skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
pg talks about how Sam Altman is the most powered person he's ever met. Seems we have a super powerful psychopath running perhaps the most important company in human history.

I do think he legitimately believes he's doing the right thing though all throughout, which maybe makes it more scary.

Sorta like how Mark Zuckerberg seemed to truly believe in Facebook's mission and wound up having all sorts of negative externalities for the world. Mark Zuckerberg just isn't quite as effective as Sam Altman, and it's easier to be suspicious of his motives.

Not to say that psychopaths are necessarily bad. Peter in Ender's Shadow turned out great!

But it does seem dangerous for 1 person to hold so much power over the future of humanity.

Sam Altman's reasoning for him having all the power, I think, is that “short timelines and slow takeoff is likely the safest quadrant of the short/long timelines and slow/fast takeoff matrix.”

If you believe that and believe that Sam Altman having complete control of OpenAI is the best way to accomplish that, everything seems fine.

I'd personally have preferred trying to optimize for long timelines and a slow takeoff too, which I think might have been doable if we'd devoted more resources to neglected approaches to AI alignment–like enhancing human capabilities with BCI and other stuff like that.
Well do share! lol
> Some reasons we might expect this to happen are:

1. People don't want to win or don't care about winning

2. People understand their mistakes but haven't put in enough time to fix them

3. People are untalented

4. People don't understand how to spot their mistakes and fix them

——

There is another very common reason. It is often emotionally difficult to acknowledge that you’re making simple mistakes that could be fixed by a relatively small amount of dedicated practice.

Relatedly, most people have a fear of putting in the actual effort to get better and then still falling short of expectations (their own or others).

It’s emotionally easier to pretend that there are other reasons outside of your control and that dedicated practice wouldn’t make a difference anyways.

In my experience, the solution to this to work on accepting your emotions and developing inner security such that you don’t feel that your self-worth depends on the outcome of these events.

One might even discover that they don’t actually even care that much about achieving a high level of performance in activity X and that the “need” to be good at it is a manifestation of older behavioral patterns and conditioning that don’t necessarily benefit them today :)
Show HN: Service Level Calculator – An education tool for SLI/SLO/error bugets
This web app runs entirely client-side and is meant as an educational tool for understanding SLI, SLO and error budgets as well as alerting rules based on Google SRE books.
> This person called the company "the biggest and slowest" of all the major tech companies

Could not be further from the truth.
As a programmer, I'd say that all the demos of my code were honest and representative of what my code was doing.

But I recognize we're all different programmers in different circumstances. But at a minimum, I'd like to be honest with my work. My bosses seem to agree with me and I've never been pressured into hosting a fake demo or lie about the features.

In most cases, demos are needed because there's that dogfood problem. Its just not possible for me to know how my (prospective) customers will use my code. So I need to show off what has been coded, my progress, and my intentions for the feature set. In response, the (prospective) customer may walk away, they may have some comments that increases the odds of adoption, or they think its cool and amazing and take it on the spot. We can go back and forth with regards to feature changes or what is possible, but that's how things should work.

------------

I've done a few "I could do it like this" demos, where everyone in the room knew that I didn't finish the code yet and its just me projecting into the future of how code would work and/or how it'd be used. But everyone knew the code wasn't done yet (despite that, I've always delivered on what I've promised).

There is a degree of professional ethics I'd expect from my peers. Hosting honest demos is one of them, especially with technical audience members.
maybe it is because of the leak made in Ontario Superior Court by a former RCMP official about Tuta helping intelligence agencies
The author has a great post on the Dunning Kruger paper: https://danluu.com/dunning-kruger/ It's interesting that the original paper does not actually justify the popular meme that the phrase became.
It's an interesting point. Writing tutorials like this also made me realize what's the difference between a function property and a function argument. I just used them completely interchangeably before. So element is more accurate here?
You can tell whoever put together that demo video gave no f*cks whatsoever. This is the quality of work you can expect under an uninspiring leader (Sundar) in a culture of constant layoff fear and bureaucracy.

Literally everyone I know who works at Google hates their job and are completely checked out.
What are the "other number of events"? Please be specific. Regarding what happened in various Arab countries in the 40s and 50s (which by the way is after the nakba so the tit-for-tat theory doesn't hold up) what does this have to do with Palestinians being ethnically cleansed? Are you justifying one for the other? It's no different than saying because of the European Holocaust or European antisemitism, the Palestinians deserve to be ethnically cleansed.
There is a lot more. There is a huge amount of safty equipment and sensors in modern car. That stuff that is not seen but its there as well.
As long as you can upvote/downvote/flag shit, you’ll get shit. The incentives aren’t aligned. That’s exactly why you’d have someone re-posting this stuff. People here aren’t old enough to remember when this happened on Digg, Nevermind Slashdot. Dang was in elementary school back then.
The whole Gemini webpage and contents felt weird to me, it's in the uncanny valley of trying to look and feel like an Apple marketing piece. The hyperbolic language, surgically precise ethnic/gender diversity, unnecessary animations and the sales pitch from the CEO felt like a small player in the field trying to pass as a big one.
The first example makes me think if the 95th percentile players still can't figure out how to trigger the mission completed objective, the problem is probably more with the mission design being inappropriate for the game's user base than an indication of some broader truth about how add the 95th percentile person is at everything
My only real criteria was studios I could think of that seem to still make games like they (and the leadership) are passionate about it and are making S tier games still. I put GGG on it because Path of Exile 2 looks like what a company with the vision of Blizzard in its hayday would be making today.
It's still false advertising.

This is common in all industries. Take gaming, for example. Game publishers love this kind of publicity, as it creates hype, which leads to sales. There have been numerous examples of this over the years: Watch Dogs, No Man's Sky, Cyberpunk 2077, etc. There's a period of controversy once consumers realize they've been duped, the company releases some fake apology and promises or doubles down, but they still walk out of it richer, and ready to do it again next time.

It's absolutely insidious, and should be heavily fined and regulated.
Why not make the CSS dynamic? Or even manipulate the SVG itself in script? D3 has been doing the latter for a long time.
In a draft published in May of this year. This should have been a draft in the 90s.

It should have been in mail systems forever. Whenever you create an account the first email should have been the server sending you your private key in some format that every email client understands and would then prompt you to automatically install it in your client for that server.

Welcome to your new email account!

Your private key is attached in the standard format.

When your client asks you to install the key say "Yes", and allow it to automatically sign your email using that key for this account.

Don't forget to check the box to automatically encrypt mail when possible.

If email worked like this I bet secure POP and IMAP would have been implemented much faster than they were in real life.
I think the deal was for employee to keep their OpenAI compensation even after moving to MSFT
> social engineering the LLM

LLMs aren't people and cannot be socially engineered; using that term to describe exploiting an LLM is abuse of language. (And "social engineering", anyway, is often just a term to describe a mechanism of achieving torts and crimes of the general nature of frauds, false pretenses, theft of service, and the like, not a term you can wave at something to make it legally acceptable.)

> We really don't want to open the "prosecuting crimes performed against an LLM" can of worms.

I'd much rather open the "prosecuting crimes committed by exploiting an LLM" can of -- well, nothing like worms, really -- than close it and create a loophole to all laws for exploiting an LLM as the mechanism.
Fake it til you make it, then keep faking it.
Denmark Bans Burning the Koran
ELI5 attempt:

Suppose you're using Newtonian mechanics to model the behavior of a moving baseball that bounces off a brick wall. You write down some equations, do the experiment, the results match, yay science.

Now imagine your lazy coworker was supposed to do the same experiment, but he couldn't find any bricks, so instead of a wall he just built a tiny rocket engine inside the tennis ball that can exert exactly enough force to reverse its velocity. The ball's velocity changes in exactly the same way, except that it changes at a certain time (when your lazy coworker triggers it) rather than at a certain place (where the wall is). Would his results match yours?

For a single ball, yes. The behavior would be identical between these two scenarios. If you looked at a graph of the ball's location over time, you wouldn't be able to tell whether it had bounced off a wall or been "bounced" by a little rocket engine. Right?

Now consider a stream of baseballs. In your lab, your baseball cannon fires a stream of balls which all reverse velocity at a certain place in space, but your coworker is firing a stream of balls that all reverse velocity at a certain time. Would they also behave identically?

No, this time there are differences. For one example, the wall-balls would collide with each other (the ball that just hit the wall would run into the ball that's about to hit the wall) and the rocket-balls wouldn't (each ball reverses direction at the same time, so the spacing between the balls never changes). For another difference, they'd bounce back in a different order (the first wall-ball to be shot would be the first to return, whereas the last rocket-ball to leave the cannon would be the first to return).

That is more or less what this experiment is doing except they're using light rather than baseballs, and a substance with variable reflectiveness rather than tiny rockets. This might have repercussions for time symmetry, that's above my pay grade, but definitely doesn't involve time travel.
"like the meat of an animal that gave its life." - that's generally not how it works.
>In order for a model to understand what ugly is, someone or something has to tag training data as “ugly”,

that is a very dated (2008) concept.

the model "understands" that 50% of people are below/above median.

consequently, those that are not "OMG girl ur BEAUTIFUL"-tagged are horse-faced.

It understands that the girl with the profile picture with 200 likes and 2k friends is better looking than the girl with 4 likes and 500 friends.
I agree that RedHat and Debian use OpenPGP mostly for its signature only and do not rely on any Web of Trust or other infrastructure for key distribution in the basic case. As a side-note just for fun:

It's interesting to consider third parties who maintain Linux package repos, like Postgres https://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/repos/yum/

They distribute their public keys on their own web infrastructure, so it's effectively TOFU. In your criticism of PyPI, you rightly pointed out that keys are useless unless pushed to a publicly-known key server because they aren't discoverable for users, which leads to ~no one verifying installs. I agree with this for PyPI, but in Postgres' case, if you do not have their key pulled locally, installs will fail by default. This means that users do generally install keys locally (actually they typically install the repo RPMs which configures local repositories as well as installs keys), even if the discovery mechanism isn't enforced by yum. My point here is that ecosystems without the ability to pre-bake rings of trust can still result in ~all downloads being verified as long as the client tooling defaults to the correct thing. pip not doing so is the main reason why OpenPGP signing never caught on in the Python ecosystem.

But yes, I agree: A modern day dpkg and rpm could swap to something with safer cryptography rather easily without changing anything about distribution. OpenPGP is a lot of bloat for their needs.

> Out of curiosity: which government standards? I'm not aware of a US Gov't standard that mandates PGP; this would be very valuable to know.

I don't believe any mandate OpenPGP specifically. I was more trying to get across that many institutions mandate FIPS 140-2/3, and current implementations (like on RHEL) complain if signatures are not present in their expected format. Because OpenPGP is my only choice for signing yum infrastructure and RPMs, it's a de-facto government standard today.
For me the key additions are: 1) integration with our org Identity Provider 2) NAT traversal + DERP relay fallback 3) Tailscale’s ACL functionality.
> Any interviewer who didn't roll with that was a sign to him that there probably wasn't an engineering maturity culture fit and helped eliminate a lot of companies.

Different problems test for different skills. Perhaps that colleague just misunderstood what he was being tested on.

Linus Torvalds had this to say: "Bad programmers worry about the code. Good programmers worry about data structures and their relationships." Not every coding challenge is about software design skills. A large number is about the programmer's potential to code to DS & A. It's assumed that design, philosophy and other moot software skills can be picked up, or that internal coding standards and code reviews somewhat mitigate a lack in that area.

But I can very well see a mature engineer being annoyed by someone incessantly asking to confirm small details on a problem where they could make their own decision about terminal and exceptional conditions. Even if they have to explain them later. After you probe your interviewer once or twice on edge cases, you're usually told to assume the simplest situation. This should nudge you to what you're actually being tested on. No need to beat around the bushes, just solve the problem.

Also, to gain insight into the culture of an organization, don't just assume or infer things, like that colleague did. Ask proper questions. Express that working in an organization with a mature engineering culture is a concern of yours. Ask about code review, software development philosophy, etc. You've shown yours, ask them to show theirs.
>Some people just get off on free stuff.

That is an understatement with that guy. I have been tempted to over the years to make a web comic on this guy. The junk he does most normal people would never even think of.
> They’re genuinely the cream of the crop!

More like the most connected and privileged, but okay.
The business side was absolutely destroyed. Atari was broken up and sold off by its parent company. Every other 3rd party developer went out of business (or took enormous losses and closed their game division) except for Activision, which survived by the skin of its teeth by pivoting to computer games and spent years digging itself back up to profitability. Retailers lost so much money that the whole concept of "video games" became anathema, which is why Nintendo had to pitch it as a general "entertainment system" and sell it with the light gun and ROB the Robot (basically as decoys for the retail buyers) just to get a tiny foothold back on retail shelves in their NYC test market and prove out the market again.
because IBM is both bigger and slower?
The person who made this post has made 30 submissions in the last 24 hours. That's extreme, regardless of whether this particular one has any merit.
I worked in med tech for the first 5 years of my career. The name of the game is regulation - everything is done to serve regulatory bodies. The amount of real innovation, even in "R&D" groups, is extremely small. Expect to spend much of your time wrangling documents (literally Word documents sometimes), with the occasional line or two of code per week if you're lucky. Don't get me started on meetings...

Even people with Ph.Ds spent their days being tortured by documents. Maybe startups are better, but big med tech is not a fun place to work. The people who succeeded and enjoyed the work, were the ones who knew how to play politics, or how to successfully avoid it.
> a standard clause in Nordic contracts

What contract is Tesla party to that they would invoke this on? OP suggested Transport Agency invoking force majeure, which makes sense.

> has a clause that the bank isn't liable if it stops working due to industrial action

Who is suggesting liability for Tesla?
The trick people are learning is to not give their money to the billionaires, people are shunning combustion engined vehicles in droves enough to force opec to look at the books and futures and it's only going to increase from now on.
Sounds about right to me. They missed the entire smartphone revolution because they were too slow to adapt their OS (literally their main product) to run on mobile devices.
I fondly remember getting Little Caesars pizza every Friday after soccer practice and coming home to stay up late with my dad and watch the new X-Files. The 90's truly were the best decade.
I don't think IBM is something that comes to mind when people are talking "Major tech companies" anymore.
> If it cannot fulfil its duties because of a force majeur event then it would be expected to explore alternatives

I don’t know Swedish law. But this certainly isn’t the case in America.
Not after the Redhat acquisition.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3t6L-FlfeaI
There is nothing free market about enforcing patent on parties that aren't signatory to it, nor the high regulatory impositions that choke out those who aren't suitably connected to regulatory capture apparatus.
Raised elsewhere in this thread: hashes of media, maybe perceptive hashes sent and revived.

Read receipts.

User is typing indicators.
> Again, the technology would be able to cure cancer.

That's your strawman. But I can - easily, at that - imagine a POC that would be specific enough to kill a single human with a very high degree of success given some meta data about them and a sample of their DNA. I'm for obvious reasons not going to expand on that here because we have too many idiots in this world but the fact that you can't imagine such things doesn't mean that others can not.
"The Simon–Ehrlich wager was a 1980 scientific wager between business professor Julian L. Simon and biologist Paul Ehrlich, betting on a mutually agreed-upon measure of resource scarcity over the decade leading up to 1990."

Interesting. But the club of Rome predicted in the 70ies problems for the first half of the 21st century. And I think they are going to win the bet. Two blogs I can recommend:

1. https://senecaeffect.substack.com/

2. https://ourfiniteworld.com/

Both bloggers I consider extremely smart.
IBM is not "major" anymore in the sense of major tech companies that the person above meant.
They didn't miss the cloud revolution, and certainly not the AI revolution either.

Microsoft is doing absolutely great under Satya Nadella.
> If microplastics are bad, nanoplastics can be reasonably assumed to be worse

It might be reasonable to assume that for the time being (precautionary principle), but in the end, most plastics are (C2H4)n. The form it can take is limited too, so while it could have effects on endocrine receptors, it would overall be limited.

[edit] I'm dumb sorry, I get it, additives can be more complex and are unknown, I'll read the article next time :/

Still stand by my initial belief, but I shouldn't have been so dismissive.
Certainly, don't use OpenVPN in 2023 if you can avoid it. WireGuard is much faster and more secure, and significantly easier to set up.

If you're a home user, the advantage to Tailscale is that it's going to "just work", with a couple clicks, on any supported device (of which there are lots). There's no configuration to get started and, for a lot of users, no configuration ever after that. The onboarding experience is spooky; it's upsettingly good.

If you're a corporate user, the advantages are drastically greater: you get SSO integration (this is historically one of the annoying pain points of corporate access VPNs, to the point where a significant fraction of pre-Tailscale netsec teams just punted on this problem and hand-provisioned VPN creds for people, which is a nightmare) and trivially simple group-based access control.
At this point, probably a handwritten letter. Back to the 20th century we go.
I wonder what's going on, tried turning of JavaScript but I could still barely scroll.
I've toyed around with the idea of doing an article where the spreadsheet gets progressively more complicated with how to model major business types.

Maybe I should do it!
I don't think IBM is a "major tech companie" in the modern lingo
I don’t understand why is Gemini even considered “jaw-dropping” to begin with. GPT-4V has set the bar so high that all their demos and presentations paled in comparison. And it’s available for anyone to use. People have already build mind-blowing demos with it (like https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/11/ai-po...).

The entire launch felt like a concentrated effort to “appear” competitive to OpenAI. Google was splitting hairs talking about low single digit percentage improvement in benchmarks. Against a model that has been out for over 6 months.

I have never been so unimpressed with them. Not only has OpenAI managed to snag this one from under Google’s nose, IMO - they seem to be defending their lead quite well. Now that is something unmistakably remarkable. Color me impressed!
The piezo was probably pretty close to a gpio line. There's normally a lot more setup involved getting true audio hardware going.
We are quite capable of producing our own vehicles and batteries

Volvo Cars, Polestar, Volvo AB, Scania, Koenigsegg, Northvolt and also new ones like Emily GT, Candella, Einride etc Even our own fighter jets, submarines and military ships through Saab.
I would expect them to stop working at all instead of de facto stealing parcels belonging to a single customer.
Hold up young one. The reason for QWERTYs design has absolutely not been lost to history yet.

The design was to spread out the hammers of the most frequently used letters to reduce the frequency of hammer jamming back when people actually used typewriters and not computers.

The problem it attempted to improve upon, and which is was pretty effective at, is just a problem that no longer exists.
> I also left with tons of others when they pulled the API

Where did you go?
You are thinking in entirely the wrong direction.
The first draft was published in 2016: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-koch-openpgp-web...

Even before that, there were other mechanisms proposed for this, such as https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-shaw-openpgp-hkp... (from 2003). Unfortunately it didn't catch on; I agree it would've been nice to have such a mechanism earlier.
Huh? It was a GREAT demo video!

If it had been real, that is.