skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I suppose "safety" means different things to different people. Elon seems to be of the type that cares about existential risks. One reading of him, is that he sees both Tesla, Twitter and SpaceX as tools to mitigate what he sees as existential risks.

In the case of Tesla, to accelerate the development of electric cars, in the case of Twitter, to reduce the probability of civil war and in the case of SpaceX to eventually have humanity (or our descendants) spread out enough that a single catastrophic event (like a meteor, gray goo or similar) doesn't wipe us out all at once.

His detractors obviously will question both his motives and methods, but if we imagine he's acting out of good faith (whether or not he's wrong), his approach to AI fits the pattern, including his story about why he helped with the startup of OpenAI in the first place.

From someone with an ex-risk approach to AI safety, the first concern is, to quote Ilya from the recent Alignment Workshop "As a bare minimum, let's make it so that if the tech does 'bad things', it's because of its operators, rather than due to some unexpected behavior".

In other words, for someone concerned with existential risk, even intentional "bad use" such as using AI for killer robots at a large scale in war or for a dictator to use AI to suppress a population are secondary concerns.

And it appears to me that Elon and Ilya both have this outlook, while Sam may be more concerned with shorter term social impacts.
This is the thing. A degree is closed-ended. You build things that can be done within a deadline, and have been done within that deadline, by hundreds of groups before you. You study well known problems that are described in many ways in various sources.

When you work, you work on building things that don't have a specific end goal, without a specific deadline, where the success criteria are also not purely academic. To the extent your problem is technical, you may be exploring the cave for a heck of a long time with no light.

You end up fighting with organizational issues as well.
I think you’re missing the point. How can I browse Youtube in mpv?
Using firefox 118 on Mac here and seeing no issues. Videos load instantly or near instantly.
In the end it’s all about business, and it’s not in Microsoft’s interest to destroy OpenAI. It’s in Microsoft’s interest to keep the relationship warm, because it’s basically two different philosophies that are at odds with each other, one of which is now being housed under Microsoft R&D.

For all we know, OpenAI may actually achieve AGI, and Microsoft will still want a front row seat in case that happens.
I haven't paid a lot of attention to Anthropic. Are you able to summarize, or link anything about, those events for those who missed it? Particularly the "training to lie" bit
How does Google benefit?
It solves hard crashes during DNS lookups by wasting a few kilobytes of RAM. Seems like a fine solution to me. The memory leak only occurs in circumstances where the program would've crashed or started messing with random memory anyway.

A proper solution would be to either nuke put/setenv() in the C standard library or redesign the *env() calls entirely, but that would break existing programs.
Krita support for generative inpainting has been around since the beginning of the Stable Diffusion craze. It was one of the first AI projects I saved. It definitely predates Photoshop adding it.

Off the top of my head, this plugin is from Nov 6, 2022, and I know there were others before this (or maybe it was just this shared in earlier form).
https://github.com/sddebz/stable-diffusion-krita-plugin

Stable Diffusion heralded an explosion in generative AI that predated ChatGPT. Weird how OpenAI got all the credit when it was Stable Diffusion that first opened the gates.
The headline makes perfect sense from a purely first principles perspective. If your grid is dependent on oil, replacing gas cars with electric cars won't change anything. However, if people start using bikes rather than cars, there's a lot of savings in not having to drag a 1 ton metal cage around with you.
Can someone check gmail as well? It loads so slowly under firefox.
Which board? The board of the for-profit subsidiary or the non-profit parent?
I would have preferred Sam launched a new venture with fresh capital.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38327236
I’m not saying that. I think the main people pushing for that were Altman-aligned members of the management, staff, and investor populations, not the board.

The board was considering the requests to bring back Sam because they realized they were handling the situation badly and didn’t want the organization to blow up and fail at its mission, but they refused to resign unless and until suitably mission-aligned replacement board members were agreed upon (note that profit is not the nonprofit’s mission).

Of course they didn’t bring him back in the end, or resign, after all.

If the board had yielded to similarly minded replacements and brought back Sam, that isn’t the same as exonerating him, only realizing how badly they handled the firing. I can imagine that an independent investigation into the truth of the existing board’s allegations would still have been ordered by the new board, just as the new interim CEO actually did. If it was truly just a personality clash leading to mistrust, that would probably be the end of it. If there truly was malfeasance that makes Sam and unsuitable CEO, they’d probably then engage a PR firm to help make the case to the world far more persuasively than happened on Friday.

Yes, this is speculation, but I’ve been a nonprofit director and president myself, and if I were on that replacement board it’s what I’d do. In that case, the organization was much lower-profile than OpenAI, and we were spare-time volunteers with a tiny budget. The closest we came to self-dealing is when a long-time director wanted to become a paid software engineer contractor for us, but he left the board in order to make that ethically clear, and the remaining board approved the arrangement. Nothing hidden or dishonest there, and he’s continued to be a great help to the organization.

(Disclaimer: I stopped my own involvement with the org over 4 years ago myself, but that was truly because the rest of my life got too busy. There was no drama or anything around that.)
The law you're mentioning is the “Digital Markets Act”, and it's a new law that will apply to Google, Apple, Amazon, Samsung and others, not having to do with any enforcement of “antitrust” laws upon Microsoft.

https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-...

Furthermore, are we talking about the same Microsoft that:

1. forced usage of Microsoft Edge, while also actively blocking circumvention mechanisms;

2. that keeps hijacking searches for Chrome, or Firefox;

3. that has telemetry in Edge that can't be disabled;

4. and that, upon first opening Edge, it asks you to agree to data sharing with the entire advertising industry?

---

You basically assert that Google is receiving preferential treatment from the EU, yet provided absolutely no evidence for it.
I believe Microsoft R&D has always been a widely respected and culturally “different” org than the rest of the Microsoft org.
There was just a post on this website where GPT4 failed to perform basic reasoning tasks better than minimum paid mechanical turk "microworkers".
Oh, and they also falsely show "4K" in the video quality icon, but "accidentally" play a 720p or even worse quality stream. If you manually select the 4K stream quality, then and only then will YouTube deign to show 4K to you.
IMHO, this kind of things are not done by engineers.

* Marketing/Sales asks engineers to add a feature flag to sleep N milliseconds for their research: "how slowing down impacts your revenue"
* engineer adds a flag, with different control parameters
* Some genius in Product figures this out and updates the experiment to slow down for competitors

When company gets a backlash from public: "oops, we forgot to clean up all parameters of feature flag and it accidentally impacted Firefox"
> From my understanding executives, particularly ones with large equity stakes, are not exempt from non-competes.

Your understanding is incorrect. There are some exceptions where noncompetes are allowed in California, but they mostly involve the sale or dissolution of business entities as such. There is no exception for executives, and none for people who happen to have equity stakes of any size.
Looks like they'll mostly move to Microsoft and destroy the founding charter of OpenAI in the process.
> My understanding is the people responsible for the Unix POSIX standards did not like the design of these functions, so they refused to implement them.

And herein lies the actual issue: C has a sh*tton of API issues in its standard library, and people really want to fix as many of them as possible whenever possible, but doing so will destabilize the standard so most of them won't ever be accepted. In the case of Annex K many clearly felt that the size-restricted API alone is not enough, because it is still easy to desynchronize the buffer and the allocated size, and it's a good point if we ignore an obvious counterpoint of the lack of safe `getenv` alternatives in the standard library at all... I wonder about the alternative universe where we have two distinct standards for the C language and C standard library so that the library standard is much easier to fix and adapt.
It is perfectly reasonable and consistent for one thread to set an environment variable while other threads are reading different environment variables.
Sam and Greg will presumably start with a fork of OpenAI source code, given that Microsoft has full rights to the IP.
"Also like, the trench run trench ends in the exhaust vent (?) while the equatorial trench seems to go all around without end?"

That probably explains my understanding that it wasn't the equatorial trench...
> Please show me from which book you got the idea that env variables are expected to change throughout the lifetime of a process.

POSIX specifies two functions that alter environment variables. It could've specified that env variables are supposed to be mapped into a read-only memory page where available to indicate that they shouldn't be altered, but it didn't, and instead provided an explicit read/write system.
and those values will make them go bankrupt before creating AGI
Indeed it seems like all of this recent drama and moving around is exactly for this purpose.

Starting as a Non-Profit, naming it "Open" (the implication of the term Open in software is radically different from how they operate) etc. Now seems entirely driven by marketing and fiscal concerns. Feels like a bait and switch almost.

Meanwhile there's a whole strategy around regulatory capture going on, clouded in humanitarian and security concerns which are almost entirely speculative. Again, if we put our cynical hat on or simply follow the money, it seems like the whole narrative around AI safety (etc.) that is perpetuated by these people is FUD (towards law makers) and to inflate what AI actually can to (towards investors).

It's very hard for me right now not to see these actions as part of a machiavellistic strategy that is entirely focused around power, while it adorns itself with ethical concerns.
Sure but this situation overrrides that. Sam has a lot of bargaining power.
No, the software part really is trivial compared to getting developers and gamers on board. Epic failing at it is an anecdote, not proof of anything.
A calculator does have an excellent understanding of math.

In that case, it's an understanding directly programmed in by developers who have an excellent understanding of math.

In the case of a LLM, there is no direct programming of any understanding, and the version best able to predict next tokens developed its own 'understandings.'

The problem is that when sufficiently complex, we really have no idea just what those understandings are, so it could be "this word often goes after these other words" or "given the context I should be happy and a happy person would say this."

Those are two very different levels of understanding, and while research over the past year has pretty well demonstrated that at least some world modeling in linear representations is occurring, those findings are in toy models and something as complex as GPT-4 is a giant black box where what % if understandings are surface statistics and what % are something more is pretty much a giant question mark.
Can you expand on your definition of "lack of sleep"? Since sleep is something that isn't uniformly measurable and is both relative and subjective to the individual what are you measuring to consider it lacking?

Sleep doesn't really work in the realm of arithmetic and there is no way to credit extra sleep because you slept in on Saturday so how can you "lack" sleep because you stayed up longer one night verse the previous night?

What if you did an extra exercise that day are you now lacking sleep because you exerted yourself more?
That would be very bad.
> They must be happy they managed to get a ‘white man bad’ comment in there.

They also dedicated a whole article to complaining that it's whites doing the most for environmental movements. Their conclusion is always the same, no matter the facts.

Why are so many white men trying to save the planet without the rest of us? Climate change affects minorities and women, the elderly and the poor. But the leadership of the environmental movement is pale and male. That doesn't look like progress - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/08/white-...
Good luck convincing the proletariate to lower their emissions when they can see the great and good living it large.
OpenAI was growing like crazy and while I typically only use it the generate new content, many people I observe just ask it anything. Instead of going to Google they just go to ChatGPT.

The current situation created a mess at OpenAI which should slow it down and permanently damage it‘s reputation somewhat. If I were Google and could choose either outcome, that‘s the outcome I would have chosen.
I don't claim that OpenAI will be the same without Sam, but Sam will be powerless without OpenAI.

What I say is, both lost their status quo (OpenAI as the performer, Sam as the leader), and both will have to re-adjust and re-orient.

The magic smoke has been let out. Even if you restore the "configuration" of OpenAI with Sam and all employees before Friday, it's almost impossible to get the same company from these parts.

Again, Sam was part of what made OpenAI what it is, and without it, he won't be able to perform the same. Same is equally valid for OpenAI.

Things are changing, it's better to observe rather than dig for an entity or a person. Life is bigger than both of them, even when combined.
> torching towns church

Surprisingly, that was only one metal band and every other metal band hates them for it. I have been told the average metal fan freaking loves churches and their acoustics. They might not like The Church, but they love churches.
> Why there is a second open source image editing software now?

There are actually more than two.
As opposed to what? (National) Socialism was for the benefit of the working people on paper, but in practice that meant imprisoning, murdering and impoverishing anybody thought to be working against the people's welfare. Since this included most productive members of society it made everyone poorer anyway.

Human welfare is the domain of politics, not the economic system. The forces that are supposed to inject human welfare into economic decisions are the state through regulation, employees through negotiation and unions and civil society through the press.
Top talent will leave OpenAI soon, it already started on twitter:

https://twitter.com/shengjia_zhao/status/1726543423824675154
COO OpenAI: OpenAI is nothing without its people
> It's quite possible an AI company does need a better vision than "hire some engineers and have them make AI".

Seems like all these "business guys" think that's all it takes.
I have a hard time believing that's actually what's happening. If they wanted to slow down other browsers, why would they choose this easily discoverable way? They could have easily slowed down serving of JS files (and other assets) based on the user agent to a similar effect. It seems more likely this is just a debug snippet that has made it into production by accident.
Lol. I can relate.
By "for profit" you mean "available to use by people right now"?
Well then I hope the "pure" OpenAI is over. I want to be able to use the AI for money, not for these models to be hoarded..
Or potentially a concurrency bug trigger? "One in 1000 times X takes a bit too long and causes problem Y; I'll make X take minimum 5 seconds so I can trigger Y reliably." Then fixes Y but forgets to remove the delay.
The sellout slogan
With his probability estimates that high, he should probably do everything in his power to stop all development.
Is there any reason to think that non-profit governance somehow makes this more likely? It seems that there are plenty of well-functioning non-profit software around. Heck, the world runs on Linux, doesn’t it?

The specific mix of profit and non-profit motives in this particular organization is confusing though, looking at it from the outside.
The only sensible start for any time axis is clearly Modified Julian Day 0 which puts the x=0 of any truly god fearing years axis in November 1858, as it should!

Alternatively Fermi Mission Elapsed Time is also an acceptably cool zero point, which puts the zero in January 2001. The zero of the unix time is tolerable only in truly desperate circumstances.
> What's the best place for a non-expert to read about this?

Thank you for your interest! :) I'd recommend skimming some of the papers cited by this working group I'm in called DISARM:SIMC4; we've tried to collect the most relevant papers here in one place:

https://simc4.org

In response to your question:

At a high level, the academic consensus is that combining AI with nuclear command & control does not increase deterrence, and yet it increases the risk of accidents, and increases the chances that terrorists can "catalyze" a great-power conflict.

So, there is no upside to be had, and there's significant downside, both in terms of increasing accidents and empowering fundamentalist terrorists (e.g. the Islamic State) which would be happy to utilize a chance to wipe the US, China, and Russia all off the map and create a "clean slate" for a new Caliphate to rule the world's ashes.

There is no reason at all to connect AI to NC3 except that AI is "the shiny new thing". Not all new things are useful in a given application.
You can look it up.

Gpt4 is included in bing man... Bing creative mode and balanced mode both.

This is widely known. The investment included access to openai technology for integration in msft services.

Its not a traditional arrangement. This is also widely known. Its a complicated investment with a profitability sunset triggering return of equity to the nonprofit. Also included is technology transfer as long as the sunset doesn't trigger.

This is why Ilya felt comfortable to do it. He did many interviews where he explained this.
It was available online at http://www.domesday1986.com/ but this now redirects to https://www.domesday86.com/ (which references the duplicate project in the linked repo)

I remember participating in the Domesday Project in the eighties when I was in primary school, and it inspired me to help set up similar project in 2005 (https://www.geograph.org.uk). At the time, we were in contact with the BBC to see if we could incorporate the Domesday data, and while they were warmly receptive to the idea, they concluded the legal framework under which the original data was collected did not allow for much flexibility in re-purposing it.
Bill Gates become ethical? That is on which episode of Star Trek Discovery? The one with the three parallel Universe?

- https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/16/business/bill-melinda-gat...

- https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a425435...
When he was professor at a public university he only had twice the median income of people in his State.

That greediness is begrudged is ok imho, but we should start with bigger fishes
In your example, if your code relied on the previous functionality, then surely you could get a nasty bug?
You think they let inexperienced developers touch the YT code base without proper code review? Even if that were the case, which is an extremely charitable assumption, that itself would be malice in my opinion.
I'm new to htmx and hypermedia. Was about to use content-negotiation in a new web app. This post convinced me otherwise. I find this blog very useful and informative indeed.
This is a deep, starting from zero course -> https://www.thecyberhut.com/auth-design/
And I never claimed otherwise. We might be aware of the problems we cause, but that doesn't seem to imply we're able to fix them -- we're still primates after all.
> * Marketing/Sales asks engineers to add a feature flag to sleep N milliseconds for their research: "how slowing down impacts your revenue"

“Research”
> - Hire an independent investigator to dig into the entire process leading up to this point and generate a full report.

This is very interesting. You wouldn't normally hire an investigator to dig into a corporate shitshow. Firing of Sam Altman was a huge mess, but if there was a serious reason to do that (like, frauding the board), and that reason would be backed by investigation report, it'll suddenly make board actions much more justifiable. And it'll put Microsoft into a tough spot, because they hired Altman back without any considerations whatsoever...
> I know either get pushed out or end up as principal engineers where they aren't routinely interacting with the younger people.

It doesn’t really help that young people always feel like they know better either.

Even if there’s an experienced architect, it doesn’t help if they’re surrounded by 10 rookies. Nobody has the time to guide all of them.
You're never more than a couple of corners away from the Covered Market in Oxford-land.
I noticed this one and it did come to mind that it was, ahem, targeted

overlords: I'll give up youtube entirely rather than watch ads/contribute towards your revenue
I had the same thoughts.

In fact, by showing the picture of the death star with the equatorial trench displayed so prominently the essay itself sort of primes you to make an error you might not have otherwise made.

But the whole thing was explained in the movie as the essay points out. The animation rotating as is pointed out kind of emphasized that the trench was not the equatorial trench. That's how I remembered it.

It was always in my head as a sort of Achilles heel or the culvert in Helms Deep, an important but easily overlooked topological detail.
Thanks, Ilya. Humanity first move. Never trust a greedy clown again.
Hey, Microsoft. Have your Clippy:)
Wait until the EU gets their hands on this..
> or maybe it was just this shared in earlier form). https://github.com/sddebz/stable-diffusion-krita-plugin

Nah that is an early version of a plugin that uses A1111 as the backend instead of ComfyUI (it does have a newer and maintained replacement, but its not the one in OP, which uses a ComfyUI backend.)
I'm not that commenter but I agree with that, or rather "I disagree with OpenAI's prescription of what is and isn't moral". I don't trust some self-appointed organization to determine moral "truth", and who is virtuous enough to use the technology. It would hardly be the first time society's "nobles" have claimed they need to control the plebs access to technology and information "for the good of society"

And as for what I want to do with it, no I don't plan to do anything I consider immoral. Surely that's true of almost everyone's actions almost all the time, almost by definition?