skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's actually what I'd be interested to learn. Presumably if a company can't fire someone easily they would have been motivated to find better predictors of future job success than a few short interviews.

Anecdotally I've seen companies skip even that process and hire anyone who seems even slightly qualified. The bar for "better hiring practices" is pretty low for me when the examples I've seen over 20 years in tech are either hire anyone to fill seats or throw obscure logic problems at candidates assuming that maps well to the role being hired for.
My strategy is just to https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/blocksite/ with the regex R:^https://www.youtube.com/$ and redirect that to https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions

With this strategy, I've often seen videos from my favorite YouTubers within minutes of them posting a new video. It also allows me to "finish" watching YouTube for the day.
I would say that the primary benefit of having journalists is not to produce articles for papers or magazines, but to have people who understand what’s happening and why. Communicating that understanding is also important, but if you don’t have the understanding, you can’t communicate it. I don’t see LLMs as playing any significant role in building understanding. Humans need to process (read and write
notes about) information to understand it. Also, the problem of LLM hallucination make them unsuitable for any serious use.
Sure, but Nokia's version might be the most recognisable to today's audience.
> I don't get why this is framed as "nowadays".

> "the same thing that always happened happens now, just increased by the presence of the internet".

Didn't you answer yourself? It's not that teens never had stress before, the article explores how they are coping with stress increase.
It's going to be hard to remove every single "shorthand descriptions of well-known entities" or other prompts that can be used to generate copyrighted or trademarked content. Sure, if you're not deliberately trying to generate infringing content, you can probably remove or discard those results, the trouble is the people who will try to trick the AI to generate this content, blocking those people is going to be impossible, without excluding any copyrighted or trademarked training material.

Another issue for generative AI is mentioned in the article: "Systems like DALL-E and ChatGPT are essentially black boxes." What happens when an AI is used to make decisions where the user/victim is entitled to know exactly why the AI did what it did? From a business and legal perspective I think the current AI solutions are dangerous and should be used very sparsely, exactly because even the creators can't point to the exact pieces of information that caused the AI to make the choices it did.
Database locking can be a bit surprising at times. I recently stumbled over CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS causing client timeouts - you might expect this to be near-instantaneous if the table exists, and it usually is, until it's not... because it always acquires an exclusive table lock, so it's blocked even by readers.
I picked apart some of the Dark Forces files myself as a kid. The GOB file was pretty obvious - I was familiar with Doom WADs, it's basically the same. I figured out the graphics formats by setting up VGA 320x200 mode with the contents of a .PAL file, and dumping the graphics file into screen memory. Then looking at the noise around the familiar patterns to figure out all the run/skip length stuff that wasn't just a pixel value.
I work in the environmental movement. I don't care if you recycle (2019)
Related, with 130 comments: "The Analog Thing: an open source, educational, low-cost modern analog computer (the-analog-thing.org)"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36165513
As the author, I can only agree :-)
If any of those results would be deemed infringing we can bid farewell to all fanart ever. Likewise, to all fanfiction. Or any original work that was merely heavily inspired by previous works. Like a lot of modern fantasy is basically Tolkien fan fiction. Or is Gandalf close enough to Merlin to claim prior art that is in public domain?
I like to find language nerds on HN :)
Hi - I am the author.

OsmAPP is my take on creating a universal OpenStreetMap app for broad public. It should be as easy to use as Google Maps, including clickable POIs and featuring as much of OSM data as possible. I want to educate the user about wikipedia-like experience of OSM, thus edit is possible even for anonymous visitors. It is has still a long way to go ;)

- Big thanks to Maptiler which processes raw OSM data and provides the vector tiles. https://www.maptiler.com/

- Geocoding is done by Photon API which allows autocomplete. The main OSM sites uses Nominatim API which can't. https://photon.komoot.io/

Also thank you very much for featuring OsmAPP here, perhaps someone will find it useful. :-)
The EU is already salivating over the idea
Fast Inference of Mixture-of-Experts Language Models with Offloading
yes, companies buying their own stock with free money to inflate their share prices is the stage of post-value, growth capitalism we're in.

and people wonder why apple stock price is constantly so high even though they've been creatively stagnant for almost a decade.
Looking at a copyrighted image posted by an author is not infringement. Printing that image onto a shirt and selling it is infringement.

That’s what OpenAI is doing.
I worked briefly as a journalist at The Times in yhr late 90s and this pretty much what it was then. It's partly why I didn't pursue that career.
The shift registers are still there on the passive panels, that's the end bit...I was talking about the controller that drives the image to the panels. It sends one row at a time, to one panel...the panels are daisy chained. So, if you have 2 panels, each 32 pixels wide, it's only sending one row of 32 pixels at a time. Add in PWM for brightness, and a PWM rate for variable brightness that's fast enough to be viewed outdoors, and as you mention, more leds per pixel for 2+ colors...it outpaces a normal MCU pretty quickly.

Starting in the late 80's They did use CPLDs and FPGAs to keep up. Here's one example on a low-resolution, 90's single color sign. It's the type you saw at movies theaters a lot. The controller was very typical, most were very similar.

https://wls.wwco.com/ledsigns/m-500/inside-the-m500.php

That's an Altera EPM3032A.

Another single color, low resolution sign controller, from 2005: https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/identifying-an-ol... Scroll down and you'll see the CPLD.

Another from 1999: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/1bMAAOSw~tFgDRCT/s-l1600.jpg
Don’t worry there are many people out there who have copies of it all, there is no way they manage to get the cat back in the bag even if all governments work together on this.

But yea get your own copies whenever possible
Let's just agree to disagree. You blame landlords, I blame poor giovernment policies.
UK has these signs everywhere
Fitting a whole game into a QR code [video]
I might be a bit idealistic, but I've always believed that the core purpose of art and publishing should be to influence culture and society, not just to make a heap of money. That's why I feel original work needs its protection, but it should enter the public domain much sooner to fuel creativity and inspiration. We should be thinking in terms of a few years for this transition, not decades.
Oh, right! I parsed the last sentence in a weird way I guess. Also thanks rcthompson for the precision about intervals being inclusive on both ends in R.
creation <> competition.

I agree with your premise but the chess analogy falls flat.

We might, legitimately, see an enormous dropoff in people creating original works of literary, musical, and visual art (without AI).
But how is that any different from creating an image from scratch? If I make a logo and use it for my business, but it turns out to be very similar to one already being used by another company, it’s the same situation.

I think the main concern here is with the top 1,000 or so brands/copyrights which seem fairly straightforward to deal with using the method I described.
The solution could be great. I really don't like the way culture always goes to the same tropes, calling any potential innovation "out of Star Trek" (with attendant distorted expectations), right down to expecting an interface based on literal hand-waving in Minority Report. If copyright held works ("USS Enterprise") could be removed, yet the actual essential concepts (space ship, naming things) retained, it would be a tremendous breakthrough.

I think what NYT &c want is for large companies like Apple to pay them for access to their works. This to me is the wrong path, just leading to more silos and walled gardens, special access for the elite.

An alternative is base models trained on Wikipedia and public domain (science journals, etc). Foundations could support high quality, well rounded current events reporting. Wikimedia provides a good model for this, with referenced summaries that I don't think can be said to reasonably violate copyright. The models would need to be improved to support references, or RAG attribution would have to be widely used when bringing in works that have a current copyright.
US media is a huge cultural influence. It takes a ridiculous amount of mindspace globaly. However, with youtube&tiktok this seems to be changing - the most important influence is not from Hollywood but ”random” youtubers. So, ”content” is waning in influence for sure, unlike hardcore national security things like US dollar, the carrier fleet or ballistic nukes. Or AI.
Okay thank you! Question have you found it useful so far?
1. Any feedback on the analytics page ?
I agree with you proposing this operator to simplify the specific (but not uncommon!) situation you describe. But i don't think, it exposes a problem to be solved but rather an antipattern to be avoided. Consider the following example in which mytransform is some function i want to apply to a part of the dataset:

mydata <- read.csv('mydata.csv')
mydata['score'] <- mytransform(mydata['score'])

This can be simplified with your proposed operator:

mydata['score'] <|> mytransform()

An upgrade in elegance, i like it. But in R, a language which is commonly used switching between scripts and the REPL, with an IDE which by default captures your workspace so all your variables etc are restored the next time you resume the session, in this environment i feel like variables should be used as constants as much as possible. Mutating a variable (as in my example) creates room for confusion: Does mydata contain the raw csv data or the transformed data? Did i already evaluate this line in the REPL or did i not? What happens if i evaluate this line twice? Many people i know tend to "jump around" in their scripts, not following the written order of operations. This creates potentially irreproducible environments.
My proposed solution is treating all variables (or at least as many as possible) like constants:

mydata <- read.csv('mydata.csv')
mydata_transformed <- transform(mydata)

Now i always know what a variable contains because each variable contains exactly the same value, independent of when i evaluate.

But nevertheless; i kinda went on a tangent here and strictly speaking, the problem i describe only arises from careless user behavior (which is quite prevalent in statistics though). Aside from this kind of behavior, i think this operator is an elegant idea!
Let's just say that that sphere of the software dev community isn't exactly universally seen as competent work, more like the orthodoxy of ~15 years ago that's now increasingly, and in my opinion rightfully, being put into question for its bad complexity and performance trade-offs when applied beyond textbooks and conference talks. And this is being diplomatic compared to others.

I'm certainly not saying there isn't something to learn from them though, I've read a bunch of them, but after seeing countless wasted debugging hours and projects devolve into a complete mess of patterns where you have to ping-pong between files, functions, and patterns providing little to no value is astounding. The option to do non-clever code is seemingly insulting to the self-professed architect, but it is in my own experience at least, vastly more maintainable and productive, not because it results in "clean" code - it's usually pretty dirty and nothing to write home about, but because reading even a page-long flat procedural function that's just doing its thing, is much more straight-forward than ping-ponging between some clever architect's conglomeration of decaying design patterns.

Having the "meat" of the code available with a minimal amount of abstractions/layers also makes it much easier to adapt according to performance requirements without having to propagate changes throughout half the application due to it being entangled in pattern abstractions. (on that note, it sounds like hmeh is trying to work around this problem with abstractions by doing a significant amount artificial partitioning. But that would be solving a mess you've created yourself in the first place). Finally it will still be dumb & dirty code a couple years from now, no need to have all those design patterns internalized.

People promoting these things will of course then just blame it on the dev and call them average, or lacking in experience, because they can't identify and combine the various clever patterns correctly, they "are doing it wrong", and that's where I believe the above narcissistic tendencies I called out comes from.
Napster hit scale too.
If employees are purposefully isolated from the company's expenses, they'll waste money left and right.

Also, they don't care since any incremental savings aren't shared with the employees. Misaligned incentives. In that mentally, it's best to take while you can.
As pointed out in another comment on this post [0], it would be an "FPAA," [1] and it has been manufactured.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38812160

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field-programmable_analog_ar...
Maptiler tiles prefer Wikidata over OSM. More info is here: https://github.com/zbycz/osmapp/issues/221
In English you can go off the road in a metaphorical way too
Answered somewhat what I mean by at least the "code smells" and idiosyncrasies (competency was probably too harsh with given the amount of info) in a reply to another user.

> Your arrogance precludes a fruitful discussion.

This was specific to the tendencies in other replies to defer to your (or your team's) brilliance/experience as the answer to why your setup is not suspicious, but excellent. Not sure what can come out of a discussion when that's the answer to everything, well nice for you, but a setup that doesn't scale with employee count (and thus competency/experience/interest differences) isn't exactly something that you can go around bragging about.
Well, climate change and the energy crisis will cause global instability for sure. Preparing your society to live with less energy is also a strategic objective: there will be wars for energy (but that's not new, there have been invasions for control over oil in the past), but it seems quite obvious that the more reliant your society is on fossil fuel, the harder it will be. And I would rather have countries degrow than count on the fact that their military is powerful enough to screw the others (which again would not be new).

I don't see that as a fairy tale land.
> Likewise, how difficult is it to just use descriptive tools to describe Mario-like images [1] and then remove these results from anyone prompting for "video game plumber"?

This approaches impossibility at scale.
If ML cannot create copyrightable or patented material under current legal precedent, than shouldn't the prompt output be considered public domain regardless of content semblance?

The paradox should still violate Trademarks due to similarity, but likely cannot infringe on copyright content under prior legal opinion... if at least 80% different from prior art. The lawyers are likely going to have to do a special firm survey to figure this one out.

Bag of popcorn ready =)
Why isn't the solution a strong disclaimer when the user generates images along the lines of "beware that the images produced may not comply with copyright laws in your country" etc etc?

Any artist can privately draw a picture of Mario, what's so different about having an LLM generate that image?
So if you want to be a professional writer, go into PR or lobbying.
Ah right, capitalism hasn't ever come in the way of the steady march of technology. This is the reason why we don't have monopolies controlling energy generation. Nor are we limited to a couple of choices of OSs or phones...etc and books, art, movies, music consumption and creation are perfectly aligned... Right? /s

IMO, what's most likely is some sort of licensing model between the AI companies and the 'big content providers' (remember most content on the web these days is not owned by the person who created it, wasn't always like that). The smaller companies then would be forced to live with either being scraped or ending up being 'invisible'.
Google directs you to the original work. It doesn’t present you a derivative work based on the original. That is, original author, presumably, benefits from distribution. AI, on the other hand, slurps multiple original works, chews them up and gives you something average but close enough, and not any specific work in particular.
If making money is the only reason to create maybe it’s good if they stop.
Summarise cached articles with Mixtral-8x7B on pure CPU
Trademarks already include text descriptions and images of the item being trademarked. This is already in the USPTO database.
Suzuki is not better. They knowingly sell cars with rusted seats: https://twitter.com/EmrahAslanPADRE/status/17392971833193350...
FWIW, the best way is probably to travel by other means, e.g.. train or bus.

With that said: I do realise that some locations are hard to reach without air travel.

It can be quite tricky to find serious organisations to donate to for the purpose you mentioned.

One organisation that I believe is serious is Naturarvet. The name translates roughly to “The Legacy of Nature”. Their mission is to protect old forests in Sweden. In Sweden we have lots of very young forests. But we don’t actually have much old forests, and this organisation is trying to change that. Nearly all forests in Sweden are used for making lumber or pulp. So Naturarvet don’t actually plant any trees, but instead try to preserve forests to let them grow old. As 'MrVandemar pointed out, planting trees is only part of the job, then we have to refrain from chopping them down.

If you’re looking for something in the US, Sierra Club Foundation might be a good place to donate to. They have a score of 98% on Charity Navigator.

There might be similar organisations in other locales, but these are the I know of. You can find more here: https://www.charitynavigator.org/discover-charities/best-cha...

Hope this helps! Would be interesting to hear your thoughts regarding my suggestions (:

Links, all in English:

https://naturarvet.se/en/bevara-skog/skogsrutor-och-paraplyt...

https://naturarvet.se/en/bevara-skog/bidra/ge-en-gava-pa-90-...

https://www.sierraclubfoundation.org/

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/946069890
Ironically I think this change in design makes it actually impossible, since now both lines appear to be tyre treads and they still come too close together.
Probably hindus ate not that interested in the bible.
I also saw this recommended in the past for assigning functions (like serving as a ground plane) to layers depending on the numnber of layers that your board is going to have:

https://web.archive.org/web/20201112034911/http://www.hottco...

https://web.archive.org/web/20201224132837/http://www.hottco...

...
Tell that to NVMe zoned namespaces.
Outside of RAM, immutable data structures exist for device technology (e.g. MLC NAND) inherent reasons.
If Materialism Is True, the United States Is Probably Conscious
Chess, at some point, and after you move beyond the opening, is creation.

People didn't stop painting because photography exists, they created new forms of photography. People didn't stop writing music or using new / unique instruments when synths and programs came along.

I genuinely believe that people will keep creating, it's in our nature, and we also like things made by other humans, because we can relate to them.
If you release a media with copyrighted content it is IMO first and foremost your problem. Now if you have some contract with the guitarist that specifies that he produced a sample he has the rights to and sold it to you, but he clearly wasn't truthful, you can maybe pass the liability to him. This is not, however, how people will hse generative models
If you use Dall-E you are not paying OpenAI to buy the rights to a piece Dall-E has produced. I see it more akin to hiring a musician to play for you for an hour, or a painter to paint for you. You are paying OpenAI to paint you something, but you I think OpenAI would never enter a contract which states that they are selling you the rights to a work.
This is something that has always bothered me about RAG. It seems that it’s fine for first order relevance, like a search engine, but for knowledge there needs to be some kind of rumination stage where it revisits the entire corpus to find information that has a second order relevance to round out its ‘understanding’.

You might be able to approximate by chunking and globbing the chunks and searching for those, as well as having the LLM summarize and extract data and search for those items as well.
In practice it clearly isn't airtight, otherwise the foam wouldn't have been able to end up inside patients. Not sure whether it would have been easier to design an airtight circui, or to ensure that the insulation is wrapped in something that effectively separates it from the air circuit.

Either way, this is pretty shitty. These machines are pretty expensive (and someone makes a hefty profit on them, because most patients rent theirs). Seems like the least they could have done was make sure it was worth the money.
The static shape of a protein doesn't automatically give you a prediction of its functional properties. There's a hell of a lot more biophysics going on that we have no predictive models for that are needed to understand catalysis, allostery, assembly, etc etc etc. We don't even have good comprehensive data for any of that (compared to sequences or structure) to model with.

Fold prediction is an incredibly useful tool for scientists and genetic engineers to help design new proteins, but it doesn't magically solve molecular or cell biology. Designing new functions and mechanisms is still going to involve a huge amount of labor and brute-force experimentation.
It is clear now that Syrian leader was willing to murder hundreds of thousands of people, so were Iranian leaders. Moving against them early "could have" avoided large part of the Middle East casualties.
It is peculiar that there are strong discussion around crypto and Coinbase was in S12 batch [1] and one of the top by revenue. Paul Graham continues to praise and recognize how prescient Brian Armstrong was [2]. To be objective there were other companies in the space before Coinbase that are still alive [3].

[1] https://www.ycombinator.com/topcompanies/revenue

[2] https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1740936771192623175

[3] https://www.coinfabrik.com/blog/oldest-blockchain-companies/