skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is not an oversight, it is a hard technical problem if they want to avoid paying Qualcomm. Which is not worth the cost right now because most people have wifi or phones they can tether to.

Maybe in 10 or 15 years when Qualcomm patents expire, it will be cheap enough to add as a feature.
it's not the "unaware" part, it's the 'endless possibilities' (snake oil) part. ai ppl looooove to draw clouds and expect everyone to buy into that shit, yet it's not that hot. it'll always be just an app, unfortunately. it's reductive but that's just its limitation and confines.
"From a privacy perspective it's not too bad - provided they delete their copy of the photo after the card is issued. This isn't any different from having the photo printed on the ID card, if you ask me."

If you have a government ID they already have your picture in a database. I know for a fact this is true if you have a US passport and I would be shocked if each state doesn't have a database with all Drivers License/state ID pictures.
Are you saying that latency in the order of 250ms when editing text is unnoticeable?

Yeah, that is utter nonsense. Just try it for yourself, instead of pulling statements like that out of thin air. You would notice a difference in tens of ms even when editing text. Why do you think people cannot stand writing with VSCode for example?

Re: moving/evolving shapes, I did not think I had to clarify that the brain is a massively parallel system with multiple modes of operation. Editing text does not require you to reprocess all visual signals from scratch, because that is not how the visual cortex works. The perceived latency when editing text is between pressing a key and your brain telling you "my eyes have detected a change on the screen. I will assume that it is the result of me pressing a key". It does NOT take 250ms to make this type of assumption, and is basically how our vision operates. It's a prediction engine, not a CCD sensor.
The Enron dataset was not leaked - it was made public by the US government as evidence from an investigation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

https://www.ferc.gov/electric/industry-activities/addressing...
>They curated feeds specifically trying to find offensive content and then refresh their feeds until they could find an ad placed near offensive content.

You agree, then, that twitter is doing the thing that they said it did. What's your point.
It's not just employment because employment can't exclude you from quitting and finding another job, but a non-compete can. Otherwise I agree.
Best of luck! I can think of no cooler space to work in than next generation clean aircraft. Now, if only I wasn't completely hopeless at physics and chemistry...
> This sounds a lot like naysayers when Apple decided to ditch the audio port on iPhones.

Those people were, and are, completely correct. The 3.5mm jack is way better than Bluetooth for headphones.
I don't agree about your point regarding training data. The internet is infamous for pedants who will correct even the smallest factual or logical errors. Take this comment for instance... It seems like the training set would be filled with proposition X, followed by a corrective assertion Y.
This might be the first time you've considered the question, but it's not novel. The ACM has a code of ethics required for membership. A compatriot of mine has focused on encouraging employers to pay for their engineers' ACM memberships, and require membership, as a way of advancing ethical standards in the profession.

Of course it's not perfect, but it's not like it's the first time it's occurred to someone to address.
I genuinely believe, based on my experiences with ChatGPT, that it doesn't seem all that threatening or dangerous. I get we're in the part of the movie at the start before shit goes down but I just don't see all the fuss. I feel like it has enormous potential in terms of therapy and having "someone" to talk to that you can bounce ideas off and maybe can help gently correct you or prod you in the right direction.

A lot of people can't afford therapy but if ChatGPT can help you identify more elementary problematic patterns of language or behavior as articulated through language and in reference to a knowledgebase for particular modalities like CBT, DBT, or IFS, it help you to "self-correct" and be able to practice as much and as often with guidance as you want for basically free.

That's the part I'm interested in and I always will see that as the big potential.

Please take care, everyone, and be kind. Its a process and a destination and I believe people can come to learn to love both and engage in a way that is rich with opportunity for deep and real restoration/healing. The kind of opportunity that is always available and freely takes in anyone and everyone

Edit: I can access all the therapy I can eat but I just don't find it generally helpful or useful. I like ChatGPT because it can help practice effective stuff like CBT/DBT/IFS and I know how to work around any confabulation because I'm using a text that I can reference

Edit: the biggest threat ChatGPT poses in my view is the loss of income for people. I don't give a flying fuck about "jobs" per se, I care that people are able to have enough and be ok. If we can deal with the selfish folks who will otherwise (as always) attempt to further absorb more of the pie of which they already have a substantial+sufficient portion, they will need to be made to share or they will need a timeout until they can be fair or to go away entirely. Enough is enough, nobody needs excess until everyone has sufficiency, after that, they can have and do as they please unless they are hurting others. That must stop
I don't do any of those things and am happy I get the option to pay less because of it.
Right. "slippery slope" is a fallacy only when the slipperiness of the slope is taken for granted. In this case there is plenty of evidence that this slope is in fact slippery.
> But I don't see why people with lower skillsets or utility curves that weigh leisure more highly than work activities should be allowed to leech off the productive capacities of others.

Therefore inheritance should be illegal, because it potentially allows for the capability of spending stored productive capacity on a full life of leisure.
It is unfortunate that some people hear AI safety and think about chatbots saying mean stuff, and others think about a future system performing the machine revolution against humanity.
It's pure rubbish. I'd be so lucky if I earned that much a week and worked less hours. The UK is not that wealthy.
Would you have a pointer to this debunking?
You can pay out profits on top of your salary. As long as its "Marktgerecht".
What do you mean "we"? Push for alternative modes of transportation to the complete exclusion of autonomous vehicles if you like. Personally, I like autonomous vehicle and will continue to advocate for them.
Yeah. That's what I said.
Well, it's not really a tech company anymore. It's now a media company. It has a few fairly popular media brands/sites and a couple of legacy products that still have some users. Some folks still use Yahoo! Mail.
Thats unreasonable as we all know its impossible to prove a negative, especially about a as yet hypothetical in a new feild of research.

As for a nuclear reactor in my city, yeah if my friend doesnt have qualifications to make him capable of evaluating the designs of such a technical and esoteric field and someone who is qualified assured me it was fine I would trust them. If we dont trust experts in their fields about their field then we are no better intellectually than the antivaxers and flatearthers
No, its yet another flavour of Chrome.
Wasn't convinced I'd watch a movie about it, but with Joseph Gordon-Levitt I'm in!
I watched a special on this and all interviewed scientists were drastically against any germ line edits (as in something that would then be passed to offspring) as we simply don't understand things well enough yet. Some groups will eventually do this in a less regulated nation, but for now we have to be very careful.
of course not, but at least have the decency to admit it - don't hide behind some righteous flag of loyalty and caring.
Like the article, I tried to make it so that someone could edit minimal data to expose fields and validation in a form, instead of having to actually having to code up all the glue code. It involved writing a lot of code that magically determined the right parameters, with the ability to override it if necessary, and too often didn't really have what was necessary to do the job perfectly. But it was good enough and a lot faster than writing the glue code each time.

I swore it off years ago, right before my boss did exactly the same thing for a new system. sigh

Now, Co-pilot can write that glue code in a heartbeat, so it makes even less sense to try to write something like that in the future.
You have to read between some lines and connect some dots here, since nothing is really publicly known and it's difficult to know if we can trust public statements anyway. Which of course means I could be completely wrong.

Still, an example I'd point to is this article where Dustin Moskovitz, who has close ties to the OpenAI board [1], is quoted saying "The thing I’m most interested in is making sure that state-of-the-art later generations, like GPT-5, GPT-6, get run through safety evaluations before being released into the world". [2] I'm not sure how else to read that other than that he doesn't think normal peons should have unfiltered access to this tech, and it would be unsafe if they did.

Beyond that, if the board shared my view (perhaps yours as well?) that the safest thing would be to make all of this FOSS, and either profits or elitist safetyism weren't important to them, why wasn't everything FOSS already?

Less concretely - the kind of elitist "we know best" attitude is exactly what I've come to expect from the effective altruism crowd, which several of the players involved here have publicly expressed alignment with.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38353330

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/24/asanas-dustin-moskovitz-is-b...
Show HN: I created an app to help friends keep each other motivated, thoughts?
Hi HN,

First time posting here as my cofounder and I have launched our first app together called Pronto and would love the community's thoughts on our concept and execution!

The Idea: Pronto came about from one of my friends. He was messaging me, wondering if he should go to a book reading in our city as he had nobody to go with. I told him my usual answer which is: why not? He agreed, and later that evening messaged me thanking me for the nudge in the right direction. I thought about that exchange, and I realized that there wasn't really an organic space for people to feel supported by those they knew.

This was the original kernel that then became Pronto. - your space to motivate your friends in whatever they're trying to accomplish. Say you want to get to the gym more often. Pronto will ask you to schedule a "Journey", (in this case heading to the gym) and during your Journey time, you will be randomly prompted to share a photo. Photos only last for 24 hours publicly, but users will keep their photos forever, serving as a personal journal of all of their hard work. Friends can then like and comment on photos, and even nudge their friends if it looks like they are going to miss their Journey.

Pronto is your place to never feel like you have to start something alone again. My ultimate goal is to create positive feedback loops in people's lives, connecting people through activity.

Why not use other apps?: I found conventional social media apps were too high stress. Apps like Instagram have users constantly worrying whether a particular photo is "insta worthy", while more specialized apps such as Strava have users worried about comparing their stats with other users. Pronto. hopes to address these issues directly, by offering people a low stress, more intimate experience with their friends.

I would love if you took a look at my app, and even downloaded it to give it a try. It's a social app at the end of the day so it will likely feel a tad empty right now, but all feedback is warmly welcomed! (Please be brutally honest!!!)

Landing Page: https://www.pronto.dev/

App Store Link: https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/pronto/id6450558539?platform=i...

Email in case you want to reach out: jeff@pronto.dev

Cheers!
Thank you for the book recommendation! I am interested in learning more about this topic. The gut microbiome is the newest frontier of discoveries, speaking of Wegovy/Ozempic….

Not sure if the book cover this, but Dr. Gregor (Nutrition Facts, How Not To Die) has written that pesticides are also > disrupting the gut microbiome > leading to obesity.

However, Dr.s are not allowed to recommend organic diets.
Parkinson's Progression Halted by Inhibiting Enzyme (In Mice)
if you'd like to take a quote out of context in order to equate two different technologies, you just go to town.
And I'll vote for it to change and lobby the people around me for change and ride the bus when it makes sense, but what to do for the decade+ until things change and I need a new car?

If the answer is "buy a used car", well, we'll quickly run out of those.
Argentina sanctions UK/Israeli companies: illegal hydrocarbon exploration (2021)
Not only that, but is this supposed to be the same modem that was to land in iPhone 15 that Apple botched? [0]

[0] https://archive.is/Y99dS
Typst could be to LaTeX what Python was to Perl.
This is the right line of thinking. Best to consider the situations where someone buys a Tesla vs. what would've happened instead.
In this case, the most productuce model is to look at as a text generator that produces documents that look like its training data, and the very predictive hypothesis one would draw from that is the one I put in my original hypothesis, and that was insightfully expanded upon by the person that replied to me.

That model produces a hypothesis that fully accords with the experiment and does so with fewer assumptions about things like theory of mind, consciosness, or agency, which are all associated with "deception"

Now, the model with the least assumptions is not always the most productive model, but here it works exceedingly well. The paper would have been stronger (less contestible) if framed in that model, but would admittedly have received less attention.
Yes, but it doesn't mean you need to entertain everything they say. Especially not paranoid delusions like "Apple and Google and Twitter are conspiring with Sam Altman to shadowban me."
Three CEOs in as many days, founders departing, and more than 600 employees out of 770 signing an open letter threatening to quit seems pretty burny.

And it's just Monday afternoon.
Letting it get stolen in the first place might count, I highly doubt not paying the ransom counts.
OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sam Altman was fired
Even Elon said just 3 weeks ago that it had lost more than half its value. Why are you so insistent on clinging to such a poor argument here?

You don’t need some independent GAAP compliant audit to see that things were going exceptionally poorly before they lost the majority of their only meaningful revenue stream and that no sane person would start investing in it at this point.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/30/23938969/x-twitter-valua...
Sorry for the late reply, I think gpt4 is behind a paywall.
Insomnia REST client updated to require signup to use
I loved 150 when I took it, and program in SML from time to time to this day.

Bob Harper (a CMU professor with a focus on PL theory) also has a really good SML reference that is closer to a textbook than lecture notes.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rwh/isml/book.pdf
Can it perform the machine revolution against humanity if it can't even say mean stuff?
The impression I get from what I read is that AI safety people want to have large cutting edge foundational models they control, can do testing and research on. They have no interest in open sourcing those cutting edge models. Whether this makes sense in the long run I don't know, but it is what I meant by AI safety types.

Of course money makers want to keep it closed source to extract rent. In some ways that is an area of agreement between the capitalists and the safety people.
The Argentinan peso is for any imaginable purpose no currency. It's only use is to get cheap steam games when it's cheaper than turkey.
Obligatory reminder of the "fun" fact that sickle cell disease leads to a sort of partial malaria resistance, which explains its perseverance in the human gene pool.

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804388115
It also covers reexporting. You're still responsible for ITAR and EAR articles after they've been exported and the recipient wants to transfer them somewhere else.
To whoever is CEO of OpenAI tomorrow morning: I'll swing by there if you're looking for people.
Back when they had their own rendering engine I've tried using it for a bit, just to give a non-Chromium rendering engine a chance.

But now that it's nothing but a slightly outdated Chromium clone, there's technically no reason to ever use it.

And because Microsoft keeps escalating their sleazy and desperate tactics to forcefully shove Edge against users' will, I'm making a point to never use it again. This brazen level of anti-competitive underhanded behavior with Edge reminds me that Microsoft is still as rotten as ever, so I'm also avoiding other Microsoft's products like VSCode, Azure, and I'm very worried about my dependence on Microsoft's GitHub.
SUQL: Conversational Search over Structured and Unstructured Data with LLMs
You can still use git with typst, if you use the offline (open-source) compiler instead of the web app.
Also don't forget the Open part in the name that they seemingly dropped as soon as there was actual money to be made, giving reasons why they couldn't open source GPT3 which they themselves threw under the bus by later releasing ChatGPT
This discussion is irrelevant, there is no point in entertaining the delusions of a paranoid schizophrenic. There is literally no direction for this to go in.

Anyone that has professionally worked with the mentally ill knows that entertaining her claims is a complete and utter waste of time.
As long as management will be done by people, it will happen. It either should be done by computer/AI/whatever completely, or it should be controlled by purely emotionless and unbiased entities.
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. However as you say, when incremental changes are regularly used as an effective strategy to obtain a larger objective it becomes a valid concern.

The logical fallacy still holds even if the majority of all policy utilizes the incremental strategy, but only because there are edge cases that invalidate the argument.

The problem for people outside of the strategy room, is that we don't know whether there is a broader objective or not, and even when a broader objective is realized it's almost impossible to prove that the end result was the original intent.
This thread is almost six years old, but sadly, it might as well have been started last week. :-(

Casey Muratori has since started a number of side-projects, so perhaps Handmade Hero has run out of steam for him. I know that he's stated in the past that is interest is more in the technical side of game programming and that he's not a game designer. Well, duh... However, his spiel has always been that Handmade Hero was about writing a complete(!) game from scratch. Not just a game engine.

His standard excuse is that this is just a weekend project and if you were to add the hours up and compare it to a normal work week in a game studio, he'd only be in, what, three months into the development or something. Well, by that measure, I guess we have to wait another few decades until the game will finally be finished.
Openpilot 0.9.5
Personally I find my own most innovative ideas come when I don't consider what other people think at all, but just look at the problem domain and try to really get inside the dynamics or constraints of the problem and then try to solve that.

Also, really unclear how you can look at human history and conclude that the intelligence of our decisions are decreasing. I'm not aware of any domain where people now don't outperform the past significantly. Even today's run of the mill violin players are equal to the virtuosi of the past. We've mostly gotten rid of slavery and war; have far excelled any prior time for medicine. Science is still doubling every decade or what ever it is. Even our propaganda is more effective - never before have there been so many organizations dedicated to a flat earth.
> it ceases to be so clear cut.

I think it's still clear cut. Losing everything is a lamentable disaster, to be sure, but that doesn't change the ethics of the situation.

> If the society you live in won't look out for you in these situations

It's not some faceless "society", it's actual people, including the specific people you know. If you're willing to do things that are harmful to others, you're actively working to make the world worse for everyone -- including yourself and those you love.
It’s in the twitter thread (which I’m guessing was hidden to you because you weren’t signed in - certainly one of the product choices of all time). Seems to be an experiment condition around the new adblocking detection.
It would, but publishing the data of someone who paid gives the ransomware gang almost nothing, and the downside would be to start as a no-name.

On the other hand, holding their side of the promise allows them to build a reputation, which makes it easier to get future victims to pay. Why would they leak the data if someone paid?
OpenAI's loss is Microsoft's gain: How the AI race just changed
Sort of looks like some people care.
Cruise can't do 1x the work of a human. I don't think using imagination-tech statistics makes for a credible argument.
Introducing Contributions
> Think about the training data.

> How often does the training data of most of the Internet reflect users identifying issues with their own output?

> How often does the training data reflect users identifying issues with someone else's output?

I wouldn't put too much weight into just-so theories like this.

We still don't understand too much about how LLMs process information internally; it could be that their understanding of the concept of "correcting a previous mistake" is good enough that they can access it without prompt engineering to mimic the way it happens in training data. Or maybe not (after all, there's an entire management concept called "pre-mortems" which is basically doing what you suggest, as a human).
I'm guessing there was some moving of the goal posts at play here, by the feds, because the SEC does a huge background check on the operations of your company before you're allowed to be publicly traded, and if they didn't find anything there, I have a hard time believing they were breaking rules as the rules were written at the time.
Certainly different companies put a different effort into their IT security measures, but I doubt any of them would claim that their system is "unhackable". So, I am not sure that not letting your data leak is an option you can really choose. You might be able to influence the probability of a hack, though.
Not unfair. That is a voluntary transaction.
That doesn’t explain anything. I’m saying that setting up a new schema would be the fixture.
They didn't use the Deutsche Mark, they came up with a new currency for their union, similar thing for the BRICS+

Milei wants to submit to their bully and give away their national resources, and it's not just about Lithium: https://cancilleria.gob.ar/en/process-sanctions-against-oil-...
Options to configure backups and spend the money on isolating their network and computers to begin with are not considered.