skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Monte Carlo tree search in Jax
It’s okay for non-demanding music but even at high bit-rates there are types of sound (e.g. cymbals) which it can’t reproduce well. Smaller, better sounding files are usually going to win and indeed they have for the most common ways people listen to music.
I've learned only one constant with git in my years as a programmer: master your own employer's git use cases, and pray to god for three things:

1. you don't change places often and thus git patterns.

2. you don't accidentally ship and commit a multi-GB file to your remote.

3. you don't change the git process on yourself and your colleagues without an extremely solid reason.

Document your chosen git patterns, even in 2023.
is the implication here a form of quid pro quo between the Government not threatening anti-trust for information in return?
> Transformers existed in 2019, and while GPT4 is genuinely advanced, it's not a gigantic leap

I'm referring to the emergent capabilities that show up with scale, which are a gigantic leap. The usual citation suggests that this came into the public consciousness in 2020 [1]. Do you take issue with the timeline or the idea that these were a gigantic leap?

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165
By the way, Valerie has more great articles on lwn.net: https://lwn.net/Archives/GuestIndex/#Aurora_Henson_Valerie
The J6 protestors would like a word. Violating the 4th amendment is as bad or worse than the crimes they committed.
Not really true: when people first engaged with ELIZA some thought they had a meaningful interaction then.
To focus on the C/C++ comparison. Rust very much leans towards C++ side of things if you go the std library route. It does bake in some abstraction which would not be appropriate for low level systems development such as the Linux Kernel, which is also not what they're going for.

Rust gives you the option of opting out of that `#[no_std]`, which removes some basic tools, such as allocations, panics etc (I haven't used it much, so this may not be fully precise). As such with no_std you do move closer to what you'd consider C development.

That said rust will still have its restrictions, so some of the wild things you can do in C, isn't possible in rust, at least not without really violating the inner workings of it.

But with unsafe you can technically do most things on the level of C, without the overhead, that C++ would provide, via. its abstractions.

I'd expect the Linux Kernel to move in the direction of developing or using their own libraries and data structures, and that becoming its own bespoke part of their use of the rust language. Such that rust only really provides its safety guarantees and ergonomics. Compile times are also quite quick with no_std, as rust only really struggle with compile times, if you have lots of dependencies.

Circling back:

Rust is more like C++ with std library enabled (default)
and C with `no_std`
"Alternative A2DP Driver" offers this functionality on Windows. Lets you customize SBC parameters, use AAC, aptX (apparently, haven't tried). Works well in my experience, lets me use LDAC with my sony XM4's. It's trialware, but cheap.

I have seen the bluetooth range drop off in higher quality modes, which seems to confirm it's actually changing the codec (or at least something) and not just a placebo.

https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/a2dp/ (i have no affiliation)
I don’t know.

My current favorite cooking surface is the coating used on Hestan Nanobond. It’s sold as “titanium” but, from reading the patent, I think it’s a bunch of layers of CrN, TiN, and AlN, applied by PVD in a process optimized to produce an attractive gray color that looks a bit like metallic titanium. It seems very hard, very durable, and does not obviously react with any kind of food. (And even if it did, unless something oxidized the Cr to +6 and made it soluble, nothing that might leach out seems likely to be harmful.)

The patent seems to expire fairly soon, and maybe the process will take off. I wonder if this coating could be applied to a lightweight titanium pot with good results.
Possibly dumb question: Why not write it in a compiled language like C or Go?
Living in a developed country. If I was living outside the US or Europe, on average, I'd be earning less than 1/5 of what I earn doing in the US (and that's for basically any job I'd be doing - as a math teacher, etc).

My favorite outlet for gratitude is giving money to cost-effective charities. I give at least 10% of my pre-tax income. Join thousands of others doing the same: Giving What We Can.

https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/
It's slowly entering the market as LE Audio / Auracast. Might be a while till good os support is available though
One of the kids I know is in a business ethics class right now and thinks it's bullshit ("describe a time when you were a decent human being") so I see things haven't really changed in 25 years, and the old jokes still work.
Ask HN: What Are You Thankful For?
I think I remember seeing a thread like this last year, and it seems like a nice opportunity to reflect today (on US Thanksgiving.)

I myself am thankful for this website, for thoughtful discussion and for the interesting and smart people who frequent it. Here's to another year!
Do you think that your fact will negate mine?

And yes, sanctions are half baked and poorly enforced. "West" continues trading with Russia.
I think the leaps required are:

- Giving gpt4 short term memory. Right now it has working memory (context size, activations) and long term memory (training data). But no short term memory.

- Give it the ability to have internal thoughts before speaking out loud

- Add reinforcement learning. If you want to write code, it helps if you can try things out with a real compiler and get feedback. That’s how humans do it.

I think GPT4 + these properties would be significantly more capable. And honestly I don’t see a good reason for any of these problems to take decades to solve. We’ve already mastered RL in other domains (eg alphazero).

In the meantime, an insane amount of money is being poured into making the next generation of AI chips. Even if nothing changes algorithmically, we’ll have significantly bigger, better, cheaper models in a few years that will put gpt4 to shame.

The other hard thing is that while transformers weren’t a gigantic leap, nobody - not even the researchers involved - predicted how powerful gpt3 or gpt4 would be. We just don’t know yet what other small algorithmic leaps might make the system another order of magnitude smarter. And one more order of magnitude of intelligence will probably be enough to make gpt5 smarter than most humans.

I don’t think agi will be that far away.
Articulating a bit more in depth: Spotify it’s a multi sided marketplace where on the artist side will have a very big power law where the big labels (that has a catalog power) brings most of the users.

What sustain the economics on the Spotify is its catalog that is a composition of the labels catalog + long tail artists and their podcasts also.

When users goes to the Spotify, they are paying not to support their favourite artist but to be able to access the platform, that occasionally will have their long tail artists.

> The whole point of spotify is ALL music, so ALL music is important, surely?

Not necessarily. Catalog + Network effects + Marketplace is important.

What you’re describing in your argument is that “since you’re in the platform due to the artist, it’s fair that this artist receives the 70% of your money”. The flaw here is that this artist is benefiting of a marketplace and all its infrastructure and distribution without paying and the whole point of the platform is to give access to its catalog.

Think on the Spotify price as some kind of “optionality fee”.
> Few have made a dent: it appears that the Feds are doing everything they can to keep Hemisphere secret.

This to me is the most concerning part. The government has a legal way to get that information, but belligerence to serve the rights of their citizens? That's particularly concerning, like they've forgotten who they serve and work for.
There are simply no common successors to HFP. There are a few handsets that use two A2DP streams, but that requires a lot of bandwidth and I don't think support is anywhere close to universal.

Bluetooth 5.2 adds BLE Audio which offers more flexibility. The LC3 codec is supported by Windows 11, Android 13, and Linux, and it significantly improves audio quality compared to the older codecs. I'm not so sure about hardware support in headphones, though.
Both of these links are very cool and now I'm doing some eBay browsing
And snap doesn't address the fact that the server components that talk to the snap 'store' software is closed-source and only available from Canonical.
Just like the war on drugs it's all a huge legal drag net to grab the money from international investors.
Well, one should consider that the deep learning system being developed today are developed through a process that's said to be "closer to alchemy than chemistry". The best deep learning developers aren't thinking about "what is intelligence, really?" but rather figuring ways to optimize systems on benchmarks.

And at the same time, current system definitely have made advances in seeming intelligence. Moreover, the Eliza Effect [1] means it's easy for human being interpret a machine that interacts appropriately as intelligent even given very simple programming. If the engineers were engineering these systems, one would expect some immunity to this but as mentioned, they are doing something subtly different. You can see this in action with the Google engineer who tried to get a lawyer for an unreleased LLM and Geoffrey Hinton's turn to worrying after an AI explained a joke to him might arguably be included.

And oppositely, because these are developed like alchemy, maybe further qualities will just pop up the way transformers changed language models and maybe this will yield all relevant human capacities. I'm doubtful but not as doubtful as I was five years ago.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect
I fear this scenario in a few years:

1- non hacker users too starting to realize corporate friendly browsers like Chrome and many derivatives can't be used anymore for painless surfing, then flocking to Firefox.

2- corporations and advertising companies pushing for a new closed HTTP standard that requires their browser, or an old browser using a closed extension that doesn't allow adblockers when using a given service or page.

Open browsers work because they still connect to open web servers, and the industry already ruined the mobile environment by forcing users to run apps instead of navigating web pages (that is, installing a hundred application for a hundred services instead of just one that speaks a standard protocol); I have no doubt they'll attempt the same in the desktop world too. We have to fight to keep protocols open.
If you're talking about collective intelligence, particularly about intelligence emerging from the colaboration of simple entities working together to form larger structures that feed back on the simple entities, you're awfully close to Hofstadter's Strange Loops.
There is also fades (https://github.com/PyAr/fades) and pip-run (https://github.com/jaraco/pip-run). Debian and Ubuntu package fades.
Are there any serious books written on the "prevent catastrophe" definition of AI safety written by people like Hinton or Sutskever? (Not necessarily them specifically, but people with technical chops rather than people whose "game" is philosophic speculation like Yudkowski or Bostrom.)
Foom specifically refers to a very fast takeoff to ASI, usually hours/days or at the outside weeks. It’s a term of art, well-defined.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/LF3DDZ67knxuyadbm/contra-yud...

It does not refer to a fast takeoff where an AGI self-improves to ASI over multiple years.

It’s also not referring to the AGI threshold. If foom happens it’s probably unambiguous; there is now an entity that is far more intelligent than humans.

I think the foom scenarios are fairly unrealistic, for thermodynamic reasons. But I think it’s perfectly plausible that an ASI could persuade the company that built it to keep it secret while it acquired more resources and wealth over the course of years.
> yes, and... IIUC, uBlock uses heuristics, which means that potentially-objectionable content is already on your system and executing. Whereas PrivacyBadger is blocking the requests to those domains.

Not sure what you're referring to there. uBlock Origin absolutely does network blocking.
Microsoft did this with the Xbox 360. Your serial number would enumerate on the rings under the X sphere on the dashboard to find NDA breakers.
The best description of AGI I've seen is in Michael Crichton's Prey. He describes in a fairly plausible detail how AGI rises from the building blocks. The emotion he captures is that of dealing with a psychopath -- goal oriented with no empathy -- to the infinite degree.

That said, I think ChatGPT and LLMs trick us into seeing intelligence where there is none because we are evolutionarily wired to look for signs of intelligence as a potential threat. Our defense mechanisms are asymmetrical as they have to err on the side of being overly cautious: you may mistake a rock for a bear but you won't mistake a bear for a rock.

So it is with ChatGPT: its conversation style triggers a false alarm deep in us that there is intelligence there and we can't shake that warning off, but this software design is just exploiting the flaw (of sorts) in our wiring.
I haven't had problems with dependency hell since the early 2000s. And even then, looking back, I'm entirely sure the problem was not in myself.

You're possibly using it wrong.
Like steel, titanium alloys have a distinct non-zero fatigue limit, and thus can be engineered to have infinite fatigue lives. Though the exact details differ and steel or titanium can be better depending on exactly what the conditions are.
I'm glad I could be of service. You're welcome.
The same bill of rights that bars excessive, cruel and unusual punishment?
It "gets to the theorem" without offering a formal proof, but having read both, I find that Hofstadter's short stories and intuitions have done more for my understanding of Gödelian logic than any formal proofs have.
I got the book "Modern CSS" and I have found it to be quite good.
A problem is that you're trading 'Compete by offering one thing this company needs' with 'Compete by offering 5 things this company needs, 4 of which are in various stages of entrenchment at the organization already'.

You'll be up against incumbent software that populates teams of workers at the company who have a vested interest in their livelihoods not being taken away, who have the support of whatever commercial organization wants to keep their business. All to provide that +1 value-add you can't even focus on as much as you should due to your efforts being split to compete with multiple other products.

Do one thing well, FIRST. Make it easy to integrate with and build integrations from. THEN expand into the supporting ecosystem.
I’m really happy that slint exists. I hope it gains traction.

I’m writing some data exploration/visualization tooling with it.

I really appreciate the permissive licensing vs Qt.
Current status:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradication_of_dracunculiasis#...
Wow, that is certainly a _huge_ culture shift. It certainly explains why it's not sitting right with me - while I do think that "providers not caus[ing] excessive/unnecessary version churn and ensuring easy upgrade paths" is a good thing in isolation, it seems like it would be massively outweighed by the downsides of forcing a library provider to maintain familiarity with all their consumers' codebases and business areas. Seems to me like that would make it impractical to make any changes to a library that is consumed by more than a few other teams - which runs totally contrary to the intention of extracting _commonly_-depended-upon logic. The ideal situation would be to create a library that is _so_ popular that maintaining that level of familiarity is literally impossible.

There are already incentives in place to ensure that a library provider is doing right by their consumers (building features that they want, making upgrades not too arduous), because if they make a hard-to-use library then people won't use it which should show up in however their team's success is judged. Seems to me that going the extra mile from "you have to provide a good desirable library" to "and you must also be familiar enough with your consumers' services to do the integration/upgrade work _for_ them" gives no new upside but all downside - service teams _already_ know their domain area, why should someone else have to?

(I recognize that you're just reporting what you've heard, I'm not arguing _with you_, I'm trying to reason out the arguments in my head to get them straight)

Really appreciate the insight, thank you!
Hey, your presentation more than makes up for that approach. I’ve already sent it to my team to see if it’s something we’d want to try!
And providing more basics, like improved agriculture, education and essential infrastructure like clean water access, is a better means to combat that issue than sending in surgeons to play hero and have a feel-good moment without making any real difference in the root causes that led to someone needing surgery.
Why would it share our values? Human values are a result of our evolutionary history, which the AI will not share. We can't even formally describe them, so there's no hope of programming them into an AI. Of course, the AI will have to learn our values well enough to act in a convincingly friendly way while it's still weak, but knowing our values is not the same as sharing our values. Once it's gained enough power it can just kill us all. That's the most reliable way of ensuring we don't interfere with its goals.
It's Bluetooth not having enough latency.
Would something like Valico fit the bill? https://crates.io/crates/valico

When looking for crates lib.rs is an excellent search utility for searching crates that you would need. For example: https://lib.rs/search?q=json
There is foom as in decently fast self improvement to super human level, but that is far from a dangerous foom scenario where that AI then escapes. You can just turn it off. It can not spread through the internet or something like that, that seems extremely unrealistic to me.
well without stdlib, there is not much I can do on non-mcu devices
it's like I have c++ but no libstdc++ for a smart tv device development
Neat! I bought the lifetime access in 2021. Nice to see you guys are still active and adding new things :)
I find that a little harsh. The prices are clear, and you can either pass or remember to cancel.
Don't use bash, don't use C, don't use C++, don't use Python, don't use Javascript, don't use Ruby, ...
> It gets compensated by delaying the video by an equal amount

Is this actually done? Who would be doing it, the OS? It just sounds like the separation of concerns and the design of the interfaces would make it pretty unlikely.
When it was published, A* was considered within the field of AI. The paper[0]'s authors were from Stanford's AI group.

The "AI effect"[1] describes how the field tends to get left with only the cutting-edge research.

[0]: http://ai.stanford.edu/~nilsson/OnlinePubs-Nils/PublishedPap...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
Ansel Adams. Famous photographer
Huh?

What makes this a plaything?

Did you respond to the right comment?
People focus on what they understand, and what they consider tractable.

Swearing is easy to understand, easy to spot, and relatively easy to prevent. Thus, most effort is focused in that direction.
Spores are highly resistant to oxidisation, but for a spore to produce more spores, it has to develop into a bacterium, and bacteria are not resistant to oxidation. This is not happenstance - spores can be resistant because they don't do anything, they are just simple storage containers for DNA and the minimal machinery to use it, whereas a complete bacterium has to do much, much more. So, this is not a model for life which can exist in a permanently oxidising environment.
because it's a script, we have bash and c on a linux and we need both, same to embedded devices.
Great! Appreciate that :)
Almost everything about the article is wrong, oversimplified, or misleading.

Take this paragraph, for instance:

> But despite its abundance, it's only recently that civilization has been able to use titanium as a metal (titanium dioxide has been in use somewhat longer as a paint pigment). Because titanium so readily bonds with oxygen and other elements, it doesn’t occur at all in metallic form in nature. One engineer described titanium as a “streetwalker," because it will pick up anything and everything. While copper has been used by civilization since 7000 BC, and iron since around 3000 BC, titanium wasn’t discovered until the late 1700s, and wasn’t produced in metallic form until the late 19th century.

As this is basically a bunch of bullet points in paragraph form, it'll be easier to handle if we break it down:

> But despite its abundance, it's only recently that civilization has been able to use titanium as a metal (titanium dioxide has been in use somewhat longer as a paint pigment).

The same also applies to aluminum, magnesium, nickel, etc.

> Because titanium so readily bonds with oxygen and other elements, it doesn’t occur at all in metallic form in nature.

The same also applies to aluminum, magnesium, and even iron. (I mean, there's some meteoric iron, but it's very rare.) Pure metals are very rare in nature. What distinguishes iron and copper from aluminum and titanium is the energy required to split the oxide into metal.

> One engineer described titanium as a “streetwalker," because it will pick up anything and everything.

Titanium is not more reactive than aluminum and it's far less reactive than magnesium. In fact, it's slightly less reactive than iron overall. (i.e., more chemically stable under normal conditions and in contact with common acids.)

> While copper has been used by civilization since 7000 BC, and iron since around 3000 BC, titanium wasn’t discovered until the late 1700s, and wasn’t produced in metallic form until the late 19th century.

This has everything to do with the temperature required to separate the metal from the oxygen atoms binding it, and nothing to do with anything else. What's more, it applies even more strongly to aluminum, which was discovered in 1825 -- three decades after the discovery of titanium. (1791.) So there's absolutely nothing unique about titanium in this regard.

I could go on. But basically this is an "I hecking love science" article that barely scratches the surface of the subject -- and still manages to be subtly misleading.
One question that nobody has asked yet - if Cassidy copied this, what else did they copy?

I’m betting there’s more.
I’m gonna guess who typically funds national labs, the DoE
The different cohorts of "AI Safety" advocates intentionally conflate these things. This is why it's been helpful to split out the "x-risk" types as "doomers" and the regulatory capture types as "safetyists".

The people who very reasonably do not want an LLM to tell users how to kill themselves have no name because they have no opposition. This is just common sense.
I always get back to this page when trying to understand/show how git works under the hood: https://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/

It summarizes fundamentals clearly.
All the more reason to switch to Rust surely?
Don't use computers.

Only winning move