skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel much the same way. Facebook tried to sell me on threads by showing me an ad with 2.5 threads visible: one of them was clearly a racist post that I didn't want to see the conclusion of, the other was clearly a liberal outrage thread about how much money Jeff Bezos makes that I ALSO didn't want to see the end of, and the third was a mostly-obscured post by a ceramic artisan I follow. They don't seem to have any idea who they're advertising to if they think these things will get a positive reaction out of me, rather than just closing it and marking it as "show less like this." For that matter, the vaunted algorithm is not very smart if it can't figure out that I only engage with reels and stories about 1% of the time, vs the content I actually like to engage with.

It's like, these social media companies wrote a SINGLE outrage-farming algorithm that they push on everyone's feeds without regard for whether it works on individuals or not.

This all is why, despite it getting worse, I use FB more than the other platforms. Actual content posted by actual humans I actually know with their actual names under them. Not some pseudonym where I can't remember if it's an IRL friend or some internet rando I follow (or why I follow them), a bunch of emojis, contextless junk, and clickbait outrage farming.
If a conceptual framework we're using, that a large heterogenous set of people are "autistics", results in any portrayal or generalisation of that group of people feeling inaccurate, maybe the conceptual framework itself is what's wrong?

I would love for people to move past talking about "Autism" and start talking more about anxiety, Social difficulties, digestive issues, obsessions, compulsions, and so on. If treating autistic people as homogenous is wrong to begin with, why is giving them all the same label a good idea?

That's a rhetorical question - the answer is that "Autism" became insurable, so ever since then there has been this pressure to describe increasingly diverse groups of people using the same label, and for people to NEVER lose this label. I had a psychiatrist re-diagnose me on the grounds that "Autism" had more funding than "Asperger's" at the time. I think pop cultures autistic savant obsession is just a reflection of this, and the root cause of nonsense portrayals and generalisations is money.
She was given the opportunity to show that she was good at the job. The reason she wasn't given this opportunity earlier was because of her skin color. Others that were not given this opportunity due to their skin color are lost to time.
They seem to be an extremely small team.
There's also a history of television programming being dropped for completely non-commercial reasons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_purge
Skin-integrated multimodal haptic interface for immersive tactile experiences
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Altman

> Samuel Harris Altman

> April 22, 1985 (age 38)
CNE and IAD are totally different disciplines with different staffing.
I'm struggling to see how a proof of P=NP really makes any difference, though- other than psychologically, in the minds of people working on solving problems.

It doesn't have any real practical use for people actually building empirically faster implementations of useful algorithms (like SAT, as you mention).

I should have been clearer in stating my premise: it appears that determining that P=NP itself would have no real direct impact on any existing real-life problems; in nearly all cases, "faster algorithms that impact life" come from a combination of theoretical computer science discoveries combined with engineering (partly CS engineering, partly hardware engineering).

I'd love to find a real counterexample, IE, something in material science, or logistics/optimization, that would make a difference to the world economy. I see CS folks get really excited about this but often times as I poke and pull on the facts, I find that the more theoretical computational complexity gets, the less impact it has on daily activities.
Washing the cars has been a problem too. From the Reuters report:

> Lundeen said in an interview that a Tesla service manager told him that a power-steering connector had corroded. The manager said the likely cause was a car wash, which he described as a known problem.

Lundeen paid $4,400 to replace the steering rack and a wiring harness.

“This is the only car that I’ve ever heard of where a car wash can damage the wiring,” Lundeen recalled telling the manager.

Lundeen said he was so shocked by the manager’s frank explanation of Tesla’s part failures that he wrote it down: “All I can tell you,” the Tesla manager said, “is we’re not a 100-year-old company like GM and Ford. We haven’t worked all the bugs out yet.”
I won’t repeat my 101xxx,yyyy number but I do wonder if there was rhyme or reason I don’t recall any numbers which weren’t 7xxxx or 10xxxx before the comma

What was the comma for (and dot for email of course) - just to break it up? Was it a checksum or some sort?
You know you went off the deep end if you don't build tech anymore for the knowledge end understanding can provide, and not even for the utility value but because you see the technology itself as an end that overrides all other goals.
How exactly would he have "legalized" it? Maybe he should have encouraged the HHS to reschedule cannabis sometime last year. I wonder if he did that?
Don't worry, when AI comes after you you'll have all the adversity you'll ever dream of.
Yeah, Windows 10 PCs were still sold in 2021 so they'll only be four years old in 2025. 7th gen processors that can't officially run Windows 11 were sold in 2017 so they'll be eight years old.
Jillion dollar valuations aren't anything new, but this seems as egregious as WeWork being worth $47B.

It's an open secret that you can't build a moat in AI. It's way too "easy" to create a good-enough competitor for any given profitable use case that can underbid them.

On the other hand, a16z just gave Adam Newman $300M to set up expensive apartments so I'm pretty sure OpenAI will be the first private $1T company.
But are you sure that woudl actually make any practical difference for any existing problems in the near term?
I’m missing how this is groundbreaking or even a “conversation”.

They played audio recordings of other whales to the whale and it replied the way whales reply to one another.

The scientists didn’t know what they were saying, other than since the target whale appeared to stick around it probably wasn’t completely gibberish.
To be fair, there are very few actual geniuses and a lot more unremarkable assholes.
The Museum of Broken G.I. Joes
A little bit of both, really. But thanks for the charitable reading.
In case, it's not blinding obvious to people. Groq are a hardware company that have built chips that are designed around the training and serving of machine models particularly targeted at LLMs. So the quality of the response isn't really what we're looking for here. We're looking for speed i.e. tokens per second.

I actually have a final round interview with a subsidiary of Groq coming up and I'm very undecided as to whether to pursue it so this felt extraordinarily serendipitous to me. Food for thought shown here
Even if a machine could generate correct answers, that's only part of the problem: humans will largely reject them.
> Even a P=NP result doesn't tell us that NP problems have efficient solutions.

Yes it does. That is literally exactly what it means. The class P is the class of problems which are considered theoretically "tractable"/"efficiently solvable"/"feasibly solvable" (Cobham-Edmonds thesis). Hence, if NP=P, then that same definition extends to all problems in NP.
More info about Groq: https://groq.com/lpu-inference-engine/
The irony is that solving the captchas is also probably training ChatGPT to solve them.

I have only gotten a captcha once from them, and not since. It was the normal "click on all the tiles that include a -whatever thing-" format.
Out of curiosity, what action on your part caused the death threats?
In all fairness, while yes Bluesky so far has not yet lived up to their promise of decentralisation/federation, it’s still under development. It just hasn’t been built yet.

Though, the whole blue sky stack is significantly more complicated than ActivityPub so I’m doubtful as many would actually set up “instances”.
I had an illuminating thought the other day. The AI race need not march further than AGI. A form of AGI is speed super intelligence, that is human intellectual capacity but better performance or cheaper energy cost.

We need to treat possibility as eventuality for preparedness sake: the ultra wealthy could in theory execute a coup against the rest of humanity. They could also retreat into bunkers with suitable farming capacity, while their silicon business operations continue on. The rest of us are out of work, and if the bureaucracy gets respected out of homes. If farmland gets bought up by the ultra wealthy, the plan could be to subvert climate change by allowing billions to die.

In the end, you’re going to foot the bill of aristocracy unless you rise up and demand a stake at the table or ensure the downfall of everything today.

Life is in fact a giant strategy game because it can be and because it is the governing dynamic at the highest level, so play or lose.
I think this video does a much better job. It places the problem in the historical context of computer science and explains why it's an important question. It's also more in depth while still being very short and approachable.

I highly recommend the channel if you're interested in information theory. It's just starting to publish new videos after a very long hiatus.

https://youtu.be/rK3xcRYLWeg
https://groq.com/groq-sets-new-large-language-model-performa...
I mean “AI” kills people all the time

The endgame in many long range cruise missiles are based on computer vision systems

Here’s the tomahawk specifically: https://secwww.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/Content/techdigest/pdf/...

I personally witnessed tomahawk used extensively throughout the GWOT

You just rarely hear about it
Does anyone have a link to the actual “conversation”? Is there a transcript?
Anars/blank-audio: set of blank MP3 audio files
> an important assumption of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is that extraterrestrials will be interested in making contact and so target human receivers. This important assumption is certainly supported by the behavior of humpback whales.

I realise they can only work with what they have but I'm not sure how much a whale's behaviour can tell us about extraterrestrial behavior any more than our own behaviour can. As mammals whales are relatively closely related to us and their social behaviours aren't dissimilar to our own.
Or... sometimes, the amount of time you spend making an asshole work well enough with other people (let alone a bunch of assholes work with each other) could've been vastly better spent on literally anything else.

High-skilled people are not always high-skilled contributors, and it's not a management issue. GP is probably a better manager than most for working to find people that enhance his organization, rather than force-fitting detractors and never looking at the bigger picture.

I usually wonder if this "only skill matters" opinion is purely held by people leading small teams, or new managers. I have never seen it work in practice or with a team of more than one.
It has no overlap with ActivityPub, it's an entirely separate protocol
They took a long break from them after 1.1, the first version was finished. They started again recently in preparation for the 2.0 release, which will hopefully be sometime next year.
No, it's because their servers would fall over if it was public registration, and they wouldn't be able to keep up with moderation
Okay.

So I already have a somewhat AI powered project that based around music.

I have the prototype and videos of it in action on YouTube. How do I realistically pitch this. I'm actually just looking for feedback at this point.
He fell victim to (discovered/invented?) the pendulum rocket fallacy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket#Pendulum_rocket_falla...
"This search engine I've gone out of my way to not track my search, viewing or other habits and usage is showing me irrelevant ads! Fucking trash!"

They'll complain at the thought of paying for YT premium ("the internet should be free bro! Except my new SaaS calendar app, of course"), pirate Factorio, pay for kagi. A real eclectic bunch.
The tone is fine, in my opinion. It’s funny because new people working on old problems without knowing they’re old problems is itself not a new phenomenon by any means.
I get that this rage bait works on some percent of the population. 20%? 50%? 75%? What that leaves unanswered is, why aren't these platforms smart enough to adapt to what actual individuals react to? Sure, they picked the most successful single formula, but you'd think they'd want to increase the platform's engagement at the margins rather than just milking one approach for all it's worth.
Twitter, previously, was the best of both worlds. A first-party app “most” people used, and then a vibrant third party app ecosystem that others, mainly power users, loved.
It's pretty fun seeing "create scarcity" in motion. I wonder if it's a viral strategy or a way for slow, sustainable growth.
Part of me thinks that's the point, I don't believe Jack set out to make something that could be a meaningful threat to twitter. It seems like it's meant to be just big enough to suck the oxygen out of the room for other twitter alternatives. (Obviously that failed, now that threads is topping download charts and twitter is sitting in the 40s.)

The man has enough access to capital and can easily hire folks with the know-how to make a service that can scale. That fact that this hasn't happened says something.
https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/5086/what...
Regarding Hugo, the Go template language is a little esoteric (or at least very unusual) at times. The final straw, though, was the lack of compatibility with the Tailwind JIT compiler. Apparently it's fixed now, but it took so long that I'd long since moved on.

Astro feels like a really good fit for static content sites. It's easy to understand, and generates very fast sites that don't rely on a tonne of pointless JavaScript (as was the case with both Gatsby and Next when I used them).
This reminds me of Diaspora.. am I that old?
I’ve noticed an increasing number of sites that provide an insane amount of text to answer a simple question.

They almost always follow some sort of structure where the actual answer to your question is all the way at the bottom of the page.

Most of the content appears relevant on the surface, but when you actually read it, it’s completely generic junk. Stuff that a high schooler would use to fluff an essay to hit a word limit.
To Stay or Leave
> It's extremely unintuitive that classical systems should minimize anything like a time or an action.

If I get to define the measure arbitrarily, then I can always find a measure that something else is always a minimum of. So in that sense it's not surprising at all. The interesting question to me is why should that seemingly arbitrary measure be action? What does that even mean, physically? I have no intuition for it.

> Think about it: they travel along the minimum path,

I'm already stuck here. What would it even mean for a particle to have an "action" (whatever that is) that is not minimized? Like what would that look like, physically? I understand what it means for distance not to be minimized, but action isn't distance...
> which is what I'm really interested in.

Whenever I see comments like these, my immediate thought is "How interested are you, if you had to put a dollar figure on it?"

Also, you are missing alternative (e): availability bias. Maybe you haven't seen a lot of innovation around UX not because people are not trying, but because those who tried to experiment with different UX were aiming at such a niche that completely failed as social network?
There was a law school article submitted a few days ago that provides a very good roundup:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38678021
Agree. If I go by 1% in 9 years, In just 810 years we will 0% pork in bacon. I for sure do not want to live in the world where zero percent pork in finest bacon is normalized.
On the surface this is a good idea, however this would turn wildly anticompetitive. Whether or not your site would have business on the web would be entirely dictated by whether or not you woul be correctly classified (or indeed classified at all) in this engine. if you wanted to start your own stackoverflow competitor for whatever reason, you would have a very hard time getting any traction. this is also true of current general purpose engines, but you still do stand a chance to be referenced well and hit high enough to still get traffic.

the yahoo model collapsed for this very reason. back when you went to more than 5 websites to look at screenshots of the other 4, the directories would not necessarly show you the latest thing, because it wasn't on the list of sites manually added to each directory.

i think the current problem with google isn't to do with spam. i think google has become complacent because their ads are on all the sites anyway, so the function of "maximize revenue per search" doesn't actually care if you find what you're looking for, because you will get shown google ads anyway, and will be coming back to google anyway. in fact, they probably get to show more ads by feeding you bad results, because then you're loading more pages. this didn't used to be the case when google search was on top of spam sites, but it doesn't feel like they're doing anymore algo updates to curb the current trend, and spam sites have caught on to what ranks higher in the results.
how is this different than me meowing at my cat and her meowing back? a “conversation” didn’t happen. Also, the scientific community is very resistant to the idea of categorizing any non-human communication as “language” (language is pretty much defined as being done only by humans) despite many cetaceans clearly showing signs of having this ability.
Could this be like Apache Mesos, i.e. a heterogeneous compute cluster?

https://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/architecture/
Old games also didn't use a database, they saved everything in a giant text file.

I'm not sure if they were "extremely stable" though. Like Myspace, it might only work up until a certain point. What kills stuff is usually going viral.
To be fair now’s as good a time as any. You’ve got the ChatGPT plugins, the secrecy behind closed sourcing the model and the reach of the chat product. That’s a lead that ventures looking for. Although it’s a temporary lead, all that VCs need to do is to find the next idiot to offload to.
More terrifying: A force that is supposed to be impartial and incorruptible, but someone finds the right lever to corrupt it.

(Before you say "that can't happen", the AGI is going to run on some hardware. Someone is going to have access to that hardware. For that matter, someone is going to write the program, and supply the training data, and do the testing.)
Basic features like what?
Yes, that’s the one. I built one of those about 7 years ago.
You're grasping at straws. This was a civil case. I don't know why you're demanding a conviction. CO Secretary of State Jena Griswold was the respondent, I believe.

Beyond that, are you objecting because the vote wasn't unanimous? Lots of very controversial SCOTUS votes have been 5-4. We all live with them. Wait, are you a CO voter? If not, then you don't have to live with this decision. As it happens, I am a CO voter, so I am glad there was due process and it was decided correctly.
Hmm here in Southern Ontario Canada Amazon has 2 delivery blocks a day so I’ve gotten deliveries at either the morning or afternoon depending on when I’m ordering (I know both sets of drivers now as they work different shifts) and I’ve yet to find a retailer or system that’s as fast as Amazon. Canadapost is the only alternative and it’s never as reliable delivery wise. Shopify is the closest 2nd at being most consistently & honest in terms of data. If Amazon could go same day that would be a major innovation here and further eat into Walmart/Best Buy type retail, instant gratification being the only reason I use them.
Yeah I've been enjoying Twitter quite a bit since Elon took over, truthfully I'm not even sure what he changed to cause the effect but it seems to be working.
> 'don't be violent'

The only evidence for this is heresay by the prosecutors.

> 'don't stalk and terrorize women'

As has been pointed out by others in this thread, that was a different person. Go read the article again.

> 'don't run a doxxing website'

You've got me there. But I don't think that comes even close to justifying an indefinite sentance.

> 'don't extort and steal'

Yeah, he shouldn't have done that. But as I said before, it does not at all justify an indefinite sentance.

> The guy stands up in court and basically says 'yeah I don't have any remorse and I'm gonna keep doing it because I don't think it's wrong' - why do we need to try and understand that more?

That is completely false. He is never quoted as saying anything to that effect. Rather, this is the closest thing we get:

> A mental health assessment used as part of the sentencing hearing said he "continued to express the intent to return to cyber-crime as soon as possible. He is highly motivated."

Perhaps the question should be what about cyber-crime he is motivated by. There is no indication that the motivation is anything malicious. It may be thrill that he is motivated by. If that's the case, it should be treated as an struggle with addiction, not evil.
Yes, it seems that the state of the art admits this as a possibility (though it seems surprising, and you can make a hand wavy argument dismissing it, as another poster does downthread). Eg this survey by Scott Aaronson:

https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/pnp.pdf#page=26
>failed as social network

Is that the case? Serious question, I'm curious about any social networks that have tried some new UX? The twitter clones seem to play things very close to twitter's style. At least it looks that way to me as someone who isn't a heavy twitter user.

Also what is "failed as a social network" when Twitter, one of the biggest bleeds money as it is?

Is the market just messed up?

Or maybe UX where I actually feel like I can find or interact with things I want just doesn't work for profitability (Facebook doesn't show me what I want)?
The fact that Google puts so much focus on content makes it sound like the Google algorithm has been corrupted. It's almost like a secret society where you need to do a secret handshake in order to get access. In this case you need to know the right word patterns to use in your content to get access to high traffic.
Assuming double arguendo, you were saying that prescription pain killer dangers are aequalis to street fentanyl and statistics show that is falsus.
Oh good catch. When I added linux support yesterday, I updated the download button, but I forgot to update the Ctrl/Cmd button. Should be fixed now.

I'll also fix the "⌥" in the editor. Thanks!
Do you know how censorship and Balkanization work on Bluesky? On Mastodon this was quite extreme, as entire servers can block each other, without any involvement from the individual user.
What other amazing things did Elon "jump start"? Did he also invent the internet, the wheel, fire?

"In December 2015, Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, Reid Hoffman, Jessica Livingston, Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Infosys, and YC Research announced[22] the formation of OpenAI and pledged over $1 billion to the venture. The actual collected total amount of contributions was only $130 million until 2019."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI#2015%E2%80%932018:_Non-...

"In fact, while the source of much of OpenAI’s funding remains unclear, filings contain only around $15 million of donations that can be traced definitively back to Musk."
https://techcrunch.com/2023/05/17/elon-musk-used-to-say-he-p...