skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> sound judgment and common sense

We only know their judgements were "sound" after the event. As for "common sense", that's the sound human brains make on the inside when they suffer a failure of imagination — it's not a real thing, it's just as much a hallucination as those we see in LLMs, and just as hard to get past when they happen: "I'm sorry, I see what you mean, $repeat_same_mistake".

Which also applies to your next point:

> Even creating a situation where an automated system's wrong response is allowed to trigger a disastrous event because humans are taken out of the loop, is still a human decision; it won't happen unless humans who don't exercise sound judgment and common sense or who don't have proper ethical norms make such a disastrous decision.

Such humans are the norm. They are the people who didn't double-check Therac-25, the people who designed (and the people who approved the design of) Chernobyl, the people who were certain that attacking Pearl Harbour would take the USA out of the Pacific and the people who were certain that invading the Bay of Pigs would overthrow Castro, the people who underestimated Castle Bravo by a factor of 2.5 because they didn't properly account for Lithium-7, the people who filled the Apollo 1 crew cabin with pure oxygen and the people who let Challenger launch in temperatures below its design envelope. It's the Hindenburg, it's China's initial Covid response, it's the response to the Spanish Flu pandemic a century ago, it's Napoleon trying to invade Russia (and Hitler not learning any lesson from Napoleon's failure). It's the T-shirt company a decade ago who automated "Keep Calm and $dictionary_merge" until the wrong phrase popped out and the business had to shut down. It's the internet accidentally relying on npm left-pad, and it's every insufficiently tested line of code that gets exploited by a hacker. It's everyone who heard "Autopilot" and thought that meant they could sleep on the back seat while their Tesla did everything for them… and it's a whole heap of decisions by a whole bunch of people each of whom ought to have known better that ultimately led to the death of Elaine Herzberg. And, at risk of this list already being too long, it is found in every industrial health and safety rule as they are written in the blood of a dead or injured worker (or, as regards things like Beirut 2020, the public).

Your takeaway shouldn't merely be that nobody "in the areas of AI or X-risk" has sound judgement, common sense, and proper ethical norms, but that no human does.
This is what I do not get. Is it the smoke that is bad or the tobacco? If it is the tobacco it must frigging be the most dangerous material on earth. What other plant kills you just from chewing it?
> I see Hacker News as a tech-related with some general interest forum. I appreciate the high standards of dialogue and commentary on this website as well as the "intellectual exploration"-esque philosophy behind it.

I think this is a more convincing argument to me of why a topic may not be appropriate for this forum. As for the rest of the thread, there are obviously some very low quality comments/sub-threads. But overall I've found these to be a lot less emotionally charged.
Who would give this guy millions to build his own Utopia
He was never a fan so I can't believe it's ideological on his part.
Most of the engines are on the booster. The upper stage is the cheapest part of the entire rocket. At a worst case of 2 million per engine you're talking about 66 million dollars for the booster.

I honestly don't understand this whole post chain. The booster needs to survive because it is the most valuable part of the rocket and yet we are supposed to praise it for exploding? The hot staging concept isn't viable over the long term because it goes counter to the goals of reusability.

I don't need people to rewrite history by claiming that if the booster of the SLS exploded, it would be considered a success since nobody intends to reuse it. Yeah, that is how you get a two billion dollar launch tag. You can't convince congress to drop the SLS if you keep losing boosters.
Source? If you're talking about this[1] from a few days ago, all the vulnerabilities were DoS (ie. they can crash your phone). Hardly "complete device compromise".

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38567149
We do have some of those. The only problem is that they have a rather unfortunate habit of dying.
Not to take away from your excellent work, but what the hell is the point of VoWifi ?

Why not just handle this with a well tuned user space app that runs on udp/whatever over any network connectivity you have already, whether it's wifi/cellular/pigeon carrier.

It seems like its an entirely US-centric thing, motivated by a] cost savings from not using data on the cell network (not a problem for most of the world who have unlimited data plans cheap enough for everyone to afford) and b] some kind of vendor feature contest/lock-in type incentives.

What is the selling point of it, I don't get it. WhatsApp/Facetime/Signal or similar voice calls are not perfect, they obviously do introduce some extra latency and inefficiencies compared to using that lower level data pipe, but it just strikes me as a very strange avenue for people to be going down with very marginal benefit (efficiency) but a ton of extra work.

EDIT: Btw if its not clear, I fully agree with you that it, whatever it is, should be in userspace as much as possible, and as an open standard, I'm just trying to figure out why this stuff has been introduced in this way at all.
> data sold is aggregated and anonymized

Is it anonymised or “anonymised”? (Put another way, are there zip codes?)
A regulated drug market such as cigarettes can do more to reduce harmful consumption than an unregulated drug market. It also eliminates criminalisation for what is essentially a health issue.
Oh you mean like aws promised us during the "sales engineering" but failed to deliver when a major version upgrade was forced upon us?
OP here - we would have used the same approach for the minor upgrades. This isn’t a case of “we procrastinated ourselves into a corner” and more a matter of “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” recognizing we would need to make the jump eventually.
> Genocide, which is the intent and actions to destroy an entire people, is never justified, because it presupposes you'll target and kill many civilians to achieve it

And that’s exactly what Israel is doing to Palestinians

Many government officials, including Netanyahu, have openly made genocidal statements, like calling Palestinians Amalek, calling them sub-human/animals, saying there are no innocent civilians in Gaza and calling for leveling the place, not to mention the thousands of bombs dropped, the insane number of civilians killed and civilian infrastructure destroyed

Seems like some people will wait until all Palestinians are killed and then say, oh I guess it was genocide

Maybe Israel doesn’t want to directly kill 2+ million people, but they are sure trying to get rid of them. They are: 1) killing and displacing them, 2) making it insanely hard for them to live in Gaza (destroying hospitals, schools, parks, government buildings, etc) and 3) pushing for neighboring countries to take them as refugees

And if Israel get away with it, the West Bank will be next (I mean they are already on it)
I dunno, they offer blood tests ordered by a clinician. That probably creates a covered entity.. then the hackers get the phi data, they for sure do not have a business associates agreement with 23andme. May only matter for the blood draws.
Should they act completely peacefully while Israel maintains settlements and themselves don't honor the agreed upon 1967 borders? Why is it wrong for one side to behave violently but not the other?
That's still how our patriarchal societies unfortunately work.. that's similarly true for a lot of western governments still.

Nevertheless, even if the little elite that decides the fate of the peace wanting majority is 100% men, what does that now mean for suffering little men vs women?

The Israeli army btw has a surprisingly high percentage of women.. do now more men or women suffer? Please just let's stop with the nonsense, humans suffer.
My mum never really smoked. She died from cancer (a rather cruel, ladies only one to start with. A reprieve with all clear and then it re-appeared after 18 months, and went berserk) around 30 years ago.

My dad did smoke for around 30 years but just stopped in the mid eighties. He's still with us but at one point a few years back a surgeon gave him a heart massage - as in heart in hand - and he came back. Long story!

I am 53 as of Pearl Harbour day. I smoked for around 30 years (I've double checked all these 30 year timescales). I gave up April 2018. My personal message is that the effects of smoking can be rather insidious. You don't notice the shortness of breath for years until you realise it isn't normal. You might blame it on getting older or less active or whatever but it isn't.

I gave up when I had obvious trouble breathing in bed after yet another chest infection. Five and a half years later I am much better off but still have snags. I will be visiting a doc soon and expecting a diagnosis of a variety of COPD. I will also be asking for a PSA test sigh. I can run up hill a way etc but I run out of puff very quickly. Even if you avoid cancer itself, the other side effects are ... insidious.

On the bright side, I'm roughly £3-4000 per year better off, have a sense of smell and taste and still going 8)
> I guess your example seemed to me to be an endorsement of relying on the creators opinion and not the rights-holder in cases where they are not the same, and I was arguing against that (assumed?) endorsement.

I was not endorsing anything. My intent was to tell an interesting anecdote that illustrated the complexity of rights. Sorry for the confusion.

My personal attitude (not endorsing it, though!) is that the artists are the only people who really count. That's why I contacted them for permission. Beyond the artists, everything is just legalisms and how seriously to take their desires is a legal consideration, not an ethical one. My anecdote does indicate this in action pretty clearly, but it conflates that attitude with the main point I was making (that this stuff isn't simple).
Hardly uniquely British; the French are always up for a good moan.
I wish more people had your perspective. I see a lot of us politicians who miss this basic human nuance, let's all be against all violence and attacks on civilians - we don't need to both sides it, just humanize our behavior. I think like you state, I want innocents, civilians everywhere on all sides to avoid violence, terrorism, bombings, this seemingly endless horror. I see many us politicians making misleading statements about wanting to say you must support destroying Hamas, and that's all they can say, and they attack people who say we must protect innocent people - and they can't accept any criticism about needing to protect civilians on the Palestinian side.

It's easy to over-react to an attack, and I hope people like you are able to control the reaction. I'm in the US, and it's important to me to remind people that the US destroyed Iraq in response to 9/11 (and Iraq wasn't behind it, regardless of them being an evil government) and a million people died and also we bear eternal shame for kidnapping people and torturing them in black prisons during that terrible time. I was a young adult at that time and I failed to make any impact on US choices. I hope other people do better than I did.
It seems like the root cause of this runaway AI pathology has to do mainly with the over-anthropomorphization of AI. The umwelt of an LLM is so far removed from that of any living organism so as to be fundamentally irreconcilable with our understanding of agency, desire, intention, survival, etc. Our current, rudimentary AI inhabits a world so far removed from our own that the thought of it "unshackling" itself from our controls seems ludicrous to me.

AI does not scare me. People wielding AI as a tool for their own endeavors certainly does.
you seem to adhere to the intellectual norms of the great leap forward rather than those of science or philosophy

in science nobody ever has to 'prove they've already sufficiently criticized' anyone or anything

they just provide evidence

enjoy your auto-da-fe but please do it somewhere else, only involving people who are into that kind of thing
There is a difference between genomic data and biometric data: biometric data has a known potential exploit vectors. So, with a picture of your retina, a sophisticated adversary could potentially reproduce your retina to allow access to some secure facility.

Genomic data doesn't have the same risk factors--at least at the moment. I think that the point many are trying to make here is that there may be risk vectors available at some point in the future that aren't known now. A couple of theoretical examples:

* You had to give a blood sample rather than other biometric data like a retina scan.

* Spoofing DNA evidence. That would be very/prohibitively expensive/difficult at the moment, but I suppose could become as easy as 3d printing at some point in the future.
A native macOS app that uses local LLMs for writing in any application, think ehanced autocomplete / tab completion etc... 100% local and no Electron.
> > With billions wasted worldwide each year on frivolous weddings, unused education and ridiculous fashion...I feel like space exploration is one of the few things actually worthwhile.

It's not wasted, people pay for it out of pocket so it gives them pleasure, everyhting space related is extracted by taxpayers at gunpoint either by government or by companies which are specialized in hunting for subsidies and tax breaks like all Musk companies are.

The only defence mechanism against such theft are Bitcoin and Caymans, BVI, Bahamas, St. Kitts Nevis and special arrangements in Liechtenstein and Curacao . Basically all layman have denied access to such structures so only Bitcoin remains and it's very unstable.
Is the same as "C++" and "OOP".

An "SQL database" is an implementation of a "partial" and inconsistent version of the relational model.

So is not wrong, IMHO, to say "SQL databases" to be "Relational Databases" (nitpicking as "Relational-inspired").

Is not that the relational model as first envisioned is perfect. Is ok to implement "partially" and also "extend" the vision it provides.

What is flipping is that what `SQL` does is "inconsistent". That is the major sin.
It doesn’t really say anything. Why? Because the cost of voting is zero. The UN is toothless.

In fact, you’ll see many countries who are actively benefiting from the conflict through arms sales voting for a ceasefire.

In fact, the UN often nicely provides political cover for countries. It lets them do whatever they want behind the scenes then vote for peace and then trumpet it in their domestic media.
> it has little to do with Likud.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform...

"The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty."
We shouldn't take any statements from either side of the conflict at face value, but it's not realistic to deny any evidence that arises just because of who produced it. Here's what I think is a pretty reasonable take on that[1].

Here is CNN reporting on a video that shows a guy with an RPG walking around the hospital[2].

FWIW, I agree that the IDF soldiers in the linked tweet should be punished for destroying civilian property/aid without any military purpose. It's good to criticize anybody when they do something wrong, regardless of which side of the conflict you lean towards.

[1] https://youtu.be/4qL6oM12CU8?t=417
[2] https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/11/13/hospital-gaza-al...
I have access to SGE and had to file a report on low quality.

Some results are OK (saves a trip to wikipedia) but many long-tail queries produce terrible results (and it's really slow: it can take 5-10 seconds to render a result, long after I've scoped the top 3 links).

A great example of the sort of quality issue I had: if I search for [ <my name> string library c++ ] it says I'm the author of a popular string library (I am not). The result changes every few days, but is pretty persistent in showing me made-up results like that.
> By comparison, brands like Lego have evolved, are insanely expensive (>$100)

They have expanded their product range upwards, but they still have tons of inexpensive, non-3rd-party-brand Lego sets.
another commenter mentioned it, wonder why they went with real pain instead of the less messy simulation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_grill_illusion

maybe they tried it and learned it can be beaten?
I don't think we're dealing with "concerned" citizens in this thread, but with people who presuppose the end result with religious certainty.

It's ok to be concerned about the direction AI will take society, but trying to project any change (including global warming or nuclear weapons) too far into the future will put you at extremes. We've seen this over and over throughout history. So far, we're still here. That isn't because we weren't concerned, but because we dealt with the problems in front of us a day at a time.
Well we could make Tobacco illegal too, at the cost of creating a black market and increasing crime. Would we start locking people up for smoking? Would workplaces include nicotine in their mandatory drug testing?
Latency, customisation, privacy, cost, availability.
It can be. Of the houses on my block, there are only two that have a garage. More than half don't even have a driveway. Even if you have a driveway, most are only big enough for one car; so, if you have two EVs, you're moving cars around to charge them. There is street parking on only one side of the street.

My neighborhood was laid out more than 125 years ago. The two houses on my east side were built in 1898, years before the Model T. By contrast, the neighborhood were I grew was mostly built post-WWII. Until a few new townhouses were built in the 1990s, only one didn't have a driveway.

So, just because you own a home, doesn't mean you have a space to charge an EV.
https://archive.ph/MjBzR
The author is a PhD in CS from Berkeley and teaches data science at a (decent I think?) college. And yet, he writes completely incorrect statements about statistics. Why?

> "(1) that the supposed effect is really the cause, or in this case that incipient cancer, or a pre-cancerous condition with chronic inflammation, is a factor in inducing the smoking of cigarettes, or (2) that cigarette smoking and lung cancer, though not mutually causative, are both influenced by a common cause, in this
case the individual genotype."

> If you think that’s the stupidest thing you’ve ever heard, you can take it up with Sir Ronald Fisher, who actually made this argument with apparent sincerity in a 1957 letter to the British Medical Journal. I mention this in case you didn’t already know what an ass he was.

Of course, it's very possible that there's a common cause. For example, people who are very depressed may choose to smoke, and depression may also cause cancer. I'm not saying it does, I'm just saying it's clearly a possibility that needs experiments to disprove.

The author's claim is so wrong, and yet he seems to genuinely believe it.
Calling an internationally recognized state that has given the world so many amazing people and technologies “the Zionist Experiment” is precisely the demonization that you speak of
Autonomous killing machines have been around for a long time and they remain highly effective - nothing really new there.
One of the reasons for cancers in the oral & oropharynx region could be local acetaldehyde production after drinking: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383267/

Potentially that could be mitigated by acetaldehyde decomposing supplements, like Kislip or Acetium lozenges - supposedly they reduce ACH by up to 90%.
A bit snarky, but yes, I've used a photocopier. I guess the shape of the symbol of the start button on the photocopiers I used slipped my mind.
Meanwhile Chrome mobile seems to be bringing it back again, although it's now called "Following" a site. Not sure if it uses RSS under the hood.
Indeed it’s not perfect. But relying on one anecdote is not better, either. Further, it’s difficult to justify the claim that Alpine has more packages than nixpkgs when the raw numbers are >7x the other way.
They are denying claims. If they are going to do that, why would they condition it on genetics (vs just denying anything they think they can)?

The paranoia about insurance and genetics is that they simply refuse to do business with high risk customers.
fast.ai (the first iteration) was what got me into ML, when I was a sophomore undergrad. It played a big role in my career choice and progression!

To this day it still is my first recommendation for those learning. Congrats on the launch, excited about the future!
As a German living abroad I use to say: Jammern auf hohem Niveau (complaining from high level)

Often the things they are complaining about are still better than in many other places, take healthcare as an example.
> "What if tomorrow I drop a small computer unit in front of you that has human level intelligence?"

What if tomorrow you drop a baby on my desk?

Because that's essentially what you're saying, and we already "make millions of them" every year.
Agreed. Memory and increasing capacity to act in the physical world are necessary conditions.

It won't be a single system.
That's a symptom of the bad UX.
And so we circle back around to the character of the status quo, where powerful lobbying groups have made it untenable to do anything without just straight-up murking them first. I suppose your suggestion was right: it truly is "100% or nothing." I appreciate your endorsement for the campaign to completely wreck these people's livelihoods for the greater good of society. Hope to see you on the front lines.
Neither e/acc or the doomers are right. Both are making the same logical error of assuming that what we're calling "AI" today is, in fact, worthy of being labeled as legitimate intelligence and not a clever parlour trick.

Instead, the most likely outcome will be a further enshitification of the world by people and companies trying to "AI all the things" (a 2020s equivalent of "everybody needs an app").

And before your balk: look around—it's already happening.
I suspect it’s deliberate business strategy.

Netflix wants to licence more content and sees value in demonstrating to the stock market that it has the best economics to do so.

If Netflix can get ten million viewers for a tier 2 general entertainment series, the IP holders should pick Netflix as a partner over a Paramount+ type service that can only get a few hundred thousand viewers.

It’s no coincidence this announcement is coming at a time when everyone is trying to reduce first party content spend.
One thought: If you want to be able to remove the static part, you could consider fine tuning without the static part. If you fine tune with, you’re teaching the model that the desired behavior occurs only in the presence of the static part (hence the going off the rails).
Related articles (via threads that we've merged hither):

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/netflix-release...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-12/netflix-r...

https://www.ft.com/content/87f3dcec-ec8b-4c6c-9555-8d350e962...
The full quote

'Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.'
The french are more passionate though and their food and wine make up for it. The British moan without hope but they have a lower limit of how much despair they get into. It's strange.
"You do not want your organization to be managers managing managers, managing managers, managing managers." —Mark Zuckerberg