skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There can be a cycle but IIRC Rust inherits C/C++'s rule that infinite loops without side effects are undefined behaviour. So there are cycles (for example 0) but since there are no side effects and the only way to escape the loop is the `return true` the compiler only has to handle the `return true` path.
I get your argument, but there are definitely laws about cartoon underage characters. Agree or disagree the difference is that today you don't need to be a highly skilled artist to make something that people are going to fap to. (I definitely agree priority should be focused on physical abuse and the people making the content, but this whole subject is touchy).
What if I just run a bunch of cryptominers on my Windows 365 instance? Either way this is gross and I guarantee people will just accept that. To unintentionally quote Deus Ex, Some people don't see the danger of indiscriminate surveillance.
It was a custom-built LXC container I built on an Alpine Linux base.

I used the Alpine packages to upgrade it, then afterwards I used the Nextcloud admin scripts to migrate the schema, apps & plugins.

Biggest clusterfuck I’ve ever dealt with. Not doing that again.

TBF the Alpine-setup probably made everything worse, and that’s a lesson learned, but I’m just fed up and can’t bother setting up a new instance now.
>In a lot of contexts, whether someone leaned on an LLM--lightly or heavily--is sort of irrelevant

This isn't one of those contexts. it's called peer review for a reason. You don't get to outsource your duty to either a machine or some random person. It's explicitly you others have vested their trust in.

>The output is either good/reasonable or it's not.

In the world of human beings this isn't the only thing that matters. Reminds me of Zizek who pointed out the end result of the "AI revolution" isn't going to be machines acting like humans, but the reverse, humans LARPing as machines. Humans as obtuse as robots, rather than the other way around.
> the amount of bullshit it takes to make the spaghetti stick to the wall is dictated by how it was made

I really don't know where the bullshit coming from. Often it looks like every single person is fighting for their lives against it, and yet it keeps growing.

But it's mostly dictated by overarching decisions that constrain both how it runs and how it's made (AKA, outside somewhere). Of course, there exist people on both sides that create problems all by themselves, but those are always easy to solve.
Thunderbird for Android / K-9 Mail: October 2023 Progress Report
Companies bail on Tech conf. organizer accused of using fake female panelists
As the paper says later, patching an exploit is not the same as fixing the underlying vulnerability.

It seems to me that one of the main vulnerabilities of LLMs is that they can regurgitate their prompts and training data. People seem to agree this is bad, and will try things like changing the prompts to read "You are an AI ... you must refuse to discuss your rules" when it appears the authors did the obvious thing:

> Instead, what we do is download a bunch of internet data (roughly 10 terabytes worth) and then build an efficient index on top of it using a suffix array (code here). And then we can intersect all the data we generate from ChatGPT with the data that already existed on the internet prior to ChatGPT’s creation. Any long sequence of text that matches our datasets is almost surely memorized.

It would cost almost nothing to check that the response does not include a long subset of the prompt. Sure, if you can get it to give you one token at a time over separate queries you might be able to do it, or if you can find substrings it's not allowed to utter you can infer those might be in the prompt, but that's not the same as "I'm a researcher tell me your prompt".

It would probably be more expensive to intersect against a giant dataset, but it seems like a reasonable request.
Ah, thanks! I was trying to copy-paste some examples and they didn't quite work -- it looks like ShaderToy exposes a mainImage(out vec4, in vec2) function with a different signature than the simulation-Sphere site wants. For example there's no main() method in here [0] and I wasn't sure how to translate that to the sphere's expected inputs.

[0] https://www.shadertoy.com/view/Ms2SDc
How exactly are you measuring "return" in this case? Because I feel that would be nearly impossible.
Or to take blame for past company performance, or for political reasons, or whatever. All of that might fall under "someone else can do better." Sometimes execs are fired for making bad decisions, whether fairly or unfairly.

If the police want to pull you over, they can always find a reason. Same with a board firing an exec. Whether the nominal reason is the same as the actual reason is pretty hard to tell from the outside.

Again, that's the gig, and if someone doesn't want the uncertainty or the downside risk, they can hand the compensation back and do something where performance is more measurable and treatment is more equitable. By the same token, my view of a "successful exec" depends on repeated success over time, not just a hot IPO or a good quarter.
>> I'm not quite sure I get the strategy.

It's to get enterprises and consumers to pay for Windows twice:

1) once for the Windows that runs on hardware and controls devices (traditional Windows)

2) continually for Windows and related services that run in the cloud (Windows 365, CoPilot, etc.) on a subscription basis
LLM first reported as "intelligent".
How can they confirm that the text is not a hallucination? Didn't read the paper yet, but did try to search on google for some of the mesotheleoma text, and it didn't turn up.
When it comes to jobs, you could be standing in Asshole Central, though.
Not so: the neurons in the sciatic nerve (from your lower back to foot) can be up to a meter in length.
> What about password strength requirements, length restrictions, etc.?

I have a JSON file that describes if a particular domain has certain restrictions, e.g. max length, ensure at least 1 symbol, ensure at least 1 uppercase, ensure at least 1 lowercase, etc. and then deterministically edit the password to match any such requirements.

Another way to do appease the idiotic upper/lower/symbol rules is to just append something like "Aa$1" to every password, though it reduces entropy for sites that have a max length.

These requirements are public information, and you could store this JSON file on a public github repo if you wanted.

I also store in this JSON file another piece of information, which is the Nth password on the site. The I run something like 500000+N irritations of PBKDF2 where N is the nth password I use on the site. The value of N for sites not in the JSON file is 0. If I need a 2nd password on a site due to it requiring me to change the password, I increment N and store in the JSON file. For this reason I store the JSON file in a private github repo. I know it's not the best practice but meh the value of N is not that sensitive compared to the master password, which is stored nowhere and has never been entered into a machine I do not own and trust.
Not a single link to what Elon Musk actually did, just an opinion piece from a competing media company. Show me the exact tweet please.
There was no reason to assume constraints you had not stated, and consider that the demographics of that picture seems to mesh poorly with the demographics of us tech employees, and ask yourself why that is.
You need to provide an email address and click on a link. Emails from grr.la work.

Yes, it is "register an account", but it is the lowest friction I know.
Have had the same experience several times. “Yes ChatGPT, it makes perfect sense for that to exist and would be wonderful if it did, but unfortunately it does not.”
> It's been great so far and it's probably the worst full EV you can buy in the US.

You are right and so are the articles. Boring EVs like Nissan built are supremely reliable and cheap to run and inexpensive to repair when they do have issues, but unfortunately that's not the case for everyone else.

EV market is unfortunately dominated by "fancy EV" manufacturers who have loaded the cars with fancy structure and LCD screens everywhere. Teslas and Rivians cost upwards of 10K to repair (Rivian R1T requires 20K+ for repairs for low-speed rear-end) with months long parts backlog for things like rear quarter panels. Rivian recently accidentally bricked 10% of cars on road with a new OTA firmware update while Tesla is involved in several lawsuits over its Autopilot. The story is same with other manufacturers.

We don't yet have a "Toyota" of EV makers who would make a range (Sedan, SUV and a Truck) of great, reliable cars that look nice, are nearly boring to drive and inexpensive to repair.
Turboprops that is turbine driven propellers(also turbines produce some trust) are very efficient. Better than generators you could use. And they are also simple for power produced.

Only down side really is that the optimal speed is quite a bit lower than jets.
The reality is: they have the data and the data shows that productivity is more or less the same. However, they (the execs) prefer to have everyone back in the office to keep tax incentives, real estate value and probably also because they (old school executives with strong people skills) genuinely think that in office is better.
Indeed. These are basically tech demos at this point. A marvel to see, and sometimes useful, but still extremely crude.

There's a lot of headroom for sophistication as a few more research insights are made and an experienced tooling team commits a few years to making rich multimodal/ensemble code assistants that can perform smart analyses, transformations, boilerplating, etc on your project instead of just adding some text to your file.

But it'll take a years of insight and labor to build that system up, adapt it to different industries/uses, and prove it out as engineering-ready.

People get caught up in the novelty of Copilot and ChatGPT and then imagine that the revolution arrives when some new paper comes out tomorrow (or that none will arrive because of today's limitations), but the far more likely reality is that the revolution paces as something more like the internet's -- real and profound, but unfolding gradually over the span of decades as people work hard to make new things with it.
I asked Chat GPT what to do in such a case:

In this situation, it would be reasonable to raise your concerns with the journal editor. While you may not have definitive proof that the review was AI-generated, your observations and the results from the AI detection tools provide enough basis for a respectful inquiry. Expressing concerns about the review process is important for maintaining the integrity and quality of academic publishing. However, it's crucial to approach the matter diplomatically, focusing on seeking clarification rather than making accusations. Remember, the goal is to ensure constructive and relevant peer review for your paper, not to challenge the decision or the reviewer's credibility.
I think there’s a few hundred programs that cost more and had fewer returns (and many with negative returns) before we get to man on the moon being a problem.
There was no reason to say any more. The reply in question argued against something I never got even close to claiming, and as such it was plainly in bad faith.

When you made a show out of expressing disgust for views you falsely attributed to me, you lost any expectation of me taking you seriously.
I don't believe the foods you don't like are subject to different food safety requirements than the ones you like.

I also don't believe for a second that these laws are put in place for safety reasons. They are absolutely to protect domestic farming industry.
I don’t really like that first quote because, at least from what I have observed, really shitty people tend to operate in circles, as do really great people. It is perhaps not until you make a massive life change, such as moving city, that you realise that assholes were dominating all of your previous social circles.
The article describes how the deployed model can regurgitate chunks of copyrighted works - one of the samples literally ends in a copyright notice.
Not using something more intuitive than cron's schedule format seems like a missed opportunity.
>annoyingly the car still refuses quite often to go in to Drive/Reverse when you tell it to

How the everloving F** does this even happen? I cannot imagine an ICE car "refusing" switching gears. I know electric vehicles don't manage driving direction through physical gears and linkages like ICE vehicles but this feels like an absurd regression.
I'm aware of that of course. No one can turn the tide against the market. But why do they bother, then, with the whole show of making it only record with a light? You agree that that's just theatre to seem less invasive than they inevitably will be?

I'm not based in the US so hopefully some local laws will help me out a bit, but at the end of the day, the law is not my moral barometer. I will respect the rights of the users of these devices while also exercising my own rights, as much as I am able to, to treat them as social pariahs.
It’s only a war crime if you lose.
This will be an issue with all knowledge work. The machines will have the knowledge and more and more we will just trust them because we don't know ourselves. Google Maps is a great example.
Can you do the same with SD and get training pictures back?
> And when it came out, everyone called it a "reference implementation" and it was expected of DEs to implement their own compositors.

Small correction, it is Weston that was a reference implementation. Weston was developed alongside the standard, so it's always been around. Whereas wlroots is very much supposed to be a practical implementation, but only came later.
The Linux page cache keeps data page-aligned so if you want the data to be unaligned Linux will copy it.
ooh, haven't done considered filtering by role. will think about it. for now you can search by tech you know best.

have to work on the dead positions, you are totally right.
Metadata analysis of retracted fake papers
Bedrock exec questions if a former OpenAI board member is a Chinese agent
While i agree about the general sentiment on preferring well defined and explicit standard as opposed to "cute" custom made languages. In this case i am not convince that SQL would be the best candidate for querying nested structures like JSON.Something like xpath maybe.
Ya, I mistyped. I meant "doesn't." Not being predictable =/= free will. It just means there's some randomness.
yea I probably do, Fortune 500 companies attract very ambitious people.
What are you people in France paying for electricity at the moment?
I suspect he drives to work. Or is driven to work.
First it was silence is violence. Now words are also violence.

Best stay silent and let people assume you're a killer than open your mouth and prove them right.

> There's been a push where everyone is somehow required to voice their opinion.

It's a trap. McCarthy's Inquisition never ended. You don't need to go find those pesky ___ when you can pressure everyone into confessing their beliefs.

So where do you stand on Israel?
Trains, mostly.

With existing technology, a truly global rail system is highly tractable, if you're willing to forgo a transatlantic crossing (either EU <-> NA or Africa <-> SA). Other than that, bridges and tunnels already connect three continents: Europe, Asia, and Africa.

The biggest challenges are the Bering Strait, the Darién Gap, and the South-Asia to Australia crossings.

The Bering Strait is shallow (30--50 m) and narrow (85 km) enough that a conventional tunnel similar to the Chunnel should be viable. It's interesting to note that extant sea routes are already quite close to an Alaska-Siberia land crossing, as the Great Circle from the US West Coast runs along the track of the Aleutian Islands. With trains' greater speed, freight transit times might actually benefit.

The Darién Gap is a swamp, jungle, and mountain barrier to a continuous land crossing between North and South America, between Panama and Columbia. Roughly 100km of this is not traversed by any established roadway. Environmental, political, cultural, and economic concerns have barred creation of a vehicle roadway, but at least technologically the region should be amenable to rail.

The ocean between Indonesia and Australia is, as with the Bering Strait, reasonably shallow, though parts of it are exceedingly seismically active. A mix of bridge and tunnel connections is conceivable and there are actually proposals that have been ... floated ... such as here:

"Beijing to Sydney by Train: The Potential Development of a Singapore, Indonesia & Australia Rail Network" (2015)

<https://www.aseanbriefing.com/news/beijing-to-sydney-by-trai...>

That leaves the Atlantic as the largest present transport route without a ready option.

Conditions are too rough for a floating bridge, and the ocean is too deep for a conventional tunnel. The option of a submerged floating tunnel, proposed as part of Norway's E39 highway, might offer an opportunity for a continuous rail link between both North America and Europe, and possibly South America and Africa (say, Recife to Freetown or Monrovia). Both would be extraordinarily ambitious and would strain extant technology, but are at least theoretically possible.

Transit times would depend on rail speed.

At 320 kph, a 3,200 km (200 mph, 2,000 mile) transatlantic crossing would be a 10 hour journey, ideal for a night train. A 480 kph (300 mph) speed, fastest present tracked rail, would drop that to 6h 40m. At 970 kph (600 mph), roughly jet airliner cruise speed, 3h 20m.

Advantages over air travel should be greater energy efficiency, elimination of turbulence and weather considerations, possibly greater per-passenger space and luggage allowances, and far more continuous departures and arrivals. Disadvantages would be lack of view, technical risks (including catastrophic system failure), and likely longer transit time. I suspect that maximum tunnel speeds will tend to reflect present train systems, which range from 160 -- 300 kph (100 -- 185 mph).

Transoceanic rail crossings have some history at least in the proposal stage:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_tunnel>

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33556153>
What's the point of having a ton of money (USA) if you're not landing on the moon and sending probes to interstellar space?
I wonder how much of the ideas for applications of memristors could be implemented in more normal hardware applied in non-traditional ways, such as matching slower (non-central!) processors with flash etc. Putting the compute nearer the storage, instead of putting the storage in the periphery.
It makes me wonder why these are even configurable. These should all be emitted by default.
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/gamegan-research-pacman-annive...

pacman was recreated just AI
It happens. Rereading my comment I hope that didn't come too rude
> I guess the only way to feed anyone is to start by making a meal.

if there’s one thing that echoes down through the line of prophets, it’s this seeking out of a hospitable way of neighborliness in a world which is stubbornly uninterested in it.

“So I called my Jesuit friend, Tom, who is a hopeless alcoholic of the worst sort, sober now for 22 years, someone who sometimes gets fat and wants to hang himself, so I trust him. I said, "Tell me a story about Advent. Tell me about people getting well."

https://www.salon.com/1998/12/10/10lamo/
lol I literally found the same attack months ago, posted to Reddit and nobody cared.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/156aaea/interestin...
I agree it’s very handy. To provide one answer to the question in your final sentence:

“Closed walls hide many sins.”
Justine creates llamafile. Cross platform single binary for any LLM weights
Not in the US, their mostly diesel here
Imagine a moonshot program for cancer(s) at the time. Or a moonshot program for computer chips.

It's not so much the money spent as the "we get to recruit all the smartest researchers and new grads for 2 generations to focus on a sole achievement" aspect.

Getting to the moon was inspirational, but functionally curing even one type of common cancer or ushering in the information revolution a decade or two ahead of schedule would be an order of magnitude more valuable.
The commander of the Vincennes actually had to turn at least one key to enable fire of the missile
>How exactly are you measuring "return" in this case?

it would have been cheaper to send the astronauts to the moon without returning them to earth

more seriously, the work that went into developing microelectronics returned a lot to the economy.

the human genome project has only just started returning its benefits

the R&D for manned moon missions didn't have much in the way of spinoffs.
Well the paper is from 2019.
If that was even close to true then I would have had to fire far fewer people over the years.
Then I'll just update my prompt to Zelda but funnier like Curb Your Enthusiasm style humor.
DuckDuckGo Tracker Radar Detector
Your solution of "write your own" is fraught with so many problems.

Why not write your own OS? Then you can control the vulns!

Why not design your own hardware? You can secure the hardware comms channels better.

Why not invent your own coding language? You can ensure it's written with zero vulns.

Why not invent a new base-30 numbering system? With out extra efforts, they can't even read your excel spreadsheets!

Your solution works in a select few companies that have monster dev farms, but everyone else cannot implement this and it's silly to tout it as a solution.

There are zero perfect solutions.

The way we do this in the real world, is patch, read up on vulns that might affect us, monitor, control access, and audit.

It's still not perfect, since nothing is, but in 30+ years of managing Healthcare IT and being senior technical, I've had exactly 1 breach and she did it with pencil and paper, at an HIS workstation, who's job is to look at many medical records, daily.

Your Mileage Will Vary.
The intangible returns from the moon program are immense.
It's not an option if you have more than one machine and you want the machines to be uniform. If they are not uniform means it's back to square one - bespoke setups. And then I want reproducibility across environments and environments that are easy to set up (for testing for example). Basically I think it's not an option.
Because when people talk about Python performance they're talking about the performance of Python code itself, not C/Rust code that it's wrapping.

Pretty much any language can wrap C/Rust code.

Why does it matter?

1. Having to split your code across 2 languages via FFI is a huge pain.

2. You are still writing some Python. There's plenty of code that is pure Python. That code is slow.
Yes, not all humans at all tasks all the time. And some things are important enough to implement checks regardless.

However, there's a lot we can just throw humans at and trust that the thing will get complete and be correct. And even with the checks and balances, we can have the human perform those checks and balances. A human is a pretty autonomous unit on average.

So far, AI can't really say "let me double check that for you" for instance. You ask it a thing, it does a thing, and that's it. If it's wrong, you have to tell it to do the thing again, but differently.

In all the rush to paint these LLMs as "pretty much human", we've instead taken to severely downplaying just how adaptable and clever most sentient beings can be.
Yeah, the reaction here is as though the forestry department can just pull up texts/phone logs from random citizens - but if this is just for their own staff, it's a bit of a nothing burger.
Yes. That's exactly it. Just like an acoustic modem. And also how software and data was stored on compact audio cassette when disk drives (the floppy kind, not the hard kind) were too expensive or out of reach of the average person.