skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m not an expert but I suspect that this aspect of lack of correctness in these models might be fundamental to how they work.

I suppose there’s two possible solutions: one is a new training or inference architecture that somehow understand “facts”. I’m not an expert so I’m not sure how that would work, but from what I understand about how a model generates text, “truth” can’t really be a element in the training or inference that affects the output.

the second would be a technology built on top of the inference to check correctness, some sort of complex RAG. Again not sure how that would work in a real world way.

I say it might be fundamental to how the model works because as someone pointed out below, the meaning of the word “material” could be interpreted as the air inside the duck. The model’s answer was correct in a human sort of way, or to be more specific in a way that is consistent with how a model actually produces an answer- it outputs in the context of the input. If you asked it if PVC is heavier than water it would answer correctly.

Because language itself is inherently ambiguous and the model doesn’t actually understand anything about the world, it might turn out that there’s no universal way for a model to know what’s true or not.

I could also see a version of a model that is “locked down” but can verify the correctness of its statements, but in a way that limits its capabilities.
HP misreads room, awkwardly brags about its "less hated" printers
I've made an image segmentation + tagging component with Preact.js and SVG for a client – turned out pretty neat. Can recommend for this kind of applications.
Speech to text is often wrong too. So is autocorrect. And object detection. Computers don't have to be 100% correct in order to be useful, as long as we don't put too much faith in them.
> If that one person's speculation is true, does the non-profit have an alignment problem, with employees who are doing the technical work -- that the employees are motivated more by individual financial situations, than by the non-profit's mission?

Yes, and moreover they've created a compensation structure which actively creates incentives that are contrary to the charity's mission.

This was probably the easiest way to attract talent that had high paying alternatives and weren't particularly interested in the charity's mission, but that was always a fundamental problem with choosing a for-profit entity with that kind of needs as the primary funding vehicle for the charity and also the primary means by which it would achieve research, etc., directed at its charitable purpose.

The problem -- taking OpenAI's stated charitable mission at face value [0] -- is that there was nowhere close to enough money available from people concerned with that mission to pay for it, and OpenAI's response was to go all-in on the most straightforward path of raising sufficient funds given what resources it had and what the market looked like without sufficiently considering the alignment of its fundraising mechanism with the purpose for which it was raising funds.

[0] which I should emphasize that I do for the sake of argument, not because I necessarily believe that it represents the genuine purposes of the people involved even initially.
Service Levels can be quite simple at a high level but as soon as you start implementing them, the calculations can quickly become abstract and hard to understand.
>Purely speculative/anecdotal, but: Atari 2600 games are just not that fun.

I had a 2600 brand new and the games weren't fun. I feel like I have gone insane or entered a parallel universe whenever someone fondly remembers that era of video games.

I was there. Everyone was like "wow this is so cool" before coming to their senses and going "wow, this is shit". That's what caused the video game crash: the novelty of moving a square around on your TV wore off and people stopped buying all of the boring, samey, shit games.
Not working on Edge on android either.
Yeah, we don't call it a standard for that reason, here's the tagline:

> Open source tools and guidelines for sending webhooks easily, securely and reliably

We have been going back and forth about this. Though we purposefully made Standard Webhooks more like guidelines than a formal specification (note there's no mention of RFC2119, for example) so that it's easier to conform to without forcing implementations to have breaking changes. Even if it means you don't get the full benefits.

I think people can get a lot of benefits even if they don't follow the whole thing, and it's our job to continue building tools to make it easier to build conforming implementations than non-conforming ones.
How to tell if food is ultra-processed
It's been pretty consistently active over the last four years from what I've seen
Right now I'm in Jacksonville, Florida.
Okay, but search is done on a computer, and like the person you’re replying to said, we accept close enough.

I don’t necessarily disagree with your interpretation, but there’s a revealed preference thing going on.

The number of non-tech ppl I’ve heard directly reference ChatGPT now is absolutely shocking.
Source engine actually has a significant amount of "air control" and half life 2 speed runs take heavy advantage of it
https://archive.ph/o4qrP
SVG is basically an expression of XML, and XML uses "element" for everything, so it would be more appropriate, but, TBH, I really don't think anyone reading gives a damn.

I have done a ton of tutorials, myself, and have found that using vernacular, and expressing in basic, readable language, always works best. Being too pedantic can make it seem "stilted."
Ask HN: What tool is the best for scheduling social media posts?
Absolutely! And fourth, we have ways to make sure the same error doesn't happen again; we can edit Wikipedia, or tell the person they were wrong (and stop listening to them if they keep being wrong).
Anything can work.

If the employees are mediocre it takes the chance of success from 11% to 5%. Or something like that. The point being that it's unlikely to "do well" regardless.

More important is to figure out what you're learning. If you're on the steep part of the learning slope that's all that matters. If it's early stage and it starts to work a bit, you'll get more responsibility and you can be the one to let these people go.

But if you aren't learning or are just spending time with bozos, then it is a waste of your time.
If you've seen the video, it's very apparent it's a product video, not a tech demo. They cut out the latencies to make a compelling product video.

I wasn't at all under the impression they were showcasing TTS or low latencies as product features. I don't find the marketing misleading at all, and find these criticisms don't hit the mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIZAiXYceBI
> Given the absence of interest in joining Microsoft, many OpenAI employees "felt pressured" to sign the open letter, the employee admitted. The letter itself was drafted by a group of longtime staffers who have the most clout and money at stake with years of industry standing and equity built up, as well as higher pay. They began calling other staffers late on Sunday night, urging them to sign, the employee explained.

What a clusterfuck. I feel bad for anyone who supported the board.
> To use a gaming metaphor that hopefully lands, the XP grind from level 1 to 92 in Runscape is the same XP amount as the XP needed to go from 92 to 99 [0].

Do you get more XP on average when you're a higher level?
That example seems a bit hyperbolic. Do you think lawyers who leverage ChatGPT will take the made up cases and present them to a judge without doing some additional research?

What I'm saying is that the tolerance for mistakes is strongly correlated to the value ChatGPT creates. I think both will need to be improved but there's probably more opportunity in creating higher value.

I don't have a horse in the race.
I assume the GP takes issue with the word "gave", as it was not given but taken.
I'm 70%-ile online chess player. That is average relative to players active on lichess in a given month.

I'm better than most people (maybe top 10% even) that "play a little." I'm (I assume) well below average for adult tournament player. The pool matters. I think if I took lessons and dedicated a serious 100-200 hrs over some period, I might reach 85th in my online pool.

95%-ile is currently ELO 2075... just under where junior masters (CMs) seem to be on lichess. I suspect that extra 150 elo would be a difficult jump... but maybe doable for me and other average players.

Chess is probably structured similar to athletics and other such pursuits. You can probably expect a similar distribution for weight lifting, for example. The average person can probably reach the level where everyone (including most over average people) is "actually trying" simply by being systematic. Where that point is varies, but weight lifting and chess have similar ranges of participation levels... like many hobbies.

In any case... I think unlike chess, it's worth focusing on either strategy or technique... not tactics.

Strategically defining the thing (chess is defined, but "software engineering" is malleable). Meaningfully selecting the pool. Actually deciding the value. Getting to top 10% rec chess player sounds fun. Getting to CM sounds arduous and pointless. There's not much value in being an entry level chess master... or power lifter.

Techniques, like the habit of planning a training plan, creating a strategic plan with goals, timelines and such... that's a valuable asset... very transferable. The tactics... not so much. Meanwhile, you don't need great tactics to get results, and tactical advice is the easiest advice to get.
That would be a sympathy strike.
The air doesn’t matter. Even with a vacuum inside it would float. It’s the overall density of “the duck” that matters, not the density of the plastic.
Geography of Extreme Microclimates
The story is so juicy. Taiwanese exploitation of the common worker just shows you how in bed the Taiwanese and Chinese Elites are, and also why production will never move to India. Apple loves that productivity
A few hand-picked images (search for "cup shuffling"): https://developers.googleblog.com/2023/12/how-its-made-gemin...
Are there any good platforms out there that people would recommend where you can have your code reviewed? Either paid for or for free.

As this article points out, feedback is an essential part of learning, and open source projects would be a great opportunity to get feedback on something you have sole agency over as opposed to many workplace projects where it's harder to receive feedback for your individual decisions.
TIL: Postman Humour
Newman lives on.
That's incorrect, after invention of a leaded fuel, the first health concerns were raised in 1 or 2 years of production, and major heath investigation happened in 4 years time. We just lobbied (bribed) our way to continue using it regardless for half a century. And even a century later leaded fuel is widely used even in the USA, and probably even worse in other countries.
Also, the first gen iPod didn't have encrypted firmware. It was just an unencrypted blob on the disk.
Thanks mikecx, it was a typo, I've changed the text to "Next is the Global Packed Field, which in this case is 00..."
He has taken the place of Kissinger on my list.
If it’s no better than asking a random person, then where is the hype? I already know lots of people who can give me free, maybe incorrect guesses to my questions.

At least we won’t have to worry about it obtaining god-like powers over our society…
This is what I mean, this product only exits to scam people. That has to show that you intent to commit fraud. So if the seller is honest, they should report the manufacturer, but they don't because the scam is the plan. I'm so tired of this crap.
Guessing from the last sentence that you are one of those "most" who "can tolerate larger than expected inaccuracies".

How much inaccuraciy would that be ?
Granted I haven't been offering a self-hosted option for that long, but I feel like Docker makes a lot of these things moot. If a customer fails to upgrade, that's on them and can potentially lead to a loss of support if they fall out of LTS.
Their communication strategy was also juvenile at best.
Used to be "marketing tricks" were prosecuted as fraud.
SPF and DKIM can be checked client side no problem, assuming your mail server doesn't mangle the received-from headers. We just generally only use them as server-side filtering.
The children are mostly okay and I view this as a veil for conservatism because they don’t behave the same as you.

Tiktok fat shaming is bad but leading your “society is dystopia” comment with obesity rates in the US is fine?

More extensive redistribution rather than moral panic + regulation over tiktok. Let’s not waste time on speculative interventions.
> it's up to management/leadership to enforce the mission and make sure employees contribute to it positively.

But surely, the primary tool that leadership has to do that is by selecting employees who are on the same page as them. A purely mercenary workforce is very undesirable unless the company is also mercenary.
I don't believe you. Where's <marque> or <blink>?
https://www.evilsocket.net/2019/10/19/Weaponizing-and-Gamify... Blog post
>Is it possible to structure things such that the people doing the work don't have to think about their individual financial situations, and can focus 100% on the actual mission?

Mostly no. People may not only care about money. But money is pretty important--at least until you get into pretty large numbers. And then it's still a pretty important keeping score metric.
I think the author's point is really that you can outperform a huge slice of people with just a little bit of careful self-reflection and asking for help, instead of putting even more effort into grinding and hoping you'll improve.

Or, even: by throwing some deliberateness in to things we're doing, we can avoid a lot of frustration.
Send PRs to open source projects you’re interested in?
Therapeutics which prompt the endogenous immune system to recognize the cancer cells as something to attack. I believe this is the basis of mRNA cancer therapeutics? I believe they are targeted for individual cancers and possibly individual people, but given the speed in which they can be made this doesn't seem like a major future hurdle.

Throw one into a gene therapy vector and it could conceivably reproduce itself (though that seems like a bad idea for a cancer therapeutic anyway).
It's quite common in the US.
Anyone know how I can get in on the fake 65C02 chip action? I wanna be rich too!
>perhaps the most important company in human history.

holy shit, hype is unreal :D
The general trend is that people use money to buy "privacy," i.e. the freedom to not have to interact with "strangers."

It's a glaring example of local optimization at the cost of global (your own life, viewed in its entirety) worsening.
Wow, there is no way around it. Sam Altman is basically getting his way by misleading people. The board did the right thing. Honesty is crucial as a leader. I think for Sam Altman his goal is more important than ethics and he will do whatever to get his way.
81 in hex is 10000001 in binary, so I think this part is correct
It’s about twice the speed
>> Nothing there they couldn't fix in a few minutes and then SHIP.

If by ship, you mean put directly into the public domain then yes.

https://www.goodwinlaw.com/en/insights/publications/2023/08/...

and for more interesting takes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WXvfeTPujU&
> this aspect of lack of correctness in these models might be fundamental to how they work.

Is there some sense in which this isn't obvious to the point of triviality? I keep getting confused because other people seem to keep being surprised that LLMs don't have correctness as a property. Even the most cursory understanding of what they're doing understands that it is, fundamentally, predicting words from other words. I am also capable of predicting words from other words, so I can guess how well that works. It doesn't seem to include correctness even as a concept.

Right? I am actually genuinely confused by this. How is that people think it could be correct in a systematic way?
> surgically precise ethnic/gender diversity

What does that mean and why is it bad?

Diversity in marketing is used because, well, your desired market is diverse.

I don't know what it means for it to be surgically precise, though.
I thought the offer from MSFT, albeit unofficial, was that anyone who made the switch kept their current salary.
Show HN: Telemetry – Predict when you'll reach your goals
Hey HN!

I've just released Telemetry, an open-source progress tracker that predicts when you'll reach your goals. Telemetry allows users to quantify almost any measurable goal and monitor progress. Whether it be personal fitness targets, financial objectives, or business performance indicators, Telemetry provides users the power to predict when they might achieve these goals through a tailored regression analysis that grows more accurate with each data point.

Telemetry for Windows and MacOS is available for download now. It's completely free and open-source, with no ads or upsells. To learn more about its features, to access documentation, or to contribute to the project, visit the GitHub repository at https://github.com/RCKT-Software/telemetry. Please also drop a star on GitHub if you like the project, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!

- Simon (Developer)
Now you made me read the link. :-D

It defines the concept pretty well, which is somewhat valuable, but has few citations, which is unfortunate.
AFAIK, XML gets it from HTML (which was its inspiration), which got it from SGML (of which HTML was originally an application), all use "element".

But, yes, SVG is an application of XML.
Readability? Every programming language suffers from "not enough readability". There doesn't exist any language that is always clear and easy to reason about. Writing is fundamentally a method of communication that involves the use of symbols to convey ideas, thoughts, stories, information, or messages. You can mess it up in any language. Clojure, being a Lisp dialect, does not have readability issues. Au contraire, I believe it is far more readable than any other general use, popular language.

Once you grok the key features of any Lisp, you may find Lisps (especially Clojure) to be clear and direct, and here's why:

1. Uniformity: Lisp languages follow a consistent pattern. Functions and operators always come first, followed by operands.

2. Minimal syntax: The minimal syntax can also be seen as making the language cleaner and simpler, decreasing the chances of errors.

3. Expressiveness: Lisp allows you to accomplish more with less code, which leads to fewer lines of code and thus potentially easier maintenance and readability.

4. Macros and meta-programming: The ability to extend the language by defining new syntax or deriving new languages can lead to more readable and concise code. This one's pretty much up for debate, because as easily as you can improve the language, you can also make it much more confusing. You know what Spiderman's uncle says.

People using non-lispy languages often get excited about certain things, to some of them I can only react with raising eyebrows. I always have a Clojure repl around. Even when I'm not programming in Clojure. Like for example, if I'm testing REST endpoints and sending data back and forth, I configure it in such a way that it always converts the responses to EDN. EDN is far more concise and much more readable than JSON. With the connected REPL I can quickly `filter, map, reduce, group-by, sort, remove`, dedup, slice, dice, and serve the data any way I like. It will take you longer to go through jq's documentation to perform the same data manipulation with JSON. It's an extremely powerful way of dealing with data. With large quantities of data. Clojure is the only language that can turn any impossible-to-navigate-through data and make it precisely readable for me. Readability? Really? Spend some more time using Clojure, you may get surprised how insanely readable it is.
> I do think he legitimately believes he's doing the right thing though all throughout, which maybe makes it more scary

I really think the opposite. I think he's after the biggest payday/most power he can get, and anything else is a secondary consideration.
Finding LogoFAIL: The Dangers of Image Parsing During System Boot
Better get hydric acid and κ1-Hydroxylhydrogen(0) while we’re at it.
Most people I worked with either tell me "I don't know" or "I think x, but with not sure" when they are not sure about something, the issue with LLMs is they don't have this concept.
You and I say that, but mistrusting strangers and being "anti-social" is the dominant paradigm - in America much more than in other countries, I think.
I find it ironic that computer scientists and technologists are frequently uberrationalists to the point of self parody but they get hyped about a technology that is often confidently wrong.

Just like the hype with AI and the billions of dollars going into it. There’s something there but it’s a big fat unknown right now whether any part of the investment will actually pay off - everyone needs it to work to justify any amount of the growth of the tech industry right now. When everyone needs a thing to work, it starts to really lose the fundamentals of being an actual product. I’m not saying it’s not useful, but is it as useful as the valuations and investments need it to be? Time will tell.
> Most software engineers aren't listening to podcasts about software engineering. If you are religiously listening to and learning from podcasts, that makes you more suspectible to being a higher percentile performer in software engineering.

It's generally true that seeking more information can lead to increased knowledge, yes.

But I've also met a lot of people in my career who can confidently recite factoids from hundreds of podcasts, books, and blog posts they've read but then struggle when they have to tackle real-world problems. Podcasts don't substitute for experience and someone with real-world experience is going to run circles around someone who merely listened to a lot of podcasts or read a lot of books.

Podcasts have also become a trap for inexperienced engineers in recent years. It's easy to listen to a lot of podcasts with guests who are trying to flex their knowledge or look extra smart by claiming their subject is the only way to do something. Then you end up with juniors trying to make complex microservice architectures with over-engineered single page app frontends for trivial tasks because that's what they've been learning about from podcasts. Podcasts try to capture the most exciting topics, whereas many engineering problems are better solved by boring old technology. Without experience to know the difference, podcasts can really lead people astray.

> A streamer that I occasionally tune into (Asmongold) says that if you are seeking information outside of the game such as watching streams of the game, that makes you a top 10% player automatically.

Influencers telling their followers that following them will provide a leg up on the competition is the oldest marketing trick in the book. :) I'm sure some amount of stream watching can provide some learning, but for fast-twitch games I'll put my money on the player who has more hours of practice over the player who watches a lot of streams of other people playing.
I think this problem needs to be solved at a higher level, and in fact Bard is doing exactly that. The model itself generates its output, and then higher-level systems can fact check it. I've heard promising things about feeding back answers to the model itself to check for consistency and stuff, but that should be a higher level function (and seems important to avoid infinite recursion or massive complexity stemming from the self-check functionality).
My mum could probably install on her phone, and configure an exit on her computer, without knowing what Wireguard or `-j MASQUERADE` means ;)
You are so lucky to have a family who cook together!