skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
About 3)

What is the benefit of learning about this kind of drama minute-by-minute, compared to reading it a few hours later on hacker news or next day on wall street journal?

Personally I found twitter very bad for my productivity, a lot of focus destroyed just to know "what is happening" when there was neglible drawbacks of finding about news events a few hours later.
Could have been worse, they could have picked Larry David, would fit the clown-show of the past weekend.
Satya may honestly be the CEO of the decade for what he has done with Microsoft and now this.
That's what I mean; she should have discussed the paper and its contents specifically with Altman, and easily could have. It's a hugely damaging thing to have your own board member come out critically against your company. It's doubly so when it blindsides the CEO.

She had many, many other options available to her that she did not take. That was a grave mistake and she paid for it.

"But what about academic integrity?" Yes! That's why this whole idea was problematic from the beginning. She can't be objective and fulfill her role as board member. Her role at Georgetown was in direct conflict with her role on the OpenAI board.
It's not a replacement but it can give you some guarantees.

Also fsync is a terrible API that should be replaced, but that's mostly a different topic.
I predict this isn't the last episode of this amazing soap opera.
I think this is an oversimplification and that although the decel faction definitely lost, there are still three independent factions left standing:

https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=38375767

It will be super interesting to see the subtle struggles for influence between these three.
Take this with a grain of salt but employees were under a lot of peer pressure

https://twitter.com/JacquesThibs/status/1727134087176204410
Aside from the terrible UI that several other people have mentioned, there are some other things that Git does badly (though I don't know if Mercurial does better):

* Large projects. It has poor monorepo support (especially on Linux), and also poor multirepos support (submodules are really buggy).

* Large files. LFS is a PoC-level hack; not a proper solution.

* Conflict resolution. The default diff algorithm is very dumb, and even with `zdiff3` it doesn't quite give you enough information to easily resolve all conflicts.
What's hilarious is the defence that the whole thing was fabricated in CG. Effectively: it's ok because we're misleading viewers as to what they're seeing and they know it.
I adore the fact that it was left in for three games because "well they never got back to me".
Man you beat me too it. I was just wondering the same thing. It's one of those things in science that it's better not to test and find out.
do we really know that scaling compute an order of magnitude won't at least get us close? what other "simple" techniques might actually work with that kind of compute ? at least i was a bit surprised by these first sparks, that seemingly was a matter of enough compute.
You seem to have found a very polite way of highlighting this.

I assume that in a not so distant future, a malware scanner will detect this and disallow one to run this locally.
This is a great one!
So, the company has successfully trashed its goals and values, and is finally focused on making money?
Jokes are the conversation. The rest is just noise.
EA is basically Christian charity for people who live in a city that views Christianity as a dirty thing.

It is employed to resolve the cognitive dissonance that highly talented people struggle with, when they realize they could do anything they set their minds to (including making the world a better place), but still want to work as a quant or optimize for ad clicks, because this pays well.

Like Goedel stated "most religions are bad, but religion is not", most people vocally identifying with EA are bad, but EA is not. To judge EA by the character flaws of prominent people like SBF, is like judging Christianity for Jim Jones's massacre. EA is, in essence, about effectively allocating charity. Noble and good-hearted.

Surely, grifters and frauds would abuse EA to virtue signal or trick venture capitalists into thinking their investment also builds wells in Africa. That should reflect badly on them. Elizabeth Holmes got so far, in part, because venture capitalists were attracted to her due to her being a young female. Merely Goodhart's Law in progress, not young female entrepreneurs being bad or without merit.
Lmao exactly
I'm convinced there is a certain class of people who gravitate to positions of power, like "moderators", (partisan) journalists, etc. Now, the ultimate moderator role has now been created, more powerful than moderating 1000 subreddits - the AI safety job who will control what AI "thinks"/says for "safety" reasons.

Pretty soon AI will be an expert at subtly steering you toward thinking/voting for whatever the "safety" experts want.

It's probably convenient for them to have everyone focused on the fear of evil Skynet wiping out humanity, while everyone is distracted from the more likely scenario of people with an agenda controlling the advice given to you by your super intelligent assistant.

Because of X, we need to invade this country. Because of Y, we need to pass all these terrible laws limiting freedom. Because of Z, we need to make sure AI is "safe".

For this reason, I view "safe" AIs as more dangerous than "unsafe" ones.
>And even if you could be sure of this conclusion, is it helpful or beneficial to promote it in public discourse?

It's absolutely helpful for mental health, to show people that there's not some conspiracy out to disenfranchise and oppress them, rather the distribution of outcomes is a natural result of the distribution of genetic characteristics.
But what color heart emoji?
Would you get incensed by "petrolhead", "greenfingers" or "trekkie"? Is that what you choose to be emotional about?
> If you truly believed that Superhuman AI was near, and it could act with malice, won't you try to slow things down a bit?

No, if OpenAI is reaching singularity, so are Google, Meta, and Baidu etc. so proper course of action would be to loop in NSA/White House. You'll loop in Google, Meta, MSFT and will start mitigation steps. Slowing down OpenAI will hurt the company if assumption is wrong and won't help if it is true.

I believe this is more a fight of ego and power than principles and direction.
Research yes, but the actual doctors looking at actual patients not so much sadly.
From the perspective of upholding the charter https://openai.com/charter and preventing an AI race -- seems potentially sensible
And Everything above all (Linux doesn't have it, so no pressure)
Agreed, this was my first impression as well. I spend my whole day in front of much more complex code, but trying to put myself in the shoes of a young kid, I would be really misled by this (unnecessary) noise.
One should also be careful to claim that the dominant group is inherently superior. There are a lot of, uh, counter examples.

Calling this a truth is pretty silly. There is a lot of evidence that human cognition is highly dependent on environment.
Noob question, but don't this potentially add per-packet latency and processing variance?

My thinking is that one needs to have a set of packets before being able to start processing. The first packets arriving must wait until enough packets has arrived to fill min size of the vector. And if the last packet comes "late", the arrival time of the last packet adds to the time for the other packets, thus adding something that looks like variance.

I assume there are parameters setting min number of packets in a vector, and timeouts for when to accept packets into a given vector.
I believe all the board seats are not fillet yet
Probably chinese sellers on all those sites. I've noticed a common thread with people who complain about counterfeits is that they're literally buying alphabet soup brand fakes from chinese FBA sellers instead of buying products directly sold by amazon or from more traditional retail channels.
I bet Team Helen will jump slowly to Anthropic, there is no drama, and probably no mainstream news will report this but down-to-line OpenAI will shell off the former self and competitors will catch up.
Hex editor with Ultima III I think we’d search for our character name and then start twiddling values until mom called us for dinner.
Have you seen the Center for AI Safety letter? A lot of experts are worried AI safety could be an x-risk:

https://www.safe.ai/statement-on-ai-risk
Satya comes out great, making the absolute best of a given shitty situation, with a high stake of 10 B USD.

Microsoft is showing to investors that it is going to be an AI company, one way or the other.

Microsoft still has access to everything OpenAI does.

Microsoft has its friend, Sam, at the helm of OpenAI and with a more tighter grip on the company than ever.

Its still a win for Microsoft.
Personally, I expect the opposite camp to be just as bad about steering.
Probably not a bad heuristic: unless proven, don't assume existential risk.
but what about interim CEOs. I thought they will announce new interim CEO every day.
The only way "we develop an actual, fully functional AGI" is by dumbing down humans enough so that even something as stupid as ChatGPT seems intelligent.

(Fortunately we are working on this very hard and making incredible progress.)
Not trying to be a dick but:

1. He tried to not buy Twitter very hard and OpenAI’s new board member forced his hand

2. It hasn’t been a good financial decision if the banks and X’s own valuation cuts are anything to go by.

3. If his purpose wasn’t to make money…all of these tweets would have absolutely been allowed before Elon bought the company. He didn’t affect any relevance changes here.

Why would one person owning something so important be better than being publicly owned? I don’t understand the logic.
discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38375239
Something that happened 2 billion light-years away is so enormously powerful that it can visibly affect Earth's atmosphere. Space never ceases to amaze me. Trying to imagine that is basically impossible, we think a volcano is a big thing :D... the sort of explosion we're talking about would make the whole Earth look like a grain of sand.
I wonder if this was responsible for any bitflips
Apparently due to concerns with AI bot crawling, and the fact that Bingbot is currently undifferentiated from AI, Wordpress now blocks Bing (and DuckDuckGo, perhaps others) from indexing public blogs that aren’t Business plan or above.
Tmp.0ut Magazine #003
I find it worrying that Elon Musk is totally silent through this whole drama.
How come the cookie popup blocking is only for Germany?
It’s definitely the right thing to do. Those women had “qualifications” in a made up field with no real world relevance that aimed to halt progress on AI work. We are no where close to a paradigm where AI takes over the world or whatever.
I like alignment more it is pretty quantifiable and sometimes it goes against 'safety' because Claude and Openai are censoring models.
MQ was a big revelation after working for 3 years with Git. Until I faced with StGit, it was much easier to use and fill more native especially with rebases.
As far as I can tell, Sam did something? to get fired by the board, who are meant to be driven by non-profit ideals instead of corporate profits (probably from Sam pushing profit over safety, but there's no real way to know). From that, basically the whole company threatened to quit and move to Microsoft, showing the board that their power is purely ornamental. To retain any sort of power or say over decision making whatsoever, the board made concessions and got Sam back.

Really it just shows the whole non-profit arm of the company was even more of a lie then it appeared.
Exactly this. The ’safety’ people sound like delusional quacks.

”But they are so smart…” argument is bs. Nobody can be presumed to be super good outside their own specific niche. Linus Pauling and vitamin C.

Until we have at least a hint of a mechanistic model if AI driven extinction event, nobody can be an expert on it, and all talk in that vein is self important delusional hogwash.

Nobody is pro-apocalypse! We are drowning in things an AI could really help with.

With the amount of energy needed for any sort of meaningfull AI results, you can always pull the plug if stuff gets too weird.
I imagine the stakes of rewriting the Star Wars films are sufficiently low that this risk is acceptable...
In his most recent interview with Lex Fridman, Elon Musk said that poaching Ilya from Google was absolutely crucial to OpenAI’s success (and that it was the most intense recruitment battle he had ever participated in).
Bluesky took long enough to invite me that I forgot what it even was when I got the email.
This is unfalsifiable speculation though. I could make that claim about anyone (eg, I could say actually it was H. G. Wells planted the seeds of techno-optimism in the present day AI community) and you would have no way to prove me wrong.

Remove Margaret Mead from the timeline and the AI camps today would probably be the exact same. Those are basically the two options with anything in life that's both useful and dangerous: optimism or pessimism, hope or fear.
In what way is it better?
Dude just think about that for a moment. By definition if existential risk has been proven. It's already too late
You can entirely remove it from your speech and lose very little.
We’re at ~250k tech industry layoffs this year and a single CEO drama dominates the media because “AI”.
That is one HUGE grain of salt considering 1/ it's Blind 2/ Even in the same thread there is another poster saying the exact opposite thing (i.e. no peer pressure)
I feel like the "safety" crowd lost the PR battle, in part, because of framing it as "safety" and over-emphasizing on existential risk. Like you say, not that many people truly take that seriously right now.

But even if those types of problems don't surface anytime soon, this wave of AI is almost certainly going to be a powerful, society-altering technology; potentially more powerful than any in decades. We've all seen what can happen when powerful tech is put in the hands of companies and a culture whose only incentives are growth, revenue, and valuation -- the results can be not great. And I'm pretty sure a lot of the general public (and open AI staff) care about THAT.

For me, the safety/existential stuff is just one facet of the general problem of trying to align tech companies + their technology with humanity-at-large better than we have been recently. And that's especially important for landscape-altering tech like AI, even if it's not literally existential (although it may be).
World-class cicd-as-code is already available as Tekton https://Tekton.dev
If you are driven by outside validation, definitely!
https://archive.ph/oArHx
From Ilya's perspective, not much seems to have changed. Sam sidelined him a month ago over their persistent disagreements about whether to pursue commercialisation as fast as Sam was. If Ilya is still sidelined, he probably quits and whichever company offers him the most control will get him. Same if he's fired. If he's un-sidelined as part of the deal, he probably stays on as Chief Scientist. Hopefully with less hostility from Sam now (lol).
The GP is very relevant. That people spend so much time in cafes is undoubtedly due to the employment situation in the region. But also, the region is demographically aging, especially in rural areas, and the cafe serves as the means for elderly men, who no longer go to work every day, to get out of the house.
>imagine such a person on your startup board!

Yeah, such a person totally blocks your startup from making billions of dollars instead of benefitting humanity.

Oh wait...
Sam Altman set to return as CEO of OpenAI
A huge amount of advertisers ran away, the revenue cratered and it is probably less than the annual debt servicing (revenue, not profit), the current valuation, accordingly to Musk math (https://fortune.com/2023/09/06/elon-musk-x-what-is-twitter-w...), is 1/10 of the acquisition price.
But yes, it was a masterstroke.
I don’t remember any other masterstroke in history that managed to lose 40B with a single acquisition.
I mean that's at best a wildcard when it comes to saving us from our own laws; it's not like our judicial system has literally ever consistently demonstrated good judgement. It's by far the most conservative and reactionary of our branches of government. That's not even touching the absolute disgrace that is our current generation of judicial staff.
it's not that deep bro
Really? You don't think prospective businessmen think "I'd like to do this, but those regulations make it stupid to even try?"

You can add at least 1 prospective company to that number. Mine.

I wanted to do something, but the costs of compliance were so high it would be stupid of me to even try.
Once a video can show a person twisting round, and their belt buckle is the same at the end as it was at the start of the turn, it's solved. VFX pipelines need consistency. TC is a long, long way from being solved, except by hitching it to 3DMMs and SMPL models (and even then, the results are not fabulous yet).
> So what was the point of this whole drama, and why couldn't you have settled like this adults?

Whole charade was by GPT5 to understand the position of person sitting next to red button and secondary to stress test Hacker News.
Sam doesn't seem like the kind of person to apologise, particularly not after Ilya actually hit back. It seems Ilya won't be at OpenAI long and will have to pick whichever other company with compute will give him the most control.
Weird definition of intelligence.
Yes, you build out the fields, and hit add to bulk, then it will generate a zip with the images. The API also supports calls whereby you can supply the data in an object and it will package it in a zip.
Why can't these safety advocates just say what they are afraid of? As it currently stands, the only "danger" in ChatGPT is that you can manipulate it into writing something violent or inappropriate. So what? Is this some San Francisco sensibilities here, where reading about fictional violence is equated to violence? The more people raise safety concerns in the abstract, the more I ignore it.
The list reminds me of when people refactor code and then just rename things. Ok, foo should've been called bar, but is that really a design mistake? The biggest design mistake for me is that it contains the letter C - it never should've been cascading. There's probably a need to resolve conflicting rules but it never should've been THE feature around which the language is designed. The precedence algorithm, the specificity etc. has been a source of endless bugs because you almost never know if somewhere somehow an outdated selector is messing everything up in a hidden place far away from what you're actually doing.

Instead the core features should've been simple ways to, well, style. From the beginning you should've been able to e.g. position vertically. There's a huge list of these issues where for a long time the simplest things were difficult and involved too much thought to get anything done. Granted things have improved, but the main issue I have is that standards like CSS should be more practice driven, e.g. what are the things I want to get done and how do I do that. Instead this is how you will override a selector as if that's the most important thing.
It's a new and "more experienced" board. This is also possibly the first of additional governance and structure changes.
Title/Link don't match.
This is what people need to understand. It's just like pro-life people. They don't hate you. They think they're saving lives. These people are just as admirably principled as them and they're just trying to make the world a better place.
(Answering myself now, oh my.)

... And doesn't this also adds, creates a relationship between otherwise independent packets, potentially creating a way to tag packets through a network. Basically if I can control the arrival time of my packets to a router (I send them at a baseline fixed rate, but delay the transmit time with a pattern), packets that are then bunched together to be vector processed in the router will also be affected by this delay. I could possibly then observe this pattern at other places in the network. Thus tracing packets.

Possibly.
I do not assume ill-intent of the other curious people here, and I think if you do, you're not following the guidelines (take the most charitable interpretation of what someone writes).
"Context on the negotiations to bring Sam back as CEO of OpenAI:

The biggest sticking point was Sam being on the board. Ultimately, he conceded to not being on the board, at least initially, to close the deal. The hope/expectation is that he will end up on the board eventually."

(https://twitter.com/emilychangtv/status/1727216818648134101)
Most of those touting "safety" do not want to limit their access to and control of powerfull AI, just yours .
If three quarters of investors into the American stock market were divesting, it wouldn't be something I'd throw off with a meme from middle-school economics.
Yeah 95% of employees is a bit too high ...

Also, all the stuff they started doing with the hearts and cryptic messages on Twitter (now X) was a bit ... cult-y?. I wouldn't doubt there was a lot of manipulation behind all that, even from @sama itself.

So, there is goes, it seems that there's a big chance now that the first AGI will land on the hands of a group with the antics of teenagers. Interesting timeline.
Artistic Algorithms: Navigating Portfolio Submissions in the Age of AI
Did being up to date really have an impact on your life? It's mostly just gossip.
By the way, Bennett Foddy is working on a new "AAA" QWOP-like game for PS5 called Baby Steps.

https://www.babystepsgame.com/
WordPress Blocks Bingbot by Default
Yeah, on one hand, the difference between a charity oriented around a mission like OpenAI's nominal charter and a business is that the former naturally ought to be publicly, honestly introspective -- its mission isn't private gain, but achieving a public effect, and both recognition of success elsewhere and open acknowledgement of shortcomings of your own is important to that.

On the other hand, its quite apparent that essentially all of the OpenAI workforce (understandably, given the compensation package which creates a financial interest at odds with the nonprofit's mission) and in particular the entire executive team saw the charter as a useful PR fiction, not a mission (except maybe Ilya, though the flip-flop in the middle of this action may mean he saw it the same way, but thought that given the conflict, dumping Sam and Greg would be the only way to preserve the fiction, and whatever cost it would have would be worthwhile given that function.)
He didn't claim they were superior. He said they deviate more from the mean, in both directions.

For example, there are a lot more boys than girls who struggle with basic reading comprehension. Sound familiar?
I'm pretty sure this is part of the plot in Children of Ruin by Tchaikovsky. It's a good book.
They won't, since they rely on the drive to make sure their data was actually persisted.
Bad link, reposting
You're correct.

When people say they want safe AGI, what they mean are things like "Skynet should not nuke us" and "don't accelerate so fast that humans are instantly irrelevant."

But what it's being interpreted as is more like "be excessively prudish and politically correct at all times" -- which I doubt was ever really anyone's main concern with AGI.
AI-Powered Crab Gender Identification: Revolutionizing Fishery Management
Legal contract management software helps reduce delays and miscommunications within a contract's lifecycle by improving overall operations.
The only mistake (a big one) was publicly offering to match comp for all the OpenAI employees. Can't sit well with folks @ MS already. This was something they could have easily done privately to give petition signers confidence.