skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
To say there's no magic in the brain drastically *minimizes the complexity of the brain.

Your brain is several orders of magnitude more complex than even the largest LLM.

GPT4 has 1 trillion parameters? Big deal. Your brain has 1 quadrillion synapses, constantly shifting. Beyond that the synapses are analog messages, not binary. Each synapse is approximately like 1000 transistors based on the granularity of messaging it can send and receive.

It is temporally complex as well as structurally complex, well beyond anything we've ever made.

I'm strongly in favor of AGI, for what it's worth, but LLMs aren't even scratching the surface. They're nowhere close to a human. They're a mediocre pastiche and it's equally possible that they're a dead end as it is that they'll ever be AGI.
The actual complaint is here:

https://nytco-assets.nytimes.com/2023/12/NYT_Complaint_Dec20...

They state that "with minimal prompting", ChatGPT will "recite large portions" of some of their articles with only small changes.

I wonder why they don't sue the wayback machine first. You can get the whole article on the wayback machine. Not just portions. And not with small changes but verbatim. And you don't need any special prompting. As soon as you are confronted with a paywall window on the times websites, all you need to do is to go to the wayback machine, paste the url and you can read it.
It's not yet dead, at least for me. Last year I wrote a Perl CGI script to generate a random flag and country name:

https://www.thran.uk/cgi-win/fleg.pl

Source: https://github.com/lordfeck/cgi-win

Needs improvement but it does the job, and I had fun.
It's not exactly a synthetic brain though, is it? LLMs are more like lookup tables for the texts they're trained on.

We will not have "AIs as capable as humans" in a couple decades. AIs will keep being tools used by humans. If you use copyrighted texts as input to a digital transformation, that's vopyright infringement. It's essentially the same situation as sampling in music, and imo the same solutions can be applied here: e.g. licenses with royalties.
there is some talk in the Raku community about porting some of the moarvm code to Zig … so this is one of the core devs getting their feet wet as part of the raku advent blog … based on this ‘spike’ they make a good case
Blue vs green bubbles is a subtext of an unspoken class system:

iPhone = for rich people
Android = for poor people

Thus if you’re a teen and you have a green bubble, you are poor.
The first 75+ years are no longer in copyright, so certainly possible to train on thousands maybe millions of NYT articles without concern.
Finding a Vatican conspiracy would be quite interesting
> realize algorithmic addiction

Is that really relevant to tiktok live?
I just add stuff to my cart whenever I think about it, and order once the total is high enough for free shipping. Works fine, I’m not often on a hurry anyway.
Understanding the point of DATA was also a big breakthrough for me, but that happened earlier.
Yeah. I don't think it makes much sense to allow copyright on textual descriptions of events that happened.

Now the question is whether did OpenAI violate the terms of service by using the bits transferred from NYT to train their LLM. I don't think their TOS had LLMs mentioned. So it's on NYT to be negligent and not update their TOS right?
You can pull the slider up for finer control, though every now and then they tweak how well this works so YMMV
> At first Cable TV didn't have any ads.

100% non-factual. Cable had ads from day one, and the majority of cable-only TV channels had ads from their first day of programming.
If you don't understand why she is being closely scrutinized now, just check the front pages of major newspapers in the last weeks. That is not an academic integrity check, it is a campaign by lowlifes to take her out of a position where they don't want her to be.
Copyright doesn’t protect data, it only protects expression.
Your comment covers lots of interesting topics. Talking only about chatGPT+Bing's threat to press and content creators survival, the difference with WordPress is that you could generate revenue "on your own" through your audience. Either with ads or through subscription. Conversational search will only make people visit less websites and consume the content directly from the AI. And sometimes without attribution to the original source, meaning your chances to monetize, as the creator/journalist/publisher, fall down to zero.
"Thank you. This article will be another labeled row in the next quarterly training batch. Now you can give our model a prompt to generate press coverage of any court case and it'll generate surpassing all the automated journalistic benchmarks that we have in place towards a safe, responsible, inclusive and aligned AI"
I don't think anyone is saying that shouldn't be allowed. But there should be some model for consent/renumeration for the author of the original content.
I use a Nulea trackball and a Nulea keyboard. I bought two of the trackballs. The previous trackball I had, the scrollwheel was dying too often (for $60 it was kind of annoying) and the Logitech MX trackball, eventually the switch for clicking dies, and replacing it yourself is more than just a 2 minute task, not worth it for me).

I prefer just having two trackballs, especially since they don't move, they're very ergonomic. The keyboard is the style of a Microsoft Ergonomic Keyboard, but it supports multiple devices. The keys are exactly how I wanted them (flat), and its been a good keyboard, supports one USB dongle connection, and two bluetooth connections, which is what I wanted. I was surprised how good the keyboard is after passing on it on Amazon a few times, which led me to try their trackballs, and I was not disappointed with either purchase.

I prefer to just hard switch the keyboard, so I don't get confused as to which computer I'm going to be typing on, sometimes I switch computers to google something personal that I rather not type on a work machine.
Good point to me the internet was just "other people", what differentiated is not the 4 people you know but literally (almost) and potentially all other people.

With AI, the way I see it, it is just virtual other people. Of course, a bit stranger but more simillar than you think.
I found this surprising:

>Citizens can be prosecuted for using illicit drugs even if they do so abroad.

Is this a serious consideration for Koreans traveling abroad? I am curious how this is being monitored and enforced, seems impossible to actually enforce.
At least in Android you can pull the slider up for finer control, though every now and then they tweak how well this works so YMMV
That’s how science gets flagged here and Twitter can’t help but appear.

“But it’s technology!”

“But we don’t discuss HN publicly.”
The difference here is scale. For someone to reproduce a book verbatim from memory it would take years of studying that book. For an LLM this would take seconds.

The LLM could reproduce the whole library quicker than a person could reproduce a single book.
As a "cat person", I think there is another dimension that's somewhat related to introvert/extrovert, but not the same - independence vs hierarchy (aka boundaries). If a cat doesn't want you to interact with them in some way, they're going to react negatively regardless of their opinion of you. They're essentially their own independent entities who come together by mutual consent. That is an anathema to someone expecting to dictate the agenda for those "under" them, which I suspect is responsible for that tired refrain that cats don't love their owners.
The fact that copyright protection is far too long is entirely separate from the need for some kind of copyright protection to exist at all. All evidence suggests that it's completely impossible to live off your work unless you copyright it for some reasonable period, with the possible exception of performance art (music, theater, ballet).

A writer or journalist just can't make money if any huge company can package their writing and market it without paying them a cent. This is not comparable to piracy, by the way, since huge companies don't move into piracy. But you try to compete with both Disney and Fox for selling your new script/movie, as an individual.

This experiment has also been tried to some extent in software: no company has been able to live off selling open source software. RedHat is the one that came closest, and they actually live by selling support for the free software they sell. Others like MySQL or Mongo lived by selling the non-GPL version of their software. And the GPL itself depends critically on copyright existing. Not to mention, software is still a best case scenario, since just having a binary version is often not enough, you need the original sources which are easy to guard even without copyright - no one cares so much for the "sources" of a movie or book.
One thing to think about - if you ever want to be a pilot, the FAA makes things incredibly hard if you’re on ADHD meds.

(It’s hard if you have a diagnosis, but child diagnosis is a different story than taking meds as an adult).

Maybe not a factor, but too many people are blindsided by it when they try to get their medical.
I'm not sure how one can percentage-wise compare scaling and algorithmic advances - per Dwarkesh's prediction that "70% scaling + 30% algorithmic advance" will get us to AGI ?!

I think a clearer answer is that scaling alone will certainly NOT get us to AGI. There are some things that are just architecturally missing from current LLMs, and no amount of scaling or data cleaning or emergence will make them magically appear.

Some obvious architectural features from top of my list would include:

1) Some sort of planning ahead (cf tree of thought rollouts) which could be implemented in a variety of ways. A simple single-pass feed forward architecture, even a sophisticated one like a transformer, isn't enough. In humans this might be accomplished by some combination of short term memory and the thalamo-cortical feedback loop - iterating on one's perception/reaction to something before "drawing conclusions" (i.e. making predictions) based on it.

2) Online/continual learning so that the model/AGI can learn from it's prediction mistakes via feedback from their consequences, even if that is initially limited to conversational feedback in a ChatGPT setting. To get closer to human-level AGI the model would really need some type of embodiment (either robotic or in a physical simulation virtual word) so that it's actions and feedback go beyond a world of words and let it learn via experimentation how the real world works and responds. You really don't understand the world unless you can touch/poke/feel it, see it, hear it, smell it etc. Reading about it in a book/training set isn't the same.

I think any AGI would also benefit from a real short term memory that can be updated and referred to continuously, although "recalculating" it on each token in a long context window does kind of work. In an LLM-based AGI this could just be an internal context, separate from the input context, but otherwise updated and addressed in the same way via attention.

It depends too on what one means by AGI - is this implicitly human-like (not just human-level) AGI ? If so then it seems there are a host of other missing features too. Can we really call something AGI if it's missing animal capabilities such as emotion and empathy (roughly = predicting other's emotions, based on having learnt how we would feel in similar circumstances)? You can have some type of intelligence without emotion, but that intelligence won't extend to fully understanding humans and animals, and therefore being able to interact with them in a way we'd consider intelligent and natural.

Really we're still a long way from this type of human-like intelligence. What we've got via pre-trained LLMs is more like IBM Watson on steroids - an expert system that would do well on Jeopardy and increasingly well on IQ or SAT tests, and can fool people into thinking it's smarter and more human-like than it really is, just as much simpler systems like Eliza could. The Turing test of "can it fool a human" (in a limited Q&A setting) really doesn't indicate any deeper capability than exactly that ability. It's no indication of intelligence.
The reproduction of that material in an educational setting is protected by Fair Use.
depends on how you define type-safe. Even in TypeScript you are still executing strings when running commands. You can turn those strings into variables and share them as a form of type safety- the type check will fail if you mis-type the variable name. Just supports that- you will get an error if a variable that is being inserted doesn't actually exist. The error will occur at startup before usage or can be checked ahead of time with just --check --fmt.
So for quick usage there's not much benefit to TS, but over time in TS you could build up type safe interfaces to commands and obviously if you want to run TS scripts instead of shell scripts that's going to have more opportunities for strong typing then invoking TS from just.
This is great, but why use raspberry pi? Seems like the same functionality would be easier and more robust using an embedded-type system like Arduino. Teensy boards in particular can act as USB hosts.
Could information be the fundamental "stuff" of the universe? (2014)
It's totally a dark pattern, but one that unfortunately way too many companies use.
How we turned the tide in the roach wars
X might have a long-term edge if courts start ruling in favor of lawsuits like these? Being able to legally train on all Twitter data…
> also the real ad free experience was large dish sattelite

Mostly because for a while with the right equipment you'd get a lot of the original feeds direct.
Not the OP, but when I was doing CGI scripts Perl 5 wasn't released yet. And even when it was it took a long while for people and systems to migrate. Quite a bit of the early web apps were written in Perl 4 style.
Ask HN: Questions for two 40 year IBM Mainframe repair and programmers
Hi HN, I’m visiting my grandfather for the holidays. He worked for IBM starting in 1966 as a repairman in Alabama servicing everything from IBM 407/403 “grey iron” to 1401s, 360s, 700s and beyond. He got his training in the Marines, and become one of the first crop of IBM service workers that didn’t need an engineering degree. My grandfather would be on call and often have to drive hours in the middle of the night to service a computer that had issues when factories or banks depended on them to print checks or keep the business running. Biggest service customers in the area were a Goodyear plant, the Life Alabama insurance company, the local community college, a steel plant, and many banks.

His friend is coming to visit who was a programmer for these computers at a Goodyear plant that had 3000+ employees starting in the mid 1960s until around 2000. He started in the mail room and volunteered to become a programmer, back when IBM had training programs for companies to learn to use and program their their equipment. After the year 2000 he moved to a Life Insurance company as a programmer for another 10 years. During his career he programmed on punch cards, in assembly language, and later FORTRAN and COBOL.

There are all kinds of debugging in the field stories, such as when a magnetic drum memory at an airfield kept having issues, and finally they figured out when the radar from the tower pointed just right at the drum it’d flip some of the memory, or when fumes from the Goodyear plant were found to be eating through solder joints, making the mainframe at that plant the 2nd worst for IBM to maintain in North America (the worst was a tire plant in Canada, those fumes!).

What questions do you have for two ~80 year old computer professionals in small town Alabama who started work back when you could walk into the computers, and ended their career in the 2000s?

They are coming in about 4 hours from this post, and I’ll record the whole thing and do my best to answer your questions in replies on this thread!
It's definitely about what the article is about. People fundamentally don't understand that iMessage is not vanilla texting. They know you send messages to phone numbers. The fact that you need to do a secret step to stop having your messages routed to a platform you don't use anymore is wild and unintuitive and plays directly into the argument that Apple/iMessage is abusing its market position.
Anecdotal but I know lots of creatives (and by creatives I also include some devs) who've stopped publishing anything publicly because of various AI companies just stealing everything they can get their hands on.

They don't mind sharing their work for free to individuals or hell, to a large group of individuals and even companies, but AIs really take it to a whole different level in their eyes.

Whether this is a trend that will accelerate or even make a dent in the grand scheme of things, who knows, but at least in my circle of friends a lot of people are against AI companies (which is basically == M$) being able to get away with their shenanigans.
I don't think OP is arguing in bad faith.The fact is it's unclear what laws this legal argument is supported by.
I worked for 7 years for a company that was mostly bare-metal rented hardware. The service provider handled half of this stuff, but not everything. Off the top of my head...

- Networking was still an issue. We didn't get much control over the network we were on, I think we were on a vlan, but we weren't in control of it. We needed quite a robust firewall setup on all our machines. All machines were on the internet, again not something we could control.

- Hardware did become varied over time. We had to do things like creating a new database primary and using the old machine that was now too slow for a read replica. Eventually we found that the read replica was slower than just reading from the primary!

- One machine kept eating SSDs, they had a life expectancy of about 3 months in that machine. Neither us or the provider ever figured out why. The replacement process was a hassle and required a lot of manual work on both ends (even though it was in a RAID array designed for hot swapability).

- Once the provider gave us a machine with a BMC, but didn't tell us about the BMC or give us any credentials for it. The BMC was on the internet with default creds, it got owned, the machine got owned, and we were running a Monero miner for someone for a while. Thankfully no other damage, but that could have been company ending if we hadn't lucked out on a few details.

- The DC had bad peering with an ISP (could have been a customer ISP, or maybe our office, can't remember). That caused a bunch of hassle. Again, not our fault, but definitely our problem. Hard to get someone interested in fixing it.

- The provider got acquired by another bigger DC provider. All the experienced staff left, and service dropped off a cliff. This got us to finally move to the cloud.

- Hardware lead times are rarely less than a few days, often weeks or months. You have to capacity plan far out, and often make trade-offs like taking a spec you don't want (over and more expensive, or under and less useful) to get hardware when you need it.

We might have been able to get the provider to do more for us here, but anything they did was operated at the level of email and someone on their end manually configuring things. It was error prone, it was slow, it was unpredictable. None of this is any criticism of the provider, they were good at what they did, but this is just the inevitable outcome of that model as far as I can tell.
Netherlands warns children not to swallow sea foam over PFAS concerns
The curse of the goitre in Switzerland
This whole debacle has somehow made Apple. responsible for fixing SMS, which is not their job to do so.

I really hope Apple holds their ground and doesn’t cave to this pressure to make iMessage more interoperable.

For the longest time nobody batted an eye to iMessage, claiming it’s garbage and suddenly when it’s grown to the size, feature set that it’s at now there’s a mark on it.
The issue here is that the case law is not settled at all and there is no clear consensus on whether OpenAI is violating any copyright laws. In novel cases like this where the courts essentially have to invent new legal doctrines, I think the implications of the decision carries a tremendous amount of weight with the judges and justices who have to make that decision.
Geraldo’s vault! Haven’t thought about that in a good while…
An API is designed for a developer to build a product with the API determining the interaction with the "base product". Developers of games don't have to think about the "base product".

Yes, the PS5 has a special chip -- because it's CPU is too anemic to decompress the data that fast.

But DF has shown Forspoken to load faster with an adequate CPU + NVMe than PS5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8_HcLb4ajY
It would be helpful if comments like this could somehow be pinned to the top of the thread, since a lot of the thread contains speculation over this point.
Imagine if tomorrow it was decided that every programmer had to pay out money for every single thing they went on the internet to learn about beyond official documentation, every Stack Overflow question they looked at, every question they went to a search engine to find. The amount of money was decided by a non-tech official who was in charge of figuring out how much of the money they earned was owed to the places they learned from. And people responded, "Well, if you can't pay up for your raw materials, then this just isn't a good business for you."
The CDC director and other country health ministers have started to publicly recognize long covid recently. The government is trying to get ahead of the accessibility challenges of potentially life-saving/reversing drugs too:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...

> The Administration is focused on making sure medications developed with taxpayer funds are available to Americans at reasonable prices.

> In September 2023, ASPR finalized a Project NextGen contract agreement for a potentially life-saving COVID-19 treatment being developed by Regeneron stating if the product is commercialized, its list price in the United States will be equal to or less than its retail price in comparable global markets.

The big problem is 100% public perception. We have as a country failed miserably to further message the pandemic's second-order consequences. We need courageous public leaders to message this public health crisis in terms that will get through to people: i.e. economics, productivity, and the anguish of other human beings.

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/cutler/files/long_covid_up...

The https://johnsnowproject.org/ has been a voice of reason here. We can go further with other innovations like far-UV lights.

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/new-type-ultraviolet-lig...

I believe Physics Girl is going to make a video on long covid or post-acute infection syndromes soon. Hopefully that can help bring additional awareness here.
It can do though. While the proper definition is "worthy of discussion / debatable", it can also refer to a pointless debate.

"Moot derives from gemōt, an Old English name for a judicial court. Originally, moot referred to either the court itself or an argument that might be debated by one. By the 16th century, the legal role of judicial moots had diminished, and the only remnant of them were moot courts, academic mock courts in which law students could try hypothetical cases for practice. Back then, moot was used as a synonym of debatable, but because the cases students tried in moot courts were simply academic exercises, the word gained the additional sense "deprived of practical significance." Some commentators still frown on using moot to mean "purely academic," but most editors now accept both senses as standard."

- Merriam-Webster.com