skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I asked for the strongest example the OP can share in order to evaluate their claim. If it's so obvious to the OP that generalisation is happening then it should be easy to provide a strong example, right?
And yet, I learned first on GW Basic and turned out to be a halfway decent programmer.
From that data point, we don’t know for sure. The Apollo Guidance Computer was programmed to put a human on the moon, but never used to actually do it, so no computer ever “put a human on the moon”. All landings used “fly by wire”, with an astronaut at the stick, and the thrusters controlled by software.

https://www.quora.com/Could-the-Apollo-Guidance-Computer-hav...:

“P64. At about 7,000 feet altitude (a point known as “high gate”), the computer switched automatically to P64. The computer was still doing all the flying, and steered the LM toward its landing target. However, the Commander could look at the landing site, and if he didn’t like it, could pick a different target and the computer would alter its course and steer toward that target.

At this point, they were to use one of three programs to complete the landing:

P66. This was the program that was actually used for all six lunar landings. A few hundred feet above the surface the Commander told the computer to switch to P66. This is what was commonly known as “manual mode”, although it wasn’t really. In this mode, the Commander steered the LM by telling the computer what he wanted to do, and the computer made it happen. This continued through landing.

P65. Here’s the automatic mode you asked about. If the computer remained in P64 until it was about 150 feet above the surface, then the computer automatically switched to P65, which took the LM all the way to the surface under computer control. The problem is that the computer had no way to look for obstacles or tell how level its target landing site was. On every flight, the Commander wanted to choose a different spot than where the computer was taking the LM, and so the Commander switched to P66 before the computer automatically switched to P65. [Update: The code for P65 was removed from the AGC on later flights. The programmers needed memory for additional code elsewhere, and the AGC was so memory-constrained that adding code one place meant removing something else. By that point it was obvious that none of the crews was ever going to use the automatic landing mode, so P65 was removed.]

P67. This is full-on honest-to-goodness manual mode. In P66, even though the pilot is steering, the computer is still in the loop. In P67, the computer is totally disengaged. It is still providing data, such as altitude and descent rate, but has no control over the vehicle.”
Good grief. I don't build nuclear power plants, and even I absolutely know the difference even if I am sometimes sloppy with my terminology Certainly the people building plants know the difference, so just stop it.

> You are ignoring most of that.

No I am not. In fact, I have dealt with that in what I wrote here. You have just chosen to ignore all these facts.

Prime example:

> > The fact is that nuclear plants take around 7.5 years to build.

> I thought we debunked that

No "we" didn't "debunk" that. Because it happens to be true, so there is nothing to debunk. It is just as true if you look at the last 50 years as it is if you look at the reactors just completed in 2022.

You just refuse to look at the actual data, and instead focus on your gut feelings and then cherry pick a few outliers that confirm your gut feelings. Not entirely coincidentally, this is the same "methodology" that's used by other science-deniers to "prove" that homeopathy works.

It doesn't. And nuclear power plants take an average of 7.5 years to construct.

https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/nuclear-constructi...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-constructi...
Emacs Web Wowser (M-x eww) defaults to https://duckduckgo.com/html/ as the search engine. This URL redirects to https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/ and that's how I discovered this HTML subdomain of DDG.
How to Take Website Screenshots Using API
Audify – Play/Stream/Record raw audio with Opus in realtime
Yes, you can try it as a Premium member. I didn't try it on any 3-hour long videos, but for a couple of shorter ones it worked well enough to give a tl;dr;.
No way the frequency of the cycle is around seven years. More like 100 years. Also not sure if the pendulum has begun swinging back. I guess it depends on which pendulum you focus on. Taking an obvious one (net immigration into the European wellfare systems), it would seem that the pendulum is still accelerating.
RENUM was in GW-BASIC. So, any IBM "Compatible" had this for sure. It was also in Microsoft BASIC-80 so it would be in older machines as well.

The optional second argument would change the step size. The default was 10.
That’s super interesting. I try to emphasize with other belief systems. Can you explain more?
Maybe the failure to get Section 174 repealed is what went seriously, seriously wrong.
People and media outlets are still hammering on her qualifications. If you think the mainstream media isn't covering this, you have your head in the sand.
And I imagine that Gmail makes google very very special in this regard
People become Scientologists in Hollywood as it opens doors in the film business.
Would it even be possible for OpenAI to excise the NYTimes data from their models without running all the training again? Seems like a huge mess, particularly since they'd have to do that each time they lose a lawsuit.
So many memories with the family's beloved Sony MSX as a kid in the 80s.
Does it not seem a bit suspect to read the the NYT reporting on their own lawsuit?
Microsoft research’s team took advantage of this fact by querying multiple times per question (with randomized option ordering) and choosing the most common answer.

Here is the paper:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/can-gen...
Thanks for sharing this info. I posted the OP, and didn't know anything about the author until now. A friend shared the link with me, and on a first pass it seemed accurate, so I posted it here. It stills looks accurate to me. No matter how poorly we think of the author, we should evaluate the OP on its merits, no?

To the moderators: Maybe there's a better, less-tainted link to this story?
(2023 - 1851) * 365 * 200 = 12,556,000

Yep, so a few million ripped off articles is plausible.
> OTA worked perfectly fine for everything else

You got TNT over the air? CNN? USA? Cartoon Network? HGTV? Sci-Fi? Comedy Central? MTV?
Or you want a mix?

I believe the recent surge in SQL usage comes from BigQuery and Athena and the likes.

The main benefit of them is that they help you with distributing the workload over sometimes hundreds of CPUs. And you don't really have to think about it.
And you are not restricted fitting all your data into your RAM memory.

But sure, if you want to do a linear regression, it may be a bit clunky. But maybe you used SQL to retrieve the subset of the data you wanted?

I am rather certain of one thing though. If I wanted to do it in SQL i would not use a proprietary keyword but construct it from SQL primitives.
In the US it's a real pain because we haven't had a popular national IM client since AOL Instant Messenger. Texting is the only way we can reliably communicate with other Americans, but the compatibility isn't great. Group chats, reactions, emoji etc. are all different. When an iPhone user thumbs up a message, all the android users get spammed with a message like "soandso loved: full quote of message". Our culture is really behind the times.

I have zero issues communicating with people in Asia over Line or Europeans using WhatsApp. But I can't reliably text the people living in my same town, lol. Welcome to the USA.
I’m curious too! I’m not making the argument, just distilling a little of what I’m sensing from others.
Tell me how many white male Harvard presidents suffered this kind of close scrutiny of everything they ever wrote? This is not a fair comparison. Every chauvinist, racist, and other kinds of lowlifes who want to take her down are joining in this fishing expedition.
Also what I deem "cargo-cult enshittification" of the Linux desktop, where open-source blindly copies large corporations in enshittifying their platforms. This is particularly notable with UI design, with GNOME being the worst offender.

Large corporations cater to the masses, so they follow these fashionable dumbing down trends in order to satisfy marketing/branding goals and maximize revenue. If it looks "trendy" then it will generate more sales, revenue, etc. And open source software ends up copying it unthinkingly.
I think the train has left the station and the ship has sailed. I'm not sure it's possible to put this genie back in the bottle. I had stuff stolen by OpenAI too, and I felt bad about it (and even send them a nasty legal letter when it could output my creative work almost verbatim), but I think at this point, the legal landscape needs to somehow adjust. The Copyright Clause in the US Constitution is clear:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries

Blocking LLMs on the basis of copyright infringement does NOT promote progress in science and the useful arts. I don't think copyright is a useful basis to block LLMs.

They do need to be regulated, and quickly, but that regulatory regime should be something different. Not copyright. The concept of OpenAI before it became a frankenmonster for-profit was good. Private failed, and we now need public.
Is there a detailed (text) explanation of the networked physics concept somewhere?
There's so many problems with DIE.

1. There's no metrics put in place to identify where there are DIE-related problems. We're just told there ARE problems, and that we're horrible racist & sexist humans, and the C suite will let us know when they see better.

2. There's no real metrics to indicate when a DIE initiative is actually successful. We don't look at general population compared to hires, or pay equity, or any other factors. All we're told is that there's always room to do better (uhh, there always is).

3. There's no stopping point. If your DIE initiative was good-intending, then we'd also identify when the initiative is completed. Instead, its a forever-going "white man bad" propaganda machine.

4. Only the DIE hires can criticize. Doesn't matter if major flaws are found, or utter logical fallacies, or anything. If you criticize as not DIE person, you are bad and likely be fired for "racist" reasons.

5. There's a lack of diversity in DIE. When's the last time you saw a man in any DIE position? Yeah, excluding 50% of the population sure sounds... DIEverse. DIE never looks at socioeconomic differences, religious differences, sexuality differences, or multitudes of differences that aren't based on "possession of vagina" and a shallow skin color assessment that veers on Family Guy skin color card.
> Her supposed crime is paraphrasing the work she cited.

No, that’s normal and not a crime. Her offense was using other people’s words without proper attribution. That’s plagiarism. I’ve seen the examples. It’s plagiarism.

> But who here could withstand the same pressure on their own body of work?

Nearly everyone, including me, if you‘re talking about willful “mistakes” (odd expression). Actual mistakes are unavoidable; even I’ve made them. Nobody’s making an issue out of that.
Why LinkedIn Chose gRPC+Protobuf over Rest+JSON: Karthik Ramgopal, Min Chen Q&A
I'm not sure if the verbatim content isn't more of a "stopped clock is right twice a day" or "monkeys typewriting shakespeare" situation. As I see it, most of the value in something like the NYT is as a trusted and curated source of information with at least some vetting. The content regurgitated from an LLM would be intermixed with false information and all sorts of other things, none of which are actually news from a trusted source - the main reason people subscribe to the NYT (?) and something at which ChatGPT cannot directly compete against NYT writers.
Sounds like the infinite monkey typewriter thing, where the NYT sieves the OpenAI output for exact segments, probably after primining it to fatten the yield
I would agree. Style is too amorphous (even among its own reporters and journalists, there are different styles), but verbatim repetition would be a problem. So what would the licensing be for all their content be (if presumably one could get ChatGPT to output all of the NYTs articles)?

The unfortunate thing about these LLMs is they siphon all public data regardless of license. I agree with data owners one can’t Willy nilly use data that’s accessible but not licensed properly.

Obviously Wikipedia, data from most public institutions, etc., should be available, but not data that does not offer unrestricted use.
> closely summarizes it

Absolutely not copyright infringement

> mimics its expressive style

Absolutely not copyright infringement

> can generate output that recites Times content verbatim

This one seems the closest to infringement, but still doesn't seem like infringement. A printer has this capability too. If a user told ChatGPT to recite NYT content and then sold that content, that would be 100% infringement, but would probably be on the user, not the tool. e.g. if someone printed out NYT articles and sold them, nobody would come after the printer manufacturer.

> undermine[s] and damage[s]” the Times’ relationship with readers, the outlet alleges, while also depriving it of “subscription, licensing, advertising, and affiliate revenue.

This claim seems far fetched as the point of the NYT is to report the news. One thing that LLMs absolutely cannot do is report today's news. I can see no way that ChatGPT is a substitute for the NYT in a way that violates copyright.
apple using that too
Operation Cat (1976) [pdf]
TBH I’ve smoked weed everyday all day long for over 20 years. Maybe that’s how I’ve gotten by but I’m wondering if there is a better and healthier alternative.
Where? I'm talking directly about the paragraph sighted. FFS I even quoted it. Those stats are for A hospital. It says it right there...A.

Y'all read those stats to be for all. Instead it was one extreme outlier and y'all's biases fell for it.

This is why we can't have nice things. Too much assuming, not enough intentional "listening".
Critical theory? I feel an analysis of power structures - what they are, how they come about - is a pretty useful arrow to the bow of the study of a society (as in, any collection of people, not exclusive to a nation, etc).

But I draw an analogy to the 1980s when 'trickle down' policies were called "the economic argument" - indeed an economic argument but hardly closed-book economic proof and there's plenty of opposing economic argument. It was a political agenda painted under an economic slogan to fool many (and even fool many into promoting). Likewise Critical Theory: a useful tool but only one of many and to paint it as the analysis a political agenda (again，fooling many into not only believing but promoting). Modern (can't say Neo, some terms get camped aggressively) takes on critical theory can be a bit removed from Marx, or can be close, but to knee jerk against it completely just coz one doesn't like some of the users feels like denial for the sake of it, and in the end means missing out just like those that stick to one theory to rule them all miss out on the othrs.
This tends to be more of the norm for the ones at 'good' institutions, which is aligned with the common knowledge / heavily replicated studies that 'top performers (best students, etc) are the most likely to cheat.

There can still be good academic works (and the alternative in industry has even worse incentives, such as intentionally hiding the ability to replicate) but unfortunately the structure as of now rewards bad behavior.
I read the substack comments and thought this must have popped into one of the racist circles on twitter and passed around. Then I came here and it's some of the same...

One person doing most likely something immoral and unethical condemns all people of the same skin color or attempts at diversity? I can find someone immoral and unethical in a position of power in all locales, colors, and genders, and times fairly quickly.

https://www.npr.org/2023/07/19/1188828810/stanford-universit...
+1 - this will be something for the holidays (and hopefully the habit persists beyond that)
NYT is an anomaly. The majority of their revenue is actually from subscriptions.
I am no economist either.
As I understand inflation is the reduction in purchasing power towards a basket of household goods and services.

So it’s not only ask and demand but many other factors like energy price rising and all the things that get into the cost of a product or service.

Inflation in the sense of growth is the more money it needs to have a transit of the value of goods the more goods are produced of value and sold so the net revenue for credits should be positiv and that over time is growth. Or otherwise said we have more stuff at the end of the day … jehaa

Edit:// the credit by the bank is the money supply in that case.

In my opinion that model sucks

But please don’t believe me I am no expert

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_price_index
If Wayland is "broken" because it does not support some use case, then by the same reason X is also "broken" - it also does not support everything you want from the desktop environment. You might argue one is more "broken" than the other, but when the we have more mature Wayland UI platforms this will not matter at all.
The training isn't the issue per se, it's the regurgitation of verbatim text (or close enough to be immediately identifiable) within a for-profit product. Worse still that the regurgitation is done without attribution.
> More on-topic: if the NYT thinks that GPT-4 is replicating their style then [as anybody who has tried to do creative writing work can testify to] they need to fire all their writers.

The complaint isn’t that ChatGPT is imitating New York Times style by default.

The complaint is that you can ask it to write “in the style of New York Times” and it will do so.

I don’t know if this argument has any legal merit, but it’s not as simple as you suggest. It’s the textual parallel to having AI image generators mimic the trademark style of artists. We know it can be done, the question is what does it mean legally.
> ... for profit.

for non-profit
The legal argument, which I'm sure you are very well aware of, is that training a model on data, reorganizing, and then presenting that data as your own is copyright infringement.
So you think we were originally trained on 300B tokens, those were then ingrained in our synapses, and then we evolved?
Explaination that works for me is that if you were rolling it around a spot (zero diameter) you would need one full revolution.
Right, hence the lawsuit. They allege that the Copyright Act is the law that was broken.
> I can't see how you'd resolve a disagreement between just two voters.

Tell them both to run the calculation again, perhaps?
Everything from 1851 to 1927 ought to be in the public domain, though. If the goal of training an AI is just "to mimic a style" there are absolutely humongous amounts of text that's totally free of any copyright restrictions.
IMO Apple did the right thing. IMessage is so much nicer than SMS. Anything is nicer than SMS. SMS is the junk protocol carriers used to double dip on GSM packets.

I'm just sad Apple didn't push for iMessage to become THE messaging standard. Google is still trying with RCS. Hopefully it takes off.
Of course, OpenAI doesn't just read. But do they simply reproduce content verbatim? And when they do not reproduce contents of the NYT verbatim, but rather process and tailor them to the situation, mixed, 'charged' with new 'information content' and adjusted to the purpose of the inquirer, it will not be easy for the New York Times.

Because ultimately, our entire knowledge is based on the knowledge of others and is remixed, 'charged' and changed by us after reading. I also think that the New York Times uses the contents of others to create new content.
I had the opposite thought -- I bet the new color mixing will increase payload size. Which of these would you rather send over the wire?

A) color-mix(in srgb, var(--primary-color), white 50%)
B) #abcdef

For me to give up scss, there needs to be a minifier that calculates colors ahead of time and emits them plain, the way scss does. (Maybe there already is, who knows)
> an AI that would otherwise save humanity.

Just to clarify, this is sarcasm right?
Good tips - thank you :)
You can easily use pipeline-parallelism though.
Especially if you have 8-16 lanes of PCIe4 with direct P2P access between the cards.

IIRC you want micro-batching though, to overlap pipeline phases.
I had assumed it meant more simple things like balanced balancing pneumatic or mechanical components that always put you at the the correct ratio sort of like a carburetor vs fuel injection.
I assume SSA is too slow.
The goal is worthy, the effort is commendable, but the underlying language (Scala) is an absolute turn-off AFAIC, and I suspect I'm far from being the only one.
Time to move LLM training to Japan who passed a law giving free reign to train LLMs on copyrighted material.
Sarah Silverman is claiming the same thing about her book.

But I've tried really hard to get ChatGPT to output sentences verbatim from her book and just can't get it to. In fact, I can't even get it to answer simple questions about facts that are in her book but nowhere else -- it just says it doesn't know.

Similarly I haven't been able to reproduce any text in the NYT verbatim unless it's part of a common quote or passage the NYT is itself quoting. Or it's a specific popular quote from an article that went viral, but there aren't that many of those.

Has anyone here ever found a prompt that regurgitates a paragraph of a NYT article, or even a long sentence, that's just regular reporting in a regular article?
Didn't have any problems with X11 and various computers - so maybe it really is Wayland-specific?
I frequently grab 720p and hardly notice
No, we’re seeing the first steps of it (maybe) becoming settled law.
I live next door to a psychiatric hospital, and there is this gentleman who often roams the neighborhood talking to nobody in particular, about nothing and everything. Reading this article, I had this lightbulb-appearing-above-my-head moment, it describes his rambling speeches well.
Apple auto-enrolled me in Music subscription; weird cust support convo ensues
I woke up to the strangest customer support conversation with Apple.

Around 8:15am, I checked my email and noticed I had been auto-subscribed to a free trial of Apple Music.

Weird. I'm a Spotify user, and wouldn't have started a trial. So, I asked my wife, and she said she hadn't done anything with Apple Music.

Hmm, maybe my account was hacked. That would be quite a predicament since I use 1password with crazy long passwords for all services. So, I contacted Apple Support over SMS to ask how and why the Apple Music subscription got initiated.

They told me that Apple auto-subscribed me because I was given a free month... and it was done at 5:14am (when everyone in my house was asleep).

The whole conversation felt like a phishing scam. Decided to move to phone support, and they are telling me my Apple TV in my living room subscribed me.

Is it possible for someone to remote into my Apple TV and auto-subscribe me? I wouldn't have guessed an Apple TV to be hackable.
I'd say it really depends on the situation: knowing the dog and the people in the vicinity, and being in a position to accept responsibility if anything goes wrong.

But there's also a question of what we want to optimize for: maximize the average pleasure of the people nearby, minimize the worst-case displeasure of anyone nearby, or some mix.

I.M.E. people differ on what that ideal balance is.
> It was fed NYT's content so it would know how to reproduce similar content, for profit.

Sounds like journalism school?