skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
But again, this is a choice about how to characterise the people in this narrative.

Certainly the king would be assaulting, killing, imprisoning/kidnapping too. He would be doing it more. But he would not be characterised as a gangster.
As you're asking, the bulk of the world's population survives with a much lower energy per capita usage than, say, a median US citizen.

For the high energy consumers it's more a perceived need than an actual need.

Further, energy availability appears to work akin to road availability; if you build a six lane highway traffic expands to fill it.

The obvious reason for wanting lower global energy use at this particular point in time is reduce the still increasing by products of energy production, greenhouse gases.

Once the climate parameters return to safer values energy production without those side effects can expand .. while we look at addressing the unwanted toxic by products of our new sources of energy - less greenhouse gases, more acids and waste associated with nickel, copper, lithium, et al.
And there's an annual subscription on top. I really don't understand the value proposition here.
Yeah, but I fear anything related to that I say would be considered against hn rules lol. If you have pointers for a site/place where we can have conversations tech topics freely I could use that pointer myself.
Another example of a defense mechanism: The strawman falacy. In other terms: That guy that said all moderation is bad - you sure showed him.

Somehow all the disinformation that gets posted on US economic rivals gets unmoderated, while all the shit that's going on in the US or is committed by it's military (or it's sibling the Israeli military) remain completely undebated. There is literally no forum to discuss the wrongdoings of the US in Iraq that lead to the war in the first place and cost over a million people their lives. Have fun repeating your mistakes over and over and sending your children to die and kill other children. And you morons hate the Chinese and Russians more with every day and for all the propaganda that gets posted on this forum.

I can understand now how the doctors must have felt during corona, with all the idiots telling them corona isn't real or dangerous, because they read a headline on reddit/9gag/HN.
Yeah, from what I know of people with ADHD, this doesn't sound like ADHD person on amphetamines ... well, unless one of the things that ADHD caused them is being a people pleaser due to rejection sensitivity and I did hear that medication can help a lot with this - like it does help with doing things you have aversion to, so if you only were nice to other people because "what if they don't like me otherwise", you could now feel liberated to be the uncaring self-centered bastard ...

But getting the dose is tricky, talking to them about better drugs could help.

If you are affraid of addiction ... yeah, some behaviors can look like that, and there can certain degree of physiological dependence ... but "I am anxious my meds that help me function better will run out, with shortage and prescription hoops" and "damnit, I forgot to take my meds in the morning and now it is too late and I am angry, because I can basically write-off the rest of the day" is fairly standard medicated ADHD experience :-)
One of the original authors of Clash here.

I was always torn on how to describe Clash to an audience whose background I don’t know up front: is it a hardware description ‘language’, or, is it a set of tools, libraries and scaffolding to use Haskell as a method for circuit description?

So yes, Clash is just Haskell. Although it is Haskell with certain GHC language extensions enabled by default plus a type-checking plugin for reasoning about type-level natural numbers.

That’s because the Clash compiler can only translate a semantic subset of Haskell to circuits. We use types to determine how big the circuit will become (fixed-length lists, fixed-depth trees, fixed-width numerics, etc.). So the semantic subset part means that Clash will not translate Haskell programs where the recursion depth is unknown at compile time, nor things like mutation (whether it’s ST or IO) or other I/O like actions.

Finally, why we’ve kept the “Clash is a functional hardware description language” is that unlike approaches such as nMigen, Chisel, Spinal, the Clash compiler translates the actual Haskell source code to VHDL/(System)Verilog. It uses the GHC Haskell compiler to do all the parsing, type-checking and “desugaring”. This means that with Clash you can use all of Haskell’s syntax to describe how the circuit operates, including if-expressions, case-expressions, etc. In the other approaches I mentioned you usually have to use some sort of ‘when’-function to describe run-time choice. So those approaches to me feel more like a “use-language-X-as-a-tool-for-circuit-description”, while Clash, again to me, does really feel more like a hardware description ‘language’.
I've tried to get coauthors to move to github and it is a huge blocker. Even just installing git is painful, then they have to learn about add/commit/pull/push. They don't get it.
The Foxit PDF Editor product page is one example (not the worst by far). It suggests prominently that you have to buy an annual subscription ($109 to $159 p.a unless you can live with the cloud option for $59 p.a). Microsoft Office 365 Personal is $69.99 p.a including 1TB cloud storage.

https://www.foxit.com/pdf-editor/

The one-time license option is hidden away in a product comparison table (and linked to in a few other far less visible places).

Nitro, the other PDF editor you mentioned, appears to offer only a one-off purchase:

https://www.gonitro.com/pricing

But it says "for Windows" and at the top of the page, there's a promotion saying "Get up to 1 year subscription - free when you switch to Nitro". So there is a subscription after all?

If you keep scrolling down to the FAQ and there's a question asking:

"Is Nitro available as a subscription or a one-time purchase?

Nitro Pro, ideal for individuals and small to medium sized teams, is available as an annual subscription."

No mention of a one-time purchase option. So which is it? I'm confused. Is this "one-time purchase" a perpetual license or does it stop working after a year?

These are certainly not the most egregious examples of pricing shenanigans. But given the recent history of companies going subscription-only, this is enough uncertainty for me not to buy.
Not a Drill, this is just Tuesday
Current AI is useless without people writing the articles in the first place.
Is ML different than if statements? Yes.

But is it reallllly different? No not so much.
Gas plants have their main cost in running them. So if they only fill the gaps, their cost is reduced too. But yes, they are not to be considered "profitable" but rather as part of the infrastructure like powerlines. But as solar and wind costs only a fraction of gas when running, this is a good trade off.
Does Crate and Barrel actually make furniture? I thought they were a retailer only, a middleman between the consumer and a white label manufacturer.

I don't mean to detract from your point with this - I've had a few things here and there from them, I agree they sell quality stuff.
Is this a rigorous study with control group and large selection?

Otherwise it looks like an option not considered seriously. I'm not going to medicate daily for the rest of my life to "decrease or slow by about a half". The promised result is wimpy - you still need to wear the same glasses till the end of your life, but hey, they have different numbers.
Thank you for spotting this, we'll look into it and remove it.
I built a platform to reduce SaaS churn automatically
It's interesting to me the ambiguous attitude people have to reproducing news content. Whenever there is a story from NYT on HN (or any other large media outlet), the top comment is almost always a link to an archived version which reproduces the text verbatim.

And this seems to be tolerated as the norm. And yet, whenever there is a submission about a book, a TV show, a movie, a video game, an album, a comic book, or any other form of IP, it is in fact very much _not_ the norm for the top-rated comment to be a Pirate Bay link.

I think that's something worth reflecting on, about why we feel it's OK to pirate news articles, but not other IP.

And the reason I bring this up, is that it seems like Open AI has the same attitude: scraping news articles is OK, or at worst a gray area, but what if they were also scraping, for example, Netflix content to use as part of their training set?
Have you tested with:

https://www.mail-tester.com/
So KeepassXC can do TOTP like authy? Cause I would love to switch from that app if I can.
Reaction: Put up a big sign saying "Dangerous Road", with a few big skulls-and-crossbones added to it...and room left for quite a few more.
That's not true at all. If you pay someone to copy NYT articles for you verbatim, and then they give the copies to you, and then you publish them online, then you've both violated the copyright. You are never allowed to make copies of copyrighted works, even for private deals (making such copies for purely personal use, such as archival, falls under fair use - but you can't build a service out of that).

So, if the summaries are derived works and not covered by fair use, then both you and the summarizee are separately breaking the NYT's copyrights. Otherwise, if this is covered by fair use, then you are both in the clear.

Finally, GPT is not "a summarization tool" in this case. If you provide a copy of a NYT article as a prompt and then ask for summarization, then yes, it is clear that GPT is not doing anything wrong, even if it spits out the exact same text. But if you simply ask for a summary of a specific article by, say, just name and date, and you get a copy of it, it's clear that GPT is storing the original data in some way, and thus it has copied the NYT's protected works without permission.
I think beginner-friendly is kind of relative. Considering the end goal, you're tying to achieve (hack the robot to run your custom software), requiring a user to solder a relatively simple board is a very accessible requirement.
Why perpetrating the mistakes of our venerable predecessors, in the form of automatic fallthrough for switch statements?
In effect they did through overzealous safety requirements (which made it more expensive compared to other forms of electricity generation)

this regulatory inconsistency is mostly irrational, because it's clear through other policies that society values safety much less in other policies (eg. driving, all the emissions from other sources, gun safety, etc)

of course regulations are not perfect mirrors of society's preferences, but it's close enough. (and of course society doesn't "has to be" consistent, but I would say a pretty vocal minority, perhaps even the majority wishes it to be so)

.

.

that said, yes, if the world would order 1000+ nuclear power plants, all standardized, then we could have it cheaper, because then it would make sense to invest in automation, and maybe modular small reactors can already get enough traction. but since we are not ordering that many and even AP1000 is just a brand not really a standard, there's practically no economies of scale
Wouldn't he?

That seems odd given history frequently characterises various monarchs as more or less thuglife than others.

Who was that villian in the tales of Robin Hood? Richard Lackland!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John,_King_of_England

Contemporary chroniclers were mostly critical of John's performance as king, and his reign has since been the subject of significant debate and periodic revision by historians from the 16th century onwards.

Historian Jim Bradbury has summarised the current historical opinion of John's positive qualities, observing that John is today usually considered a "hard-working administrator, an able man, an able general".

Nonetheless, modern historians agree that he also had many faults as king, including what historian Ralph Turner describes as "distasteful, even dangerous personality traits", such as pettiness, spitefulness, and cruelty.

These negative qualities provided extensive material for fiction writers in the Victorian era, and John remains a recurring character within Western popular culture, primarily as a villain in Robin Hood folklore.

It's not the case that royalty is always viewed in a favourable light, history has many opinions and the balance of consensus swings from monarch to monarch wrt them being mostly harmless or not.
Or make an array with 2 billion uint64 entries all containing this constant:

0xC3C033C340C033

Then cast the array as if it was a uint32_t* add the number you want to check, cast it again as a function pointer of a function returns a int and voilà

It should take 16G of space to encode but it should require only a single page fault to load from disk.

uint64_t a[] = { [ 0 .. INT_MAX ] = 0xC3C033C340C033 } ;

int is_even(uint32_t n) {
return ((int (*)())((uint32_t *)a + n))();
}

This uses a GCC extension. If you can't use that or if it doesn't work you can easily create an ELF object file that contains a data section with that number repeated 2 billion times.

Explaination:

That magic number is actually two 32-bit numbers juxtaposed:

The first one is 0xC340C033, which encodes the following instructions:

xor eax, eax ; 33 C0
inc eax ; 40
ret ; C3

This effectively returns 1 in the eax register (which is compatible with the C calling convention)

The second number is similar but it doesn't include the "inc" instruction.

When casting as a int array we end up with an array with alternating function bodies. At even positions we have functions that return 1 (true) and at odd positions it returns 0 (false)

The interesting thing is each of those function bodies fit into a 32-bit number. A single jump to an arbitrary address would require larger array.

Of course, it's silly to do this for even/odd but it can be useful to understand how this works.

Go kids, build your own forths!

(Disclaimer: I haven't tried out any of the above and typed this on my phone while walking in the woods, so I'd be surprised if it actually works without some touches, but the gist of the idea should work)

Edit: fixes
>or produced replicas from memory and sold them (the most comparable example), I’d be sued.

This is not the most comparable example, because it's not what ChatGPT is doing. The most comparable example is if you were hired as a contractor and the employer asked you to write verbatim some copyright content you'd memorised. If the employer then published it, they'd be the one liable, not you.

>Humans produce derivative work all the time, and it’s fine for LLM’s to do that, but you can’t do it verbatim.

Nobody's suggesting preventing humans from consuming any copyrighted content just because in future they might recite some of it verbatim, but that's what NYT want for LLMs.
I also want more open-source code to exist, and that's why I want modifications of my code to also be open-source, at least to whoever is using those modifications.
Recent SQLite builds include the memdb [1] VFS (and the associated sqlite3_serialize and sqlite3_deserialize APIs) by default. How does this compare?

I'm also curious what use cases you had in mind. My SQLite wrapper reimplements the memdb [2] VFS mostly as an exercise of the VFS API, but it provides a few additional niceties. The backing memory doesn't need to be contiguous, nor is it copied when the DB grows/shrinks. This makes it possible to have significantly larger in memory DBs. I also make it easy to bootstrap the database from (e.g.) a file on disk, or data embed in the binary. It's not as easy, however, to access the DB bytes after the DB goes “live.”

[1] https://www3.sqlite.org/src/file?name=src/memdb.c

[2] https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/ncruces/go-sqlite3/vfs/memdb#s...
> Stalin treated his people as expendables, both before and during the war.

Not sure that disqualifies their contribution. It is a moral/political issue, and all sides had those. So I would say the Soviets.
Oh, I think that's OFTEN true. When your build gets big though - when you're building multiple packages for example of which most are not yours - the benefits can start to become more worthwhile.

I currently work with people who think a huge build.sh is the way to go - so the build does a lot of unnecessary things just to be sure they are uptodate and it's slow. It's still not bad enough to kick up a fuss but it's going that way.
The NYT is also worth a tiny fraction of that. If it looks like they might get anywhere, it might be better for OpenAI to buy them
I think that the moment you start making big money from someone else's business is the moment that they get riled. That and when you really hurt their business. I suspect that the NYtimes thinks that IA is damaging them in the order of (possibly) $100k pa, and that it thinks that OpenAI is making in the order of $10M's from their content (and possibly doing some damage as well). It's an easy commercial decision to ignore one and go after the other - especially as going after IA is going to create some backlash as well.
Automaker halts Japan production admitting tampering safety tests for 30 yrs
why though? this is exactly what databases have been invented for! One could simply store a mapping of numbers to their classifications as 'even' or 'odd' in an SQLite database. This approach has the added benefit of not requiring program updates whenever a number's classification changes from odd to even.
Solar+battery isn't sufficient in all places indeed. But those places are usually great for wind. With solar+battery+wind+other renewables+grid, the solution becomes rather easy. Toss in some gas until the battery capacities have grown enough. But nuclear is the worst thing to put into this mix due to its nature.
>If the LLM in the body is allowed to read nytimes on a tablet I'm sure they wouldn't care.

Why should the law treat a LLM in a body reading NYT on a tablet differently than a LLM browsing the content from a website online and reading that?
Until they start using this system for suggesting changes to the documentation for this system itself.

I am unsure if the suggestion files are meant to just be snippets long enough to uniquely identify where changes are meant to go, or the whole file again but with change suggestions.
I think Scarblac's point is that using a > comparison would be cheating, and you'd have to do that as a series of 4 billion if/else statements too.
It's still a useful measure to be aware of. Imagine if the IRS costed 30% of collected taxes to run instead of 0.4%. That would be a pretty telling sign that maybe we need to improve the IRS instead of raising taxing.
Of course the old cars you can still buy now are the reliable ones, because the unreliable ones have long been scrapped
In that case, the language model calls a search function and just repeats the result out its conversation context, not its training data. With that in mind it's not clear why it's ok for Bing itself to quote the source, but it stops being ok, when a chatbot does it.
Via a doctor.
Just like in any business.
Solutions for green hydrogen generation from sea water do exist, and are even competitive depending on volume produced. One (!) nuclear powered cargo vessel, built as a specialized ship for fleet support in the Russian arctic seaa and capable of going through 1.5 meters of ice (thus requiring the power output of a nuclear power plant, same reason Russian icebreakers use NPPs) and bein used for supply missions to the Russian naval base in Murmansk, doesn't really count.

Again, those other cargo ships, NS Savannah, Otto Hahn and the Japanese one, were all economical failures, the Japanese one was even a technological failure. That makes a grand total of around 7 civilian maritime NPPs in operation, all Russian, with less than one built per year. Global shipping needs hundreds of those, at cost point competitive with alternatives to be viable. That tech, or capacity to build those numbers, simply doesn't exist. heck, that is even mentioned as a direct quote in the Reuters article that is being paraded around.
Not sure I get what Gavin means. He's advocating just accepting liability... as though that isn't something with huge risk/monetary implications?!
Copyright doesn't stop the collection of content, it stops the copying, processing, & redistribution of content. Internet Archive acts as a library, so its widely accepted as fair-use when it makes collections of webpages available.

OpenAI's distribution is materially different to that of a library, so it's not a like-for-like comparison.

One of the main tests of copyright law (at least in the US) is if the entity distributing is _selling_ the copied/derivative work. It's unambiguous that OpenAI is selling something akin to derivative works, which is why NYT feels they can go after this claim. Meanwhile IA's operations don't create sales or incur profits, so while NYT's legal team may be able to establish that copies have been distributed, without the _sale_ aspect of the infringement, judges aren't guaranteed to side with NYT in an legally expensive PR nightmare.
Wishful thinking. Just as equally, NYT’s right to copyright over its material, in order to have a functional press, is enshrined the constitution. Anyone threatening that copyright could be unconstitutional.

I think we all agree that no one is entitled to “progress of science” at any cost - as a straw man, killing hundreds of newborn babies for scientific research is not great - so we use ethics and the legal system to find the line of what’s acceptable.

I don’t know exactly what NYT is asking for here, but the two options aren’t unconsented training vs nothing at all. NYT could license, for a fee, its content to OpenAI. It’s pretty common for scientists to have to pay for materials!
And that is about to change as well.
Isn't it totally normal to write articles / blog posts that effectively summarize, and often quote from, news articles?
This is very Japanese. My experience was that if you ask for help directly from a stranger, they will stammer and be flustered and not be so helpful; but if you stand around and look like the lost tourist you are, within a minute or two somebody will approach you and offer to help.
In the ever-evolving world of sports and entertainment, having a brand ambassador who embodies the spirit and values of a company is crucial. Cricadda, the most reliable platform for sports betting, has found the perfect fit in Bollywood actor Sanjay Dutt as their brand ambassador. With his charisma, passion for sports, and extensive fan following, Dutt is an ideal choice to represent Cricadda and its values.
No there isn't. Car quality has barely changed in those years.
uh, i guess this is a good idea, would reduce friction and the UPI is also great but the pricing only shows for whatapp/sms/email...
what about others?

i mean i could think about using this but for a software where the user has to login multiple times a day, this would get expensive
That, is an excellent point. However, the very reason I buy in them in the first place is that they proved themselves to me _at the time_. Believe it or not, what I'm saying is I never had a bad experience with cars from the 90s, in the 90s.