skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Contrary to conservative talking points that the CBC is some sort of pro-liberal propaganda machine, the CBC just runs the same news, with roughly the same slants, as the rest of the media here. The anti-EV hit pieces get clicks. Clicks bring money. Money keeps CBC afloat. Those kind of articles frankly everywhere right now, likely because someone is paying to propagate them, and the outrage they generate ("guvnment forcing EVs on us") sells.
Translation? Summary? I don’t think there is a wide audience able to consume Turkish content on HN
I thought of one more: He didn't mention five spice tofu -- make it 21!. That stuff is delicious. It is a great snack (plain -- no cooking required) when drinking with friends.
Every now and then it's helpful! I hate how it tends to "guess" for me, though. And it's not hard questions, it's exactly the kind of boilerplate it's supposed to be good at. I'll ask things like how to connect to the Amazon API in Python for some quick boilerplate, or about a built in library in Python, and it'll just make stuff up. I often have to yell at it to not make stuff up 1 or 2 times before it gives me "real" code.

If I'm doing something obscure or niche forget it, it'll just make up a bunch of nonsense. But I wish it was easier to get it to say "I think it should work like x but I'm not sure about y part" instead of just going all in and making stuff up.

We need to train it on old LessWrong posts so it learns about degrees of belief and such lol
I added Markdown mode to chalk.ist
It's now possible to render markdown blocks on https://chalk.ist/.

How to use:

- Click '+ Markdown Block'

- Add markdown content

- Click 'Render'

- Copy image to clipboard or download
That’s quite a lot of metaphysical speculation for a conclusion that is all but clear.
Clickbait. Author is using the word wiki while all he wants and actually do is a ... regular website (which obviously hugo is fit for).

The essence of a wiki is to be a collaborative website while author is expressly mentionning he doesn't want to use a wiki software because he doen't need collaborative functions.
Robotics profit-sharing model shows early success
Communism is the alternative.

Always has been.
New theory seeks to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
That idea does not explain the shortsightedness epidemic in south East Asia.

If it’s genetic, the numbers should stay relatively stable.

If its from a behaviour, there might be variation
I am currently in my 20s and decided to basically leave social media when I was 17.
It was really difficult for the first couple of months because I was pretty isolated thanks to the pandemic. Now I can tell you that I see the benefits of not being in the loop of local toxic events.
If you do "Golden robot holding a lazer gun in a sci-fi setting, cinematic" it will give you a golden robot that doesn't look in the style of C3PO or Star Wars.

"Droid" is actually a Star Wars term [1], and saying you want it from a "classic sci-fi movie" is asking it to reference a real thing that is well known. Reid is intentionally pushing it that way to fill his agenda and these terms are not as generic as he's making out.

[1]:https://trademarks.justia.com/756/52/droid-75652542.html
What LLM are you using? I use ChatGPT and StableDiffusion semiregularly. Maybe I just suck at prompts, I find them very hit and miss, even for very simple tasks.
The EU cannot agree that the Do Not Track flag on web browsers is legally binding but big content should be able to create legally binding flags on their websites to avoid scraping of data? Seems odd!
What Is Utilitarianism?
The Most Important Technology of 2023 Wasn't AI
LOL. "Humble"? To me, chicken breast meat is humble.
One of the challenges of quantum computing is getting the useful results back into "classical" mode, where you can use them. Theoretically that's one of the hurdles of getting better theoretical performance than a classical computer. What you describe is more akin to how a GPU works, but in this case, you can't "just get" the result from the GPU.
Hey, don’t look at me. I always say please and thank you when I play with LLMs.
But what do you do if the child needs to refer to the parent, or the parent needs to know its children. An illusion of a tree is only useful insofar as you don't really care about it being a tree.

I structure things as trees because I want to be able to traverse them. When a user sees your tree and expects to be able to do tree operations on it, but discovers its just an illusion and they can do no such thing, then dissatisfaction sets in.
I think you're on the right track here. For instance, I have no idea whether or not Brazil has a universal healthcare system, so if the article was about a company in Brazil, such a note would be relevant to me. The USA population includes approximately between a quarter and a half of the world's English speakers, depending on whether you count English as a second language or not. Therefore it's reasonable to assume that the majority of English speakers won't have a personal connection to the USA or necessarily have knowledge of their politics.

As for this specific article about the Big Three, the statement in question was added by user GoldDragon[1], who was banned for 'sock-puppetry' in 2011 and, by their edit history, appears to have hailed from Ontario, Canada.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Big_Three_(automo...
> “General Li, I want to assure you that the American government is stable and everything is going to be okay,” Milley said, according to Peril. “We are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you. General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise … If there was a war or some kind of kinetic action between the United States and China, there’s going to be a buildup, just like there has been always in history.”

From the outstanding Atlantic article https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/11/general...
We don't feed or house tons of people right now, despite those resources.
Can't both be done? Can't society provide for both in immediate danger as well as those suffering less?

Do we need to stop tending for people's mental health because many are not eating?

Maybe the effort involved in categorising, understanding and prioritising suffering would be better used... well... actually reducing suffering.

Because when we think like this we risk dismanteling efforts that are really important, like protecting other animals from abandonment or abuse, or protecting the environment, because we risk putting them in lower hierarchical priority compared to our own most immediate form of suffering.
For other readers, TVP = Textured vegetable protein. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textured_vegetable_protein

I only see that term used in India. Is it used elsewhere?
Wonder. Do Cliff Notes have to pay royalties to the underlying material?

Cliff Notes contain quotes, and citations.

Does the cliff note company, when producing Cliff Notes for "Into The Wild", pay royalties to the publisher?

For that matter, does any paper, article, etc.. that may contain a quote from another, have to pay royalties to the source of the quotes?
Capitalism is bad; Communism… how do we describe excruciatingly bad?

We’ve tried it, it’s never worked, and because it relies on a fundamental denial of basic human freedoms, it will literally never work. The only question is how much misery it causes in the latest attempt.
No, Google agreed to a licensing agreement and removed the direct links to the images.
Oh! Uh... I don't know what to say about that.
Being a counterfactual, your statement is by definition opinion, not fact.
Or for niche uses, such as military naval propulsion, space, and actinide destruction.

Technologies with multiple uses beyond nuclear would also be worth looking at. A very interesting one is CO2 turbines, which could be much smaller (and cheaper) than steam turbines. These are available, but have not been pushed to their optimized limits like steam turbines have.
I was being sarcastic, I don’t think I was necessarily being glib.

I suppose the deeper point I was trying to make was that “this time is different/special” is shallow thinking, as is believing that the real issue is with our “current greedy short term thinking”.

The real issue is the human condition, which remains largely as it has throughout our history. We need to choose a way to live knowing we will die, and then live that way.
Let's advocate for robust protections and support systems for artists, ensuring they can secure a sustainable and comfortable livelihood from their creative work.

Once they hit the tipping point of broad cultural absorbtion (think Banksy) AND/OR raking in absurd amounts of cash, move their IP into the public domain more aggressively (think Disney, NYT, etc.). How exactly this would work should be debated.

They'd still own the IP and have all the rights to use it commercially, but other's would be able to use it as inspiration, remix and maybe even resell it if attributed (or cheaply licensed).

In other words: "IP-Tax" the unproportionally successful.
Even if we had a perfect library of useful proteins and their utilities, the composition of these protiens, and the emergent behaviour within "machines" made by them, would be complex enough to be handfuls of classes of new engineering altogethor.

I think its like saying "we know how to make bricks and iron and bolts now, shouldnt it be easy to make a full scale functioning replica of the greater tokyo metropolitan area?"

Even if you came up with a spec for a complex tissue or just a fluid that functions as a standalone chemical factory, you would need to fabricate it. However many specific protiens from your library, in specific ratios, mixed and maybe even... positioned.

In short protein folding is just the first fundamental step towards this print any biological design out of proteins world that I guessed you are alluding to.
Tesla's Plug Moves Another Step Closer to Dominance
I am beginning to think that in these discussions these models are functioning more like an obscuring factor than anything else and the discussion is getting bogged down in that, and not the crux of the argument.

They’re giving people plausible deniability in the “chain of responsibility”, and I think if we took away “LLM” and replaced it with “fairground sideshow magic box” the argument that LLM’s are somehow special and deserving of exemptions disappears real quick.
Rather than attempting to combat our obvious future, they should spend this effort to find ways to monetize and succeed in this new environment.
How about this: Image generators should be treated like random google image search. They sample randomly from the distribution of publicly viewable images. Google does it exactly while Image generators do it in an interpolative way. Google images produced copyrighted works most of the time, an image generator only sometimes. Neither should be liable if someone sells a copyrighted work that was produced to someone else.
This brings back memories. I ordered a NerdKit many years ago and one of the projects was making a scrollable LED panel using similar techniques you're describing:

http://www.nerdkits.com/store/NKLEDARRAY001/

Multi panel extension: http://www.nerdkits.com/videos/multipanel_spi_ledarray/
It uses various APIs from Google to perform the following actions:
- request URL indexing
- fetch URL indexing status
- download and catalogue sitemaps

The tool automatically sends URL indexing requests for pages that have dropped out of indexing for various reasons.

However, it is up to you as a website owner to make sure that you have high quality content and valuable backlinks to your pages to rank well in search results.
If as many people worked on SPARC CPUs as Intel had/has working on x86 CPUs, would some of these problems have been solved? A modern x86_64 chip is immensely complicated internally.

Also, would register windows have caused speculative execution problems analogous to "Spectre"? You did have to keep some weird number of bytes (96?) available for register spills when you created a new stack frame. It might be possible to get Spectre like leaks from the kernel in that spill zone.
Reminder that YouTube provides feeds for channels:

* https://www.youtube.com/feeds/videos.xml?channel_id=[ID]
As an author, I do want the stories I write and worlds I build to be protected for a reasonable period.

Right now, copyright is a significant discouragement to any other entities from taking a story I wrote and claiming it as their own and preventing me from ever growing an audience for my work. It’s far from perfect, and I can’t afford litigation, but it enshrines a cultural value of allowing people to create things and be known for them. Profit is a side effect of this.

Art is already poorly valued compared to the enormous investment time and energy required to produce it. Removing copyright means you can’t even have minimal protections from a more popular person erasing you.
Is this with some sort of dimensionality reduction of the embedding space?
Clojure is statically typed - in practice everything is a java.lang.Object. Checkmate, type system enthusiasts >:D. Except macros, I suppose. If you try to pass function arguments that aren't a Java object or primitive IMO it won't work. [0]

More seriously, if you want something with type T, Clojure can give you something with type T. It understands types. Doesn't respect them, but it understands what it is ignoring. It isn't trying to replicate Java, but it has all the tools to replicate Java if necessary.

[0] The author acknowledges that this paragraph, while true, is unhelpful. It is offered in a wry tone.
Seems mostly nonsensical, not sure if that's a bug or some deeper point I'm missing.
If You're Scanning This, It's Too Late a QR Code-Based Fuzzing Methodology
The notion that we'd be able to design a society from the ground up in the manner dictated by Communism is fundamentally science fiction as well. This isn't unique to Communism, overall I think the degree a society can be controlled by anyone in power is significantly overstated. It's quite a parallel to the project of terraforming Mars. Nobody is doubting we might affect a change with policy or violence, but what's missing a degree of control in the magnitude and direction of that change.
Ok, I totally agree that journals are a scam (though, someone has to pay for the editing - should that be publicly funded too?)

I'm not sure I agree that science / fundamental research is the only knowledge that's worth anything through. Making a new product or making a work of art both take time and effort and are trivially copied and it would be a shame for there to be no way to make money from doing those.

(If your answer is that those should be publicly funded as well, that's fair)
> snowflake might as well shutup shop and return billions to the investors.

I mean, we can dream right?

There’s a bunch of companies that I don’t believe deserve their status or valuation and Snowflake is one of them.
> Nobody is forcing them to be on Instagram and like posts about transgender, Middle Eastern conflicts etc nor forced to change their profile pictures to a faded flag in faux solidarity.

Peer pressure is forcing them.

Yeah, you can say they should just ignore peer pressure and such... but if say, 90% of teens had smoking problem, would you just shrug and say well nothing is forcing them to take a cigarette?
Are these formats appropriate for multi dimensional gridded data or are hdf/netcdf still what people use for those?
So we are paying millions of dollars in executive bonuses, and the CBC keeps getting worse? Not on my dime
Your advice is shit that’s what’s wrong. Your situation is not the same as others. Everyone knows what you’re saying. You’re not giving useful info saying “power through it”. You’re bragging.

So good job. But shut up. Whatever rudeness you feel from me saying shut up is FAR less rude and unhelpful than the poor people you’re telling to “power through it” who are certain that they cannot. Because you are implicitly calling them weak. And that’s fucked up.

Because for the third time, it might be MUCH harder for them to lose weight than you.
How do you feel about extremes?

Antibiotics have saved billions of peoples lives from an early death. But use of antibiotics in farm animals is putting us at risk again via resistant superbugs that are sending us scrambling for new drugs to combat them.

Or, to take the analogy to 11, should each individual on the planet have access to a button that if pushed would cause the planet to explode? I seems reasonable the answer would be no, but now how do you set up a system of rules limiting who has access to the technology to make that button?
It's not clear to me that that's the order of causality.

It's easier to be optimistic and to write optimistic when your society has high marginal tax rates and visibly uses those rates to combat poverty, fund research, and subsidize college (and when you're part of the demographic receiving most of those benefits).

When you see societal protections being stripped away and privatized, the suffering that was caused by that, and the callous nature of your fellow citizens who "got theirs" and continue to vote for politicians who attack and tear down the systems that enabled such growth and optimism, you're more likely to write stories shaped by that world view.

Dystopian fiction has a long history, but from stories I've read it feels like the inflection point was, as with so many things, the Vietnam war, which for many people shattered the myth of technological infallability.
Yup! LLMs are literally the most “life imitates art technology” situation of all time! By writing a bunch of shit about how an AI is supposed to behave, lo and behold, the AI acts stereotypically.

That’s why people need to STFU about Rokos basilisk.
Funny you mention that. I was also confused by this same experience! I was recently introduced to the theory that most of the internet is bot activity and very little legitimate user activity. I think from a pure ratio perspective that’s very true, and this list made me ask “this is what people want to know about?” I was hoping to see people researching higher level queries, most of this seems like film and tv or fairly basic concepts like “sex”.
The examples were chosen by the author to make a point precisely because they are well known.

But every single copyright holder with their works online (which includes you and me) has the same legal rights as the NYT or Disney. Naturally some copyright holders have more real-world capability to go legal than others, but that does not reduce the legal risk.

> If anything it means they only infringe on archetypal works and not the other 99.9%

How on earth do you get to that conclusion? There's no "popularity" floor to copyright protection. Either a work has been infringed or it hasn't.
That’s a wildly interesting idea.

It open up another market too: compatible, scalable storage. Sell shovels in a gold-rush, and what better shovel than the substrate infrastructure that those bidding query engines would probably depend on.
There is no reason to preallocate 8 Gb though. I've explained how it works myself, but you rushed to justify their decision without reading my full post.
Thech billionaires seem to either want tech feudalism, where obviously they are the feudal lords, or go straight to oligarchy. Feudalism has the added benefit of higher, perceived legitamicy of the rulong class, and the resulting stability makes the rulers' lives so much easier.
What perspective other then ideology has this not apply to your own position? You seemed pretty comfortable in your position despite the number of people killed and outcome counter to your declared intention.
At this point most people don't even know who he is let alone read his writing.
But when Google image search produces a result, the question of whether it is copyrighted is something I can generally figure out in a matter of seconds or minutes. This is not so for image generators.
Never thought I'd see my old employer mentioned on HN! When I left in the mid-2010s, they were just getting the mobile app off the ground. The first iteration was just trying to replicate some of the web app functionality with a new UI but I haven't checked in on it in years.
Which makes more sense. But just why do I have certain visuals and a certain person in mind reading it?
image editors don't offer something that's based on questionably sourced copyrighted material as a part of their product. ai apps and services do.

it's just ai companies using dirty data and hoping they get away with it - and they do, for the time being, it is a bit trickier to show that 'yep, well that's there', and people don't seem to realize that just using a copyrighted image, at all (downloading, accessing in itself, let alone using for something else), or creating an image that would just "look like" a trademarked character - not "make a 1 to 1 copy" but just "look like" - would be enough for it to possibly be an infringement.

there can be a sufficient fix - taking out potentially infringing images from a dataset, and making an effort to make an actually clean dataset. it's really just a matter of "do you actually have rights to use that content? at all, and in that way". and ai companies continually say 'no...but what if we use it anyway".

and it's kind of a sloppy analogy, because with text to image generators (where you just interact with a model that's offered to you), well - people aren't "uploading copyrighted material into an editor". the copyrighted material is already there in the model, it was used in making of it. and if there was no such copyrighted material that'd fit the prompt, it wouldn't be able to generate something. the infringement lies with the service that uses copyrighted material for a model, and then offers it.

fan fiction and fan works continuously being in a murky area with copyright/trademark is not just a thing of "early days" of internet, it's been there all along and is still very much present. companies could crack down if they wanted, but there is too much of stuff out there, it might be hard to nail down exact people, and it might be plainly not too nice to the fandom. but it is not "impossible", and it is very much not a conversation that ever 'went away' or become "kinda solved" - it isn't.

again, with image editors, text editors, etc. - user is making all the actions with content, and the user would be doing the infringement, in editing and further if they were to choose to publish.

with generative ai - copyright infringement is built into the models. copyrighted works were accessed and used to turn into a model. user is just asking, "is it there". and it is. in some of those demonstrated examples, user is not even asking for a model to infringe on anything but it just does.
The best government is a kind dictator.

The best dictator is an immortal, brainlinked hivemind.

Therefore scifi inspired tech will save us.
Im just as ignorant as you about it. The quantum part to me doesnt seem to matter. I don't see why its any fundamentally different from making a computer out of any other substrate. Light, sand, chemicals, at the end of the day you compute a function by following a set of steps which may or may not have constraints of seriality.

I think von neumann cant handle purely parralel algorithms efficiently. Even gpus. I think thats whats where the "all qbits interacting simultaniously for n steps after being put in initial conditions" is about. Its purely parralel.

It could be the case that information cant be extracted before it is computed, and that for some algorithms the peak efficiency serial version is equal to the best efficiency purely parralel version. It could also be the case thats not true and that classes of quantum algorithms could be better.

At the end if the day the way i see it substrate is just an engineered means of applied ops per time.