skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> like, stopping a program from running is not hard, nor is isolating a program (airgap)

Not if

...it's open source so anybody can run it

...or if it's decentralized

...or if it can spread like a virus

...or if it's a part of a larger system that makes money so you don't want to shut it down

etc.

> LLMs have nothing close to agency, to my knowledge - in no way are they self directed

They have agency with AutoGPT and similar agent programs. You might not have heard about them because they're not yet effective. It's a very new and active research area. We just got the first (?) benchmark for LLMs with tooling two days ago (https://huggingface.co/datasets/gaia-benchmark/GAIA), and GPT-4-V became widely available two months ago.
also, manufacturing robots and self-driving cars.
Ah yes, now I see it.
> the natural assumption which I too had was that phone numbers are used for sms only to invite others but on singal my name/nick is used like whatsapp, viber,etc..

I don't know about Viber, but this isn't true for WhatsApp. If someone sends you a message on WhatsApp, you can see their phone number.

Again: the overwhelming threat model is here is "two individuals that already know each other want to communicate privately." That's what Signal facilitates, and it does so pretty well given the purity compromises that need to happen to do that for non-technical users. They're not worried about leaking phone numbers, because they're already shared.

Finally: there's a good chance you being downvoted here because (1) these comments are indistinguishable from FUD, and (2) you're making claims (and now talking about examples) without citing them. I'll lead by example here: we know that the FBI can only retrieve minimal metadata from Signal[1], and various foreign intelligence services have more luck deploying malware to phones[2] than they do actually breaking anything about Signal's design. Nation state adversaries don't have trouble finding peoples' phone numbers.

[1]: https://therecord.media/fbi-document-shows-what-data-can-be-...

[2]: https://theintercept.com/2017/03/07/the-cia-didnt-break-sign...
One cannot predict what a smarter-than-themself agent will do ahead of time, if they could then they’re just as smart. Just as a dolphin cannot predict how a human will come up with novel and utterly overwhelming ways to farm them, you and this other poster cannot predict how an AGI will achieve dominance of its environment to achieve its goals, so your request is impossible to fulfill. Lee Sedol couldn’t “take us through it step by step” how AlphaGo would beat him in Go.

That aside, afaik most safety concerns arent around a bad human actor using AGI to dominate the planet, it’s around an AGI being misaligned to begin with, it cannot be controlled, we promptly lose everything after it manifests.
Previously discussed:

Show HN: Recursive LLM Prompts

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35234276
https://github.com/orgs/mercedes-benz/sponsoring

They're sponsoring quite a few devs. Caddy, curl, and SeaweedFS notably.
I don't understand why anyone tries to build a livelihood on these stupid platforms. It's a virtual certainty that you will get screwed over and have no recourse.

If the platforms continue to be a major source of income for many people, then those people need to petition their elected representatives to force the platforms open. The OS has to give you a choice of browser, so the smartphone should have to give you a choice of app store.
QML is NOT a browser stack though. QML is just a way for you to script QObjects. QtQuick - on the other hand - is a very performant GPU accelerated scenegraph that can be scripted using QML.

> The point is to keep my code in C++ and not hop around to x different files to make sense of my application.

Another point of view that differs from this is - QML lets you easily separate UI logic from business logic, to better make sense of your application. Especially when it comes to "responsive applications". For eg. All the UI related parts of your application stay in QML files in folders like desktop/ android/ common/ etc... All the "backend logic" stays in C++, ready to be used by all these UI elements.

It is not about being forced to write JS. Nothing stopping you from writing very declarative looking C++ either (fun article: https://woboq.com/blog/property-bindings-in-cpp.html ). It is just about using a better tool for the job. State machines. Reactive properties. Declarative UI description. All of these make you need a lot less code than writing everything in imperative c++.
Of course it will be, that's what the Decks run now. They don't update in the same way or pace as regular Arch, though. pacman is basically disabled. You're encouraged to do everything through flatpak and appimage, and then the occasional blessed system update comes through for the other parts.
Yeah see, that is what I thought at first as well.

I sort of imagined that I could get the best of both world, and just "unsafe { <C style code> }" my way out for performance critical things.

But the thing is, the static safety boundaries of Rust allow the compiler to make much, much tighter assumptions than C & C++, especially around aliasing rules, un initialized memory, and moves.

When you relax these boundaries with "unsafe {}", you don't enter "C world", you enter the litteral gates of hell where any innocent temporary cast can throw you in a random load/store reordering bug.
> Choose a better government, then.

Do you know how ridiculous you sound right now?
Regardless of whether you take LLVM seriously, it's a serious project in serious commercial use in many environments.

> Fucking make that straightforward already dear LLVM project.

Much of what you are asking for can be enabled by not-rocket-science changes to the driver. Give it a try.

The LLVM project is much more "bazaar" than other high profile Open Source projects, so I think you'd have a relatively easy time convincing folks to accept your changes provided they don't break existing tests.
That won't happen, because PWA support relies on Google and Apple doing the right thing with their browser engine. Chrome supports PWAs, but could deprecate it at any time. Firefox bizarrely does not support it without a config flag enabling "site-specific browser". It's effectively unsupported as the majority of users aren't going to be messing around in the settings.
> At one job, we weren't allowed to install any adblockers to the browser (there was a lot of bureaucracy so I never figured out why).

It could have been the IT department fielding too many "this web-based app" isn't working requests due to ad-blockers. A lot of time can be spent trying to troubleshoot an issue before figuring out the cause is the ad-blocker.

Edit: It could also have been a policy to disincentivize people to use their work computer for non-work-related tasks. Ads typically don't pop up on work-related web applications.
Often, when you have a compiler-y recursive ADT, you will want to allocate the individual nodes in an arena rather than from the global allocator as with Box. And at that point, you can use references (with the lifetime of the arena) rather than Boxes, and you can pattern match across those.

(Note that this doesn't work if your "arena" is just a Vec, which is something people have sort of hijacked the term "arena" for. It needs to be an arena that doesn't reallocate its contents on growth, something like https://docs.rs/bumpalo/latest/bumpalo/, in order to hand out references that live across allocations like this.)
It's really worth watching this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38388669
This is peanuts VS the sums of money frozen in FTX.
Yvon Chouinard: The High Stakes of Low Quality
https://archive.ph/2023.11.23-171258/https://www.nytimes.com...
> Most of the ai safety arguments revolve around “once it’s powerful enough to cause damage it’ll be too late to come up with a strategy”

I don't see any reason to accept this argument. The AI safety people should also prove their assertions, not expect us to take them at face value.
Oh my goodness! I'm very happy that it worked out for you too!
Thank you so much for the kind words!
Yes I started working on the channel id part, gotta make that easier for sure. My wife has been complaining at me for that too :) I'm thinking both, name->id, and also, even video-url->channel-id.

youtube made that very weird in their API, every query has costs, and finding by username is more expensive, there are old usernames, which are not channel custom-urls right now. very mixed-up.

well, anyway long story short, I'll do it! Thank you for your message. Cheers.
compiling on mac is very easy/fluent experience for me. I guess OSX is still kinda first-class citizen for LLVM so maybe it does not count?
> acts more like a bookmark

In fact, Mercurial uses the term “bookmark” for its lightweight, git-like branching. Mercurial’s branches have slightly different semantics and can’t be deleted like bookmarks or git branches
Gpt:“This is just your speculation”
> Benioff of salesforce and the CEO of Nvidia were also very publicly offering those same people jobs with no interview.

This fact alone will get any SEC actions thrown out (unless someone can show Nvidia, Salesforce and Microsoft were all in on it).
All of these self-proclaimed “platforms” need to be regulated: no participation in your own platform (Amazon Basics), or at least no self-preferential treatment, caps on platform usage fees closer to 3-5%, neutral and open source search algorithms, limits on advertising.

I’m a capitalist at heart but this is anti-competitive, it’s closer to feudalism than capitalism.
Blame Apple for forcing developers (and encouraging bad guys) to spend more time thinking about the App Store rules than they do themselves.
> We're so far away from AGI

Although I personally suspect this is correct, the issue seems to be that there are a lot of people who feel otherwise, whether right or wrong, including some of the people involved in the research and/or running these companies.

I've seen several prominent people say things to the effect of "We just don't know if we're six months or 600 years from AGI,", which to me is a little like saying, "We don't know if we'll have time travel and ray guns in six months or 600 years."

No, we don't know, but all signs seem to be pointing toward a longer timeframe rather than a short one.

The counterargument to that seems to be, "If we can make something that appears to be able to mimic human responses, isn't that AGI in practice even if it's not in principle?", which is a sentiment I have also seen expressed by some of the same people.
Right. I think there's the investor narrative, and then the actual value function offered to customers. Regardless of the former, very few would be an AI startup by the definition of the latter.
AI is the cutting edge of CS. When it's well understood it stops being AI. Some day LLM and neural nets will get the same reaction... who calls LLM "AI"? It's just a formula!
Huge fan of Titanium.

If only we could find a cheap way to get the metal out of titanium dioxide. Like a Haber process-level breakthrough.

Then we could start replacing steel with titanium in many applications. Think entire freight trains, cargo ships, containers, cars, trucks, tractors -- all that heavy steel replaced by titanium alloys.

Enormous quantities of fuel and energy saved by lower density and higher strength. In many applications, it would likely make stainless steel obsolete.

Trillions of dollars of value may be locked up in such a breakthrough.
I'm not saying it isn't. I'm saying that some people would be less likely to take any test in the first place if they know they'll be tracked.
Retrying end-to-end instead of stepwise greatly reduces the reliability of a process with a reasonable number of steps.

That being said, processes should ideally be failing in ways which make it clear whether an error is retryable or not.
But there are two, which is very different from one.

I'm not sure that adding more would make all that much difference. One player would have absolute pricing power. Two keep one another at least a little in check.

That assumes no collusion, and that's not entirely true, by not completely false either. Many cases of similar behavior are just them responding to the same market in similar ways.

I think that completely free and open player you want isn't going to be much of a competitive advantage. It has a small niche but not enough to break into the insane levels of overhead in creating a complete ecosystem. Especially since most users just want the device to work with a minimum of grief. And especially since the use of public airwaves means a ton of regulation.
That's the wrong conclusion entirely, besides the mixup about safe AI and aligned AGI. AGI Safety is a real thing. But you can't have AGI Safety whilst at the same time ignoring both geopolitics and to be working on creating AGI. Those are incompatible, it's like being against nuclear weapons but developing one all the same. Every bit of knowledge you develop will be used to bring AGI into the world, also by those that would be your enemy or that don't give a rats ass about safety. The only people that can credibly claim to be on the side of AI safety are the ones that are not helping to bring it into this world. As soon as you start creating it and/or commercialize what's there already to create a stream of funds that can be used to further the development you're automatically increasing the risk.

To believe that you are sharp enough to go right up to the point that the pile is going critical so you can destroy it is utter madness.
Sounds like according to other articles there was concern that a new breakthru they called Q* had the potential for AGI. I’d be shocked if this were the case, but of course nothing is public yet. I’m firmly in the camp that we’re very far away… especially for anything I’d consider calling general, but perhaps I simply don’t know what I don’t know.
There is also a bash language server.

https://github.com/bash-lsp/bash-language-server/
I agree llms are powerful but they are not explosive - conflating the two is IMO even more dangerous
Thank you for your kind words! We are now a team of eight, and I thank you on behalf of them all. :)
Yes, but in quadriplegics that connection is severed, and while it results in a lot of unpleasant medical issues, spinal cord injury doesn't alter cognition (other than the depression from coping with a severe disability.)
I don't mean to be facetious in any way, but how does AGI/ASI protect itself from humans simply pulling the plug?
> Apparently if you do that, most people will give a 5 star review. We haven't done it since it seems... weird? scammy?

This is what Uber does. Not just a 'rate your trip' but also the 'add a tip' prompt. Only way to get rid of the screen is to select something or hit Back a bunch of times.
I don’t really mess with crypto anymore, but back when I did, literally every transaction I ever made was with myself. I literally never spent any on a good or service.
Public healthcare (and public education).

Over the past 12 months I've been engaged with metastasised testicular cancer. It started with a radical unilateral orchiectomy, followed by 1 round of BEP/3 rounds of EP. I just got back to work and found out it was back and had 4 rounds of high dose TICE 2 of which included stem cell recovery. I was meant to have lung surgery to reduce the risks of later spread through dead tissue but am instead scheduled for radiosurgery on a machine they are trying to fix.

I don't know where you live but I've always understood my tax contribution has been insufficient, this health crisis is sweet confirmation bias for me, public healthcare is a true blessing for me and no matter if I win/lose/draw this battle I hope those who come after me in some way benefit from me going through treatment just as I have in theory benefitted from others persisting with treatment.

In my personal view greed is a waste of time, be comfortable if you can and figure out what kind of contribution to our community would mean something to you. every headline these days seems to point to how greedy the current crop of big tech is (which probably includes those tech luminaries in Google such as Urs and Jeff Dean).

Much love in your journey,
Lostletterbox
This isn't a Stripe issue.
How ridiculous. This is just sci-fi bullshit without a shred of logic or scientific evidence. You would have just as much credibility claiming that we are at risk of an alien invasion. I mean I can prove that it's impossible.
What would you suggest can be done about it? People like Sam Altman exist, and they will get funding and support from other people who (1) like money or (2) are doing what they enjoy.
I just did a search and this has to be one of the most posted Wikipedia pages on HN of all time - but I suspect it's because we all live it daily and giving it a name makes it manageable. When you see it happening, you can say "hey, can we please stop wasting time succumbing to the Law of Triviality and instead work on something that actually matters?"

The two areas this crops up for me in the ship design and construction industry:

1.) Inspectors. Whether security inspectors, ship production inspectors, whatever - they must "find" something wrong, or they're not doing their job. And you must spend time addressing it or you won't get certified.

2.) Probably more frustrating - in big meetings, the truly challenging problems get glossed over (like a high likelihood of propeller cavitation at the intended ship design speed), but we spend an hour and a half talking about where we should put deck tie-down fittings to secure equipment. The latter is something everyone in the meeting can understand, regardless of expertise, but it really is very simple to work out and doesn't necessitate the cost of $xxK/hr churning on the topic.

Anyway, this was my first time seeing this post, so thanks for the repost.
Yeah, as you allude to in your parting sentence, I'm not sure if this idea makes me more or less secure. Chance for accidental infection at the storage facility goes way down, but should the sequence ever leak to the internet chance for accidental infection from some stupid amateur biohacker goes way up in my opinion, and that's before we get to purposeful infection.

If it's going to be preserved, I think I'm happier with it not being digital and stored in highly secured areas by professionals, but perhaps the threat model in my head isn't accurate enough.
Because it's an arms race guaranteed to occur given the incentives created by our capitalist system and our competitive multipolar geopolitical reality. If you don't get there first then an unscrupulous company will, or some entity in an authoritarian regime will, and that will be more risky even if it is delayed by 10 additional years.

The counter-argument is that those 10 extra years are necessary for additional AI safety research to occur.
i remember trying to rewrite so fragile scraping bash script in python, and even with some effort to use nice libs and create some cool helpers it ended up as long and not much more solid

bash is infectious in the bad sense :D
export PS1="\u@\h \[$(tput setaf 7)\]\w\[$(tput setaf 8)\]\$(parse_git_branch)\[$(tput sgr0)\] $ "
Why are you so sure we are that far from AGI? Looking at current capabilities, and rate of improvement I would be surprised if it is more than a few years off.
I am happy you have a better experience, but it doesn’t do me any good.
The truth about Beethoven's 'symphony of fate'
> just manipulate the media (conventional, social, all of it) on both sides to engineer a situation in which we would enter a nuclear war

Good luck with that. Remember how it ended the last time this was tried, with.. peace talks.

If you really want a global thermonuclear war, humans are completely useless. You have to take the matter into your own hands.
You mean the CIA reached Pakistan.

> The CIA’s efforts to capture Osama bin Laden via a fake vaccination drive in Pakistan led to a rise in vaccine hesitancy in the years after the scheme was revealed.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2277145-cias-hunt-for-o...
From an appropriate @city.gov email address?
My take is that bugs in sh scripts are best avoided by not programming in sh. So my preferred tool for sh linting is git-rm. It's not always possible, but driving down the sh line count sure helps against bugs from this language and its weird expansion rules.

Most people don't even know the language has expansion rules and write stuff that accidentally works after the fourth try. This lang wants to become obsolete.
Your physical location should mean nothing on the Internet.
Leaning into the tree metaphor (and following the precedent of other version control systems), git should have used the term trunk instead of master or main.
I’d love to see a project that would do this, but more generally.

I don’t use GitLab CI, but I do use a good handful of other file types that essentially inline shell scripts. Dockerfiles, GitHub Actions, and Justfiles, just to name a couple.

Usually, and almost exclusively for the sake of ShellCheck, I make a point of putting anything more complex than a couple of commands into their own shell scripts that I call from the inlined script in my Dockerfile.

(This pattern also helps me keep my CI from being too locked into GitHub Actions)
Because they’re not Apple. It sounds nice to gate features to phones. But they’re trying to expand their subscription revenue to offset ads. It’s a much bigger market to target every android user.

Google ships the advanced photo products to non pixels after a delay, the pixels get a head start not exclusive access.
Thanks for the reply. I think if you combine unsafe with raw pointers instead of borrows you relax the rules enough to avoid this. But in this specific corner of things, I haven’t had direct experience so you may very well be right.

There are still some Rust-specific details you would still need to handle—as you mentioned, uninitialized memory—but for that one specifically I haven’t found MaybeUninit to be particularly cumbersome.
It’s not an either or. As argued elsethread, it should arguably always be a library (though not necessarily a published one), and optionally (if needed) also a service that wraps the library.
I have used this in LineageOS and honestly loved the feature. The ability to send higher quality audio to stuff like my car stereo where I don't have any support for 3P codecs. Also headphones can really benefit from this.

The UX needs some work, but the feature is fantastic.
Nothing in rust actually limits or makes it any harder to handle something "more dynamic" like JSON.

In rust you just make a JsonValue enum that represents the values and the data types that you're handling.

In something like Python, you just use the built-in runtime value type to represent the structure.

Either way you still have to plumb up the data ingestation and your codepaths that you want to use the dynamic data in. For example you still have to check if the "name" key's value is a string and not an object, array etc.

Otherwise, you probably could just use some accessors that access the values willy nilly that coerce them to text, return an error or panic, that could also exist in rust (some of these things you would have to wire up manually, some are provided by the language and others are fixed by just annotating structs.)

To summarize, fail to see the point you're trying to make, do you have some specific example you are thinking of that I can take a look at?
More likely, you'd need the threat of imminent destruction, which, honestly, wouldn't be enough to prevent anything. We've seen how effective a death sentence is at prevention, which is to say: not very.