skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They really dont have a happy path. Incorporating an API is not at all the same as being able to base the product around that feature.

Forspoken can’t base the design around instant load times, because most PCs don’t have DirectStorage over ultra-fast NVME drives. Even those that do, don’t have coprocessors to read from the drives, meaning they’re eating up massive amounts of compute to read that fast.

Not even a little bit the same as the situation on the PS5.
What's your reasoning behind Biden's reelection?

Currently, he trails Trump in all swing states, right
Yes. Journalism is a job. People do the work of turning these happenings into words, and are paid for it. That's what's stolen here. The value created through doing that work.

If it didn't have value, Microsoft would lose nothing by no longer ingesting it.
It's not called "XCC" (or perhaps just "XC") as he mentioned in his talk, but there is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exact_cover which has a link to a Knuth algo (EDIT: and a section on what they call "generalized exact cover").
That was the reason for the different programming paradigms (Algol-like vs Prolog-like), to reduce the probability.
Well, yeah. There are not extra perks except for the leaderboard.

I've run forums with various types of tiered systems and you don't gain much by having "ranks".
If I were the CIA/US gov officials I would somehow want the NY Times to drop this case as one would not want AIs that don't have the talking points and propaganda pushed via papers not be part of the record.

I am not saying that the NY Times is a CIA asset but from the crap they have printed in the past like the whole WMDs in Iraq saga and the puff piece of Elizabeth Holmes they are far from a completely independent and propaganda free paper. Henry Kissinger would call the paper and have his talking point printed the next day regarding Vietnam. [1]

There is a huge conflict of access to government officials and independents of papers.

[1] https://youtu.be/kn8Ocz24V-0?si=kWyWXztWGjS_AJVl
Here's the OP (the user, replying, not writing the opening post) to clear this up for us.

> It just takes a lot out of me physically, emotionally and mentally. Wondering if I need to be spending that much of myself. I feel like I work twice as hard as everyone else.
My take on this is that much of work and problem solving is about understanding the problem. So I think human abilities will remain the bottleneck. I pose this thought experiment: Is it possible to design an AI system for a monkey which gives it super-monkey abilities?
When the US entered WWI, they couldn't build a plane despite inventing them. They had to buy planes from the French. Why? The Wright Brothers patent war [1]. This led to Congress creating a patent pool for avionics that exists to this day.

Honestly, I get this feeling about these lawsuits about using content to train LLMs.

Think of it this way: in growing up and learning to read and getting an education you read any number of books, articles, Web pages, magazines, etc. You viewed any number of artworks, buildings, cars, vehicles, furniture, etc, many of which might have design patents. We have such silliness as it being illegal to distribute photos commercially of the Eiffel Tower at night [2].

What's the differnce between training a model on text and images and educating a person with text and images, really? If I read too many NYT articles, am I going to get sued for using too much "training data"?

Currently we need copious quantities of training data for LLMs. I believe this is because we're in the early days of this tech. I mean no person has read millions of articles or books. At some point models will get better with substantially smaller training sets. And then, how many articles is too many as far as these suits go?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers_patent_war

[2]: https://www.travelandleisure.com/photography/illegal-to-take...
Thanks. I don't know either. You may be right: Maybe it's both true and a PR campaign.
> I get a full rotation because I've followed the earth's curvature all the way around the globe once, even though I'm walking straight without rolling.

I don't follow. You aren't walking straight without rolling. You're constantly turning to keep the angle from the center of the earth to your head, as measured through your feet, fixed. This is not a necessary part of moving around the earth; you could maintain a constant orientation to e.g. the earth's axis of rotation instead. The one rotation that you're imagining isn't due to your travel around the earth; it's due to the rolling that you're pretending you aren't doing along the way.

I tried defining a parametric equation for the position of a point on the rim of the small outer circle; if it has radius r, and it starts at coordinates (3r, 0) lying tangent to a circle of radius 3r centered at the origin, and it takes 2pi units of time to roll around the larger circle, then its position at time t is

(4r cos t, 4r sin t) - (r cos 3t, r sin 3t)

(unless I've made a mistake...?)

We then need to define what a "revolution" is. If we define it in what appears to me to be the obvious way, as having been completed whenever the vector from the center of the outer circle to the point that we're tracking on its rim is parallel to its initial value of (-r, 0), then this parameterization makes it clear that the zeroth revolution of the outer circle ends at time t = 0, the first ends at t = 2pi / 3, the second ends at t = 4pi / 3, and the third ends at t = 6pi / 3. Since the maximum value of t is 6pi / 3, it appears that there cannot be more than three revolutions.

However, I find the argument compelling that we should be able to get the number of revolutions by dividing the distance traveled by the center of the circle - 8pi - by the circumference of the circle, 2pi. This clearly tells us that there must have been four revolutions.

What was wrong with the parameterization approach?
IMO the hardest part of open source is documentation and packaging so hats off to people like you who take that final step from tinkerer's project to open source! Also props to you for the galvanic isolation and actually designing a circuit lol.

I'm sure there's even more keyboard/mouse switching projects out there, there's just no good acronym or search query to find them. You could search for "KVM" but it's just dominated by PiKVM. We should really standardize on something for the SEO.
As I commented in another thread, the idea of being permanently damaged by being taught the Wrong Thing is a misconception about learning. Yet most of us are where we're at by having survived many such things.

I hope Dijkstra was being humorous. I used to wear his quote as a badge of honor.
Exactly. FB happily gives away their ML tech like Llama because what they really care about is the data that can be used to train/tune models. The ML bits are just a commodity and not really worth much (something a new wave of ML startups have yet to realize).
I have much less experience with QLab, but I just used it for the first time in a real project, and was extremely happy with the whole experience. We’re playing back soundscape cues sync’ed with a kinetic sculpture, all triggered with OSC from the main server controlling the sculpture.

QLab was the least painful part of getting sound and lighting integrated. If the lighting system we used (Madrix) was half as easy to work with as QLab, I’d get dozens of hours of my life back.
The data will have to become more curated. Exclusivity deals will probably become a thing too. Good data will be worth the money and hassle; garbage (or meh) data won't.
Here's 4.5 hours of content from various experts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=278vwGkFXRM

There's many more of these types of videos by the NIH and other large groups too.

There are also reviews here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-022-00846-2

Short answer is...we somewhat have hypotheses around the cause. We don't know much about the lasting damage yet.

Many folks who have long covid do not have any organ damage from acute infection. But the big question is if a persistent infection causes damage over the duration.
All of this can be true (I don’t think it necessarily is, but for the sake of argument), but it’s legally irrelevant: the court is not going to decide copyright infringement cases based on geopolitical doctrines.

Courts don’t decide cases based on whether infringement can occur again, they decide them based on the individual facts of the case. Or equivalently: the fact that someone will be murdered in the future does not imply that your local DA should not try their current murder cases.
> Perl just didn't lend itself to well-structured code. … once your CGI script started spanning multiple .pl files, you were gonna have a bad time.

You would split your app across .pm files (modules) not .pl (scripts). At the control layer this meant classes based in CGI::Prototype, CGI::Application or the like. At the model layer it would be DBIx::Class or Class::DBI. View would be Template. Then in each layer you’d have a hierarchy of classes like every other language (as .pm files).

Perl has its issues but simply organizing code in a tidy way was not a problem. Problem had more to do with the readability of code, lack of basic OO facilities, awkward split between “references” (pointers) and direct values.

> Along came PHP. It had a few advantages right out of the gate: (a) you could inline it in html, and I really can't overstate just how amazing that was at the time -- suddenly you didn't need templates anymore, you just used the html you already had

While this was absolutely a win in terms of convenience when taking a site dynamic for the first time, and made PHP wildly popular especially for replacing old cgi scripts (va apps) it seems to have made PHP worse from a maintainability standpoint than well written Perl when it comes to sizable web apps.

In terms of libraries Perl had a very nice standard lib plus CPAN where the code and docs were generally to a very high standard. I don’t think PHP won at a code architecture level, it won at the very things that tended to produce the messiest, most amateurish Perl code that gave the language a poor reputation - hacking up a quick and dirty solution. It was superb at that and I admire it for that. But let’s not overstate the thoughtfulness of early PHP. It was an abomination of a language in many ways.
I would guess the monetisation is going to be limited to either subscriptions or advertising if your reputation allows people to especially value your curation of facts/reporting etc. The big issue with LLMs is the lack of reliability - it might be accurate or it might be an hallucination.

Personally, I think it would be a lot simpler if the internet was declared a non-copyright zone for sites that aren't paywalled as there's already a legal grey area as viewing a site invariably involves copying it.

Maybe we'll end up with publishers introducing traps/paper towns like mapmakers are prone to do. That way, if an LLM reproduces the false "fact", it'll be obvious where they got it from.
To have a positive impact on the world? Also, presumably NYT still has a business model unrelated to whatever OpenAI is doing with their data and everyone working there is still getting paid for their work...
This announcement was only added to the README in early October[1]. In the meantime you can of course compile it yourself/grab a build from GH actions. I'm sure they would appreciate the testing, especially leading up to release :-)

[1]: https://github.com/input-leap/input-leap/commit/78ca8f1ef7b6...
Amazon Prime video to now include Ads
Not even bad, just... merely average. An entirely ordinary person person who may have done sloppy work in the past and when called before congress, did what she was told.

I don't care who runs Harvard, a school I have zero connection to, and I can't scapegoat one person for sudden widespread spike in antisemitism over the last few months. They just look totally dumbfounded.

I imagine they will become a lot less dumbfounded in short order. DOJ investigations and a few million dollars in civil suits can have a near magical clarifying effect on a bureaucracy.
But, wasn’t the reason proprietary unixes died out at major work horses because of a nearly feature comparable free alternative (Linux)?

Extending the analogy, LLMs won’t die out, just proprietary ones. (Which is where I think this tech will actually go anyway.)
This is a genuine question based on my desire to get a better understanding of our current progressive culture. I am not passing judgement and I hope you can answer honestly. Did you ask this question with the term 'cultural appropriation' in mind? Does this sweater make you uncomfortable and if so why?
Without 200 years of copyright protection, how will any author be able to afford food?
I see a complete economic collapse unless creators start getting paid both for their data upfront, and paid royalties when their data is used in an LLM response
Yes, and it’s more about responsibilities than skill. If you’re doing senior developer jobs then you get the senior developer title.
What does the Sackler defence refer to?
That is not a fair way, for two reasons:

1. You can't award a bonus question to a subset of people, that is not a fair way of running a standardized test. You can't score some people as x/154 and some at x/153.

2. The old score was just plain wrong, so using it in any way is unfair.

The truth is no one got that question right because there was no right answer available. None of those available answers is "righter" than the other so it is not fair to assign a higher score to one of them like you proposed. Those people that got a higher old_score also got that question wrong, so their old_score is as wrong as any, and awarding them this unearned extra point would be unfair.

The only two fair options would be: to annul the whole test and make everyone retake; or the one taken where they annul that one question pretending it never existed and score based on the remaining questions (with each remaining question now being worth a fraction more). And this later option is in fact very fair, I don't think there is any real argument against this being fair.

It does suck that people were initially informed a wrong score and then later were disappointed with their real score. On this line I find it absurd that the SATs don't have the recourse period before they release the scores, and instead just releases the tentative scores as if they were real. This would all have been avoided if they heard the recourse and annulled the question before publishing results (as pretty much any serious exam around the world does it).
I think you are joking, as this is actual reality for many younger people, isn’t it?
Very cool! Take my money :) In my case I would like to share mouse, keyboard and monitor. So, just switching between two laptops.
> It has a higher frame rate and resolution, but it doesn’t necessarily play “better”, depending on how you view the importance of the native controllers etc.

I literally use a Switch controller over bluetooth with my switch emulator.
You may be interested in https://unlearning-challenge.github.io/
And if some of that mRNA happens to land in cells that don't readily get replaced, like heart muscle, what happens next?

>There is no known pathway of persistence in this mechanism

No known, and published in a paper, pathway. Engineering is about using things in practice we don't yet understand. They didn't know why suspension bridges kept falling down, so they just used a "safety factor" to decide how much to over-build a structure vs its theoretical capacity.

We have no idea what the long term consequences are of this gene treatment. It's not possible to have 10 year or more data on something just cooked up in the past 3 years.
I like long videos, too, but I could see this being useful to let it summarize a video beforehand so I can see if it's worth spending the time to watch it myself. Could also be good if you have a long video and you want the text transcription to use for reference later.
My browser doesn’t display ads and shows little regard for most paywalls. Do I owe NYTimes something?
We don’t, and shouldn’t, give LLMs the same rights as people.
Thank you, this is information I did not have when I wrote my comment.

I was responding to the main prompt, and I did write this:

> (Disclaimer: everything I’ve said is based on inferences and incomplete information.)
Access to ressources is hardly a new problem: when I was an NLP graduate student about a decade ago a teacher of us had scrapped (and continued to do so) a major newspaper for years to make a corpus. The legality of that was questionable at best, yet it was used in academic paper and a subset for training.

The same is equally applicable to image: Google got rich in part by making illegal copies of whatever image he could find. Existing regulations could be updated to include ML model but that won't stop bad or big enough actors to do what they want.

> We’re in a “mutually assured destruction” situation now

No, we aren't. Very good spam generators aren't comparable to mass destruction weapons.
So you toss the “primary” in airplane mode and let the secondary check in to pass drm via hotspot when the kids are in the car.

At least that is the plan.
Actually, it's horrible news. For humanity.

We can ballpark most of the parameters for the possibility of intelligent life capable of being detected at interstellar distances--and they add up to why haven't we already seen it?!?!

Three parameters remain which in combination must add up to billions to one against it. The development of multicellular life, the development of intelligence and the lifespan of that intelligence.

By observation the first two took a considerable amount of time, between them using up 99% of the clock. (Earth's environment will not remain suitable for the development of a species like ours for more than about another 50 million years. The sun is slowly warming, Earth's ability to compensate will peg at that point and Earth's temperature will start rising--favoring things which can evolve faster.) This research suggests that multicellular life isn't as high a barrier as it looked like.

Thus the odds that the limiting factor is behind us go down. That means the odds that it's in front of us go up. And if it's in front of us it's not far in front of us.
> People do the work of turning these happenings into words, and are paid for it. That's what's stolen here.

Stolen from whom? Journalists who got reported got paid. The owner is a billionaire. I don't understand your logic.

Does NYT pays money to the people/countries etc it uses to as subject to create content(NEWS)? Isn't that stealing then?

Also their website TOS didn't prohibit LLMs from using their data.
BBSs were much more personal and local than the internet. I remember going to local board (BBS) parties where you met the face behind the avatar. Online games, chatting with sysops, downloading filez... Those were the days.
This is very upsetting. Just for clarification, is the "I" in your comment referring to you or Lee Sun-kyun?
> CGI scripts went out of fashion for several reasons that fall into the categories "too complex to maintain" or "there's this new thing called PHP...".

This is how I remember it also. Doing CGI "well" was significantly harder. And new ways of making dynamic web content was rapidly coming out.

There were no HTTP server libraries in any languages. All web servers were large codebases. Most of the web sites ran on Apache in multiuser environments. Configuring (and compiling) Apache correctly and securely took a bit of voodoo in those environments.

The security issues with CGI wasn't just injection attacks. How should admins setup safeguards when every user could write a binary/script that remote people could execute? By the time best practices evolved PHP was taking off. And PHP offered a little bit more of a sandbox.

And then... ColdFusion. Java Servlets. JSP. ASP. And many more ways of creating dynamic websites that were often easier, had better libraries tailored to webdev, and included better sandboxing.

Web servers started to become proxies to long running processes and stateful web apps became a thing. For better or worse. (for worse IMHO. :D)

CGI with Go or Rust could be pretty interesting and significantly easier than my first C-based CGI binaries. Mostly because of their extensive web-dev library options and dependency management tools.
There is no theft. Hyperbole won't get you taken seriously, use correct terminology.
> almost no workload (other than CAD, Graphics) runs on Windows or Unix including this very forum

About a fifth to a quarter of public-facing Web servers are Windows Server. Most famously, Stack Overflow[1].

[1]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10370/1424704
I hope HP isn't seeing this
You must have used that device if you're making that argument in good faith.
I disagree. A printer is too neutral - it's just a tool, like roads or the internet. Third parties can use them to commit copyright infringement, but that doesn't (or shouldn't) reflect on the seller of the tool.

I propose it's more like selling a music player that comes preloaded with (remixes of) recording artists' songs.
> I am not saying that the NY Times is a CIA asset

Operation Mockingbird. While the publication as a whole may not be an asset, there are most assuredly assets within its staff.
The internet did change things pretty dramatically.

Productivity at information communication tasks just isn’t the entire economy.

I think we are massively more productive. Some of the biggest new companies are ad companies (Google, Facebook), or spend a ton of their time designing devices that can’t be modified by their users (Apple, Microsoft). Even old fashioned companies like tractor and train companies have time to waste on preventing users from performing maintenance. And then the economy has leftover effort to jailbreak all this stuff.

We’re very productive, we’ve just found room for unlimited zero or negative sum behavior.
Oh good, thanks, I will!
Difference might well be a lot less than you think after compression. XML(like) things compress almost embarrassingly well.
Solidly rooting for NYT on this - it’s felt like many creative organizations have been asleep at the wheel while their lunch gets eaten for a second time (the first being at the birth of modern search engines.)

I don’t necessarily fault OpenAI’s decision to initially train their models without entering into licensing agreements - they probably wouldn’t exist and the generative AI revolution may never have happened if they put the horse before the cart. I do think they should quickly course correct at this point and accept the fact that they clearly owe something to the creators of content they are consuming. If they don’t, they are setting themselves up for a bigger loss down the road and leaving the door open for a more established competitor (Google) to do it the right way.
Trying to prevent AI from learning from copyrighted content would look completely stupid in a decade or two when we have AIs that are just as capable as humans, but solely due to being made of silicon rather than carbon are banned from reading any copyrighted material.

Banning a synthetic brain from studying copyrighted content just because it could later recite some of that content is as stupid as banning a biological person from studying copyrighted content because it could later quote from it verbatim.
Creating a Directed Acyclic Graph from a Mesh
Ask HN: What skill do you want to develop or improve in 2024?
Inspired by a similar thread asked a year ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33873800

I'm thinking to split my online learning in two parts: marketable skills (1) and just-for-fun skills (2).

For (1), I am thinking to go through as many of Andrew Ng's deep learning courses as I can. With AI developing at such a fast rate, it would be beneficial to know how it works underneath.

For (2), I'm thinking to go through a raytracing course and some basic VFX courses on Blender. Possibly something about storytelling as well.
Can confirm - it worked in both.