they want their way. The non profit setup was a facade. And this has clearly showed it in the fallout. The board had every right to veto or replace Altman if they didn't feel they were prioritizing their mission.
The problem is we don't know. It might be current-grade LLMs plateauing for 50 years, and it might be AGI in 5 weeks, with exponential growth to the singularity.

Heck, we're split on whether current GPT is a glorified autocomplete, a friend, or an alien intelligence, or a half-dozen other theories. It's a black box.

Most people can't handle uncertainty, so they're in some camp, and all the camps are crazy and stupid.

Ditto for covid, for that matter. In early 2020, it could have been anything from a glorified flu to a civilization-ending plague. Ditto for global warming, for that matter. All the models are speculation and extrapolation from limited data. Ditto for a half-dozen other things.

Personally, I think we should play it safe for all of those, but reasonable people can differ. What reasonable people can't do is argue for certainty before we have data coming in or a reasonable understanding of the underlying threat.

Edit: If people could handle uncertainty (and understand value differences are okay), we'd also have a lot less political polarization. A lot of this is simply about believing the other side _might_ be right. If I believe something with 10% odds, and you with 90%, it's often possible to compromise, where with a categorical split, it's not.
This does not solve the company's California AG problem.

https://www.plainsite.org/posts/aaron/r8huu7s/
>I read Nadella has threatened to turn off OpenAIs computers and would litigate the hell out of them to prevent the computers from being turned back on.

What a way to destroy confidence in Azure, or cloud platforms in general.
See below, don't take it as me saying theory of relativity is fundamentally wrong.
As everyone else has mentioned, there is no such thing in CA, but you can sue if employees reveal company secrets to their new employer. OpenAI would probably have a strong case if they suddenly released a copycat product soon after leaving.
etiquette*
If you build a product on top of someone else’s SaaS and it’s fundamentally irreplaceable you are at their mercy forever. Eventually you will get rug pulled if only because they lose their edge or die.
I have basically shipped gpt-4-32k to a few million boomers. Hard to say more without doxxing myself.
It's possible that the failure occurred at some point in the past. If the board truly believes keeping Altman is inherently incompatible with achieving their charter, they have to let him go. The fallout from that potentially kills the company, but a small chance of achieving the charter is better than no chance.

If that's the case, then the failing would be in letting it get to this point in the first place.
It is a very basic fact that LLMs have no concept of true or false, it only has an ability to look up what text data it has seen before. If you do not understand this you are in no position to discuss LLMs.
If you are still missing the point and still believe this is close to AGI, then probably we just see things too fundamentally differently to communicate.
I was driving home from work Thursday night, and had to go for 90 minutes in stop-and-go traffic. I had an idea about a new architecture for a computer where the CPU, GPI, and I/O processor would all be socketed in identical processor sockets. I was talking through the busses with VoiceGPT for about an hour. (I think VoiceGPT is the name of the voice interface to OpenAI's ChatGPT. It is available with a ChatGPT Plus subscription.)

Note: I've been told my 3-processor idea is a horrible mistake, but I like it.

On my way home from Church, I can talk through something the pastor said.

On the way home from a class, a student can talk through something they did not quite understand in class. ChatGPT sometimes explains things in a way so that people who did not get it before understand it. If I still do not understand something, "ELI5" is my standard second attempt. VoiceGPT keeps answers short, so I do not have to go back through long responses as often, but if there is something I do nt udnerstand in the answer, I can drag it out for many more prompts.

A teacher (like myself) can assign students to talk through whatever thing(s) they did poorly on during an exam with ChatGPT or another AI. If the students drive a lot then they can do this with VoiceGPT. The transcript can count as a grade. I do this in my community college classes, but I expect my students to use the free version and type instead of talking.

For the first time, every student really can master every concept (subject to limitations on their time.) The magic here is one a student works hard enough to get an A or two in a field, classes that build on that are really easy.

I have learned some great prompting tricks. For example, we learn things when they are relevant to us. So, my first question is usually "I am a _______ working on (or learning) _______. Tell me why I should be excited about _______."

Another trick I use is: To reduce hallucinations, I do not ask "Tell me about _______." Instead, I ask "How familiar are you with _______?" If I start distrusting the answers, I start a new chat window and try again with revised prompts.

I can imagine future professional development where (for example,) a teacher realized they are not good at something and chats with an AI until they AI thinks they have mastered the concept. Imagine getting monthly 30-minute quizzes, and based on what you score, you are assigned professional development chats and simulations. For me this is much preferable to sitting in long meetings.

There are definately things that are too fast to do with voice. I could not follow VoiceGPT's math when it talked out math in the billions of transactions per second on busses on a hypothetical motherboard. That is why the transcription is awesome.

It's also nice to be able to tell VoiceGPT "I want you to take an note. Do not answer, just take a note." after it agrees, tell it what you want to take a note on, then go back to the conversation.
Well the big thing is it contradicts quantum mechanics, which has far better experimental support.
You’re saying that gamification is bad, and yet you hit a 2500 day streak.
I would say, for what it’s worth, the gamification effects worked.
Youtube premium has no ads btw. It's really great for podcasts or music so you can just listen in the background without the app open.
> There is not good evidence (that I know of at least, maybe I will learn some) that the actual EM field is quantised.

Is there a classical explanation of entangled photons experiments?
The engineers are said to be relieved that Altman is gone, so it doesn't sound like they'd be following a "success story" (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Could be too far gone with both those who left and those who remain.
Tldr:

Bug in the randomness of BitcoinJS which was created by Stefan Thomas. Used in blockchain.info wallets.
Vulnerability called Randstorm. Can check wallet at
https://www.keybleed.com
Its $14 a month and cheaper in a lot of non-US countries, I don't think this is a "check your privilege" kind of situation
And yet most people continue to see it as a character flaw rather than as a disease or the symptom of one.

They repeat "calories in, calories out", as if excessive hunger wasn't central to weight gain. We aren't rats in a lab being fed a limited amount of food, we all eat until we are satisfied.

So what are the factors that contribute to so many people these days being too hungry relative to the amount of calories they actually need? And what can we do collectively to mitigate the exposure of people to those risk factors? It's a tragedy.
Legal agreements do not supersede facts. He has the legal right to falsely claim he is a/the founder of Tesla, nothing more.
The only winning move is not to play. Sutskever has no clue how to contain the genie, nobody has. Why do we put our hope in some engineer or another, beats me. There are throngs waiting in the wings for their shot at ephemeral glory and riches.
> If Canada surprise attacked your hometown and killed your entire family would you have empathy when the United States declared all civilians must clear out of Montreal before a retaliatory strike takes place?

....of course I would have empathy then? How could I not? My family isn't the only family capable of suffering. If anything, my suffering would make me care more about the suffering of others. I would never want to inflict that pain on other families. It makes no sense.
That ship has sailed so long ago, it's already circumnavigated the globe several times.
Have you read the issacson book though? Plenty of people that work directly with him talk about how involved he is....for better or worse.