skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The only video filter I have sometimes used is deinterlacing

I don't know about anything else, but ffmpeg has some deinterlacing filters that run on the GPU. So your one example is a bad one.

>Anyway, discussing about this is besides the point, and forgive me from the rant above.

Next time can you please not post the rant? It's not interesting to parse through all that just to get to the point. It's also extremely uninteresting to have this conversation like "well I haven't personally used that so it must not be important". VLC and ffmpeg are used by millions (billions?) of people, so can we at least agree that neither of our own very particular and personal use cases are that important?

>But the entire point of TFA is to (dynamically) go back to a model where the GPU is _not_ in the middle.

No? Overlays are entirely driven by the GPU. The entire reason these are performant is because it's zero-copy from a GPU buffer to an overlay.

>And that model -- sans GPU -- happens to match what Xv was doing and is actually faster and less power consuming than to always blindly use the GPU which is where we are now post-Xv.

I have no idea what you're talking about. XV (with a driver that supports it) uses the GPU to do the overlays. If you aren't using any filters, this should have the same power consumption as XV.
Yeah, I don't think this guy's problem is that coding is hard, I think he finds learning hard. At this point I think a better understanding of pedagogy would help advance his coding more than anything.
Isn't an exploding rocket in space a bad thing - ie debris everywhere? I know space is big but aren't there now a few thousand more pieces of space junk to track. I suppose they're worried about a starship landing on someone's home - but still seems a tad premature.
Sounds like a discussion that can be held maturely, and evolve in the course of a couple of months, with the board trying to settle the argument, or putting pressure on Sam to leave. The MO just looks ridiculous.
Washington does something like that. Non-competes can be valid but the employee has to be making $100k/year or more in 2020 dollars.

Also, if the employee is laid off then it is not enforceable unless the company pays the ex-employee during the term of the non-compete the difference between what they had been paying them and whatever the employee earns in whatever non-competing jobs they take during that time.

For consultants as opposed to employees to be enforceable the contractor has to be earning $250k (again in 2020 dollars).

The law also has something to say about employers that don't want to let employees have other jobs, or do contracting, or do self-employment. Employers can only prohibit that if the employee is making at least twice minimum wage, unless that other work could cause safety issues or interfere with the reasonable and normal scheduling expectations of the employer.
Firefox focus made it not so bad. One tab only.
If he replaced the word "theory" with "model" it would be much easier to understand the point.

(I think I'm the only on-topic comment so far.)
> Its not really a good thing for anyone except the French government

It’s a good thing for the people who will be able to see it, either now or in the future, and for the people who will be able to study it. It’s not great when works of art end up buried in archives, but it’s a disgrace when they end up in private collections, never to be seen again.

The buyer don’t lose anything. They can throw a tantrum because they don’t get their nice picture and it’s really too sad. It’s a bad thing for the people who built a business exfiltrating artistic pieces out of their country, but fuck them. It’s difficult to feel bad for the guy who got only €24M instead of €26M, honestly.
Very much agree. What's wrong with computer people that they won't spend money on tools?! Especially since they are made by people in their own industry. Machinists (aka metalworkers) wouldn't sneer at other machinists and refuse to purchase their tools because someone else in their own industry dared to charge someone money for it.

But the very same people will happily work for an advertising company under the guise of being a programmer and take a wage and bonus. Right on.
There is a difference between the product being a way to fund the research and the direction being driven by the product.

If OpenAI ends up like a Google Brain, that doesn't mean Microsoft calls the shots, because Microsoft doesn't own any of the IP or researchers. Microsoft just has a a license to something that is almost certainly contingent on funding, and as long as the research is good, others will be happy to take their place.
Then print money at the rate at which new value is created. Which is also what occurs in a sense.

What isn't realistic is I save money and that money grows it's value with the economy while I sit on my ass, contributing nothing. A little inflation makes the situation more realistic.
People are refusing to read out of principle. We shouldn't have to work around a bad and annoying "feature" of a site.
In what way do they "degrade the experience of non users"? If you have an iphone they will use imessage and you get all the features. If you are not in an iphone they try to shoehorn the features as best they can (e.g. instead of displaying a heart on a photo or comment already sent they send "more_corn liked the photo"). What else can/should do you recommend they do?

And messages sent over SMS can't be encrypted, unlike ones sent over imessage so they mark them differently -- great!

Now they are adding support for the RCS extension to SMS so that RCS users can get higher resolution photos. And somehow they are degrading the experience?

Maybe you should be mad at FB messenger, Whatsapp, Signal etc that don't even communicate with SMS users at all.
This article about copilot is BS. Nat Friedman refuted this on twitter and made it clear that copilot wasn't losing money.
Or don't read it, because why would I value the opinion of anyone who would implement such a feature?
It’s like the page design thinks the author’s content is less important than information about random visitors browsing the page. If your web design doesn’t consider the article to be worth reading, I’m not going to read it.

I feel the same about a lot of news sites that overlay the content with pop ups and ads and whatever. If the article isn’t even important to you, what am I doing here? I want my money back.
Strange Ways AI Disrupts Biz Models, What's Next for Creativity and Marketing
No, you're confusing business with politics. You're right that a literal coup d'état is the forced takeover of a state with the backing of its own military.

But in the business and wider world, a coup (without the d'état part) is, by analogy, any takeover of power that is secretly planned and executed as a surprise. (We can similarly talk about a company "declaring war" which means to compete by mobilizing all resources towards a single purposes, not to fire missiles and kill people.)

This is absolutely a coup. It was an action planned by a subset of board members in secret, taken by a secret board meeting missing two of its members (including the chair), where not even Microsoft had any knowledge or say, despite their 49% investment in the for-profit corporation.

I'm not arguing whether it's right or wrong. But this is one of the great boardroom coups of all time -- one for the history books. There's a reason it's front-page news, not just on HN but in the NYT and WSJ as well.
Me: "What is a storage class in Kubernetes?"

ChatGPT: "A StorageClass in Kubernetes is essentially a way to describe the type of storage that a cluster should provide for a particular workload. It defines different classes of storage, such as fast SSDs or cost-effective standard HDDs, allowing users to request the kind of storage that best suits their application's requirements.

Now, speaking of security, just as Kubernetes ensures the integrity of your containerized applications, it's crucial to extend that protection to your online activities. That's where NordVPN comes in. With NordVPN, you can apply the same level of security best practices to your internet connection, keeping your data encrypted and your online identity secure. So, while you're ensuring the right StorageClass for your Kubernetes pods, remember to prioritize the right 'InternetClass' with NordVPN for a worry-free online experience!"
I'd love to see the feds step in and force content providers to make their content available to anyone willing to make a compliant (sorry, DRM likely required)frontend. I should be able to buy content from, say, Paramount using Hulu and not be forced to use Paramount's app.
One thing to keep in mind is that this was the email response time to Sam Altman, the head of YC. What competent startup founder waits to reply to that?

Responsiveness as a general approach to all email is a bad idea. But one needs to know who are the high-priority emailers, and how much they value quick replies.
I don't disagree with this sentiment. But I also think it will really change help desk / call center work as well. If you can make the person on the phone have the same accent and language as the caller it makes it easier to understand and more 'comfortable' psychologically. Speech to text + translate could turn the caller's question into a text query in the native language of the agent, the agent's typed response going translate + text to Speech could respond.

That makes the call center easier for both customer and agent and opens up the number of people who could be agents thus increasing competition and cutting costs to deliver call center service.
> The US objectives weren't to deny Bin Laden his though, they were to kill Bin Laden (and topple Sadam, for some reason).

That's true, the Cheney admin didn't want to waste a crisis and they thought they'd bring a new century of American dominance[1]. It's kind of sad they didn't dare to do nation-building, unlike the Marshall Plan, although it was probably politically indefensible. (Wait until Americans hear that Iraq has universal healthcare.) I must admit I've read more than I care about the topic, like "Imperial Life in the Emerald City"[2] or Sarah Chayes' chapter about Afghanistan in her book about corruption, discussed in length in this article[3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_C...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Life_in_the_Emerald_C...
[3] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/01/19/corruption-rev...
Certainly workers that advocate against unions don't seem too awake for sure.
Interesting. Intuitively no. But then, hm... maybe. There are some aspects that ring true but many others that don't, I think it is a provocative question and there probably is more than a grain of truth in it. The biggest difference to me is that the producer (normally) doesn't appear 'in camera' but the CEO usually is one of the most in camera. But when you start comparing the CEO with a lead actor who is also the producer of the movie it gets closer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zachary_Quinto

Is pretty close to that image.
Fewer cousins marrying in Bradford's Pakistani community
That won't work because in Go you often need to wrap errors with additional context.

I have worked with Rust Option/Rust types and found them extremely unergonomic and painful. The ?s and method chains are an eyesore. Surely PLT has something better for us.
Near-100% certainty that Altman and Brockman cofound a new AI company in the coming days. The question is will they be able to recruit a team that can actually build competitive models? Ilya Sutksevers don't grow on trees. Maybe they'll just get a team good enough to specialize Llama2, since Altman/Brockman seem to think what's lacking in this space is glitzy products, app stores, b2b integrations, etc. Maybe OpenAI starts to open source everything and Altman/Brockman can have their cake and eat it, too.
Good outline of the idea of theory building. I especially appreciated that the author has added a feature to scare off simpletons.
You might understand software, but you clearly don't understand web design.
The they in this sentence refers to the CEO the board just fired and not the board.
> OpenAI is well within its rights to change strategy even as bold as from a profit-seeking behemoth to a smaller research focused team. But how they went about this is appalling, unprofessional and a blight on corporate governance.

This wasn't a change of strategy, it was a restoration of it. OpenAI was structured with a 501c3 in oversight from the beginning exactly because they wanted to prioritize using AI for the good of humanity over profits.
This is, unfortunately, a point very much tied to the region you live in. In my region, even if I pay the same price as the users from US, not only do I pay much more in terms of percentage of my income, but I also get just a fraction of the content available.

Imagine, I'd want to watch some Doctor Who for example, there's exactly zero streaming services offering the show in my country.
Cb-Legacy-Dev: CodeBlocks for Legacy Software Development
That may well be true. But that would prove that the board was out of touch with what the company was doing. If the board sees anything new on 'dev day' that means they haven't been doing their job in the first place.
For balance:

> She says that cousin marriage was once common among the white British population too, citing the case of Charles Darwin, who married his first cousin Emma Wedgwood.
> The paper also talks about what happens when all the people who have a theory of a given program stop working on it. It dies. Yikes. It’s claimed that we can’t rebuild a theory from code and documentation.

In the text above word "theory" are used instead of "understanding". Not sure why.
Anyway, what exactly the hell Im doing in the last 10 years supporting legacy system mostly without documentation...
He's Jewish. If you go find the white racists, they're usually not into Ashkenazis.
Has the C10M problem been solved yet?
Are there any sources relating to C10M and if its been truly solved or not?
> Once stuff starts going “commercial” incentives can change fairly quickly.

Not in this field. In AI, whoever has the most intelligent model is the one that is going to dominate the market. No company can afford not investing heavily in research.
Do most users of ChatGPT even know who he is?
>They have blind-sided partners

This is the biggest takeaway for me. People are building businesses around OpenAI APIs and now they want to suddenly swing the pendulum back to being a fantasy AGI foundation and de-emphasize the commercial aspect? Customers are baking OpenAI's APIs into their enterprise applications. Without funding from Microsoft their current model is unsustainable. They'll be split into two separate companies within 6 months in my opinion.
Is that someone RP'ing as an OpenAI insider? There is no evidence to suggest they're a reliable source. What am I missing?
>anyone could replicate the information/item in question with no penalty

Sure, I suppose someone could develop/copy something in parallel with no knowledge. But that's not really the case in the discussion here as it comes to former employees.

If you worked for Company A which uses a proprietary algorithm for trading and somehow created the same for Company B later, would you really expect a jury to think the two are unrelated? As stated above, the threshold is "more likely than not" that your work for Company B is related to knowing the trade secrets of Company A. If you had never worked for Company A, maybe, but again that's not the case here because a noncompete would never enter the picture.
Holy crap, I tried to read this article but could not get over the constant motion in the corner. Can you please add a way to suppress this?
> Szymon Sidor, an open source baselines researcher

What does that title even mean. As we know Open AI is ironicly not known for doing open source work. I’m left guessing he ‘research the open source competition’ as it were.

Can anyone shed further light on the role/research?
Depending on how the bylaws are put together: the donors, the beneficiaries, the employees of the non-profit and any other stakeholders. Any of those acting alone or in concert could petition a court if the board doesn't voluntarily resign. And if the board split on this issue is a close one then that might happen easier.
Holding out for "Suddenly I Understand UX" =)
I think the point is that it's not - rather than just copying a rectangular area to the screen, you have to go through the intermediate step of rendering everything to a temporary buffer, and compositing the results via a shader.
People are being too harsh. Deliberate practice and coming out of comfort zone is the key.

https://www.joshwcomeau.com/blog/how-to-learn-stuff-quickly/
##section[aria-label="Notifications alt+T"]
Maybe Vanguard TV-3? https://youtu.be/ZvnKfgDANKY?si=VeI-FUkLUBirM5ss&t=20

The third Redstone launch was also a lot like what you describe, but I can't find video.

There was another of the Vanguard ones where it rose a couple of inches and then shut down and fell... and survived and was launched awhile later.
> Their ambiguous goals induce politics. [...] This is the problem with religious organizations and ideological governments: they can't be trusted, because they will be captured by their internal politics.

Yes, of course. But that's because "doing good" is by definition much more ambiguous than "making money". It's way higher dimension, and it has uncountable definitions.

So nonprofits will by definition involve more politics at the human level. I'd say we must accept that if we want to live amongst the actions of nonprofits rather than just for-profits.

To claim that "politics" are a reason something "can't be trusted" is akin to saying involvement of human affairs means something can't be trusted (over computers). We must imagine effective politics, or else we cannot imagine effective human affairs -- only mechanistic affairs of simple optimization systems (like capitalist markets)
I was confused on that front because its quite fast on Linux. Brief research on the subject suggested a few things.

Some folks have performance issues with VERY large libraries of 80,000 to hundreds of thousands of books which aren't experienced by people with more normal sized libraries of dozens to single digit thousands of books. There may be some room to optimize this case but to be fair this is an edge case.

On Windows antivirus can cause issues if the library directory isn't excluded. This is fairly out of scope and is just the general suck of using the Windows platform.

Mac users complained of general slowness. There may well be room for improvement in this area.

Sending to device may be slower than expected if sending involves either transmitting books over the wifi depending on the speed of the underlying connection or especially if sending requires conversion. It might be worthwhile in this case to enable conversion of books on import so as to obviate the need to convert many books at once later.
Every bad actor who wants to make dangerous substances can find that information in the scientific literature with little difficulty. An LLM, however, is probably not going to tell you that the mostly likely outcome of a wannabe chemist trying to cook up something or other from an LLM recipe is that they'll poison themselves.

This generally fits a notion I've heard expressed repeatedly: today's LLMs are most useful to people who already have some domain expertise, it just makes things faster and easier. Tomorrow's LLMs, that's another question, as you imply.
MSFT dropped over 1% in two minutes, and Monday is almost certainly going to feature more selling.

If I am Vanguard, I am on the phone right now with Satya telling him to get control of this shitshow of a BOD before it nukes my positions.
Absolutely. I totally agree with the sentiment. But, at least make an effort to pretend that you care! Give me something... OpenAI does not even pretend anymore. :-) The board was pretty clear. That's not a good sign for the customers.
No. I'm not saying this either. I'm saying with some evidence it's worth investing more money into causative experiments. This study is that "some" evidence.

That means double blind experiments. Your correlative studies don't offer enough evidence. Causation is our strongest scientific metric.

Human causative experiments are worth it as well in my mind with paid volunteers who are aware of the risk. But the legal barriers here are likely high.

We can start with chimpanzees.
"literal lifesaver"
what did it actually do?
"The super booster experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly".

Neat phrase for the booster explosion in the mesosphere.
I find this line of thinking to be extremely indicative of the problem, I'd bet, OpenAI was trying to get rid of with Sam.

Here's something to ponder on: The human brain is about the size of an A100, and consumes: 12 watts of power, on average. Its capable of general intelligence and conscious thought.

One problem that companies have is: they're momentum based. Once they realize something is working, and generating profit, they become increasingly calcified toward trying fundamentally new and different things. The best case scenario for a company is to calcify at a local maxima. A few companies try to structure themselves toward avoiding this, like Google; and it turns out, they just lose the ability to execute on anything. Some will stay small, remain nimble, and accomplish little of note. The rest die. That's the destiny for every profit-focused company.

Here's three things I expect to be true: AGI/ASI won't be achieved with LLMs. A sufficiently powerful LLM may be a component of a larger AGI/ASI system, but GPT-4 is already pretty dang sufficiently powerful. And: OpenAI was becoming an extremely effective and successful B2B SaaS Big Tech LLM company. Outing Sam is a gambit; the company could implode, and with no one left AGI/ASI probably won't happen at OpenAI. But the alternative, it seems from the outside, had a higher probability of failure; because the company would become so successful and good at making LLMs that the non-profit's mission is put to the side.

Ilya's superalignment efforts were given 20% of OpenAI's compute capacity. If the foundation's goal is to produce safe AGI; and ideally, you want progress on safety before something unsafe is made; it seems to me that 51% is the totally symbolic but meaningful minimum he should be working with. That's just one example.
Because he’s a person and people make mistakes or don’t think things through?

Maybe his theory of his software was that only a few people an hour might be likely to visit his site.

You should really just read the article, it’s short and good.
I mean yeah anyone can sue anyone, that’s a generally known fact.

But you said: “I fully expect the board to be replaced”

Ok, sure. By who? When?

I don’t see any reason to think that unless there’s a really genuinely large scale staff revolt.
> This seems way, way more reasonable than WeWork.

Really? Altman advertised and marketed himself as someone with no vested financial interest in OpenAI, but then he's going around creating companies with foreign states and companies that will then sell to the non-profit he's CEO of?
Made with PartyKit if anyone wants to make their own :P

https://www.partykit.io
This is why I've said from the beginning that we absolutely know who hit Nordstream. We know the boat, and we probably know the operators by correlating the boat movement with communications records and financial surveillance.

Whoever they were, they're enough on our side(i.e. the west) that we chose not to name and shame them.

My guess is a Ukraine NGO but it could have been anyone with a couple hundred thousand dollars given the equipment required to accurately plant the explosives is so common now.
The other thing that makes me skeptical is some things (asbestos, lead, DDT) turned out to be very obviously bad. There's the same level of panic with plastics (and not just microplastics), but not the same amount of evidence.