skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fair enough if that is what they believe. Personally I find AGI is a bit unrealistic and mentioning it is just for the purpose of creating hype. It feels like something Musk would say to give people this vague futurism belief of their tech that won't actually happen this century if ever.
Not total clickbait but close to it.

The article uses words like “expect”, “might”, “could”, and “hope” throughout. Look at where 2023 is on those charts: way to the left on the x-axis.

I hope batteries really do get cheaper in the future but this is optimistic prediction headlined as present-tense fact.
It would be interesting if Altman and Brockman, assuming that they want accelerated development, ended up in some high level roles at Microsoft. That seems like a win-win-win all the way around since OpenAI could follow their new path, Microsoft and Google could build new things fast, and the open model proponents can keep up their good work.

Except for a clumsy fast press release, this doesn’t really have to end badly for anyone.

Even though I have been an OpenAI fan every since I used their earliest public APIs, I am also very happpy that there is such a rich ecosystem, other commercial players like Anthropic, open model support from Meta and Hugging Face, and the increasingly wonderful small models like Mistral that can be easily run at home.
edit: I meant to say "consistent with your hypothesis" not "favor your hypothesis"
It has a lot of users that keep using it, despite all the fud saying otherwise. And they're shipping more features than before, and experimenting more. So it's bound to either die violently or eventually find another growth engine and become a massive opportunity. The "everything apps" abroad are quite good and there's really no equivalent in the US. Twitter/X could be it, although realistically with all the bad karma that Elon is collecting, it'll be tough. But if the silent majority doesn't care and is willing to try out the new features, it'll probably work. I think.

I think in the tech community and other luminaries, bien-pensants associated groups, we have a tendency to really exaggerate and delude ourselves into believing what we want to be true in the social world. We dislike person A/idea A so we're convinced anything that has to do with it will fail or has to be some sort of negative spin.

In reality I think the average person on this planet is a lot more pragmatic and doesn't necessarily care anywhere as much as loud people do.
Yea cause Steve Jobs dying stopped apple from becoming a juggernaut. People need to stop idolizing the fact that one or two people are "indispensable". Humanity moves forward eventually, even if Einstein wasn't born, someone would have figured out general relativity.
the only way to reach her will be for me to call every
household in her state until I reach her mom

She couldn't, y'know, tell you her mom's number BEFORE the email shuts off? Literally the ONLY solution is to ring every phone in the state?

Maybe she could send you a recording of her mom's phone number, assuming the audio codec doesn't secretly manipulate it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37392708
Why would Greg have said "after learning today's news" if he took part in the vote? If he decided to quit immediately after the vote then why would the board issue a statement saying he was going to stay on? I don't think he took part, the others probably convened a meeting and cast a unanimous vote, issued the statement and then contacted Greg and Sam. The whole thing seems rushed so that's probably how it would have played out.
She seems to have deleted her LinkedIn in the past half hour. Interesting.

Edit: Just had to be logged in to see it :/
Sears used to sell entire homes through the mail [video]
> Sure, the investors own the company and the board answers to them.

Huh? Plenty of startups in the stage being referenced are still majority owned by the founders.
Sam seems to have an enormous ego, so it's not out of the world of possibilities.
You'd have to read the company charter and by-laws.
Not sure what you mean here. They tried to IPO in 2019 and all the dirty laundry came out, scuttled the IPO and Neumann got ousted.
They'd bring to the table having been CEO and CTO of OpenAI. That's a lot of relevant knowledge and experience (the latter being the more important in this case).
There it is!!

There it is!!

“I look forward to building AGI with you.”

vs.

“Together, we will continue to deliver the meaningful benefits of this technology to the world.”

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2023/11/17/a-statement-from...
As long as humans represent the lowest cost actuators, perhaps we'll have an economic role suited to manual labour. But that's not necessarily a situation that lasts a very long time.
Give them $5 trinkets while they spend 2 hours in traffic burning $30 worth of fuel.

Sounds about right for the capitalist pig-dogs.
Tesla is out on account of Musk being their CEO. They've locked in for now through licensing their plug.
But Altman would be a good source. I don't like Kara Swisher, but Altman seems like a credible source here (if that is her source). He surely knows high up people at OpenAI and may have talked to them.
Here is Helen Toner's resumé: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helen-toner-4162439a/details/edu...

I am genuinely flabbergasted as to how she ended up on the board. How does this happen?

I can't even find anything about fellow board member Tasha McCauley...
> If you think they do, feel free to go buy options and bet on the world being taken over by GPUs.

This assumes too much. GPUs may not hold the throne for long, especially given the amount of money being thrown at ASICs and other special-purpose ICs. Besides, as with the Internet, it's likely that AI adoption will benefit industries in an unpredictable manner, leaving little alpha for direct bets like you're suggesting.
He'd still 100% wrong.

"I think you're wrong, so let me lie and manipulate to get my way."

Utter toxic twattery.
I appreciate your take. I didn't know that was his stated reasoning, so that's good to know.

I'm not fully convinced, though...

> if you publish a model with scary capabilities you can’t undo that action.

This is true of conventional software, too! I can picture a politician or businessman from the 80s insisting that operating systems, compilers, and drivers should remain closed source because, in the wrong hands, they could be used to wreak havoc on national security. And they would be right about the second half of that! It's just that security-by-obscurity is never a solution. The bad guys will always get their hands on the tools, so the best thing to do is to give the tools to everyone and trust that there are more good guys than bad guys.

Now, I know AGI is different than convnetional software (I'm not convinced it's the "opposite", though). I accept that giving everyone access to weights may be worse than keeping them closed until they are well-aligned (whenever that is). But that would go against every instinct I have, so I'm inclined to believe that open is better :)

All that said, I think I would have less of an issue if it didn't seem like they were commandeering the term "open" from the volunteers and idealists in the FOSS world who popularized it. If a company called, idk, VirtuousAI wanted to keep their weights secret, OK. But OpenAI? Come on.
> what did he do before open ai?

Worldcoin. Which is, to put it mildly, not positive.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/richardnieva/worldcoin-...
Screen time does not affect child development
re the website name (aipanic) and the attitude that the real problem is the people reaction to ai and not ai itself.

radio erevan q&a

q: what should we do in case of an atomic attack?

a: you dress in a white sheet and head tippy-toe to the cemetery.

q: but why tippy-toe?

a: let's not create panic, comrade.
"Firing Sam is absolutely one of the dumbest things a BOD has ever done in history."

You sure about that? This take is going to age like milk once facts come out.
you're basically saying that his intentions weren't the problem, but that points out everything that's wrong with the situation.

> anti-semitic white nationalist conspiracy theory

and this, is somehow an attempt to skirt around what i'd already written. its not a conspiracy theory, its not white nationalist, its not antisemitic, its just an observation of dynamics between demographics over the latest in modern history.

however, there is in fact a mainstream narrative that scares people with stories of nutjob right-wing conspiracy theories. and sure they exist, in extremely small numbers. the problem is that the people who push this narrative also ignore plenty of racism and spew plenty of conspiracy theories while ignoring extremism on their own side. and anything you say that can possibly look like you're within the bottom 1% of IQ on the right-wing extreme will be used against you through the power of misrepresentation, despite not having any relation nor any appreciation of it.

there's nothing within the substance of the criticism that isn't used hypocritically against who its aimed at.

all i want is to be casual again. over-analyzing simple remarks to attack an individual is a sign of genuine malice, there's more written between the lines of the actions taken against him than whatever meta-conversation someone might imply exists in the background of a single tweet.
What? I understand why people think that its usefulness is overblown (I do too), I understand calling-it pseudo-intellectual too. That's in my opinion a mistake, because my huge issue with it is that it is too intellectual, with almost no real, prescriptive value (too much contradictions). I also think that its writers like to smell their own farts, to take an image from South Park.

But 'not critical thinking'?

I'm not calling you a liar, but are you sure you learned critical theory in your field of study? What was taught about it? Or were you just suffering from second-hand exposure (like you talked to sociology students)? But critical theory is basically applying critical thinking to... Almost everything,and especially social relations and norms (which is why it's not really useful 99% of the time).

I think I have to illustrate it a bit: it was used in archeology (and linguistics) with success. Basically : a lot of European 'war chiefs' tombs were discovered in the 19th century by people who thought only men can use weapons. Someone who took their critical theory course seriously said: 'can we check those bones again to see if they had bias?', and, as easely predicted, having weapons in a cairn did not meant the skeleton was male, thus we no understand info-european culture better than before (which is more in line with ancient Celtic culture than Judeo-Christian culture, especially when it comes to females).

It has to be credited for change in the teaching culture too. The 'teachers must learn as much as they teach' is a direct relative to critical theory. Is that what you are against then? I think I like that position in my mind, but some learn better under pressure and rather have authoritarian teachers (I know I do), so in the end it's a negative,i agree.

Like I said, it's not pseudo-intellectual, it's too intellectual to be effective. The ideas are nice, the praxis is limited. It's not a materialist theory. I also disagree with like 60% of CT critic of Marx (the only think they got right was the critic of ideology, but tbh I think this originally was from Foucault, so not new at all).

Ultimately, I think the best critic of Critical Theory is one that weren't really aimed at it, Baudrillard's hyperreality. (I'm stopping here, sorry, I would have to type twice as much to explain why, just read Baudrillard Simulacrum, it's the most interesting conservative thinker of the era imho) (and yes, he is conservative).
Singapore

One approach is to replicate Singapore massive taxation on vehicles, which disincentivizes ownership.

To own a vehicle in Singapore, it costs ~2.5x the normal cost due to taxes.

As such, it has one of the highest uses of public transit, bicycles and walking in the world.
So, if this is true, the safety folks won despite not having any evidence to support their position.

Am I the only one who remembers the numerous takes describing how GPT-4 was going to automate all jobs and possibly end the world? They have proven themselves completely incapable of evaluating the impact of their technology.
There's a difference between self-dealing you sell the board on and self-dealing you conceal from the board (also, different where its a pure for-profit where the self-dealing happens and where there is a non-profit involved, because the latter not only raises issues of conflict of interest with the firm, but also potential violations of the rules governing non-profits.)
So is curing cancer, but having a North Star is good, even if it’s unattainable.
John, I don't think you understand how corporate law departments work. It's not like a romantic or friend breakup where someone says a mean remark about the other to underline that it's over; there's a big legal risk to the corporate entity from carelessly damaging someone's reputation like that, so it's smarter to just keep the personality/vision disagreements private and limit public statements to platitudes.
I think you're likely vastly overestimating the amount of people in the general public who have any idea who Sam is at all.
Yes? But a human doesn't have to be nearby.
> corporate sponsorship/patronage

Those are the only things that make any sort of sense. The alternative solutions require a reality distortion field to even begin to work. Copyright? It's logically reducible to attempting to sell numbers. It just isn't going to work in a universe where globally networked computers exist. Intellectual work is infinitely abundant once created.

We gotta figure out new business models. What's valuable isn't the end product, it's the labor that creates it. We need ways to get paid either before or during the creative act, not after it. Sponsorship and patronage accomplish this and are perfectly ethical. I see artists accepting commissions and requests for a price, that's another business model that satisfies the requirements I mentioned. GNU once proposed a vision where all software was free and people would hire programmers to work on the features they were interested in.
It means there was no shifty business.
> its not good that (if he's innocent) this is about the only thing people have to speculate on.

Agree completely. Super odd, especially where they essentially claim Sam is a liar
Scala Community Email Regarding John De Goes
Maybe if all his posts before today weren't all lowercase.
EV for mining is already a big deal: you don't want to run diesel equipment underground in an enclosed space.

The optimisation for mining would be replacing more of the surface diesel generators with solar + batteries as a logistics optimisation.
That's a parody account
I wrote that post.

I generally advise developers, and believe most of my US colleagues also advise developers, to treat past releases under MIT and BSD terms as irrevocable, even though they don't explicitly say they are. But that conclusion comes as much from practicalities as legalities.

If the MIT license lets people make and share copies willy-nilly, online and off, how do you go about notifying every potential recipient that you've taken that license back? Even if you send a notice to just one user you want to block, who wants to see that on the Internet within hours? Who wants to be the company potentially arguing in court to undermine the reliability of MIT license grants generally?

On the legal side, sketching very roughly: The general rule seems to be that non-exclusive licenses without terms remain revocable by default. But in what circumstances won't a court find a contract or quasi-contract, applying those rules instead?

So much better to get ahead of all this head scratching by saying in the terms that those giving can't take them back. Alas, literally nobody's got commit bit on what we call "MIT", "BSD", &c. anymore. But we made very sure to do it the Blue Oak Model License: https://blueoakcouncil.org/license/1.0.0#reliability Other, more recent forms, notably Apache 2.0, say it, as well.

If you're reading this and thinking about a particular bit of software, don't rely on what I've written here. Talk through it with a lawyer who's up to speed on the latest, will ask you for specifics, and will stand professionally responsible for their guidance. I won't.
> capitalization breaks flow and parsing for me.

It can also break meaning though. Try de-capitalizing:

* I helped my Uncle Jack off a horse.
I'm extremely glad they didn't, it was perfect the way it was. That topic absolutely demanded a humanistic presentation. It's a tragedy in subject matter and tone, not a film meant to educate the viewers about the ins and outs of how AI works. There are plenty of resources for that elsewhere, the team behind this movie did the right thing to treat it with appropriate weight and not try to drown that all out with technobabble.
That's possibly legitimate news, but that's not what the page linked covers.
Non profits too often can be uniquely bureaucratic, undertrained in governance and efficiency, and more tied to deeper personal interpretations or none at all and being open to bouts of oversimplification.
Microsoft should now hire Altman in the ultimate double bluff.
How exactly does a "misaligned AGI" turn into a bad thing?

How many times a day does your average gas station get fuel delivered?
How often does power infrastructure get maintained?
How does power infrastructure get fuel?

Your assumption about AGI is that it wants to kill us, and itself - its misalignment is a murder suicide pact.
Oh just filter by Last 24hr since it's fresh news. There's like 3-4 right at the top you'll notice. Not too difficult.
Hopefully not too pedantic but Albania is not in the EU.
> That is an incredibly weak and ill-informed method for vetting technical matters.

So is your claim that, because a "standard" says something and claims it's a "specification", that is sufficient to guarantee that every implementation does exactly what the "standard" or "specification" says.

> Python doesn't have a standard

Again, you're quibbling. It has a language reference, which I linked to, and which is what is used to determine what implementations count as Python implementations.

At this point I don't think we have enough common ground for a useful discussion.
> Why would Greg have agreed to the language in the press release

We have no evidence he agreed or didn't agree to the wording. A quorum of the board met, probably without the chairman, and voted the CEO of the company and the chairman of the board out. The chairman also happens to have a job as the President of the company. The President role reports to the CEO, not the board. Typically, a BOD would not fire a President, the CEO would. The board's statement said the President would continue reporting to the CEO (now a different person) - clarifying that the dismissal as board chairman was separate from his role as a company employee.

Based on the careful wording of the board's statement as well as Greg's tweet, I suspect he wasn't present at the vote nor would he be eligible to vote regarding his own position as chairman. Following this, the remaining board members convened with their newly appointed CEO and drafted a public statement from the company and board.
Then why aren't they accepting new customers
Definitely lots of tape and bubblegum holding things together. Like any fast growing company! And this one is breaking speed records.
If I had a dollar for every Ivy school student whose parents were government functionaries in poor second and third world countries I could probably get a few years of Amazon Prime. But so what? I think it's good for the talent, and good for this country.
It's a fair point. Want to note one thing I found strange: the city I sold in (very hot market) had 3%/3% as standard, and the one I bought in (less hot) had 2.4%/2.4% as standard (at least in the area I bought). I don't know the dynamics of the industry here enough to know why that would be.
The article seems to say that the ADL stopped using that definition years ago. Why did he wait until this week to tweet about it? Especially by replying to a vague tweet about "Jewish communities"? Seems more like damage control to me
A more plausible theory is that the training actually relies on a ton of human labeling behind the scenes (I have no idea if this is true or not).
What’s he supposed to do?
Or that the drama singularity is always positioned just barely at the event horizon.
KeyBase could have been that service. I really wish they'd stayed focused on identification rather than crypto wallets and chat.
But have you seen her in those sunglasses! She's so cool!
GPT-4 is so expensive. for reading and editing a text I usually use 6k tokens ends up being 25 cents via api. do it 1000s times you are going to spend a fortune. 0.03 + 0.06 is extremely expensive.
I mean even the first sentence of the article is factually incorrect. He did not "step down".
> Altman, unusually, didn’t have equity in OpenAI

> Altman was part of the original group of tech leaders that invested $1 billion to launch OpenAI in 2015

Err, does he have equity or does he not?
It would be quite simple for the firmware to handle such use cases as that with some battery management.

They just want to control exactly how you use their products
So Rust code may look jarring in-general compared to dynamic languages, and this is because Rust is a strongly typed language, but on top of that its type system also gives guarantees around data races that other typed languages don't prevent. So most Rust frameworks seem "noisy" when doing more than Hello World in my experience.

In my experience Rocket is intentionally less "batteries-included" than newer versions of frameworks like Rails and Django (especially around querying databases), but provides an opinionated approach that has minimal boilerplate in the same spirit as those frameworks. If you just want to write a Rust web service and get to the business logic, Rocket is a great choice especially if you're coming from another language.
Hypothetically how would you handle an incompetent nonprofit board?
I once saw a GBI test exercise; it looked like nothing so much as a "Missile Command" arcade screen, just in live action.
To be clear, I'm not trying to exonerate the government here. I totally agree that the government failed to keep its promise to make sure the tax money that went to the ISPs actually got used for its intended purpose. I just also think the companies knew full well what they were supposed to do, but chose not to do it because they knew the politicians weren't going to actually hold them accountable. Both sides are at fault here.
Hippie computer worship seems like indirectly self worship as the creators.
> Imagine if you were the CTO of a company, massively underestimated your AWS bill,

Microsoft is investing billions into OpenAI, and much of it is in the form of cloud services. I doubt there was a surprise bill for that sort of thing. But if there was, and Altman is the one who ordered it, I could see the board reacting in a similar way.
Why would you consider the fact that she was born in Albania to be suspicious?
For any additional questions or inquiries, you can reach out to us through the Indiegogo messaging system or contact us at help@fxbulksms.com.
The coordinated and disciplined communication from both suggests this wasn’t a surprise. Is this a planned move in a grander scheme?
It's usual in chats, not for formal writing like officially announcing your resignation. At least that's my impression.
He has every reason to claim that "top folks" were on his side regardless of whether it's true, and nothing to lose if it's false.
I mean, the Simpsons has predicted several monumental events multiple times in its history. Random can be just that good.