skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So many key employees are defecting, this Tweet could be interpreted as his support of the people siding with him over the good of the company, which would be narcissistic if the board had a valid reason for their decision. But all that's speculative.
I think that's rather the point in TFA: both the chance of accident and realised impact force goes up with speed, regardless of cause and fault.

We codify limits. What's the advantage of allowing higher performance hardware on our roads?
Of course you want the port to be weaker than the board it is attached to, so that the port breaks rather than the board.
I was illustrating their problem has to be with all social media, not specifically Meta. If you believe Meta does something different from those others you can say that!
There is also https://opencode.de/en/ueber-open-code but I think this is less about funding

EDIT: okay sorry, this was already mentionend in TFA
Yes, it would almost be like the fires you have today, when a truck explodes that's carrying fuel for all the other fuel using vehicles.
Who is actually responsible for the real innovation there? I read Ilya was a co-author on the papers that made GPT and Dall-E possible in the first place. Is anybody in that weight class publicly siding with Sam, or is it all people working on APIs etc.?
Recent documentary where those heavy CAT loaders in Sweden mines are electric: https://youtu.be/V5aDnIfBCKA?si=aQevXe13IjjFkgRQ
I bought a new phone a few months ago. Galaxy A14 5G. Of course, it's an extreme budget phone, but it works fine for me and - because there's less pressure to go for flatness - it has a 3.5mm port. In my experience, lots of budget phones still have them.
Fun fact - putin's palace in Gelendzhik has a very similar pool - a much more tasteless one of course.

He probably visited a Berlin pool like this during his bureau work and dreamt of owning one alike.

his pool: https://image.stern.de/31558812/t/bI/v2/w960/r0/-/pool-putin...
And variance between users, some people grab the cable and yank it to remove the plug from the socket, for example.
> Don't you think the board must have sought legal counsel before acting?

They probably should have, but they may have not.

> It is more likely than not that they checked with a lawyer whether what they were doing is within their legal rights.

It is. But having the legal rights to do something and having it stand unopposed are two different things and when one of the affected parties is the proverbial 900 pound Gorilla you tread more than carefully and if you do not you can expect some backlash. Possibly a lot of backlash.

> I don't think OpenAI board has any responsibility to care for Microsoft's stock price.

Not formally, no. But that isn't what matters.

> Such arguments won't hold water in a court of law.

I'll withhold comment on that until I've seen the ruling. But what does and does not hold water in a court of law unless a case is extremely clear cut isn't something to bet on. Plenty of court cases that have been won because someone managed to convince a judge of something that you and I may think should not have happened.

> And I don't think the power of Microsoft's legal department would matter when there's no legal basis.

The idea here is that Microsofts - immense - legal department has the resources to test your case to destruction if it isn't iron-clad. And it may well not be. Regardless, suing the board members individually is probably threat enough to get them to back down instantly.
Arcan FE: A12: Visions of the Networked Desktop
For this application you don't need to reconstruct what was lost. You merely need to fill in some plausible content that is not identified as a particular watermark.
How do you refactor code, if you have a poor test coverage? Also for me actually the most importan benefit is the instant feedback I get, when I write the unit tests before the implemenation. I can move faster with more confidents.
Where should the business logic rather be? My tests are typically calling APIs to test the business logic. Trying to improve myself here.
I’m not a TDD purist but I’ve found that so long as the request / response flow is a JSON api or similar (as opposed to old style forms and html rendering) then writing integration tests first is quite easy so long as you make sure your test fixtures are fairly fast.
Are calling earth a type 13 planet?
Opening hours of these pools are usually terrible. Many of them are closed on Sunday. Most of them are closed in the summer. If you are working 9-5 during the week you will have a hard time finding a pool close by where you can actually go swimming. E.g. in the article they write Berlin has 60 indoor pools. But at the moment only 28 are open: https://www.berlinerbaeder.de/aktuelles/detail/geoeffnete-ha...

And don't go there with family and small kids. Changing rooms are much too small for families. And most of these old indoor pools have no kids area to speak of.
These pools are just good for nice photos on Instagram or some blogs about architecture of the past.
This reductive comment only applies to car vs person.

The real world has buildings and vehicles that offer protection against impacts. The faster you go, the higher the likelihood of multiple fatalities.
That wasn't the point.

They mentioned the "white guy"
in this case because it was relevant to the insinuations of wokeness.
No, that has nothing to do with any of the problems julia faces. Julia's LLVM is just regular LLVM with some patches that are usually upstreamed. The Julia team is pretty good at keeping up with upstream LLVM.
That's quite generous. Accelerating startups is a business, a greedy one at that, many times involving manipulations, lies, scams. No, this isn't an art.
One summer I essentially boiled myself in the open pools there as a teenager, because I had so much fun I disregarded early signs of sunburn.

Very underrated place, but I suppose it would have more visitors if it weren't for the language barrier. I remember we couldn't figure out which one is the men's room, because the information was only given via text and that was years before smartphones.
>Yeah, that is the whole point - not wanting bad actors to be able to define "alignment" for themselves.

Historically the people in power have been by far the worst actors (e.g. over a hundred million people killed by their own governments in the past century), so given them the sole right to "align" AI with their desires seems extremely unethical.
> As a prominent researcher in AI safety (I discovered prompt injection)...

You might want to try a little more humility when making statements like that. You might think it bolsters your credibility but for many it makes you look out of touch and egotistical.
I wouldn't interpret missing interactions on twitter as more than people not using twitter.
Not my experience at all. USB-A would very often break. Never I had a USB-C break.
It's weird that keyboards before this just didn't have a key there. No one looked at the almost entirely contiguous main block of keys and thought "huh we could put another key in that gap"?
well if youve gone up the hill your battery will be warm and wont be full.

if you charge at the top of the hill your battery will be warm you just need to know not to fill it up.

you just need to train drivers not to have a break at the top of a hill.
"...One of the people, a leading investor in OpenAI, is confident that they can dispose of the board and reinstate Altman and Brockman before the weekend is out. Investors are hoping that Altman would return to a company “which has been his life’s work,” and that Mira Murati, promoted from chief technology officer to interim chief executive on Friday, would stay at the company, added the person..."

Note to the upcoming Netflix Series writers. Keep on working on those dialog pages...
"Move slow and ask for permission to do things" evidently wasn't working out. This firing wasn't a call to start doing evil. It was too tedious a process.
Yeah yeah...

This "political correctness" makes the AI measurably stupider, if nothing
U.S. FCC says new rules will curb SIM swapping
> The original software does not have to include a way to offer such notices, just updating any existing code that does to point to the modified source is not necessarily sufficient to comply

This is not what the license says.

"If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your work need not make them do so." https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html
> Tell engineers to make sure the AI is not bigoted?

That’s more the domain of “AI ethics” which I guess is cool but I personally think is much much much less important than AI safety.

AI safety is concerned with preventing human extinction due to (for example) AI causing accidental war or accidental escalation.

For example, making sure that AI won’t turn a heated conventional war into a nuclear war by being used for military intelligence analysis (writing summaries of the current status of a war) and then incorrectly saying that the other side is preparing for a nuclear first strike -- due to the AI being prone to hallucination, or to prompt injection or adversarial examples which can be injected by 3rd-party terrorists.

For more information on this topic, you can reference the recent paper ‘Catalytic nuclear war’ in the age of artificial intelligence & autonomy: Emerging military technology and escalation risk between nuclear-armed states:

https://doras.dcu.ie/25405/2/Catalytic%20nuclear%20war.pdf
My laptop has a opinion which side is up on usb c and doesn't connect the other way around (the way docking stations use)

I basically have to replace my laptop to use my docking station just because usb c isn't sturdy enough :/
You'll love this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABAP
Why is that risky?
I've had a case in Germany that for an outsider may have looked like we should have lost it. In a nutshell: we took on a joint-venture to develop a market that we weren't particularly interested in, 51:49 to their advantage. The day after the ink was dried and we had set up their development track to create the product they took the source code and sold it to another party.

We had the whole thing - including the JV - reversed in court in spite of them having the legal right to do all this. The reason: the judge was sympathetic to the argument that apparently the JV was a sham created just to gain access to our code. Counterparty was admonished, a notary public that had failed their duty to act as an independent got the most thorough ear washing that I've ever seen in a court and we got awarded damages + legal fees.

What is legal, what you can do and what will stand up are not always the same thing. Intent matters. And what also really matters is what OpenAI's bylaws really say and to what extent the non-profit's board members exercised their duty to protect the interests of the parties who weren't consulted and who did not get to vote. This so called duty of care - here in NL, not sure what the American term is - can weigh quite heavily.
I am well aware of the literature in the area. 'Trained by reinforcement' in the case of animals includes direct causal contact with the environment, as well as sensory-motor adaption, and organic growth.

The semantics of the terms of the 'algorithm' in the case of animals are radically different, and insofar as these algorithms describe anything, it is because they are empirically adequate.

I'm not sure what you think 'evidence' would look like that conditional probability cannot lead to agi -- other than a serious of obvious observations: conditional probability doesnt resolve causation, it is therefore not a model of any physical process, it does not provide a mechanism for generating the propositions which are conditioned-on, it does not model relevance, and a huge list of other severe issues.

The idea that P(A|B) is even relevant to AGI is a sign of a fundamental basic lack of curiosity beyond what is on-trend in computer science.

We can easily explain why any given conditional probability mdoel can encode aribatary (Q, A) pairs -- so any given 'task' expressed as a sequence of Q-A prompts/replies can be modelled.

But who cares. The burden-of-proof on people claiming that conditional probability is a route to AGI is to explain how it models: causation, relevance, counter-factual reasoning, deduction, abduction, sensory-motor adaption, etc.

The gap between what has been provided and this burden-of-proof is laughable
I suspect that if that evidence existed we'd have seen it by now because without it the board looks like incompetents.
That seems a bit irrationally negative. I mean "[Sam] will definitely backstab you if he gets the opportunity."

I don't know him but he seems a reasonably decent / maybe average type.
Doesn't change the fact that this probably wasn't the outcome they were going for.
Ah, heh. Missed that.
Persuasion through status rather than argument
You're looking at a 1969 international signal code; the books are set in 1800-1815, and that particular signal hoist (famously used by Nelson at Trafalgar) was in a Royal Navy code from 1799: https://tmg110.tripod.com/british21.htm
Have you tried out working on multiple projects or tasks at the same time?

When I hit a wall, it's often futile to continue working on that single problem. So I'll just leave it as is is for a day and work on something else.

When I revisit task one the next day, I often have a fresh approach or I'm able to spot that bug I just couldn't find the previous day.

Other devs seem to prefer working very "linearly", but I'm doing better if I juggle several tasks at once.
COVID, Ukraine, financial crisis, climate...
Having a JIT is not a magic bullet. The reason so many different JITs for Python have been developed, yet none have seen widespread adoption is that Python's semantics are anathema to optimizing compilers.

Julia was designed specifically to have language semantics that would make compiler optimizations as easy as possible without sacrificing usability.

Bolting an efficient, all-language compiler onto Python post-hoc is essentially impossible without fundamental changes to the language.
Did you paste a proper link?
Ask HN: Any comprehensive courses on Auth?
I would like cover basic username/password auth, OAuth and Active Directory, security keys and everything in between. Would like to do this in a linear fashion, ie like a coursera course with practice problems.
I just don’t see the danger. There isn’t anything you couldn’t find on 4chan in a few clicks. And the bioweapons example is a pointer to RefSeq? Come on.

These efforts just don’t stand up to scrutiny. They risk appearing unserious to people outside the responsible AI world. I think there are better places to spend time.

Edit:
> If you don't, and the model can, you can't ever undo publication.

We’re talking about a model trained on published information. You already can’t undo publication.
Yeah this was what I was thinking - by its nature this research is very much out in the open. Anyone and everyone is training their own LLMs that have comparable capabilities to ChatGPT (even individuals on single nodes are able to host small models now)

What is the moat for ChatGPT and OpenAI? Apart from huge financial backing from MS (and cheaper compute?)

If he starts something new I suspect funding won't be a problem and you can bet your bottom dollar that Amazon, Facebook, Google, Twitter and everyone else will be sniffing around like crazy so money won't be an issue I am sure.

Time to sell any OpenAI investments I guess?
François, thanks for this.
I pay like half of the taxes and most public baths in my area are free and indoor ones are reasonable priced.

No idea why Berlin should be special in that regard.
On the same line, Sam Altman very easily can have some lines of code inside OpenAI shipping products.

So very easily Sam Altman can be an AI Engineer the same way Steve Jobs was a 'UX designer'.
It is a first as in the first 787 has landed in antarctica. What is not clear about this?
> They enjoy unparalleled safety in their cities.

Plenty of countries/cities which don't are pretty safe too (e.g. Eastern Europe these days)
It’s like rain on your wedding day.
Rule or observation doesn't matter all that much (it's a shade, after all) and the whole idea lines up with my personal experience.
Do you want to compare the percentage of corn of people's diet between now and then?

Do you want to compare the actual plant - size, nutrition profile?

Do you want to compare the growing methods - monoculture pesticide gmo corn vs heirloom corn?

Food forests being a big thing is disputed by some people, that doesn't mean they didn't exist, and it certainly doesn't mean that we couldn't do the same thing but better if we made an effort to.

It irks me when people use 'the way we do things now' to dismiss alternatives with great potential. What's the motivation there?

Where's the logic in saying 'we can't do that, because that's not how we are doing things now?' It's stupid, and it shows a complete lack of imagination.
Microsoft would rather China run on mostly pirated Windows than on Linux.

The Chinese do have a government-sponsored distro, Red Flag Linux, and at one point the Chinese government ordered Windows 2000 be uninstalled from government computers and replaced by Red Flag Linux, although whether that actually happened, while anyone’s guess, is unlikely.
> She holds comparable influence to a USAF Colonel.

That's... not very much? There are 4,400 colonels in the USAF: https://diversity.defense.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=gxMV...
Thats a new term for me, thanks for pointing out.
This article is a litany github issues for correctness bugs in library code, every one of which appears to have been fixed long ago now so it's not quite true to say there's been no rebuttal. Whether there remain a lot of correctness bugs in julia library code I can't say, but not these ones any more.
You might be interested in the Netzwerk Freie Schulsoftware https://digitalcourage.de/netzwerk-freie-schulsoftware
I'm fully aware of the idea that TDD is a "design practice" but I find it to be completely wrongheaded.

The principle that tests that couple to low level code give you feedback about tightly coupled code is true but it does that because low level/unit tests couple too tightly to your code - I.e. because they too are bad code!

Have you ever refactored working code into working code and had a slew of tests fail anyway? That's the child of test driven design.

High level/integration TDD doesnt give "feedback" on your design it just tells you if your code matches the spec. This is actually more useful. It then lets you refactor bad code with a safety harness and give failures that actually mean failure and not "changed code".

I keep wishing for the idea of test driven design to die. Writing tests which break on working code is inordinately uneconomic way to detect design issues as compared to developing an eye for it and fixing it under a test harness with no opinion on your design.

So, yes this - high level test driven development - is TDD and moreover it's got a better cost/benefit trade off than test driven design.
These are requirements. There is a looong way from requirements to final product.
Almost like speed is only one factor in road safety.

Autobahns are designed for faster traffic with various features and rules to avoid common collisions. It may be possible to upgrade all the highways designed for 60-70mph to the same specs, but that does seem unrealistic. Just maintaining the surface condition is a common problem in the UK and US.

https://www.german-autobahn.eu/index.asp?page=design
I notice a lot of people are arguing against usb c, but in reality: devices are designed for the average consumer, not us special HN peeps, usb c is the way forward, we can't use a bulky almost industrial USB connection forever, having a single type of connection has so many benefits, if someone exceeds the plug/unplug rating or the socket breaks for some other reason...it can just be repaired.

Everyone arguing against c like they wanna go back to old style serial port connectors or something.
First of all, I think you have a good material for writing a novel, or at least a tale about something I'd like to read, I mean, it sounds like a melting pot of characters what you have there.

Regarding your position, you need to assume what it is and try to stay positive about finding what you want to get, based on what you said, other people work on projects that don't require a permanent effort, and are not going to finish well, the kind of initiatives I think you're not interested in. If that feeling of being out of context continues it's better you leave or low your expectations. I assisted a couple of times to one of those places and never felt the motivation to being part of that. I think it's most effective when you go with a group of people already created
We are doing big (Billions a year) of campaigns on google for various clients. All metrics either stagnated or stayed the same over the years while a lot of our clients now spend 10-30x more. The same goes for Instagram, Facebook everything gets really expensive and everyone is scared to quit. It's the opium for marketing departments.
The problem is that a company would only fire the cavalier AI researchers after the damage is done. Having an independent ethics department means that the model wouldn't make its way to production without at least being vetted by someone else. It's not perfect, but it's a ton better than self-policing.
> Another common theme is that while Julia is great at composition, it's not clear what's expected to work and what isn't, because the interfaces are informal and not checked.

This is THE huge issue when combined with the other variables:

- you often have hundreds of depedencies that interlock

- you often have dependencies that work with multiple packages, and they will often pull them all into your tree (there are sometimes "bridge packages" written, but that is O(n^2) in the number of packages)

- many maintainers do not care about good versioning practices, because they are not enforced, and it is not their problem when they break a bajillion other packages

- many people writing Julia code are not software developers. this is great! but they usually don't look at what their testing coverage looks like. often the CI always fails on a package and it's ignored.

Would Julia only allow multiple dispatch as a link between those packages, the situation would look a little better. But often the packages also talk through simple accesses of values like `X.someproperty`. I've seen situations where maintainers would add and remove these properties and break their own other libraries. Better "enforcement" of these types of things - however that would look like - would be a huge improvement for the time sink that is maintaining a Julia package.
He screwed them how? They knew they were employees not co owners.
> A lot of tech people will probably earn that money in a few minutes.

Great. Good for them. What about the rest of the world, some (many) of whom can't afford a(nother) monthly subscription fee?

Are they now to be excluded from participating in popular culture, if they do not wish to be subjected to obnoxious advertising?

Youtube basically reached a de-facto status of a public library, considering it contains archival TV shows, sports matches, original music, documentaries, lessons, instructions, clips of contemporary life, and so on. While median quality is much lower, it easily rivals Wikipedia in breadth and depth.

It my opinion, it should be publicly funded, without discriminating access based on willingness (ability!) to pay or to be subjected to ads.