skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Its pretty clear whats going to happen. Energy companies will provide the absolute minimum redundancies and will make formidable profits most years. Every 10-15 years there will be some catastrophic blackout due to unlikely weather events and everybody will scream murder. The energy companies will swear to do better and maybe some toothless regulations will be legislated. The politicians will be happy to be bought off by those companies since the next event will be most likely after they have left office, so its free money.

Rince repeat.
> Why someone work with full time writing articles should give the work for free

OpenSource developers did that ;)
My understanding is that they are using increasingly small precision on the floats used by LLMs. So we just have to wait for them to reach 1-bit precision.
[dupe]

Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38781941
My grandmother was born at home in 1917. Her father had to hitch up the wagon to go to town to fetch the doctor, and she had been born by the time they arrived. She felt it wasn't any particular innovation that was meaningful so much as the velocity of change. She lived to be nearly 100, so had gone from that horse-driven subsistence farm life to watching people land on the moon and the eventual digitalization of the world. She commented many times that she had a hard time believing that the same rate of change would occur in the next 100 years after she was gone. I've often wondered what that would look like - you'd almost need colonies on Mars to top what the last 100 years have been like in terms of changes. I suspect that the complete reengineering of our world away from fossil fuels may be that level of disruption and change.
From the same team that decided to drop signatures… unsurprising.
Hyperlinks to scripts? I’ve been wanting to do something similar for ages for those few occasions where ambient sunlight really wanted me moving to something that wasn’t a dark. It seemed like quite a bit of work since, like you, more often than not, I’m not in that sort of environment.
Transformations are happening. Maybe if the output is verbatim afterwards, than that says something about the outputs originality all along... or am I a troll?
“ While Musk had exceled as a self-taught coder, his skills weren’t nearly as polished as those of the new hires. They took one look at Zip2’s code and began rewriting the vast majority of the software. Musk bristled at some of their changes, but the computer scientists needed just a fraction of the lines of code that Musk used to get their jobs done. They had a knack for dividing software projects into chunks that could be altered and refined whereas Musk fell into the classic self-taught coder trap of writing what developers call hairballs—big, monolithic hunks of code that could go berserk for mysterious reasons.
” from his biography
any news on the tunnel to Finland?
I don't understand why anyone would do this even with real borosilicate glass. It is unreasonable to expect glass to survive with something massive and hot on one side and something massive and cold on the other side. Even flawless pyrex will break with temperature differentials above 300F.
Table salt has not only iodine added but anti-caking agents too so it might be what OP is tasting.
There's a generation of electronics that were plagued by failing capacitors that contained a flawed chemical that was produced based on a stolen formula that contained errors. There's also the wave of electronics that had issues with lead free solder.

Recent appliances and devices seem to last longer again, aside from smartphones with pesky unreplaceable batteries that turn into spicy pillows after a year or two.
people don't know how to install Windows either. In theory they could go to a shop to update their phone like their are doing with Windows but the reality is that nobody cares about updating their phone.
> unfettered access to identifiable private conversations

You misread the post I was responding to. They were suggesting health data with PII removed.

Second, LLMs have proved that AI which gets unlimited training data can provide breakthroughs in AI capabilities. But they are not the whole universe of AIs. Some other AI tool, distinct from LLMs, which ingests en masse as much health data as it can could provide health and human longevity outcomes which could outweigh an individual's right to privacy.

If transformers can benefit from scale, why not some other, existing or yet to be found, AI technology?

We should be supporting a Common Crawl for health records, digitizing old health records, and shaming/forcing hospitals, research labs, and clinics into submitting all their data for a future AI to wade into and understand.
Planned obsolescence is industry standard, from toasters to iphones.
Ha. Maybe I didn’t deserve that 1600.
Not the sockets - I'm talking of the plugs that you put into the sockets.

I haven't seen a plug with screws in ages. They all are a single molded piece now, aren't they?

See: https://www.kulthifi.de/WebRoot/Store19/Shops/80012341/5E84/... for example.
There's also a limit of about 4 or 5 comments per hour or so. Otherwise, you get a message "You are posting too fast" which I get pretty often.
100% agree. And just like you don’t talk to a new-born child in quantifier logic and you don’t attempt to write a PhD thesis in babytalk, there are places where more or less rigorous and exacting language is appropriate.

It used to be the general consensus was that “scripting” comprised quick and temporary automation of tasks and therefore the emphasis in a language was on something convenient and expressive that could get a bunch of stuff done quickly even if the semantics were a bit janky (I’m looking at you bourne shell). Then perl really opened a lot of people’s eyes to what could be done with “scripting languages” (both in terms of power and in terms of the horror that could unleash in the wrong hands) and there has since been a gradual shift towards simplicity and understandability given that there are few things more permanent than a temporary script.
_Optional: A type qualifier to indicate pointer nullability [pdf]
Make it a microservice in Kubernetes so that it scales.
To create a new package, you MUST generate a global token that can also do whatever on all existing packages on the account.

How many people do you think will bother to delete the global token after having used it, and then generate a scoped one? 1%? Probably much less than that.
agreed. go to 4chan/8chan if you want to see no moderation.
I think that idea has been burned for the time being. The last time it was in the news, there were all kinds of weird things going on, including shady Chinese money, etc. But given that a ferry is fast, a high-speed train to Poland sounds nice indeed. In other words, I hope they succeed business-wise or strategy-wise.
Young males that wear Tensorflow branded muscle tank tops and drive Mitsubishi Eclipse convertibles with the vanity plate OVERFIT. They are everywhere these days.
When you’re running taxpayer funded public services for millions of people that adds up.
Layoffs Are Coming in 2024
Didn’t notice that, incredible

> Copyright 2023. All unauthorized distribution of this source code
will be persecuted to the fullest extent of the law
Maybe more likely they just have people inside Apple?
The Biggest Discoveries in Physics in 2023
I keep track of cool stories that I find on HN and elsewhere on https://nextapex.co (Electric Clojure HN clone) and I think my favorite one is 8 weeks of hot yoga keeps you happy https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/10/heated-yoga-m...
Painting was always first and foremost for spiritual and religious purposes, not for documenting things.

Secular painting became a thing only very recently, two or three hundred years ago. And even then, it was always used to whitewash or vilify something or someone. Bias was (and is!) its primary purpose.
Easy enough to check with even the indecent compilers!

https://godbolt.org/
>Maybe open source means different things to different people?

Sure, but when there's a widely accepted definition and you aren't making efforts to clearly distinguish your usage of the term from the common usage, then you're just trying to take advantage of all of the linguist context and baggage associated with the common meaning while actually meaning something completely different.

In other words, you want the goodwill that comes from being open source without any of the responsibility and obligation.
Professors are largely behind a paywall
Using existing vaccine tech isn't the same as developing entirely new technology, which mRNA is and Cuba's vaccine isn't. And the tech Cuba used was developed by pharma companies first, too — protein subunit vaccines are well established, used for hepatitis B, tetanus, and others.

And if existing tech works well enough — great! Then use it, and don't use the more expensive mRNA ones.

Of course, there are benefits to mRNA vaccines, which is why they were deployed first — Moderna had a working vaccine barely over a month after starting work on it, with only the gene sequence of the virus from Chinese labs to work with. All the rest of the time was just testing. Effectively being able to print a vaccine given a gene sequence is extremely useful.

And again — the state (aka the United States) does not fully fund research. It provides less than half of funding in a non-banner year, and a fraction in boom years. Cutting funding not only would hurt deployment and development, it would also harm fundamental research.
> I would say that science requires being able to formulate internally consistent theories that generate precise predictions of reality that can be falsified by experiment.

Is astronomy a science then? Astronomy is often said to be an observational rather than experimental science, but if your definition of "science" requires falsification by experiment (as opposed to just observation), then astronomy might not be a science at all.

And social science can make experimentally falsifiable claims. For example, one theory in political science (with some data to support it) claims that parliamentary systems (in which the executive is subordinated to the legislature) produce superior outcomes (greater political stability, superior policy choices, etc) to presidential systems (in which the legislative and executive branches are independent and roughly equal powers). One way to test this experimentally: convince a few US states to adopt the parliamentary system, wait a few decades, and then look for any statistically significant differences in outcomes between those states which adopted a parliamentary system versus those which retained a presidential (or should I say gubernatorial) one.

I mentioned before Eric Kaufmann. His book Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? suggests that religion will triumph over secularism in the long-run due to a higher birth rate. If, over the next 500 years, the world never gets significantly less secular than it is today, I think he'd agree his theory would be falsified.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there isn’t at least one thing this insane at some FAANG.

“We’ve got to scale the maths engine cluster to handle the load!”
I think the scale only matters here (probably). Because I will find it hard that a teacher/professor will not be allowed to setup a service where they will teach and provide their knowledge for others. That is basically the concept of teaching. Of course until LLM, we never had this scale before. Millions of potential learners vs the normal hundreds in a classroom session. So that makes the new case interesting
From deep in the article:

"(In 1989, an American ophthalmologist named Richard Stone found that he could induce myopia in chickens by manipulating light levels, and that there was less dopamine in the retinas of the myopic chickens.)"

And yet it took so many years to draw the conclusions for human myopia. I'm wondering how many insights are still hidden in scholar articles waiting to be put together. Would an LLM trained on scholar data be able to answer a well-posed question with new insights?
Btw, the big bang theory is not something personal from Sean Carroll. He might talk about it (a lot), but a lot of scientists talk about it, and it's a theory that has evolved over the last 100 years by thousands of scientists around the world. So in that sense it's not really "Sean" against another guy with an alternative theory. No it's 100 years of worldwide collaborative science research.

And yes it is an incomplete theory, like all the theories we currently have. But it is currently the theory that matches our observations in experiments the closest.

It could always be that we're on the wrong path, and that a completely other paradigm is necessary. And it is good to be open to such posibilities and to think about it. But as long as an alternative theory doesn't do a better job at predicting the observations we get in experiments, you can't dismiss the current theory.
> you're just quibbling with the name.

I'm not quibbling with the name, I'm objecting to classifying them together with real scientists. That classification has immense implications for how society views them and their assertions. I'd be fine if they called themselves scientists, if we called real scientists something else. The point is that society should recognize that their aping of scientific methodology confers no special validity to their conclusions.
My parents were fans of their original show. When they came back on the air a few decades ago I learned of them and admired their humor. I was a preteen at the time and some of it went over my head but the rest was laughter.

I wonder if they still have their winery? I regret not seeing them perform at the local casinos near Napa.
When open source developers do that, they also include an explicit licensing information that lists cases when the usage is allowed and restricted. So even if the code is open source and licensed under GPL, its usage in a closed source product like ChatGPT is not allowed.
The MtG preprint suggest people have been looking for such games but failed to identify any. From "Previous Work", first page, column 2:

> Prior to this work, no undecidable real games were known to exist. Demaine and Hearn (2009) [10] note that almost every real-world game is trivially decidable, as they produce game trees with only computable paths. They further note that Rengo Kriegspiel {Rengo Kriegspiel is a combination of two variations on Go: Rengo, in
which two players play on a team alternating turns, and Shadow Go, in which
players are only able to see their own moves.} is “a game humans play that is not obviously decidable; we are not aware of any other such game.” It is conjectured by Auger and Teytaud (2012) [1] that Rengo Kriegspiel is in fact undecidable, and it is posed as an open problem to demonstrate any real game that is undecidable.

> The approach of embedding a Turing machine inside a game directly is generally not considered to be feasible for real-world games [10].

Regarding your ontological question, that we don't know if something is Turning complete doesn't mean it isn't.

People explored the Game of Life before it was proven to be Turing complete. The 1970 SciAm article says "Conway conjectures that no pattern can grow without limit." so Martin and Gardner didn't even know about gliders then. People don't say GoL wasn't Turning complete in 1970.

I pointed to a 1998 paper claiming the Z3 machine from the 1940s was Turing complete, that author clearly believes that a particular physical configuration is not required.

Nor did Turing construct a physical representation for his paper.

FWIW, the MtG preprint gives a concrete example of a 60-card initial deck. I would be surprised if neither the authors nor anyone else has ever tried it.

The ontological question is even more fully resolved because no one has ever created a real Turing machine. We always have the proviso "if given enough memory".

Similarly, the video game "Minesweeper" is NP-complete as the size increases, and with an infinite board - clearly not physically realizable - is Turing complete. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minesweeper_(video_game)#Compu...
A small number of outputs of ChatGPT are close enough to training articles to be (probably) copyright infringement.

What does that mean?

Look up "substantial non-infringing use" and this little court case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....

Now spend a few million on lawyers and roll your dice.
Using selenium and chrome webdriver under the hood to do so, as well.
I generally tend to downvote comments that use "x bros" for pretty much any x on sight for that reason. It's exceedingly rare for such a comment to be much more than a thinly veiled insult with little substance. Sometimes I might even agree with the insult, but it's still rarely appropriate here.
If your programming language of choice has no arrays (like most of the languages implemented in one of the many, many, many "How to write your own interpreter/simple compiler" tutorials out there) but supports variables, then you can use this technique to kinda implement them anyway, Okasaki-style:

var arr0, arr1, arr2, arr3, arr4, ..., arr65535 : int;

func get_arr(index: int): int {
if index < 0 or index > 65535 { exit(); }
if index < 32768 {
if index < 16384 {
if index < 8192 {
...
if index < 2 {
if index < 1 {
return arr0;
} else {
return arr1;
}
} else {
if index < 3 {
return arr2;
} else {
return arr3;
}
}
...
}
else {
...
}
} else {
...
}
} else {
...
}
}

proc set_arr(index: int, value: int) {
if index < 0 or index > 65535 { exit(); }
if index < 32768 {
if index < 16384 {
if index < 8192 {
...
if index < 2 {
if index < 1 {
arr0 = value;
} else {
arr1 = value;
}
} else {
if index < 3 {
arr2 = value;
} else {
arr3 = value;
}
}
...
}
else {
...
}
} else {
...
}
} else {
...
}
}

It even has O(log n) access time which is actually the same complexity as accessing a RAM by a pointer anyway! Just replicate this code for any array variable you need to simulate and pre-allocate enough of the memory, it's totally free with that .bss trick anyhow.

So technically, languages without arrays are about as Turing-complete as those with limited-size pointers/array indices (funnily enough Brainfuck — where the pointer is invisible to the progammer — actually is Turing-complete).
Not really, since they do a mathematical function over blocks and don't need a single if statement. They map learned data + input -> output as a pure function
I think the introduction of an expectation for compensation has generally brought down the quality of content online. Different people and incentives appear to get involved once content == money, vs content == creative expression.
New York Governor signs bill to limit neonic pesticides
Swedish Traders Press Nasdaq for Shorter Hours, More Work-Life Balance
https://archive.ph/vfWKX
How would a normal person order tests for autoantibodies or persistent viral infection?
>I really doubt it's a backdoor after reading the blog post and this thread chain from a prolific M1 MacBook hacker (macran) I think it was just an unused or very rarely used feature that was left enabled by accident.

Why? Apple isnt exactly a small family business and this is quite the drastic "feature" to be left enabled by accident.

How would one look from your perspective?
I don't think X is a lot less broken. It is just better supported by UI toolkits. In both cases you need additional stuff to have UI platform. In case of Wayland that stuff is just less mature.

You can find similar posts for every change - not only about Linux. The only thing existence of such posts prove is that people have strong opinions about something.
Well yeah, copying a work and using it for its original expressive purpose isn’t fair use, no? You have to use it for a transformative purpose.

Suppose I’m selling subscriptions to the New Jersey Times, a site which simply downloads New York Times articles and passes them through an autoencoder with some random noise. It serves the exact same purpose as the New York Times website, except I make the money. Is that fair use?
Fantastic use of meta-programming, and I like the benchmarking at the end, you have clarified much for the beginner and expert alike.
As someone who works in the space and uses these tools, I've not seen any output without significant manual modification that was production quality, and I've only heard developers or non-designer AI-enthusiasts say otherwise. I know people who are about as close to AI->Prod pipeline as you can feasibly get right now in games, but there's still a whole lot of Adobe in that process, even for chintzy mobile games. Not to sound arrogant, but developers judging whether or not an icon system is sufficient for its intended purpose is like a designer judging whether or not a codebase is technically solid for a given use case. People who don't produce work like this at a professional level love these tools because they abstract away most of the finer-grained decisions that artists and designers must make when producing images. But without that granular control, even with all the tweaking and inpainting and whatever else you can muster up, that AI is still making more choices about what goes into that composition than the prompter, and mitigating that is often more hassle than it's worth. Text-based AI tools just don't have the consistency or the specificity required for commercial art, and maybe never will. There's just a really big conceptual disconnect.
>GPLv4 anyone?

The AGPL?
> First transgender Iranian Mullah gets out of the closet.

I think Iran actually has a healthcare system that's progressive on just this one issue.

From Google AI:
"Iran is the only Islamic country that recognizes sex reassignment surgery (SRS). Sex changes have been legal in Iran since the late 1980s, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution, passed a fatwa authorizing them."

I forget why he did that. However, that prediction isn't as absurd as you intended.
Speedqueen is that brand, and their stuff isn't even all that expensive. The issue is that its washers destroy your clothes by being rough on them.
I wouldn't call Eric Kauffman a "scientist," and I don't think Kauffman would call himself one either. His bio page says:

> I am a Professor of Politics from Vancouver, British Columbia, I was born in Hong Kong and spent eight early years of my life in Tokyo. In winter, my favourite pastimes are (ice) hockey and skiing. In summer, cooling off in the ocean or by the lake. I am principally interested in cultural politics: ethnicity, national identity, left-wing ideology and religion.

Lots of people study things, without properly being called scientists. Historians, archeologists, etc.
It's always fascinating to see some of the largest companies on the internet with websites so thoroughly broken that it's clear that not one single set of eyeballs was laid on it by any human working for them.

The site fails to render, barfs random elements over the screen, I haven't seen the broken jpeg placeholder in years. It's like seeing a picture of an old steam locomotive that exploded. It's utter destruction is almost art in itself.
Anything + 2 and then minus two is back to the original thing. This says more about the transformations than the source material.
Sad news. I watched them often growing up. In an incalculable stroke of coincidence, I just tonight watched the episode of Saturday Night Live that he hosted along with his brother. Their performances reflected incredible talent.

I mentioned to my wife today that similar levels of acts seem harder to come by these days. Maybe the signal is still there, but the noise has grown to become unbearable.
Yeah, the article very conveniently ignores the "integrated" part of the IDE acronym. Which was one of the maint selling points of them: you don't have to cobble various small pieces of functionalty together by yourself, it's been figured out and done for you by the IDE developers once, now you can just write your programs.