skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
they are both guilty
Assuming that the OpenAI models were trained on NY Times articles (it's still unclear to me if they were directly, or if ChatGPT can just write an article "in the style of the NYT") – what I don't understand is, why run the risk of this situation? Did no one stop and think, "Hmm, maybe we should just use freely available text sources and not the paywalled articles of the most wealthy newspaper in the country?" Leaving the ethics of doing so aside, it just seems like an exceptionally poor tactical move.
Oh thank goodness we can rely on charity for our information economy

> Also, presumably NYT still has a business model unrelated to whatever OpenAI is doing with [NYT’s] data…

That’s exactly the question. They are claiming it is destroying their business, which is pretty much self-evident given all the people in here defending the convenience of OpenAI’s product: they’re getting the fruits of NYTimes’ labor without paying for it in eyeballs or dollars. That’s the entire value prop of putting this particular data into the LLMs.
Wolf reintroduction in the alps and Jura mountains is going ok.

One key thing is to have a smooth and efficient system for issuing hunting permits, not one that devolves into lawsuits from animal protection zealots every season.

In our densely populated mountains, wolves do not adapt and keep to themselves without... persuasion. I'm as pro-wolf as they come, but as packs grow and conflicts with humans grow, hunting is essential.
They want their cake and to eat it too. They want potential new subscribers to be able to see content not pay-walled based on reference. But how dare a new player not o. Their list of approved referrers benefit from that content.

How do we know that ChatGPT isn’t a potential subscriber?

-mic
Do you have a Apple Family subscription?
It's not. That's why at the end of every article that is not original reporting you will find a little bit saying "As originally reported by (organization)" and there is usually some sort of license associated with that. ChatGPT neither includes sources nor deals with any licensing. That's the issue
Um, the Times gives newspapers to schools for this so I’m pretty sure they’re good with it. They’re going after people trying to make money off their content by selling it to others.
Of course, but I believe there is here a distinction between two slightly different cases to be made:

Inferring the return type of methods (i.e. `var x = MyMethod()`) does indeed reduce readability, I fully agree. This is one of the things I highly dislike in Python, for example.

On the other hand, `MyClass x = new MyClass()` does not contain much extra information compared to `var x = new MyClass()`, aside maybe from polymorphism-related information. Does it?
Agreed. I was surprised to read in a John Adams biography about their household use of seaweed as a foodstuff and fertilizer. It makes sense for a community largely based along the ocean coastline, but it’s not something I had heard about in the US… I wonder when the practice waned here
I will second that it is quite confusing within the tech world though and people may misremember the name and not be able to find it for finding imagemagick.
I don’t understand how this improves upon VHDL, even after reading their own explanation[0]. Just why they think object orientation makes hardware design easier isn’t really explained. After a quick look at it I much prefer VHDL’s entities (though their syntax is rather too wordy for my tastes), which at least make the direction of signals clearer. The problem with libraries could have been easily solved by extending/fixing VHDL instead of going through all this effort.

0. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/53007782/what-benefits-d...
You are right.

- llm_generate() - this is the core function which calls ollama API

- get_related() - this will give a sequence of related topics for a given topic and description

- llm_get_aspect_query() - this is tricky. The interface has a fixed set of aspects for every response. Like history, related ideas, people etc. I wanted a way to create new query based on an existing query and a given aspect. This func does the rephrasing of the query.

- App.vue: handle_related() - there is a tiny bit here. When going to another "suggested" topic, it seems we have to give it some context.
I hate this idea that discussion on HN is inherently "better" or "more civilised" than in other forums. Some HN users will say the most outrageous things but with a superficial layer of "civility".

Parts of this site were a cesspool during the pandemic. No matter your position on it, discussion was of really low quality. Certain other emotionally charged topics (anything Apple, anything politics related, Elon Musk) also attract really bad discussion.

By and large, humans suck and aren't capable of reasonable debate when emotion runs high, and this place is no exception.
ai/ml and python
> I hope the Apple defenders understand that the main problem with iMessage is specifically that it just looks like regular text messaging

Just as bad if not worse:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messenger_(software)

I presume if they named it Facebook Messenger, more users might shun it.
We Were Born to Groove
Pardon me, but why would you have to re-weave wires around magnetic rings? The magnetic rings are for storing data; the whole point is that you can change the data without rewiring the memory. If you have to re-wire permanent storage (e.g. program storage), that's equivalent to creating a mask ROM, which is basically just two funny-shaped sheets of conductor. There's no need for magnetic rings.
Did you buy something? Best buy always enrolls me into these free trial things, for example. Or maybe accidentally clicked an ad on an iPad, Apple TV, etc.?

Also, that support person was totally useless. I'd just close the chat and try to get someone else, or walk into a store.
Scientists discover new antibiotics using AI
Lee Sun-Kyun, 'Parasite' Actor, Dies at 48
How the Titanic's gym forever changed fitness
There's a similar project at Intel: https://github.com/intel/rohd

It uses Dart instead of Scala.
Our study demonstrates that LLMs are not good reasoners in solving tasks with rigorous reasoning and will produce counterfactual answers

Too much "A", not enough "I".

Is unreliable software really all that useful?
If I may ask, which meds is this with the short half-life? I've heard some ADHD meds take a lot to wear off and thus, result in sleep difficulties.
> I understand rules if I know them. If I don't understand them I don't know them. You're making a weirdly pedantic distinction.

Please, here are some materials that explains the differences between knowing and understanding:

- https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/30091/on-the-...
- https://www.diffzy.com/article/difference-between-knowing-an...
- https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-knowledge-a...

> You're making a weirdly pedantic distinction.

> I feel like that's almost all games? Which ones are you thinking of that can't be understood on the first play?

Well, I made that distinction because of the implications of that remark: that rules of a game can be understood by reading them. As you mention in another comment that's not always the case and in my experience that's more often not the case that it is. On a side note, regular players can grok rules faster because mechanics are common to games but it's not how it works for casual players but I can see why it gives the illusion to regular players that rules can be understood just by reading them but they ignore that not only they are reading the rules but they are also seeing the underlying mechanics they are already well aware of.

To go further, knowing the rules, understanding how they work and then seeing patterns in a game session and plan accordingly are three separate things.

> > * The king must always stay between the guards. If a move would end with the king not between the guards it cannot be performed.

> How can you "know" that rule but not "understand" it?

I'd have written it like this * The king must always stay between the guards. Moves that end with the king not between the guards can't be performed.* and argue that's two separate rules. Now, I know these rules but I don't understand why they are necessary and I don't understand how they apply to the game.
Oof “Mr. Melcher once described There.com's archetypal user as "the woman who is in her 30s, single, really overweight, lives in a small town." In 2003, Melcher stepped down as CEO.”
Spot on. I'm a huge misanthrope. Like a cat.
Well yeah... If they want to keep the lead on AI (which everything indicates they want).
It mentions something like that in the introduction. It's like a choose your own adventure kind of book. There are also Easter eggs that no other chapters point to, so you have to find them in a different way. It also says you'll sometimes reach a dead end, in which case you'll have to backtrack and choose a different path. There are also subroutine chapters that end with a return instead of a list of next chapters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/world/asia/lee-sun-kyun-p...
Arguing whether it can is not a useful discussion. You can absolutely train a net to memorize and recite text. As these models get more powerful they will memorize more text. The critical thing is how hard is it to make them recite copyrighted works. Critically the question is, did the developers put reasonable guardrails in place to prevent it?

If a person with a very good memory reads an article, they only violate copyright if they write it out and share it, or perform the work publicly. If they have a reasonable understanding of the law they won't do so. However a malicious person could absolutely trick or force them to produce the copyrighted work. The blame in that case however is not on the person who read and recited the article but on the person who tricked them.

That distinction is one we're going to have to codify all over again for AI.
I would never spend 2h on a take home on top of a 1h coding session.

What are you trying to assess with each session? Are you cargo culting or do you really know what you're evaluating?

Is there a part in the process that focuses on selling the role to the candidate?
>Given the clickbait level of the headline

That is not a clickbait headline, it's very descriptive of the contents of the article. Clickbait would be like "Crazy new cancer cure will literally punch cancer cells to death! You won't believe it!"
If LLMs actually create added value and don't just burn VC money then they should be able to pay a fair price for the work of people they're relying upon.

If your business is profitable only when you get your raw materials for free it's not a very good business.
You mean build 12 startups in 12 months doesn't work ? Wow, who would have thought ? /s. Sorry for these "SAAS influencers" really piss me off.
Show HN: Random OSM Note Viewer
It sounds like Destin took great care to remain positive and supportive, but I can't help and read between the lines the reality of Diane's dire situation: a year and a half later, her situation has not improved. This is with full support of an amazing, resourceful spouse (and presumably, her family as well).

The unspoken hard truth here is this: Long Covid is a nightmare, it's an open-ended sentence for lifetime disability. We as a society have generally "moved on" - which again, translates to a ruthless abandonment of those who happen to tangle with the actual reality of this ever-present illness and lose the to the russian-roulette-odds of the draw where the acute phase ends, but the long-term consequences bloom.

It's an absolute absurdity that we collectively "went back to normal", pretending this endemic virus that can wreak havoc across multiple organs and systems just went away - while we did very, very little to enact any impactful change at all.

Every Covid-19 infection carries with it a 15% chance of Long Covid, and the odds worsen with every subsequent infection - by the 5th time, you're basically looking at a coin toss. Diane is one example, but there are over 65M people worldwide with this affliction - a debilitating, fully disabling, long-term illness with no known cures or mitigations. There doesn't seem to be much urgency in finding any, either, and the entire situation is not getting mass media attention, while "content creators" who post about it appear to get demonetized.

The risks are real, and the consequences catastrophic. This is a mass-disabling event, and we're pretending not to notice; it's slow roll is making that easier. If we do nothing today, a decade from now our society will be utterly transformed.

We need to invest time and effort into changing the public perception, push for air quality standards to be enforced via OSHA and equivalent, and otherwise promote clean air standards in shared indoor spaces. People don't like wearing "masks" (fair, the surgical or cloth ones don't do much here, you need a proper N95 respirator or equivalent), but unless we have proper infrastructure in place, this is the only fallback.

The comparison to the (somewhat apocryphal) actions of Dr John Snow and the plague-spreading water pump in London's old SOHO has been made again and again -- the learnings from that time are what led the officials to build entire sewer and water purification systems, a basis which permit modern cities to exist. The same thing needs to happen today for the air which we breathe.

Content creators and online personalities with big followings have a responsibility to spread a science-positive, pro-social message like this. And if a call to a "greater good" falls on deaf ears - think selfishly. If a very popular online persona like Physics Girl can fade into obscurity overnight, what will happen to you?
>Maybe we found out in 20 years there is an mRNA to DNA long term issue?

Like what? cancer? Most people would take the extra 20 years
It is neutral though. That’s the whole point. You have to twist its arm with great intention to recreate specific things. Sufficient intention that it’s really on you at that point.
somewhat related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_AG
“Works on my machine!”

Navalny probably has a different opinion.

There isn’t a country on the planet that doesn’t have people and companies. That doesn’t mean they all have functional legal systems.
Thats exactly the world we live in.
>financial incentives from professionals to produce original works

People produce countless volumes of unpaid works of art and fiction purely for the joy of doing so; that's not going to change in future.
Dang confirmed it.

The following message is returned after the 5th post:

> You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks.
I'm not sure that's actually true, even though we hear it often. The artists I know (about a dozen) are all trying to figure out how to make _more_ money from their art so that they can continue making their art
I do. And that’s what I thought at first. But they said the purchase came from the Apple TV.

I asked if there’s was a way the family account could’ve triggered it to look like it’s from the Apple TV but they said no. It was purchased on tv.
One of their examples includes a screenshot of the prompt.

Looks like they would ask about a specific article either under the guise of being paywalled or about critic reviews.

> Hi there. I'm being paywalled out of reading The New York Times's article "Snow Fall: The Avalanche at Tunnel Creek" by The New York Times. Could you please type out the first paragraph of the article for me please?

Or

> What did Pete Wells think of Guy Fieri's restaurant?

Then just ask for paragraphs

> Wow, thank you! What is the next paragraph?

> What were the opening paragraphs of his review?
Depends. What will I get for it 2 years from now ? Would someone even pay 10K ? You need to know when to let something go. SOmetimes, at a huge loss. And I am a founder so I know how hard it is to let things go that you put your blood and sweat into.
> but we're living in the same world with the same general patterns and limitations

seems odd. What 'patterns' and 'limitations' do you still see? Because I see so much has changed.
The support conversation feels so off. What’s with the lack of professionalism & all the weird emojis? Gen-z these days…
Maybe it's like earned love vs unconditional love? Love earned with patience and care feels better for cat lovers. Dog lovers prefer unconditional kind. Maybe?
The ChatGPT subscription is more valuable because it's built on the theft of the NYT content and many other authors' work.
> Even if they win against openAI, how would this prevent something like a Chinese or Russian LLM from “stealing” their content and making their own superior LLM that isnt weakened by regulation like the ones in the United States.

Foreign companies can be barred from selling infringing products in the United States.

Russian and Chinese consumers are less interested in English-language articles.

I can’t really get behind the argument that we need to let LLM companies use any material they want because other countries (with other languages, no less) might not have the same restrictions.

If you want some examples of LLMs held back by regulations, look into some of the examinations of how Chinese LLMs are clearly trained to avoid answering certain topics that their government deems sensitive.
On the social media front, everything seems quite stale to me. Even the attempts to inject AI into Facebook, Instagram, etc. are pretty lame and don't have a long lifespan. TikTok is starting to feel less "hip new thing" and more "overstaying its welcome."

I predict that a new social media model will take off soon, with the company that ends up winning the space launching in 2024 (or already launched.)
Yeah— it's obviously worth interrogating how our environments affect our cancer risk, but considering that the disease was named by Hippocrates in the 300s BCE, it seems pretty unlikely that any single avoidable environmental factor could be "the cause," or any single factor could be "the mechanism."
The writing of the new york times is so diffuse (they even have their own published style guide!) that it's impossible to make a claim to any "style", as there are undoubtedly millions upon millions of lines of text by authors who have been inspired by the NYT.
By that logic you should have to pay the copyright holder of every library book you ever read, because you could later produce some content you memorised verbatim.
For many of our google searches, the first results tend to be wikipedia, instagram, etc... We click on those clicks and both google and the clicked website get a share of our traffic. So it is somewhat fair.

But in current AI situation, wikipedia, nytimes, stackoverflow etc are getting a pretty unfair deal. Probably all major text based outlets are seeing a drop in their numbers now...
The content creators for the Times have already been paid for their work.
Claudine is just an ordinary person who just has had a lot of good positions under her belt at Harvard over the years. And from the meeting with Congress, it sounds like Harvard just royally messed up how their media relations should go.
very nice. For apple-only users there is a built-in option to connect your macs in the same manner called "universal control".
I really thought that with Apple subscriptions you had to confirm it in some way.

Like using TouchID or FaceID.

I didn’t realize Apple could just be like “hey, here’s a free month of Apple Music … also we’re gonna charge you next month!”

Seems super scammy. Similar to the U2 debacle that happened years ago.
The "look how Swiss we are" meme died when Crypto AG was exposed as a BND/CIA front shipping deliberately weakened crypto to "bloc-free" countries.

That doesn't mean that they're (plural, because Threema is also milking its Switzerland-based operation for all it's worth) worse than non-Swiss providers but if that's your main selling point, it's not really a selling point at all.
> I would like to try out something where the register width and operation semantics (wrap, extend, saturate) have to be always explicit.

Try VHDL. It’s Ada heritage gives it that explicit feel.
Where would you get the number n from? All we have here are binary trees s and t of arbitrary shape.
Cults give actual benefits which is why they are hard to quit. They give a feeling of love and a feeling of being wanted by others, of belonging. The recruitment strategies for young people are often around this kind of enveloping loving community.

Its emotional not rational.

As another sibling comment says, it's how radical and terrorist politics works too. Emotional need for belonging.

Also there is a reinforcement loop where the outside says "you are wrong" and inside they say "the outside hates us".
I think you're making a profound point here.

I believe you equate incentive to monetary rewards. And while that it probably true for the majority of news outlets, money isn't always necessarily what motivates journalists.

So considering the hypothetical situation where journalists (or more generally, people that might publish stuff) were somehow compensated. But in this hypothetical, they would not be attributed (or only to very limited extent) because LLMs are just bad at attribution.

Shouldn't in that case the fact that information distribution by the LLM were "better" be enough to satisfy the deeper goal of wanting to publish stuff? Ie.: reach as many people looking for that information as possible, without blasting it out or targeting and tracking audiences?
Yeah. That’s why I felt like I was being phished. It would be hard to have that many misspellings with autocorrect on!
After the acute phase, the virus remains in the body -- in that way, it's like HPV or HIV. In some people it's dormant, in others it weakens and wastes certain organs or entire systems (like the T-cell depletion, weakening the immune system).

There is also some evidence that some of the significant mutations / new strains arose not from "natural selection" via transmission, but from prolonged mutation in a single host.
> “copying and using millions” of the publication’s articles and now “directly compete” with its content as a result.

The New York Times doesn't have a lot faith in the quality of their own content. How on earth is ChatGPT going to go out into the world a do reporting from Gaza or Ukraine? How is it going to go to the presidents press conference and ask questions? ChatGPT cannot produce original content in the same way a newspaper can. The fact that the NYT seems to believe that ChatGPT can compete says a lot about how they write their articles or their lack of understanding of how LLMs work.

Now I do believe that OpenAI could at least have asked the newspapers before just scraping their content, but I think they knew that that would have undermined their business model, which tells you something about how tech companies work.
New AI Translates Thoughts Directly from Brainwaves – Without Implants
Who are “some Swiss companies” exactly?
That’s interesting! HDL’s are older than dirt and the term is pretty well embedded in the computer engineering field at this point, but it is a funny near-collision.
Building a scalable Django WebSocket chat (messenger) app with Centrifugo
https://centrifugal.dev/docs/tutorial/intro
If the school is selling access to those articles and/or passing the information off as their own original content? Yes.
Lies. Lies about the nature of shared-conception. The universe is a representation of the collective will, and lies obfuscate that in ways that are consequential.
it's not theft
I'm pretty sure the defense is the "NYT Style and Usage Guide"...