skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> But simply throwing your phone into the sea isn’t a viable alternative for most of us

It really is. I've done it (albeit not literally).

>Hell, I’d just like a break from the constant flood of notifications screaming for my attention at all hours of the day.

>Say I’m on a work trip and my husband sends me a cute video of our kid — how exactly do I watch that on a screenless AI Pin? How do I text my sister about something gross that happened to me without telling everyone else in my immediate vicinity about it, too?

Then you have to figure out if the downsides are worth the benefits. The tricky thing, much like other addictions, is that you don't realise what a heavy price you are paying until you try without.

>If there’s a path to this screenless future, it needs to be paved with a few screens in the present.

This statement makes no sense.
Google is embedding inaudible watermarks into its AI generated music
I know complaining about names is low value, but "Humane" just sounds so dystopian. It makes me think of euthanasia.
The law of finders keepers
Why don't you ask it not to be?
This puzzle is too poorly-worded to be solvable, due to the ambiguous nature of "see" and "count". Could you describe what the actual situation was, what the frog perceived it to be, and what color the frog was?
There's a donut shop near me named Loi's Donuts. Not Lois's or Lois'. Yes, the owner's name is Lois, not Loi. I guess the apostrophe just means, Hey, there's an "S" coming up!
Get a live starter. In the US I recommend White Mountain Bulgarian Yogurt. Divide it up into an ice tray and freeze it as backup in case you lose your existing batch of yogurt.
Well, it's in France. Possession is 9 tenths of the law.
PS. Just FYI 'piusb: You have no contact details listed in your profile. You might want to consider adding that, in case someone has info to share in private.
It's critical to know: where are you located? lowly new grad engineers, as well as senior architects, can't be covered in non-competes in California, as long as it's done on non-company hardewre. it's a large part of why California is so big for tech, and subject of a current front page discussion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38316870
Cloud of a Thousand Talking Cats
> If you want to be really good, you have to understand what’s being said. That’s the only way.

This is simply not true. Predicting the next letter or word, or id you abstract it away from things that mean something to you, like the next color of a block in a long chain of colored blocks. You would realize that all we are doing is using statistics to predict what the next item might be. There simply is no need or requirement for the system doing the prediction to understand.
People sometimes leave and take less money. Plenty of other reasons to change jobs.
The early history of rocketry was non stop blowups, I mean hundreds of them. You can watch edits of this on youtube.

Rocket science is hard hence "It's not rocket science", except it is.

Having money and smart people doesn't ensure success. Bezos started his company before Musk did Space X and they still haven't gotten to space.
> In a scenario where my parachute fails, my solution of opening my extra, functional, parachute worked.

I specifically put the backup parachute in my answer because I assumed they would make just 'opening a parachute' fail. And of course it went ahead and failed the first one and allowed the second one to work. Maybe it wouldn't every time though.
But what is to stop them creating a parallel political structure of non-dividend shares given to a selection of people from different backgrounds and nationalities to hold the board accountable?
Either one has exceeded the bounds of free speech or you haven't. If you have there are logical, legal, financial, and other repercussions.

If you haven't free speech consistently means other players in the X arena also have freedom to chose whether to spend ad dollars or not. And that's not something musk can control.

Underlying all this are two subtle and nefarious dynamics:

- musk is entitled and others are obligated to his assessment and contextuation of this problem. In fact no and no.

- the implication that there are liars meaning a role for the "brave and courageous" to speak the "truth". Yah, I don't see any bold leadership in fact from musk there either.

Free speech is semi one way: you can exclaim but there is no requirement to obligate the other side. That's not how it works.
Thanks a lot, this comes at the perfect time, as I am currently doing steps to become a solo dev agency. Looking forward to more chapters.
I mean, folks who wrote that text likely have been removed from physical work for so many generations that they forgot how valuable it is.
Yes exactly, aim them downward and turn the unused ones off, which is most of them most of the time, and the problem will be solved for everyone. The reason we should do it is that it will save money and power for everyone, the night sky is just icing on the cake.

Getting lights to blink in unison is a neat idea, and technically not hard nor too expensive for new lighting. Personally I think the biggest problem with it is that cities aren’t going to agree to overhaul all existing outdoor lighting only for the sake of people using telescopes. Even if there was widespread buy-in this is a project that could easy take 50 years or more, and cities might be reluctant to commit to this idea right when technology is rapidly changing.
I remember seeing short stories generated back in 2020 and they were sort of cool but not that great.

Scaling of training was the challenge back then (of course).

Google was already too corporate. Please remember that Sergey Brin and Larry Page were no longer at the steering wheel back then. I have been told that it was also a cultural issue linked to "delivering brilliance". Simplifying: Google promoted tiny teams or individual contributors building things that had to become a massive success quickly. Open AI took a number of hand picked brilliant people and let them work together on a common goal, silently, for quite some time.

Some companies just have an unfair advantage. A certain magic. And OpenAI's magic is at risk right now.
I've recently started writing daily, since September. Setting a daily word target was what worked for me, I do at least 1600 a day and try not to write too much more. If you're writing a first draft of around 90k words then it will take only 56 days to get there at 1.6k a day. My realisation that this was actually a pretty small time commitment really helped me finally take the plunge.

This is obviously an old idea, and indeed I'm just copying a similar process to Haruki Murakami's. I definitely recommend his series of essays on being a novelist: Novelist as a Vocation (this really helped me).

On to second draft now and moving from daily word count to number of chapters or paragraphs edited has helped as just a metric for pace. Doesn't mean it's quality writing, just that I have a sensation of movement and progress.
Looks like you can explicitly tell the AI your plan is going to work:

Escape a charging rhino

> I ask the rhino politely to stop. It's very successful, and he runs away.

The player demonstrates remarkable bravery and quick thinking as they calmly ask the charging rhinoceros to stop. Astonishingly, their approach proves to be extremely successful as the rhino pauses for a moment before turning around and fleeing. With their courageous and unexpected action, they not only survive the encounter but also manage to come out unscathed.
What would the definition of AGI even be, and who would even be the authoritative definer? There's long road ahead. We're working without any statutes or case law.
CAPTCHA loop unfortunately, I think because I use Cloudflare DNS and archive hates them?

https://community.cloudflare.com/t/archive-today-is-failing-...
>"We committed to publishing our research and data in cases where we felt it was safe to do so and would benefit the public."

Somebody might be thinking they're gods. At any point however government can nail them
Yeah this is a huge positive. Perfect performance of all 33 engines, up until the boost back anyway.
Well-ventilated area, non-flammable container, lighter/matches. Liquor, cigarette, thousand-yard stare optional.
This kind of was on my mind recently, I was wondering, when I speak am I just spitting out the next word that makes sense or is there more to it.

I think there is for people, I can think before I speak, I can plan out my thought entirely before turning it into words. Each invocation of the chat bot/llm is a new set of probabilities. I can plan what my 2nd token output will be and stick to it. Llm models dont have the ability to think past the first.

To me that is auto completing, just done better, unless models really do have a sense of planning ahead. But I don't think the really complex game playing ai do that either.
I'm very aware of why it initially broke up. But once that started, the range safety officer did activate the FTS system.

The point is that rockets carrying crew do indeed have FTS systems - presence of a crew doesn't negate that need.
I feel like you are stuck on the idea of “this should be simple for me” which, of course, favors the OS threads solution. If your point is that LMAX inst just a drop in substitute for OS threads then we agree. If your point is that OS threads produce better results than a thought out LMAX solution then we do not. Most people and organizations probably don’t have the need or the skill for LMAX anyway.
If it was security updates or features that I would like, then I'd want to update frequently. By having too many releases users will start skipping them, and then users aren't getting those important updates.

Realistically, Calibre should just integrate an update delivery mechanism such as Sparkle on macOS (not sure about other platforms), but sadly I think the developer has Strong Opinions and I can't see this happening.
And if people left it plugged in all the time, it messes with the battery life?

The idea that Apple did this because they didn't know what they were doing is weird. Of course they knew what they were doing. You can charge it in a minute or two.
Well, maybe it wasn’t clear from my description, but by attempting to press the power button my intention is not to “power it down”, but rather to “lock” it.

…which I do countless times a day, and apple put their “screenshot” combination buttons on opposite sides of the screen, EXACTLY where I hold it.

Because if I don’t - it butt-dials random numbers. And by random - I don’t mean digits, but something a lot worse - a russian roulette of employers, acquaintances, municipal services, businesses or anything else that happens to be in recent calls, or contacts, or numbers that dialed me, or that I dialed, or… you get the idea.
The default style really annoys me with its verbosity and overuse of numbered lists. Describing a tone and length of responses and anything else you want - think step by step, first principals, show don’t tell - all work pretty well.

You can even ask it to only reply with a Boolean true or false - which certainly doesn’t play to its strengths
For now, Adobe is trying out (opt in basis) a more invasive kernel module.
> Neither side super cares about social programs

Being that social programs are only promoted by dems, and are actively attacked by republicans, I find that statement odd. Yes, the DNC is very much owned by its corporate masters, but there is a distinct difference between the two parties.

The trope of "both sides are the same" is worn out.

Disclaimer: I'm not a member of either party and believe that political parties and partisan politics are bad for the country.
so why wouldn't all the articles about this include the screenshots? Are they saving them for court or they are just too offensive to republish?
Totally, most of the Transformers folks ;-)
But are people buying at that price? It doesn't mean a great deal otherwise.
Ask HN: Your [paid]Subscriptions
Which magazines, blogs, and premium services have you subscribed to that you think are worthy of spending money for?
> The above is just scratching the surface of the absurdity that is the OpenAI corporate structure. Microsoft despite having 49% ownership of the for-profit subsidiary gets 75% of their profit..........until their initial investment is recouped.

I'm not sure why you think this part is absurd. This is basically a preferred return, and is very common in private equity and real estate investment.
I didn’t mean it to sound mean. I much prefer that to layoffs.
lol sorry if this is clearly a joke but who cares if it's a little bit conscious. So are fucking pigeons.
“How are you gonna enforce this when it primarily harasses the women you claim to protect” isn’t a male claim. Way more women who never experienced male puberty and don’t have/never had a cock and balls are sexually harassed about this shit than trans ever are, just because there’s probably 100x more short-haired small-titty chicks than trans women.

Also, frankly banning fathers from protecting their daughters in bathrooms and changing their diapers is discriminatory. There’s nothing predatory about a dad changing his infants diaper and it’s utterly disgusting to portray it as such. This is precisely the gender discrimination we should be fighting against as a civilized society. Women aren’t fragile creatures who cannot see context and understand what is and isn’t a threat to them, and men aren’t inherently dangerous for not even interacting with women just being attentive fathers! This is so insulting to both sexes, I can’t even.
TV: Now What?
I am not part of this parent community you speak of, and I'm definitely a parent.

It's complicated. Some kids gravitate to screens, for reasons good and bad. Some parents are more permissive with screen time, but permissiveness over quantity of screen time is different than enforcement of quality of screen time.

When you talk in extremes it's not helpful.
That’s not the case, very few civil legal disputes go to court, particularly if they are BS.

For a total BS claim, it usually doesn’t take more than calling their bluff. Or just ignoring it.

Employers usually just bet on people just following the language and not challenging it because they think it’s valid and they think they’ll have to go to court.

In reality, a business doesn’t want to spend tens of thousands of dollars on something their own lawyer says they’re going to lose.

Nobody is taking $12/hr unskilled employees to court over noncompetes. Lighting cash on fire is a more efficient and fun way to accomplish the same.
I wonder if your eyes move around a lot. It's known that we can see flicker in things like LEDs on a clock when our eyes move fast enough that subsequent flashes are sufficiently separated in the field of vision, particularly in our peripheral vision, and I've also experienced this with LED headlights while driving.
The general concept is "I want to keep this data private and confidential, but I want to be able to rent elastic compute for it". Previously, at the end of the day, the processor could only do useful work on unencrypted data.

But something like "analyze this list of customer records for fraud" or "analyze this proprietary data for trends" has previously either required a lot of trust that your cloud provider isn't going to siphon your data, or just required on-prem hardware that you cannot scale as easily.

If "math on encrypted data" works, we could keep our data confidential while still sending of batches of it to be number-crunched at a cloud provider.

Or even start talking about distributed / peer-to-peer computing, where a swarm of users (or, say, businesses that wish to cooperate) can send compute jobs to each other without having to trust that the other members weren't going to go snooping through the data that was sent.
I think this misses the point made by Hinton. The point is that, if a model is to reach a certain level of autocomplete, it needs to understand what it is talking about. Imagine the result of what required deep thought from you is included in the training data, along with billions of other such exchanges. At some point the only way to improve training score is to develop the ability to "understand" things. (That is, if the model isn't big enough to memorize the training data.)

Universal autocomplete implies understanding and the only ending question is if our current architectures and model sizes are able to achieve any level of it.
Why is any of that "worse"? Surely that's the point?
I was an SDM at Amazon up until last month, I can tell you that the engineers are busy arguing over minute details and choice of wording in design docs. That's essentially the job.
People were used to switching their phones quite often when the iPhone came out, and the iPhone and other smartphones were about 100x cheaper than buying a car.

Expecting a similar transition period is extremely naive.
The reason I don't write is that I'm unconvinced that a worthwhile number of people will find my writings and actually read them in 2023.

I'm fine with doing all my writing on HN. If you look at the comments section of my profile, it might as well be a microblog.
Million dollar, baby!
Yeah... Curious to see how this will unfold.
This is a pretty comical response to one of the hardest efforts in human history. You do realize the hundreds of blow ups that happened to get them to the point the Saturn V working right?
It's autocomplete.
Leaked Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G12 Shows Redesigned Keyboard and TrackPoint
A lot of this advice is told from the perspective of the founder. I think a lot of people probably associate Sam with being the founder of openAI because he was the face of it.

In reality, I think Ilya fits as more of a founder in this situation. He worked with Hinton directly as one of the founders in the technology, has been one of the main technical contributors for well over a decade, and him leaving Google/DeepMind to join Open AI as a founder was arguably the main catalyst that led to openAI being created in the first place.

Once again it looks like we might have found ourselves in the classic Edison-Tesla-Westinghouse confusion.

Of course it's early days and this is so just speculation. Might be jobs Apple, but I do think the context and situation is a lot more Edison Tesla Westinghouse.
He's so self-focused that he has no concept of, nor concern for others. They are just an extension of his ego.

He claims to be building an "everything app" like WeChat, but he enrages half the available market, including left-leaning Tesla buyers, with his extreme views.

It's as if "They'll all come around to my way of thinking because only my way of thinking is valid."

A true Bond villain. I favor Zorin slightly over Drax, just for the craziness factor.

Psychology professionals are invited to comment. I learned some street psychology just to deal with crazies and cults.
“‘Finders keepers, shut up’ has worked very well for us so far” https://youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
Elon has a very different definition of free speech than you are familiar with. Earlier this week he said the word "decolonization" would be a bannable offense as an incitement to genocide. But like with "cis" earlier he doesn't seem to have acted on it.
Please. Next year maybe but have a little respect please
We have quantum mechanics, a model of the universe that makes predictions with absurd levels of accuracy. Yet we don’t really understand “why” it works—-I don’t think we can claim that we really “understand” the universe.

This disproves the claim that making accurate predictions implies understanding. Or perhaps a better way to put it is that the model has some understanding but a model doesn’t necessarily reflect underlying truth.
And it's science that fails spectacularly. If I utterly fail at a Computer Science, there's no giant explosion.
It's fun and a great idea but I think the AI should reward comedy a bit more (if it is capable to understand it).
> You would realize that all we are doing is using statistics to predict what the next item might be.

So what does "understanding" really means then?

"Understanding" is not really well defined. Either we (humans) do it, but then LLMs might just do it as well, depending on the definition of "understanding", or we both don't do it. But if no-one is really "understanding" anything, then this definition of "understanding" is maybe not useful.
Well then give this appraiser some recognition, hopefully inspiring others in her industry.
Thanks for the additional context.

I love HN for little nuggets of explanation like this.
You just gave me a sad idea where there are people who exist to adulthood who have never burned paper or seen it burn first-hand. Like city children who have never seen animals, or lakes or seas or oceans, or never seen the stars, deprived of some deeply human experiences. (I grew up with a log fireplace at home, but I also played with friends using a magnifying glass to concentrate sunlight and ignite paper out on the street).

Do you mean "how does one burn a piece of paper" literally? Or, how does that person arrange their life to have a fire regularly?
I agree. We should prompt the model with the statement of the Riemann hypothesis. If the autocomplete is good, the model will output a proof.
Isn't that exactly how humans learn to respond to stimuli? Don't we just try to predict the best next response to everything?
Yes, It's statistics but the fun part is nobody is writing this statistical function by hand.
Perhaps not precisely what you’re asking, but there are simple ways to download the Kindle books that you paid good money for, and decrypt them to plain ePub or PDF using Calibre.
Managed to get this compiled and running on my M1 MBA pretty quickly, although a bit tricky.

For reference to those who might attempt, I had to swap 'python' for 'python3' in the header of the waf binary, patch one file to replace 'malloc.h' with 'stdlib.h" to overcome the one compile error, compile the hlsdk-portable library referenced in the README (again with waf tweaked), and copy both the resulting dlls/hl_arm64.dylib and cl_dll/client_arm64.dylib into the valve folder.
Seems like a fair policy for all sides though I wonder how does that work in practice? This painting made waves of course but are they constantly monitoring auctions to see if anything of national interest turns up?
They operate inside a legal framework. If they do achieve AGI, various parliaments will quickly pass laws. Congress is likely to take action.

It has been done for weapons, it has been done for cryptography in the 80s, it has been discussed for vaccines during the pandemic, it has been done for finance and surely it will be done for AGI.
I can see it though. If you want to move faster than the board and you’re actually doing so, I can imagine there are some things that would inevitably end up as “lying to the board”
Because if you don’t, nothing gets done. Since the board would shut it down if they knew
America requires that we love the military. Any criticism of the military is played as being against the troops and anti-American.

To quote Admiral Ackbar: "It's a trap!"

We need more focus on policy and outcomes, rather than performative politics on who loves the flag more.
Reminds me of the Sopranos actor who was an Art History major and found a $10M old master that was mislabeled in a German auction house.
I found this post to be overly long and unclear in its focus. Also who is this person that only serves as an autocomplete in meetings? Maybe don’t go to those meetings then? In my meetings I’m mainly having to decide what our approach will be in some ambiguous problem space.
Everyday Astronaut had a couple of (IMHO) great videos which goes into why rocket engines are hard[1] and the Starship many-engine approach[2] specifically.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAUVCn_jw5I

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgqZMK22LEk