skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Can someone explain the sides? Ilya seems to think transformers could make AGI and they need to be careful? Sam said what? "We need to make better LLMs to make more money."? My general thought is that whatever architecture gets you to AGI, you don't prevent it from killing everyone by chaining it better, you prevent that by training it better, and then treating it like someone with intrinsic value. As opposed to locking it in a room with 4chan.
I wouldn't be surprised if this is the chief scientist getting annoyed the CEO is taking all the credit for the work and the researchers aren't getting as much time in the limelight. It's probably the classic 'Meatloaf vs the guy who actually wrote the songs' thing.
Was the massive wave of support for Ukraine a hype train? I mean, I guess so but my point is that it still has nothing to do with some sort of conspiracy theory. Maybe there's no narrative distortion, people really just do support them?
You don't "bootstrap" a chip fab.
Gulf states and their sovereign wealth funds are great source of dumb money.
If you haven't seen the news update, that's apparently what happened. The Chief Scientist pushed out the other two C-levels, accusing them of hiding stuff from the rest of the board. The board took his side.

Altman and Brockman have yet to share their side of the story.
Even with phased arrays, you think it's not possible? I didn't check link budgets on and off target or anything, just curious.

Also, the ISS orbits at ~450km, so I'm not sure where you're getting that record lowest orbit from. Microsatellites will decay pretty quickly there, but these spy satellites are typically bigger with thrusters for orbit maintenance.
Convincing people is the ultimate trade. It can achieve more than any other skill.

The idea that success at it shouldn’t be grounds for the genius label is absurd.
Mind boggling that someone can compare the utility to cost ratio of cable/satellite TV requiring contracts and installations to on demand libraries of near unlimited content with instant sign up and cancel abilities on every device.

Exact opposite of a “nominal iteration”.
Lip-service to safety versus actual safety that looks unsafe.

I deal with bureaucracies a lot and this is how they do everything: it has to look good, but they don’t actually care to make things good.

E.g.: fill out a ton of paperwork about how secure the web application is against hacking, but nobody reviews the source code for vulnerabilities. Or they fill out the paperwork and report the app as “secure” even when third parties like me are listing vulnerability after vulnerability.

The report is what mattered, not reality.

OFFICIALLY, on paper, the Shuttle was very safe.
> 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.

Given the language in the press release, wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Sam Altman, and not the board, blindsided everyone? It was apparently his actions and no one else's that led to the consequence handed out by the board.

> Which in turn now creates the threat that a for-profit version of OpenAI dominates the market with no higher purpose.

From all current accounts, doesn't that seem like what Altman and his crew were already trying to do and was the reason for the dismissal in the first place?
Because the Middle East has oil money, and they know that the age of oil is coming to a close (or that there is some risk that it is coming to a close, same same, see also option pricing) and they want to mitigate the loss of income by investing in stuff.
> Not sure what sense of "openness" is relevant

It is in the name OpenAI… not that I think the Swiss are especially transparent, but neither are the USA.
Yeah but the board just took this action on purpose and decisively.

Who outranks them? I don’t get the premise. You’ve implied twice that they could lose their seats over it.

How? By what mechanism? Challenged in court or presented with a resignation letter by whom?

Seems to me they’re the top of the org chart. They’re only accountable in the sense that employees can quit or they can run out of money.

But they happen to have direct control of one of the most valuable pieces of technology ever created so what exactly are you suggesting will happen.
According to the author of that PR, they're using 10% of 1 NPU core on 3 cameras: https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/pull/8382#issueco...

The bottleneck instead will probably be the video stream decoding speed, especially as the SoC's hardware decoder isn't being used yet.
Depends on how your values align with those of Middle East sovereign wealth funds and their owners.
Civilian GPS receivers are passive reception devices.

> Cellular signal from a personal cellphone isn't strong enough to register at satellite altitude.

This isn't entirely true. A primary limiting factor is the frequency-specific gain of satellites' antenna arrays. With a big enough antenna and fast and sensitive enough ADCs, much more is possible. Sifting through TD-SCDMA is the fun part.
What the media never tells you is the context behind the tweets, and what Elon actually said. The media lies all the time

https://youtu.be/u9l_2E4LPgY?si=gcMzcGRVCG5LqMsF
This submission should use the full article title: “SpaceX's Starship explodes after reaching space in second test launch“

(It currently is the clickbait “SpaceX's Starship explodes”)

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:

“If the title includes the name of the site, please take it out, because the site name will be displayed after the link.

If the title contains a gratuitous number or number + adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys." Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids."

Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.”
Oof they're using different colors and they promise they'll improve the situation. Sounds like a difficult technical challenge.
A few points,

Plastic nanoparticles isn’t a single thing. There are many types of plastics, with many types of additives. Most plastics are bioreactive, especially when not handled properly or maintained in the proper conditions. A great many plastics and especially additives are known to be toxic, carcinogenic, etc. These aren’t controversial statements and is widely known, understood, and cataloged.

Further, in this study, they point to prior studies that have established most adult humans have detectable amounts of nanoplastics in the blood stream. Further the point to prior research establishing many nanoplastics (and specially polystyrene, what they are studying here), passes the blood brain barrier.

They contribute findings that, in mice, polystyrene nanoparticles are admitted to neurons and they isolate a number of changes in the proteins and signaling of the cells that propagate to other parts of the brain. The changes are indicative of changes observed in Parkinson’s, but since we don’t understand Parkinson’s, we clearly can’t establish a causal link in this way.

RCTs could establish a probable correlate, but given again plastic nanoparticles are a single monolithic thing, there’s an incredible amount of variability in such a trial. This will take a lot of time and need to be pretty narrowly constructed so fundamental research like this is how you establish and guide such trials in the future. We haven’t really focused on the subject very long. But all of the facts above should be of grave concern.

Even if the body clears out nanoparticles, which I’m certain it must, that doesn’t mean they can’t cause serious issues prior to clearance. We are also presumably constantly exposed to more so you should view it as a chronic and persistent level in the body even if the body can clear it. In fact I would say unlike heavy metals we almost certainly clear it otherwise you would simply accumulate greater and greater concentrations; which I don’t think is observed.

It’s good to be skeptical, but I don’t think “we haven’t established a specific disease caused by the pervasive presence of plastic nanoparticles in animals” doesn’t imply “this is ok” by any measure.
With sufficient head-scratching and ingenuity it's possible to use BS to create a UI like the "big players" have. But yes, they get to do roughly what they want as I understand it - C and/or HTML/JS.

Quite annoying when, in this space, the most common requirement is "make it like Netflix".
> Everyone who was committed to a pro-profit company has to ask if they are next to be treated like Sam.

They probably joined because it was the most awesome place to pursue their skills in AI, but they _knew_ they were joining an organization with explicitly not a profit goal. If they hoped that profit chasing would eventually win, that's their problem and, frankly, having this wakeup call is a good thing for them so they can reevaluate their choices.
In the 1960s, high resolution images were definitely possible (and taken daily from Russian territories), but only when the plane was overhead.
Netherlands.

Panels cost about 210/each for the new ones and the old ones were pretty much free. Inverter: the one upstairs is a new one, 500 Euros ('second chance'), three phase 4KW, the one downstairs is a monster, it's 17KW with up to six strings and cost another 500. The panels on the high roof were installed, about 1000 to do the job and the rest I did myself, add another 500 or so in cables, tubing etc. The power bill went from 8500 / year to 3500 / year, and all of that is the remaining gas usage. We're looking into using any surplus in nov/dec/jan/feb to help heat the house to further offset the gas usage but the economics aren't really there yet as far as I can see.

And even in November we are still offsetting about 75% of our electricity usage, which somewhat surprises me, I'd expected far worse.
I don’t think it’s fair to jump to that conclusion, since he apparently never raised the money, founded the company, or developed the chips. The worst we can say is that his attention was divided and his goals may not have been aligned with OpenAI’s. And of course, I say this assuming the anonymous source is correct, which may not be the case.
Is this the recommendations sub-thread? Inconsolata is the best i've used.
At the time of the ITA acquisition, Google had a strict four-language policy: C++, Java, JavaScript, or Python. Nothing else was allowed.

The ITA acquisition made them rethink that a little bit, as they noticed that all the smart people working on QPX, the kind of people Google wanted to keep more of around, really loved Lisp and had built something great in it. And then Go came on the scene and Dart and... well, so much for the four-language rule.

QPX defied bitwize's Corollary to Greenspun's Tenth Rule: "Any sufficiently complicated Common Lisp or Scheme program will eventually be rewritten in C++, Java, or Python." (These days I would add JavaScript, TypeScript, and Rust.) It was still being maintained in Lisp as of the late 2010s and probably still is today. If Google ordered a Big Rewrite of QPX in another more marketable programming language, they risk losing the good people who worked on it to begin with. So... maybe next decade.
Who is "Simon"? Link to source re; departure?
If they wanted Israelis to be slaughtered wouldn't you be hearing evangelicals saying we need to cut all military aid to Israel, and wouldn't we see these Evangelicals teaming up with left wing progressives who also want to cut military support and Arms shipments to Israel?
If this was a division over the safety of models, the safest thing they could do is to release older models as soon as they release a new one.

If they release GPT-5 (closed), then they should release GPT-3.5 with its weights, stack, and documentation.

Real research can be done to see what safety precautions can be learned from it, as the successors are quite similar. For example, GPT-3.5 is still updated with features as of Dev Day, and gives a quite similar tech stack to the newest models.

--> What no one on Earth wants to bet on is a few people in San Francisco figuring safety out, when the rest of the world could be working on that. <--

If a model is leaked to the public, you have no time to prepare for safety. The damage is done.

If a model is kept forever behind closed doors you do not follow your mission of safe AGI. This only proves that overnight moves could be made that destabilizes who has control over the most powerful models. At least an open release of older models shows your dedication to innovation and safety.

I'd bet that since Microsoft has a copy of the stack and weights, and that the US govt has their own Azure instance cloud, the US already has a copy of OpenAI's technology. So its not going to die if OpenAI crumbles. It just goes to two different hands.

---

And this is just a bare minimum step. Not even considering this means there is a larger problem than ideological division. It is more like a power grab.

*As much as people think that releasing models is a safety risk, it might just be the best thing you can do.*

---

Economical Steps for a release that satisfies safety and investment (don't give away your MOAT):

Current Model: GPT-4; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-3.5; Fully Release GPT-3

Current Model: GPT-5; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-4; Fully Release GPT-3.5

Current Model: GPT-6; Faster/Cheaper option: GPT-5; Fully Release GPT-4
SHOW HN: Bamboo-Centralized apartment marketplace that uses AI leasing agents
The fact that this is a schism is already weird. Why do they care how the company transforms the technology coming from the lab into products? It's what pay their salaries in the end of the day and, as long as they can keep doing their research work, it doesn't affect them. Being resented about a thing like this to the point of calling it a "absolute embarrassment" when it clearly wasn't is childish to say the least.
the hybrid structure was intentional (and known by MS etc.) created to be able to do things like rain in (or fire) a CEO which is more representing the interests of the other minority stake holders then the interests of the non-profit.

So depending on the exact non-public reasons for the communication breaking down it might not be a disaster but the hybrid doing exactly what it was intended to do.

Now the real interesting question is how much MS must have been afraid to be technologically left behind to knowingly enter such a deal with such a huge investment?
Origins Of OpenAI & CapProfit Structure: https://youtu.be/Ft0gTO2K85A?t=433
>Will they have my interests in mind going forward? Will they devote all their energy in delivering the best, most advanced product to me?

Sorry to burt you bubble but the primary motivation of a for-profit company is ... profit.

If they make more money in screwing you, they will.
Amazon, Google, Walmart, Microsoft, Oracle etc.

The customer is never a priority, just a means to an end.
Exactly, I have always been curious about the same thing - if we have live statistics on queries then what stops us from cloning data (to correctly capture statics such as skew, etc.) and running these live queries with a bunch of knobs tuned automatically (which indexes, on which columns, etc.), and reporting the cost-throughput paretto optimum to the user? The configuration space is too large to explore randomly? And it's structure is too complex to produce automatic suggestions?
In Europe, Saudi's are well known for making sound use of their capital. They own much London because of it.
Yes, this was my thought when seeing those comparisons as well.
Also lol why would he risk his own money when he can keep it, risk other people's money, and end up richer on the other side even if he fails?
Something something greater good
> I have a contrarian prediction : Due to pressure from investors and a lawsuit against the openai board, the board will be made to resign and Sama & Greg will return to openai.

The board is not beholden to any investors. The board is for the non-profit that does not have shareholders, and it fully owns and controls the manager entity that controls the for-profit. The LLC's operating agreement is explicit that it is beholden to the charter and mission of the non-profit, not creating financial gain for the shareholders of the for-profit company.
> locking it in a room with 4chan.

Didn’t Microsoft already try this experiment a few years back with an AI chatbot?
The problem here is: Who watches the watchers?

To my eyes, and to many others, it appears the board is power-tripping. Also, OpenAI's unique structure means they have no checks on the board that an investor class would normally give.

It's difficult to envision a thriving future for OpenAI under these circumstances or a world in which they are a significant factor in AI policy. Their early market lead, still a considerable advantage, will not be sufficient to weather the storm brewed by the board's own actions. Losing their market leverage would mean ceding the influential role in shaping AI's future, potentially leaving the giants such as Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and others assuming control and steering the future course of AI, but without the creed to make AI "good."
I mean, I'll state the obvious: Money.

That, and despite a lot of really bad PR (and a lot of very real human rights abuses) the Saudi's are not as black as they're painted.
> voting out a politician as a coup.

That6 is literally a political coup
I take your point, but still, I don’t think it’s correct to imply that investors in the for-profit company have no sway or influence over the future of OpenAI.

I sure as shit wouldn’t wanna be on Microsoft’s bad side, regardless of my tax status.
They didn't pay a fee
The #MeToo movement made me realise that we will probably choose constant surveillance for our own protection, rather than have it imposed on us by some Orwellian government.
Could you expand on why? There is a lot if NSFW content on Internet. What could be different, regulatory wise, this time?
What would motivate someone to do this? Is it just because they can't make any money and "south America is cheap", or are there other reasons?
You should note the banner at the top of your reference:

> This is a humorous essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors and is made to be humorous. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. This essay isn't meant to be taken seriously.
Do you have a link to something discussion the resolutions you mentioned? The video didn't seem to mention them when I watch, unless I missed it?
You can check on ebay - filter for "Sold items", then untick "Completed items" to see only ones that sold.

There are some selling for around £400, but also some auctions went for around £150.
This isn't a function of GNSS modules. It's a combination of a cell phone module, a GNSS module (or a combination) with an embedded controller comprising an element of a field force/fleet management system.
The most personal talk I've ever given in tech
speaking from personal experience, i selected go for a project because it is high perf, automatically uses all cores w/ goroutines, and is type checked
> compares them to a control group

Good luck finding a single person on earth (let alone, a group) not exposed to microplastics.

The “forever chemicals” were found in even the most remote areas of the world. Wind, rain, storms, and other natural events carry this junk and spread it all over the world.

There is literally a massive plastic graveyard in the ocean. Plastics turning into micro/nano plastics. Infiltrating food (fish), water, and carried into populations.
Money doesn't magically create hardware, it takes time to produce it
Reddit isn't what I would call successful in making money, so there is that.
Same. I love experimenting with my coding font and for the past year or so I was using Hack.

I wasn't able to find anything better yet after trying a lot of fonts: Fira, JetBrains Mono, Iosevka, Monaspace, Ubuntu Mono, and others.

Or perhaps I'm too familiar with Hack now and everything else now looks weird..
Maybe elon could. But very few people can.
Money is one thing, geopolitical risk is another much more turbulent force than the markets.
Kind of ironic the raison d'être of Go is a memory safe language for concurrent programming but you can easily footgun yourself into doing something memory unsafe using concurrency...
A difference in this case is how capital intensive AI research is at the level OpenAI is operating. Someone who can keep the capital rolling in (whether through revenue, investors, or partners) and get access to GPUs and proprietary datasets is essential.

Carmack could make graphics advances on his own with just a computer and his brain. Ilya needs a lot more for OpenAI to keep advancing. His giant brain isn’t enough by itself.
> Didn’t Microsoft already try this experiment a few years back with an AI chatbot?

You may be thinking of Tay?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot)
Ideas and money are cheap and plentiful. Execution is everything and from what little I know about Altman that seems to be his strength.
Show HN: WithUI – Build and Share AI mini-apps in seconds
I kept having all sorts of ideas for different apps that utilize AI, So I thought to myself why not just build an easy UI builder that could easily be connected to AI executions and this is how WithUI was borned.
It's still an early idea and I still want to see if other people find it as useful as I am, so currently everything is 100% free to use.
SMH. The majority of oscillators are shielded to prevent interference and to pass regulatory approvals. Civilian GNSS receivers are passive devices.
Because you want to share risk? You can play more games if you share risk.
Inskape devs have a lot of trouble making their app work on other OS.
>depending on what cause them to come here

There was literally a 15-year long civil war in Lebanon from mid-70s till 1990
This is basically what the second amendment was intended for. It starts with a bit about militias and securing the state; the intention is clearly that we should be able to buy weapons of war. Nowadays that includes missiles.

How are you going to secure a free state with a rifle? Any reasonable adversary to the US would have jets and stuff. We should at least be able to get together and buy a neighborhood SAM site.
Isn't that exactly how humans have been able to progress so far? By standing on the shoulders of others to reach higher and higher lofts?

If you don't want your knowledge to be used by machines or man, then you should bottle them up and hide them from both.
I found it very odd listing a bunch of languages and not providing support for Cyrillic family...