skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Kind of off topic, but seeing “Join Discord” in the main nav for this product makes me sad.

Discord truly is the least efficient and enjoyable way to engage around new products, yet many founders are doing it because it’s what the other cool kids are doing.

Who has the time to troll through some random product’s Discord server? I’ll never understand this trend. Discord is awesome for voice chatting while gaming, but terrible for building communities around products.
There have been issues where a computer science professor claimed an LLM was verbatim generating the code he wrote.

Many individual artists have similar claims [0].

Now NYT has.

Individuals cannot foot the bill for lawyers so they have no choice but to see it all while being unable to do anything. NYT apparently has the muscle to pull it off.

Morality or ethics don't stand a chance here, it is all about who can march the largest army of lawyers which clearly, is the Tech bro clan.

I'm sad for all the creators. And of course, those marketing it as "synthetic intelligence" are on a whole another level.

[0]. https://youtu.be/jsggOAMQX3Q
NYT's ask and my own are never going to happen, but I think forcing the models to be public domain would be the best outcome. It was trained on the creative output of a substantial portion of everyone online going back decades, including my own.
Pretty hard to be skeptical about climate change after the last year of storms, heat waves, fires and floods, not to mention melting glaciers, rising seas. This ain't normal weather.
Why is it unreasonable to request they retrain without their content exactly?
The end result will be that OpenAI pays the Times a few hundred million dollars for a license. Chump change for OpenAI, but real money for the Times.
I can't see how, judging by news from the past year alone.

Nearly all of Evernote’s remaining staff has been laid off: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36609641

Evernote to raise prices for Personal and Professional accounts: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36064245

Fed up with Evernote; what are your recommendations?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36781119

Evernote will restrict free users to 50 notes starting December 4: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38478398
Brexit has failed for UK, say clear majority of Britons – poll
It's now 34 and now I know what it is I'm not looking up gingering at 31!
I am the technical product owner for a product which is a deep learning based computer vision platform. It is a deep tech product featuring generative AI and foundation models designed to address our domain-specific challenges. I am located in the AI research division, working alongside research scientists holding PhDs and research engineers.

My contributions are multi-faceted:

1. Despite having a technical background in software engineering and lacking expertise in machine learning/deep learning, I am actively building my skills in DL. This enables me to understand the DL features (training, inference loops, segmenation, object detection and fine-tuning etc) required by the domain and how they should be developed in the backend and frontend.

2. On occasions, I also delve directly into DL code to solve some minor bugs to enhance my understanding which allows me to make more informed decisions.

The DL skill set proves beneficial during customer product onboarding sessions because the customers are technical and ask lots of deep learning questions. It also helps in the effective communication with both frontend and backend teams, helping them visualize the problem and determine the necessary workflows to support DL processes.

So, yes. I am upskilling myself in DL to stay relevant in the AI product management.
Is that what you’d tell the police if you were caught selling pirated copies of Blu Rays?
I don't mind if there's a little piece of me somewhere in that model!
I noticed that SooperLooper is missing. One of my all time favorites.
I’m not a lawyer but it seems to me that the infringement would be in the publication of the output of the models, not in the mere existence of the models.

Let’s imagine a really obvious case of copyright infringement - where a shady publisher buys up copywritten books, assembles them into a private library, then prints and sells copies. The infringement is the “prints and sells”, right? Not the “assembles a private library”?

If we accept that ChatGPT is committing copyright infringement (which at least seems true if it returns big chunks of the copywritten material verbatim), I don’t think you can get from there to compelling deletion of the model.
Once you start doing serialized PRs then doing squash merges increases your chance of a nightmare.

For example you have PR 1 and PR 2 (based on 1). Squash merge PR 1 into main. But while 2 is under review someone merges in 3 into main and you need to bring it into 2 to resolve some conflicts. You’re now hosed because the changes done in 1 are now present TWICE. First in 1’s commit, and also in the squash commit. Now you’re resolving all of 1’s changes as merge conflicts.

This may sound like a contrived examples but it has happened to me EVERY time I’ve worked somewhere that demands squash commits. And this is one of the reasons I hate squash commits.

“Makes the history prettier” vs “Rewriting the actual commit history”. Telling the truth > pretty.
I'd argue that training LLM's on news sites makes them less useful anyway. It's not like these sites do any meaningful research. They just disseminate information readily available elsewhere.
I do find it odd that almost all of the negative coverage of crypto, SBF, FTX, etc. has avoided his political donations. Unless I'm misunderstanding what happened here (and please correct me if I'm wrong), but it very much seems like FTX stole money from regular people to use for lobbying and influencing elections. I can't think of anything more anti-democratic than that.
Not the kernel, but yes: the runtime lies about its architecture.
While I don’t necessarily agree with the NYT, I fail to see how or why LLMs are entitled to consume other peoples work for their own material gain.
I wonder if this works for Stable Diffusion as well...
I don't think it's practical. It would almost be like training from scratch.
Gotta have that "gluten free" label.
Can someone with actual fundamental understanding of LLMs explain to me why they think it's perfectly legal to train models on copyrighted material? I don't know enough about this. Please don't answer by asking chatgpt.
They can’t. Thousands of other orgs would consider that precedent and get in line.
> Many of those vehicles are along the lines of "electric auto-rickshaw with a shell"

Ever ridden in a BYD, MG, Vinfast, Nexon, or an IONIQ?

To people who aren't car enthusiasts (aka the majority), those cars have a better form factor than the equivalent Toyota, Hyundai, Suzuki, or Mitsubishi that people would normally buy.

> but lack of "small daily drivers" is definitely not what is holding back US EV sales

It isn't. It's the fact that an EV costs as much as a the median salary in the US in 2023 [0] ($50,000 is the Median wage, and the average transaction price for an EV is $53,000 [1])

> pretty clear "an affordable daily driver" is not really what US drivers want

The overwhelming majority of car sales in America are used, not new [2]. The average used car sells for around $26k [3] compared to $48k for new [4]

That implies that affordability takes the front seat in most purchasing decisions.

[0] - https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm

[1] - https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/how-much-electric-car-cost/

[2] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/183713/value-of-us-passe...

[3] - https://www.kbb.com/car-news/average-used-vehicle-price-fall...

[4] - https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/buying-a-car/people-spe...
You should be able to easily reconstruct the parent/child relationships from the OP's order/indent encoding scheme though (at least if you ensured that only "valid" indents are stored, no child without a parent, etc)

So I think the easiest way would be to store as order/indent first and later migrate to parent/child when you implement features that need it.

The only change I'd do is to define "indent" more abstractly as the item's depth in the tree and not literally the number of spaces you want to render. That makes it a lot easier to spot invalid data, makes later migration easier - and also gives you more UI flexibility, because it allows you to change the rendering method or make it configurable per user (nested <ul>'s/<ol>'s, tabs, 8 spaces, 4 spaces, 1 space, etc)
See also, interestingly, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_redefinition_of_the_SI_ba...
That happens to basically everything the true crime followers get their hands on. They are all about narrative.
> I didn’t go to lectures. They were way too early in the afternoon for me to get out of bed for.

...

> This appreciation of which texts were important, and what I was being invited to write about happened much faster than would have been the case pre-Internet. I really do wonder how students do this today (get in touch if you can tell me!).

Maybe listening to people who are well versed in the subject and the current state of the academic conversation? You can find such people lecturing, sometimes ;)
Why is that their problem? If they didn’t get permission to use copyrighted content why is it unreasonable for retraining to occur without their content?

And please spare me the humans learn too nonsense. Computers are not humans.
If you’re trying to save a bunch of money by ditching 3 $10-20 monthly services, you’re probably targeting the wrong thing.

If $60/mo for the household prevents even just two unplanned outings per month, (which the cost per each would likely start at $60) is that not a cost saving measure in itself?

The biggest things besides housing that people often pay are car payments, insurance for your vehicles, and utilities. Where can you save there instead? If saving is important to you then maybe ditch the car payment and get something you can pay for in cash, replace the old furnace for a high efficiency heat pump, etc.
Me neither, as long as I get to own it along with everyone else!
There's at least a bit of work put into security, yes.
I have also discovered that certain implementations of dd have a progress printing functionality that can be used for similar purposes. You can put a "dd status=progress" in a pipeline and it will print the amount and rate of data being piped!

This dd option is not as nice as pipe viewer but it's handy for when pv isn't around for some reason.
You want him to play League of Legends from prison?
There is no production line for the current generation bolts. They're building a production line for a new architecture (MY2025+), but there are some significant changes to that design that many people might consider negative (e.g. lack of Android Auto/carplay) alongside the standard risks of buying a first generation architecture.
There are transformer-based approaches to vision models. It should work for those.
He may be “author, futurist, thinker and systems architect,” but he doesn’t know how law works. He’s citing a prayer for relief against the specific defendants sued. A court doesn’t have power to order relief against a party not before it. Whatever models may exist beyond those made by the specific defendants in this case are not the targets of that language.
The article says they beat Rainbolt head to head.
Yes; not a lawyer, but as far as I can tell yes (and physical media too); you can, in advance (which I do), in any format you want without restriction - it’s just FLAC/MP3 etc. No DRM.

I do prefer buying full digital discography when available, because it’s such a good deal. For $30 or so, I get years and years of albums, while still supporting an artist with a much larger sum than I could via a streaming platform.

Admittedly, I’m still also using YT Music precisely for the reason I described above, and also because it makes it much easier to discover new music, compared to Bandcamp (something I’m hoping to potentially address in my own alternative).
The blackberry passport had a square screen as well, I thought it was pretty great.
I have similar sentiment in the UK but the leaf has the wrong fast-charge port! Everything is CCS apart from the nissan leaf and a few other older things. Give it another year or two and finding a chademo fast charger is going to be fairly challenging compared to CCS (where 100+ KW ones are becoming more and more prevalent now)
This is what Google promised, and I hope the near future of AI is able to deliver on.
Courses like this is what makes me keep going, I’m pretty new to EE and PCB design so the learning curve is somewhat difficult since I have to look up for resources everywhere for the specific things I want to make. I tried KiCad at first but ended up using Flux as my main design tool because of two things: If I’m stuck on something, instead of having to google the answers and accommodate their context with mine, I instead ask their AI which already has the context of my project.
And second one is that there is such a strong sense of community and collaboration, it makes me feel like I never have to do anything alone. I mean the whole library is made by other people (as far as I know)
I know I won’t have to Google everything at a later point but for now it’s what works for me.
just what i was looking for thx.
> You’re saying it’s better to have no high quality media at all than to have any form of DRM?

I get your point, but there’s plenty of high quality media produced without financial incentive or with alternate funding schemes (donations, gov grants, patronage). I think hyperbole weakens the argument here.
Shouldn't that last point be fixable by specifying a scaling factor in winecfg?
> Or... things are about to get worse for copyright holders.

If that's so, things are about to get worse for everyone, too. With little to no protection against AI, no one will be incentivized to create new IPs, whether they're books, drawings, songs. Or even films and games, when AI is able to also generate those in the (possibly near) future.
That's pretty much the entire point of many publications. You think readers of Financial Times aren't reading FT in the hopes of getting their own material gain? What about Wall St analysts? Consuming something for gain is not copyright infringement, distributing it for gain is.
That ship has sailed: https://www.hyrumslaw.com/ and, of course, the obligatory xkcd https://xkcd.com/1172/

When I read that rant comment, I thought of "oh, so it's microservices writing to a shared byte array" in a nod to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
A lot of analogies break down here. This is just an early salvo in many arguments to come, that will need reasoned debate by competent people, judged by wise leaders. I really hope we can have that debate.
Speak for yourself. People who make their living in (actually) creative fields don’t have the luxury. We’ll see how all the brogrammers feel about industrial scale plagiarism 5 years from now when Gen AI models code better than any human.
Would it be reasonable for NYT to demand that all humans forget anything learned from NYT articles?

The NYT is asserting a drastic expansion of copyright, to cover not just the specific expression of ideas but the ideas themselves.

We should be wary of AI companies, and copyright is woefully unprepared for our new world, but the answer is not to change the system so creators retain infinite control over who can even remember their work.
And who will preach morality, ethics, ownership, the right to retain your creative endeavours and benefit from them so that overall society keeps progressing and there's enough reward for putting labour into something creative and genuine?

Before someone comes up with the argument that LLMs are creative and genuine, yes as a technique they are. The art form, the theory and science is marvellous result of human ingenuity. Hats off.

But the end result, is not.

Just like tape recorder is a great invention but the pirated music recorded on it is not.
This. The models are out there. Maybe they will just be illicitly shared but even if no new models are trained from scratch I suspect there will be many ways to use extend existing models without going back to scraped images.

I always felt that we already had a solution - I can already get all those images from a web search. Where the law currently intervenes is when I try and distribute works based on close copies of them. Why is this insufficient?
The dozen brands that have paused ads on X amid ongoing crisis
As I mentioned in another reply, this isn’t just about saving money. Sure, I don’t want to throw money away if possible, but it’s also about educating our kids about tradeoffs and not spoiling them.
I basically agree with all that. I think I'd further say that the way any kind of practical regulation shakes out, it may never make sense for individuals to own self-driving cars.

If we are to hold the creator of self-driving systems responsible for any poor behavior of their creations (as we very well should!), then they must have both the ability to be certain that all of their deployed software and hardware is always in the intended correct working order, and the ability to perform fixes and updates on demand of either themselves or some regulating agency.

Therefore, it seems pointless for it to ever be possible for an individual to "own" such a thing. They would inevitably be mandated to never attempt to modify the system and to accept any updates and maintenance tasks immediately on the creator's demand. So why should any reasonable individual, or banks who would have to be writing loans to those individuals, want to own such a thing when they have so little control over it and so many liabilities?

Consider a situation like - the car has 6 laser/lidar sensors. It is designed to continue operating as well as possible if one of them malfunctions. If one of them does infact malfunction, who is responsible for deciding when to replace it and paying for such service? If you truly own such a vehicle, wouldn't you be the one paying for it? And if you're paying for it, how could you not be the one deciding exactly when it happens? So then inevitably some people would put it off as long as possible and have the vehicle operating in a degraded condition. Maybe it could try to refuse to operate until serviced, but when? Maybe when you're out of town somewhere, or when you have an important meeting to make it to later?

Liability, even conditional, for the end user doesn't seem like a very good solution either. Is it really a good system for every unfortunate incident to become a legal battle between an individual owner and what would necessarily be a gigantic mega-corporation with a fat legal budget for who is really responsible? Yeah, no.

So I think I just proved that self-driving cars pretty much always have to be operated as a taxi-like system as Waymo etc currently do. Lidar sensor breaks? Not my problem, the service needs to send another one, no matter what the location - it can't go to any location it couldn't send a replacement to anyways. If there's any problems, there's always a clear party responsible - a giant wealthy mega-corp that is very easy to regulate and fine and capable of fixing the whole fleet fast.

Am I missing something here? Maybe, but I don't see it right now.
It’s currently not explicitly legal or not. There are lawsuits in progress to determine that very answer.
*Axel Springer, not to be confused with Springer Nature; I’d imagine most HN readers outside Germany would use unqualified ‘Springer’ for the latter since they’re a big publisher of academic journals/texts, but the two are unrelated.
On cue, the "it's all right wing propaganda" dodge.

Bloomberg is not part of the German "right wing", and also not known for disseminating propaganda. Furthermore, the "right" is just as responsible for the mess as the "left". The current applicable laws were passed during a grand-coalition under Merkel. This is not a party-political issue, but a German issue.

And Pro Tip: if you can't actually counter the facts, trying to denounce is not helpful. Because, as you can't counter the facts, you are admitting that "the right wing" actually has the facts correct.

From the piece you cited as a counter: "Einige Industriebetriebe denken mangels Billig-Gas darüber nach, ihre Werke ins Ausland zu verlagern, zumal der Strom hierzulande auch nicht günstig ist. Es geht um energieintensive Branchen wie Chemie, Papier, Glas oder Baustoffe."

Hmm...companies that need energy are thinking of moving their production elsewhere, because electricity is also not cheap in Germany. Not sure how that makes your point that renewables are "cheaper", when German electricity is more expensive than in other countries. Which it is.
Computers are not humans. Why do people continue to make these inane comparisons?

Show me a human can remember even half of what GPT4 was trained on and I’ll concede the point.
The cheap money thing doesn’t pass muster, Cisco had yearly layoffs for the past ~15 years even when interest rates were zero. Google was founded when rates were equivalent to what they are now, and as a high revenue company not even as sensitive to borrowing rates as startups and funds.

You’re repeating a cliche without thinking about it deeply.
Simply duplicating copyrighted data is itself a crime in certain jurisdictions.
From https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-30/ftx-founder-sam-bankm...

"He had been extradited in December 2022 from the Bahamas, where FTX was based, to face the seven earlier charges. The Bahamas has yet to grant its consent for a trial on the remaining charges, however, leaving the timetable uncertain, prosecutors said."

Sorry to burst the bubble of the conspiracy theorists.
> Morality or ethics don't stand a chance here, it is all about who can march the largest army of lawyers which clearly, is the Tech bro clan.

There’s diminishing returns in this regard. Me suing Google has this dynamic, but the NYT is large enough to hire perfectly effective legal counsel. 1000 top lawyers won’t necessarily beat 100 top lawyers.
Perhaps they haven't, and they only seek to stir up a witch hunt.
He’s really snarky in the replies too, telling Simon Willison “your takes are usually better. Do better next time please. :)” [0]

So that’s a window into this guy’s personality.

[0] https://x.com/dan_jeffries1/status/1741126530590294264
Also Nitter loads in about 1 second. Just compared with Twitter, Twitter takes 14 seconds.
There are two components here that both already have an answer in the real world.

1) making owners of cars responsible for (most) traffic infractions

2) issues caused by third parties, with the first party bearing initial liability

Number 1 is surprisingly common in overseas countries. Some of those countries have figured that your garden variety traffic fines clog up the courts, so they’ve lifted simple garden variety infractions out of criminal law and placed them in administrative law.

In doing so, they’ve made the owner of the car (i.e., license plate holder) responsible for these types of traffic infractions, who then receive their fines by mail (which are technically settlement offers to avoid prosecution) with a generous appeal window, after which the fine is finalized (doesn’t end up on criminal record because it’s not criminal anymore).

This frees up court resources, allows for ticketing without stops, and shifts responsibility to the car's owner, who then, if applicable, can settle it with whomever they borrow their car to.

For more severe infractions, it’s still tied to the driver, with the car owner being the initial presumptive driver.

Number 2 is a common situation in the US and overseas and is resolved by going after whoever is responsible (e.g., manufacturer) after the fact to be made whole again.
It’s similar to going after the seller of the stolen goods after the original owner takes back their property from you in jurisdictions where property rights don’t transfer after stolen goods are sold.