skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The board's job is not to do right

There is why you do something. And there is how you do something.

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.

They have blind-sided partners (e.g. Satya is furious), split the company into two camps and have let Sam and Greg go angry and seeking retribution. Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose.

For me there is no justification for how this all happened.
Yes, that is my point. It's not really a python version issue.
Not at OAI or some researcher, but I‘d be in an archetype 3:

I‘d do anything I can to make true AGI a reality, without safety concerns or wanting to profit from it.
when you say (paraphrasal quotes) "the inaudible will be preserved through lossy compression designed around knowledge of human hearing" you're essentially saying that "undefined behavior will be preserved through optimization", and that is a boldly optimistic claim.
Wow, someone actually tried that? Thank you, never seen that.

There is also the Polaris Sector.
Just tried this out on some of my own code and it nails the warts that I had flagged as TODOs (and a few more...). The tool gives helpful info about the source of the nil, too. This is great.
"LFBOTs are seen across the Universe and defy explanation. The first, dubbed the Cow after its designation AT2018cow, was spotted in 2018 in a galaxy about 60 million parsecs (200 million light years) from Earth. The Cow was notable for being up to 100 times brighter than a supernova before dimming over just a few days, a process that takes weeks for a supernova."
Because they swapped some characters like \ to /, if I remember correctly.
It may not be profitable but it's utility is worth way more than zero.
Not sure where I said I was screenless. However, I have no smartphone, no social media (apart from occasionally poking the HN bear), no personal laptop, no smart watch, etc.
Same here. I semi routinely check the website for any updates, but alas.

I’m sure it’s cooking and will be done when it’s done, but the teaser really makes me excited.
Right but the problem is money isnt value itself. It only represents value. Thus it's not a realistic representation of value because real value degrades while money does not.

Imagine I sell a house for 2 million. Now that house burns down. Basically that money now represents value that doesn't exist anymore. If this was an island economy consisting of 1 burned down house and 2 million dollars the economy essentially now has 2 million dollars in paper bills representing nothing.

This is why money is inflated deliberately. To keep the representation from getting too unrealistic. It incentives you to move your value into more realistic representations of value.

In short money already does have an expiry date or something equivalent. It's inflation.
There are some possibilities that could be opened up at certain efficiency thresholds, though, due to considerations that aren’t purely economic.

For instance, if small panels had high enough efficiency you’d probably see a lot of people who wouldn’t consider roof installations popping them up on their back decks and the like since it’s far less involved to do so. It’d also help work around rules like the one my HOA imposes, where roof mounted solar can’t be street visible.
Altman's not going to sue. Right now he has the high ground and the board is the one that looks petty and immature. It would be dumb for him to do anything that reverses this dynamic.

Altman is going to move on and announce a new venture in the coming weeks. Whether that venture is in AI or not in AI will be very revealing about what he truly believes are the prospects for the space.

Brockman and the others will likely do something new in AI.
I think you are correct.

I think they literally could get dump trucks
full of cash.

I see no reason why they would of course.

Still as far as I understand and I fully admit that
Is not a lot, OpenAI is running on a lot of MS cloud,
so they would (probably ) ot be able to offer
OpenAI² enough compuete in the near future.

I doubt anyone could, but if it became a need I am certain
every at scale provider would be doing their upmost to win
the business.
Lancashire!? let me tell thee lad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqAbMbRQ3jE

This man ers frum bolton, and this is hus pro-ject.
I just realized it's THAT Helion. Their fusion experiments are not without controversy.

Here's a video on explaining how it works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bDXXWQxK38

And here's a video explaining what's wrong with the scheme:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw

But the TLDW version is that environment required for fusing He3 with deuterium also leads to deuterium fusing with itself, a reaction that creates neutron radiation that irradiates its environment.
The LLM craze would certainly exist without Ilya. Google was doing LLMs much before OpenAI and had so many top tier researchers including Hinton. OpenAI didn't beat Google in pure research, only in product development. And Oppenheimer is known more for his leadership at Los Alamos and not due to his scientific theories, so a comparison to Altman is apt.
you misidentified privilege to idle musings under capitalism.

but are on the right path. join a marxist-humanist philosophy group. cheers
Yeah technically you can always default init fields to None, but then you have to type everything as an Option and the ergonomics are so bad you're really incentivised not to do that. In that case you bundle that in a transient structure (a builder) and you get rid of it afterwards.
Contact this company if you're looking Best IP-TV Provider
Whats-app: (+12023675323)
I buy from him every year and I don't find any problems with the server, worth encouraging
The point being made is that the board is the one that's supposed to be in power. How the CEO is fired may be gauche but it's not usurpation of power or anything like that.
You're right that conclusive research can be impractical or neglected for many environmental and social impact "sciences". This is why psychology, ecology, biology, medicine and even chemistry weren't always taken seriously by more rigorous disciplines. No innovation really marked a moment between when they were denigrated as soft sciences that couldn't make sound conclusions and their role in society today. It's mostly just a cultural shift and a loss of implicit skepticism in them. So yeah, it's hard to know stuff like "how dangerous are plastics" as rigorously as "how much energy is released when these two nuclei fuse"

But there's also a practical weight that matters in a lot of these pursuits. Plastics overtook the world during a time when people weren't really considering their impact at ecological scale and didn't have sufficient models and tools to really assess what they might do to biological systems over lifetimes or generations. It was a historical accident that happened fast and without many brakes applied and now "plastics everywhere" is a pervasive background noise that's very hard to meaningfully control against. So the controlled science which was never conducted initially, and we now think probably should have been, is almost impossible to perform because we're left in that that fuzzy "soft sciences" place where everything is already plasticked.

But does that mean we should just keep charging ahead without trying to look, and that maybe a mindful step back from unscientific historical use would be worth considering even without conclusive evidence (since such evidence is now too hard to gather)?
Too late. They are clearly abusing their monopoly position to lock in users and degrade the experience of non users. This is clear anticompetitive behavior.

They have further begun abusing their monopoly position to force customers into paid iCloud storage in order to use iMessage as intended (anyone curious should attempt to opt out and then try to manage iMessage iCloud storage. It is impossible in hilariously pointed ways)

I have been contacted my attorney general and the FTC to request that they take action against Apple for illegal anticompetitive practices.

I recommend everyone else here do the same. Apple and non apple customers will be equally benefitted by anti trust action. (Which is obviously the point of government intervention)
tries to... be a Christian and survive and live.
Is a generic solution.
Replace christian by hindu and it does not work.
The example in the link you posted is equivalent to quietly whispering "GENERATED BY GOOGLE" every 15 seconds of over the generated track.

Regenerating an audio is similar to painting a fake painting. It is the strokes which will reveal the original author. But in this case you want to claim the piece for yourself - stripping the signature elements of the author BUT still preserve the original quality.

So, make sure the ID is not more nuanced and distributed than you might think :) Otherwise your auto-encoder might reproduce it as well.
>Until someone either conducts a naturalistic experiment with lots of people exposed to large doses of microplastics and compares them to a control group, or we expose some larger animals to microplastics over a long time in a true randomized controlled study, I'm going to remain skeptical.

I know an anti-vaxxer who says the same thing about lifesaving vaccines, but in the opposite direction. He seems to claim that there are few/no truly inert (meaning pure saline, as opposed to aluminum-doped adjuvant without the inactive virus) placebo controlled RCTs for many of the most commonly scheduled vaccines. And until there is one, he won’t believe they are safe.

The guy is nuts imo
Because who is looking in the middle of the Indian Ocean at commercial airliners. There’s far more important targets and areas for these systems to focus on
If a lot of people heavily pursue the idea without doing any conclusive study, you'll have lots and lots of positive non-conclusive results to publish on any hypothesis, it doesn't matter if it's true or not.
6 strings of cells, hooked up to two inverters, one handling two banks on a very high roof, peak production there is 4KW, one inverter handling four strings on covered outdoors space and the garage. The last four are at very shallow angles, so less than ideal but total surface area really makes up for that. We draw about 300W on average and the peak production capacity for the whole setup is close to 15KW (or even slightly higher in full sun in March). Over the last 11 months the system produced 12 MWh on about 4 MHw consumption so net 8 MWh returned to the grid.

34 of the panels are brand new 370W glass-glass panels, the remaining 16 are much older (probably a decade old, maybe more) that still work pretty well rated at 265 W each (but probably closer to about 220 or so).
https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.adk1633
> that it's little different from JetBrains Mono or Roboto Mono in a real-world editor or terminal.

On the contrary.
> Again, they didn't state that he lied. They stated that he wasn't candid. A lot of people here have been reading specifics into a generalized term.

OED:

candour - the quality of being open and honest in expression.

"They didn't state he lied ... without even using lies of omission ... they said he wasn't [word defined as honest and open]"

Candour encapsulates exactly those things. Being open (i.e. not omitting things and disclosing all you know) and honest (being truthful).

On the contrary, "not consistently candid", while you call it a "generalized term", is actually a quite specific term that was expressly chosen, and says, "we have had multiple instances where he has not been open with us, or not been honest with us, or both".
No satellite was pointed at the path when MH370 was flying.
OpenAI exists only due to massive cash injections from MSFT (and initially from Musk). Saying that they shouldn't have done the MSFT deal is like saying they shouldn't have started the thing.
yeah, I was just curious if this was the whole security point in their software.
I love how at the end of the video the SpaceX announcer refers to what just happened as a "rapid unscheduled disassembly of the booster".
So the first AGI is going to be used to kill other AGIs in the cradle ?
Well, I guess (hope) no one thinks it is due to genetic disabilities which are preventing disrupting innovations from (mainland) chinese.

It is rather a cultural/political thing. Free thinking and stepping out of line is very dangerous in a authorian society. Copying approved tech on the other hand is safe.

And this culture has not changed in china lately, rather the opposite. Look what happened to the Alibaba founder, or why there is no more Winnie Puuh in china.
I think we need Sutskever to do a speech now to tell us what _his_ vision is exactly and what is going to happen to the GPT Store especially.

Possibly followed by Murati, but also maybe her comments won't be that relevant if Sutskever is really as into shutting down product development as it seems.
"This radio thing is a dead end. I usually just get a bunch of static when I turn it on, or maybe an electrical shock. And even if it works, it's only a question of whether a tube burns out before the battery dies." - lazystar's grandpa, circa 1923
Already posted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38300425
That truly sounds like a nightmare. Imagine going to buy a loaf of bread and being asked "what's your expiry", then being told "your money is no good here" because it only has a week left.
Degrowth for Whigs
> It's such a small cohort that when someone doesn't completely blow it, they're immediately deemed as geniuses.

And many times even when they do blow it, it's handwaved away as being something outside of their control, so let's give them another shot.
To this end, blood flow to the head was surgically separated from the systemic circulation and full extracorporeal pulsatile circulatory control (EPCC) was delivered

On the whole, it doesn't sound like a very nice procedure for the brain (or the rest of the pig)
Seems like a solid B, yes?
be careful, you may have a hundred in a year or so
The transformer architecture is NOT a Markov process, by mathematical definition of a Markov process. This is not even debatable. It's a mathematical fact.

> Many of the dumb behaviors we see from LLMs today comes from their lack of internal state between tokens, so it don't remember what reason it had for generating the previous token and that means it can easily generate inconsistent answers

The attention mechanism in the transformer architecture models relations between tokens within the context window, and does the exact opposite of what you are describing here. This is one aspect of LLMs that violates the Markov property.
Dupe https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38300425
As others have mentioned, Result is a sum type so you either have a T or an E, there's no situation in which you can get both or neither.

The second part is that it's reified as a single value, so it works just fine as a normal value e.g. you can map a value to a result, or put results in a map, etc... , language doesn't really care.

And then you can build fun utilities around it e.g. a transformer from Iterator<Item=Result<T, E>> to Result<Vec<T>, E> (iterates and collects values until it encounters an error, in which case it aborts and immediately returns said error).
> There is one OpenAI board member who has an art degree

Oh no! Everyone knows that progress is only achieved by people with computer science degrees.
> 2. I hate OpenAI (or Sam Altman's?) apparently puritanical inclination to anything considered Not Safe For Work, especially for paid API usage. Why not allow people to build and sell virtual partner chat bots with explicit NSFW content?

I don't think that is either's fault, the US is just very puritan and a lot of it is because credit card companies and banks don't like it.

> it's easy to interpret this as purely in the self-interest of OpenAI shareholders

My guess is that this is probably what the board didn't like, Altman focused too much on profits in various ways.
Wherever I've lived in the UK I rarely come across this, mostly the opposite.
I disagree, it's about the culture, the culture and education will dictate how well public property will be treated, just look at public toilets in Japan vs ones in the US, it's quite revealing

Money that expire will work well in the EU/Asia, probably not in the US, it's a way too self-centred and selfish country
The author says he struggled with concepts that are “easy” or supposed to be. In my experience of coding since 6th grade and having been in the industry for quite some time, it’s difficult to say something is supposed to be “easy” or “hard”. The author doesn’t give many concrete examples so it’s possible he is just assuming certain things should be super easy… A lot of programmers I meet love to claim they don’t struggle with basics, then I ask them to write be a simple bubble sort or binary search from scratch and 90% cannot do it. They could only do it when they could reference or look it up. Everything thing seems “easy” after you learn it. There’s this romanticized super genius idea everyone thinks they need to live up to but that portrayal is simply fake. No one’s grasps things instantly.. I am a researcher at MIT. I work with arguably some of “smartest” people on the planet, and even they struggle with basic concepts from time to time, as does everyone. There is simply too much information for any single human to know it all, and learn new things instantly. It doesn’t happen…. Most things that should be “simple” or “easy” always end up requiring significant effort because we don’t truly know how to do something until it’s actually down. Forgive my spelling and grammar errors. I am typing on a phone and my hands are just too big to do it quickly.
Downvote me for your life here, I don’t care.

This sort of comment is why I have a love/hate relationship with HN. Love, because yesterday I learned some amazing stuff that I told my partner about in bed.

Hate, because of the assumptions that so many people are so quick to jump to. You know nothing about this guy’s motivations. (His name’s Neil. I’ve spoken to him. He seems like a really solid dude. He probably has thicker skin than me.)

So you come in here and you imply that this thing is essentially a scam to rob you of $75. You imply that Neil is a scammer, trying to rob you of $75.

It’s really shitty and I wish people wouldn’t do it.

Edit: I’m not saying “don’t criticise the site”. If you don’t like the site, say so. But don’t criticise the motivations about which you know literally nothing.
Yes, when you are severely space constrained it could well make sense. But 25% isn't a big enough difference to enable that. You'd have to do much better than that.
I think you have moved the goalposts from “modern LLMs are good and reliable and we shouldn’t worry because they behave well by default” to “despite the fact that they behave poorly and unreliably by default, they are not smart and powerful enough to be dangerous, so it’s fine.”

Additionally, maybe you are not aware of this, but the whole notion of the new OpenAI Assistants, and other similar agent-based services provided by other companies, is that they do not intend to use LLMs as pure word generators, but rather as autonomous decision-making agents. This has already happened. This is not some conjectural fearmongering scenario. You can sign up for the API right now and build a GPT4 based autonomous agent that communicates with outside APIs and makes decisions. We may already be using products that use LLMs as the backend.

If we could rely on LLMs to “follow instructions closely” I would be thrilled, it would just be a matter of crafting very good instructions, but clearly they can’t even do that. Even the best and most thoroughly RLHFed existing models don’t really meet this standard.

Even the most pessimistic science fiction of the past assumed that the creators of the first AGIs would “lose control” of their creations. We’re currently living in a world where the agents are being rushed to commercialization before anything like control has even been established. If you read an SF novel in 1995 where the AI threatened to kill someone and the company behind it excused it with “yeah, they do that sometimes, don’t worry we’ll condition it not to say that anymore” you would criticize the book and its characters as being unrealistically stupid, but that’s the world we now live in.
> that seems unfathomable

Of course, I feel the same way. But I would have reacted the same way if someone had told me yesterday that sama would be fired - that seemed utterly ridiculous for so many reasons. And that's the point.
>There is no evidence that these things cause damage in mammals despite all the alarming research

There is no evidence despite all the research evidence?

Or do you mean, there is more evidence that cell phones do not cause harm, than there is that they do cause harm?
It doesnt include all characters. Pretty standard practice for font trials.
> I expect the board to be axed

By whom?
By pursue as a possibility I mean try to get a conclusive result.

What you are describing here is "pursue as dogma"
> Incredible.

Incredibly dystopian. Since at least nine years ago, there hasn't a single place on the surface of the planet where you had any total and absolute privacy.
> Anybody old enough to remember the same 'OMG its going to change the world' cycles around AI every two or three decades

Hype and announcements, sure, but this is the first time there's actually a product.
Altman was raising billions from Middle East sovereign funds for AI chip startup
> I'm curious what recourse Microsoft has, if any. Presumably there's some clause protecting them against openAI self-immolating?

Given the disclaimer attached to the OpenAI Global LLC (the entity Microsoft is directly invested in) operating agreement that is also reposted on OpenAI's own description of its structure about how investment in the firm should be treated as a donation, and that the firm has no obligation to seek profit, and its primary goal is to serve the charitable mission of the nonprofit and that that will trump all other concerns including profit, I doubt very much that that is the case.

Now, if there was actual evidence that the board (which is, remember, the board of the nonprofit) was not making a bona fide effort to serve its understanding of the charitable purpose of the nonprofit, but instead serving some unrelated (especially profit-oriented) reason, that would perhaps be grounds of the lawsuit, but most of the concerns being expressed are exactly the opposite -- that the board is putting its view of the nonprofit's purpose ahead of commercial interests that people wish the firm would pursue. Which is exactly what the entire structure (and the laws governing charities) are set up to assure...
There is much new in the article .. what it talked about was known long ago ...
Yeah - I think this is the schism. Sam is clearly a product person, these are AI people. Dev day didn’t meaningfully move the needle on AI, but for people building products it sure did.
The for profit entity is ultimately controlled by a nonprofit, kinda like how Mozilla the nonprofit also owns Mozilla the profit-seeking company. Patagonia (the clothing company) recent became something similar too.

The onion layers let the for profit subsidiary make some money and get taxed on it, but they are ultimately beholden to the nonprofit parent's wishes.

I guess OpenAI just expects to get a lot of donations / quasi-investments. Hell, Mozilla survived for two decades on Google's teat, and all they do is make a browser and act as a thinktank.

If OpenAI can keep up the momentum, there'll probably be funders lining up for new arrangements after the Microsoft one expires. Shrug.

But none of this explains wtf happened yesterday.
booster confetti