skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I remember when having a cassette tape for something started being very uncool - when CDs were getting big.
They still have a time and place for me, picked up some bargain cassettes a couple weeks ago - Hendrix and the B-52s. My car has an original tape player and I like listening to full albums
At this point I'm sort of wondering what the point of the move to streaming even was. These streaming companies came in and decimated the "traditional" TV industry, but they're almost all losing money, and all definitely losing customer satisfaction. And now ads are creeping in. We just had a revolution and replaced one flag with another. It's no wonder people are going back to waving the pirate flag.
That wasn’t sufficient for Bing, Cortana, or Windows Mobile/Windows Phone.
Everyone keeps saying that Microsoft made a huge mistake by not having board representation, and I couldn't disagree more.

Microsoft's relationship with OpenAI was really ideal from a speed-of-advancement perspective. That is, reams and reams have been written about how Google has to move at such a slow pace with AI productization because, essentially, they have so much to lose. Microsoft saw this first hand with their infamous Tay AI bot, which turned into a racist Hitler lover in a day.

Microsoft's relationship with OpenAI was perfect - they could realistically be seen as separate entities, and they let OpenAI take all the risk of misaligned AI, and then only pull in AI into their core services as they were comfortable. Google's lack of this sort of relationship is a direct hindrance to their speed in AI advancement and productization. Microsoft's lack of a board seat gives them a degree of "plausible deniability" if you will.

Plus, it's not like Microsoft's lack of a board seat impacts their influence that much. Basically everyone believes that the push to get Altman back has Microsoft's/Nadella's fingerprints all over it. Their billions give them plenty of leverage, and my bet going forward is that even if they don't take a board seat outright, they will demand that board membership be composed of more "professional", higher caliber board members that will likely align with them anyway.
The fallacy of the EA movement is that they persuaded themselves that it is possible to reason towards the most “effective” altruistic course action in a fully rational way. The reality is that there are serious philosophical-logical paradoxes, like the repugnant conclusion [0]. As a result, they reasoned themselves into conclusions that were most favorable to their own preferred way of life.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere_addition_paradox
Suppose you were working on an early mission-critical computer system. Your coworker is thinking about a potential security issue. You say: "Yeah I read about that in a science fiction story. It's not something we need to worry about." Would that be a valid argument for you to make?

It seems to me that you should engage with the substance of your coworker's argument. Reading about something in science fiction doesn't prevent it from happening.
I'm a developer and have used Open AI as a beta user from before their public launch and been interested in the structure and business side of AI and had never heard of Ilya until this recent blowup. I'm just one data point, but my guess is that the vast, vast majority of the public that knows anything about AI has also never heard of Ilya.
What is the optimal number of species? Is there a universally optimal number or does it depend on conditions on the planet? On one extreme, if each individual organism were its own species, nothing would be able to mate and everything would die. If everything were one species, one disease or change in environment could wipe everything out. So, those clearly are bad. But somewhere in the middle must be a "best" number for some metric. Ecological resilience would probably be a good metric, if we could measure that.

There is the assumption in a lot of the environmental rhetoric that whatever number of species and the exact types of species that existed ~200 years ago when we started keeping track are the optimal ones and that they should stay that way forever. It doesn't work that way though. If a species goes extinct, it's because its environment changed and it's no longer adapted to it. Whether the source of that change is another species (humans) or something else is irrelevant. A new species will come along that's better adapted.
I assumed that one was a typo for altruists, but given the other bizarre phrase selection maybe not.

The best part to me is the only person I've had make good arguments for EA in person is female. And she was supporting the analytical quantitative scientific argument and data driven process, so it seems that some "masculized college students" maybe were the problem.
I appreciate the insert explaining monotone functions, and the coloring connects it back to the cube example.

However, they don't say which exact function was used to color the outputs in the example, so it doesn't really give you a picture of what these sorts of monotone functions look like.

Can someone reverse engineer a possible function for that example?
"The board" isn't exactly a single entity. Even if the current board made this decision unanimously, they were a minority at the beginning of the year.
carbon credits, the millennial iso9000
That's not how this works. There is no need to explain why he's wrong. Claims made by cranks without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Yes you’re probably right, it had just slightly more thrust than the SLS, at about 9M pounds.
"AI safety" is just a rehashed version of "think of the children".
>Everyone who can sign a check is dying to get in on this. All the smart talent in the world would love to be employee number 1 through 1000.

That's sound like the riad to disaster. People who can sign a check and are dying to get in on this, usually lack any moral or ethics.

Not a smart move to work for those people just because you fell for a clever salesman.
subsidize ? it doesn't cost the airline anything to seat the tickets of a singular order together.
looks like this one isn't paywalled (for me at least)
Thanks, I knew there was a word I was forgetting…
According to the exact literal meaning, every algorithm you ever run on your computer is O(1), because your computer is finite. The same can be applied to the reachable universe.

Context is inevitable.
anti-vax, climate change denial, anti-abortion even for rape, wants to abolish the central bank of Argentina.

fun times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javier_Milei
> However, the case for a breaking change should be a heck of a lot stronger than "we think all timestamps should have timezones".

How about if you rephrase the case as "we've sampled codebases that use naive timestamps, and at least 50% of them had critical bugs related to mistaken assumptions made about timezones by functions used to produce vs consume those timestamps. Your code is already broken. This update just makes the compiler force you to rewrite your code in a way that makes the errors obvious and/or into type errors — and, therefore, which forces you to fix those bugs."
The real tragedy is failure on behalf of US and EU governments to regulate ML/near-agi. It shouldn't be up to Ilya to keep the public safe or to determine if there is any real danger -- at least not on his own as part of an organization that has a conflict of interest. But we don't even have basic privacy protections or social media regulation even after multiple election interferences.

I hate being right about this crap but OpenAI's tech will get integrated into a lot of daily tech people use and as always abuse will flourish, the 80% will suffer and the 20% will prosper.
They're both computing pi due to how they are constructed. If they were built to compute e and computed pi instead they would have free will.

You're misreading my description.
I recall some radars used those large round screens, long persistence phosphors. Often these were mechanically rotated in time with the antenna, with slide contact rings. Later electronic rotation superseded that.
That edit was here before that comment received any replies, so this is not a response by edit.
> A default case in a switch only solves, well, switching. If a rogue value comes in, it will go out somewhere. E.g. json to sql or whatever things are moving.

I mean, yeah, but eventually you have to do something with it. And the only useful thing you can really do with an enum is switch on it...
There is also a simple, weaker argument about why memory addressing is not O(1).

To address memory of size N, you need a log(N) sized addresses. Operations on log(N) sized numbers are not constant time, so addressing memory of an arbitrary size can't be constant time.
We usually take operations like addition as if they were constant time because we assume a certain number of bits, and indeed, 32 or 64 bit addition is constant time, but not the addition of arbitrary sized numbers (aka. bignum).

Retrieving data from memory, even magic memory that doesn't care about the laws of physics is actually a kind of binary search. You take the most significant bit of the address, which tells you in which half of the memory bank it is, then the next bit gives you the next half, then the next, etc... until you get to the cell containing your data. That's O(log(N)), not O(1).

My argument is weaker that the one in the article, because it doesn't take the laws of physics in consideration so it only puts memory operations at O(log(N)) and not O(sqrt(N)), but the idea is similar in that memory operations are not constant time.

It is also the reason why I think that log(N) in big-O notation is the limit of practicality. That is, further than that and big-O becomes meaningless and one needs to take the actual machine in consideration. Maybe, after reading the article, O(sqrt(N)) should be the limit instead.
The pricing of cable was horrendous. As a user, I am ecstatic.
My apologies I only bothered to update myself and see those things you mentioned after posting. My only vague recollections were of news articles about massive install bases of outdated pirated MS Windows and occasional well publicized but ultimately minor efforts like the Munich thing.

The 2014 events for Russia and the new cold war stuff for China seem to have pushed those countries into doing something. Thanks for the update.
I just wish they would make more compact shows that tell their entire story in a single self contained season. If 1899 for example had only been given a single season from the outset it actually might’ve been a much better show.
It's not even clear what the complaint is. The article only gives a couple of examples of what's going wrong, mostly the fact that "new EAs" don't respect some of the people the author admires and some swipes at the FDA.
How about never delete your stuff because contract terms changed in the backend?
He said in an interview 2 weeks ago that below a certain capability threshold it is beneficial and good to open source models —- but once you cross that threshold it is a bad idea.

The example he gave is a model that could independently do science.
Power is a fuzzy thing. You can think about power as being distributed across lots of different entities (the board, CEO, senior execs, investors, rank and file employees, etc) with some having more concentrated power (eg the board) than others (eg individual employees). However, if you create a situation (eg lots of employees decide to walk out in support of the ousted CEO) that can aggregate enough power to overcome any other single entity. That seems to be what is happening here.

It does not matter that the board has the legal power to do whatever they want eg fire the CEO. If the investors and key employees that keep the company going walk away, they end up with nothing so they might as well resign and preserve the organization rather than burn the whole thing down.
The study did include a multimodal model.

Apparently it doesn't improve abstract reasoning capability, because according to the article the multimodal gpt4 did just as dismally as the text-only gpt4. This was surprising to me, as I would have expected an improvement with a model that did include spatial relationships.
But you are just painting one extreme vision here.
The Spectacular Failure of SPACs
What does it actually take to declare a species extinct ? How long are they actually looking for them ?
I honestly don't understand why they don't demand a complete screenplay of the whole series up front when they greenlight a show, and then commit to producing the whole thing, whether it's a hit or a flop. No definite beginning, middle, and end? No cash.

What they do now is like, "OK, I'll build this C++ project for you 1000 lines at a time. It will be extremely expensive, but you can pay me after each delivery and feel free to kill the whole thing at any time."

By hosing their most loyal viewers -- the ones who will stick with their favorite shows to the end -- they may not necessarily be losing money, but they are biasing the statistics that they use to determine what future shows to invest in. The remaining viewers will be those who don't mind having the rug pulled out from under them: less-sophisticated, less-discriminating people who are just looking for something to play for background noise in the living room.
I recently learned about this industrial control bus. Seems pretty robust and interesting even though I don't personally have experience with it.
The word enshittified has officially been enshittified.
This isn't, but some other articles are.
It threw a python exception for me and didn't generate speech
That's not their stated goal, you're misinterpreting it by changing the wording.
I would highly recommend this also,- but firstly you need to understand how it fits into an organisational system.

I founds this YouTube very informative as to how [all these things hang together](https://youtu.be/cUQcNi_obIc?si=HtZ9iLc76KF2iB2L). [This is perhaps relevant for passkeys](https://fedoramagazine.org/fido2-for-centrally-managed-users...)

Alternatively you can go down the OIDC or SAML paths (generally the path of a developer)

While I've worked with keycloak I've always found the [Curity's resources](https://curity.io/resources/openid-connect/) for understanding OIDC core and extensions very good.

The order in which you learn these things isn't really important but they're both important (but really depends on your problem domain)
Honestly the only show I regretted being cancelled was 1899.

They still produce some great content. Recently watched Bodies and the Fall of the House of Usher. Both fantastic shows.
Is it assumed that Sam would be more aligned with Microsoft than not? From a vague awareness only, I'd guess that Microsoft wants to wield OpenAI against rivals, and SamA wouldn't find it unappealing to be bigger than Zuckerberg?
Come on, I think it's really obvious that the largest AI nonprofit in the world might be interested in chips, to a much larger degree than a typical nonprofit would be interested in cafeteria food.

I think the analogy is more like someone on the board + Executive Director of your wildlife preservation nonprofit buying up land with potentially endangered animals on the side, with the (presumed) intention of selling the land back to the nonprofit.

Clearly a COI even if it's net good for the animals.
Not OP, but I do this with SQLite in memory DB. If each unit only adds the tables the test needs, this is super fast, probably around 2ms per table.
I am not sure what you are saying. Agreeing with me or not? "Can" as "a shit ton of room" vs. some undescribed "absolutes"?

Self-dealing CEO's and board members can, and are, convicted criminally and civilly of violating their fiduciary duties. And "can" and are fired with cause.
Not at this magnitude. If you read the latest Semianalysis article, Microsoft’s current infra project is the largest infra project currently being undertaken by humankind (not sure if that’s overstatement, but regardless, $50B largely and competently directed towards (Open)AI-supporting hardware isn’t something easily replicable)
In many countries, the normal route to a ph.D. involves writing a thesis separately from papers you publish.

https://www.hochschulkompass.de/en/doctoral-studies/doctoral...:

The dissertation is the core of your doctoral degree and the most important piece of work you will produce for this degree. It is usually written as a monograph which is a comprehensive, self-contained treatment of a research topic.

[…]

Alongside the monographic dissertation, more and more faculties are offering the possibility of submitting a publication-based dissertation, known as a cumulative dissertation. This consists of several shorter pieces of work which are thematically linked.

The totality of the written doctoral works must satisfy the requirements of a monographic dissertation. Faculties which allow cumulative dissertations may have very different requirements, for example in relation to:

• The type of publication (book, journals, manuscript)

• The current status of the publications (published, submitted, in preparation)

• The scope of the publications and the results they contain, etc.

If you wish to write a cumulative dissertation, you should find out at an early stage whether this option is available at your faculty and if so, what requirements apply.

Even if his university allows such a bundling of papers chances are he still would have to write the texts that describe how they’re linked thematically, and possibly a layman’s description of the work, etc.
> Ask the Scottish how they feel about Sweden exporting its culture a while ago.

What's this referring to?
FYI I'm referring to the specific "why not matrix?" piece which was posted on telegraph and then was replied to by a matrix developer on lobsters. I don't want to link to them directly, hopefully you can find them both, but it's a good read if you thought about going all in on Matrix. The response particularly left me disappointed, since we still experience lots of bugs, which were allegedly fixed.
I think the fundamental problem is that Netflix has too many show, and follows the "see what sticks" philosophy.

I think they should be more like (formerly?) HBO or Apple and try to make fewer, better shows.
MS took a large bet on OpenAI and already integrated it in many of its products.

Destroying OpenAI good backfire big time.
Doesn't Mozilla run the same way with for-profit under a non-profit?
I prefer having more different stories get an adaption than the same ones getting many seasons. Fans can buy the source material to get the rest of the story.
Nope, awful standard on top of an already awful standard.
The information necessary to build a nuclear weapon has been largely available in open sources since the 1960s. It's really not a big secret. The Nth Country Experiment in 1964 showed that a few inexperienced physicists could come up with a working weapons design. The hard part is doing uranium enrichment at scale without getting caught.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_Country_Experiment
Nothing wrong with that. But it's strange that such a person (who undoubtedly makes $$$) wants to make some more $×10^-n (n ≥1) by paywalling his articles.
Same here! Once they were praised for trying out new stuff and sticking with it; now everything must be an immediate smash hit. 1899 broke the camel's back, I've cancelled and since then pirated one of their shows.
He confirmed he's returning: https://twitter.com/sama/status/1726345564059832609
One of the benefits of being cynical and jaded is that I see exactly where these kind of movements are going as soon as they get started. The new-atheism movement from a decade ago is one example, rationalist movement was another. The newest one is e/acc. While the movements themselves often die and fade away, their impact often does not.

Something strange happens when an idea becomes a movement and then it becomes an identity. Pretty soon the identity alters the movement which then subverts the idea. Next thing you know you see someone who claims the identity in a TED talk speaking ideas you would never personally support.

For that reason I don't just judge ideas on their own merits. I try to consider the movement that will arise around it. Then I try to consider the assumed identity of those caught up in the movement. Then I consider how a large number of individuals sharing an identity will reflect back onto the movement.
I agree the original concept is fine. I think we can mostly split criticism of the movement from criticism of the ideas. We can look at the SBF thing and this article and the links posted by GP to see a lot that has gone wrong with the movement.

But then we have to split the ideas that have attached themselves to EA, because I don't think Peter Singer was talking about 10^54 simulated consciousness or whatever.

So the article seems to agree with the most basic idea of EA, which I feel even the average person on the street would agree with, the "donate money with maximum effectiveness". And your example is from a group that believes in "earn to give", which is way more controversial and one of the big excuses for SBF and crew. Also, assuming a random social worker could just choose to go into business and make millions seems just incorrect.
> I assumed once we hit a certain level of traffic it was too computationally expensive?

Seems strange; AFAIK in e.g. Varnish, Vary just means you get more "stuff" tacked onto the buffer that gets built from the request and then hashed to create the cache key.

And actually, come to think of it, if memory for N concurrent in-flight requests is the concern, then you don't even need an actual (dynamically allocated) buffer, either; presuming you're using a streaming hash, you can feed each constituent field directly into the hasher, with only the hasher's (probably stack-allocated) internal static buffer for blockwise hashing required. (Which you're gonna need regardless of whether you're doing any Vary-ing.)

So it's really just a question of how many CPU cycles are being spent hashing. And it's likely just going to be a difference between hashing 300 bytes (base request — hostname, path, headers that are always implicitly Varied upon) and 350 bytes (those things, plus whatever you explicitly Varied) per request. Doesn't seem like too much of a win... (especially when hardware-accelerated hashing ops operate on blocks anyway, such that you only get stepwise cost increases for every e.g. 128 bytes.) I wonder why they bothered?
Netflix does a remarkably poor job of advertising their own shows. Maybe if I kept the service around more I would know more about their shows, though I tend to get really annoyed when they do autoplay trailers in a banner at the top of their UI. Having liked the books quite a bit I came to Altered Carbon a season late because I just didn't know that they made it. Honestly right now I couldn't tell you what I might be excited about on netflix the only thing I know is that there will be one more season of stranger things but it was delayed even before the writers strike.

Meanwhile HBO/Max/Whatever seems to do a pretty good job, even when the shows are pretty niche. Of course I see advertising for House of the Dragon or any of the big prestige HBO shows, but also for their niche Max based stuff (which seems to be going away a bit..) like Flight Attendant or Doom Patrol.
>Microsoft had to put out a statement "its all good we got the source code"

IP lawyers would sell their own mothers for a chance to "wanna bet?" Microsoft.
That maybe true but I have noticed significant reduction in insect populations and varieties which is primary foods for small animals, mammals and birds.
Hook Your Knowledge Base into GPTs