skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not as interested in making a technical/legal argument, as I'm just sharing my feelings on the topic (and eventually, what I think the law should be), but during training copies are made of copyrighted material, even if the model doesn't contain exact copies of work. Crawling, downloading, storing (temporarily) for training all involve making copies, and thus are subject to copyright law. Maybe those copies are fair use, maybe it's not (I think it shouldn't be).

My main point is that OpenAI is generating an incredible amount of value all hinging on other people's work at a massive scale, without paying for their materials. Take all the non-public domain work off Netflix and Netflix doesn't have the same value they have today, so Netflix must pay for content it uses. Same goes for OpenAI imho.
In some big business companies this is solved by pre-installed "security software" that usually takes up about half of the RAM, sometimes even more, and is using a measurable chunk of CPU all the time.
"And now even that nominal opt-in option is gone. They just take it."
In enterprise software, optimizing performance usually means removing the custom stuff.
The idea is that the reason rent drops matters for the population in who moves in to the area.

Building more housing drops rent, but means the area is growing. People leaving because they are no jobs also drops rent, but good luck living in a place with no jobs.
I get how IPFS works. I think the problem you have is that you can't distinguish between IPFS and CAS.

Lots of things use CAS, not just IPFS.

The specific case you outline can be served by existing technology, without having to introduce magic coins, beans, or other distractions.

I was pretty interested in IPFS prior to it being overtaken by web3 grifters.
Because they want agency, creating something using a process where they have total control. It’s why people make music, do sculpting, write poetry. You can pay someone to do this for you, but it’s more gratifying to do it yourself.
Well now I need to know what that machine is
I've been using Midjourney to generate assets and textures that I Photoshop into new images, such as album covers, banners, and flyers. It has been excellent for speeding up my workflow. My small audience has found a high amount of visual appeal in the results
Yes!!! I've been playing around with SingleFile and other similar software to try and hoard as much useful data as I can. And I've been mocking preppers for all these years.
I agree with the other commenters about the scale of this “deriving inspiration from others” is where this feels wrong.

It feels similar to the ye olden debates on police surveillance. Acquiring a warrant to tail a suspect, tapping a single individual’s phone line, etc all feels like very normal run-of-the-mill police work that no one has a problem with. Collating your behavior across every website and device you own from a data broker is fundamentally the same thing as a single phone’s wiretap, but it obviously feels way grosser and more unethical because it scales way past the point of what you’d imagine as being acceptable.
Hi, I've just built this fun webpage that mimics Mac Sonoma, perfect for showcasing both Mac and iPhone apps
Yes, I work on systems that integrate LLMs and search technologies and frequently test whether or not what is said might be better run through an LLM. I don't post things randomly, however. Sometimes the output is good enough to post, sometimes (clearly) it isn't. However, it's not my default behavior.
I doubt a legal case would succeed, and Google would know that. But the types of companies who threaten to sue over deep image linking are also the most likely to threaten not to sign contracts for content sharing with YouTube etc or for ad services. In other words, Google's other businesses create a liability for their search effectiveness.
Spot on. Most ai model value is in the stolen content. These criminals need punishment.
Great catch, currently fixing bugs that are coming up right now, didn't know about that one!
A followup tweet with a fraction of the views with a pretty big delay. Was he going to add that initially and forgot, or did he add it because people started pointing out what was happening in the corner?
Instead of hiring American independent contractors, more remote independent contractors will be hired.

Work from home taught companies that many jobs can be outsourced.
Discord is just Kryptonite to some people, myself included.

I eventually got used to it but I don't enjoy it. First time trying to log in it didn't believe I was a human + the way most servers have you add a react emoji to confirm you read the rules and only then do you actually see the channels available to you, not to mention all the alert sounds with no visual indication of what just alerted, something about it just makes me feel old.
If I read a lot of stories in a certain genre that I like, and I later write my own story, it’s almost by definition going to be a mish-mash of everything I like.

Should I pay the authors of the books I read when I sell mine?
Huh, memorising songs is interesting, how do you do this?
Split it into a set of cards per verse where each card in the set is of a different line hidden?

Useful approach of going through a textbook as well thanks! I'll try it.

After writing out the original message I thought about using ChatGPT to suggest solutions, the execution leaves something to be desired, but the kinds of solutions it's suggesting are interesting.

For example giving it a block of text and asking it to generate questions, use that to find questions I find interesting and then answer them and turn that question / answer pair into a card.

It does seem that figuring how to not fall off the bandwagon is the biggest thing to work out first.
You can remove your work from a search index anytime you want. Not so with work included in a training set
I agree that SCOTUS passing is correct and with everything else in your first paragraph as to why.

Addressing the issue would certainly be the job of the legislative branch but I question whether they should try to address this with a law. My feelings on this are a bit conflicted because I truly hate "Jailed Gardens" and wish they didn't exist. However, I also know that it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to draft legislation that responds to dynamic, rapidly evolving problems in open-ended domains like high tech. It almost always ends up being ineffective, subverted or causing unintended consequences downstream.

As much as I hate it, in areas of governance often the only viable options are all non-optimal in various ways. In this case, I think the 'least bad' approach is to let Apple have their jailed garden and run it the way they want to (short of demonstrable anti-trust, of course). Personally, I opted out of Apple devices a long time ago for this very reason and use Android devices I can root and modify however I want. After all, some people like living in the iOS jailed garden and appreciate the benevolent dictator keeping them safe and making their decisions for them (or are at least willing to tolerate the costs for the benefits). For my part, this is just another of those things I really don't like but for which reflexively calling "Thar oughtta be a LAW!" would be ineffective or make things worse. The road to dystopias is paved with the good intentions of those trying to legislatively enforce idyllic utopias. It's annoying but maxing broad freedom to choose often requires tolerating the annoying behavior of others maxing their freedom to choose (including those selling time-shares in an idyllic garden-jail).
The ICE cars also need electricity for their resistive heating blocks, so the EVs aren't worse off in that regard.
It's sad to me that so many in this community side with OpenAI/etc against the artists. It's understandable, because these companies have created a very cool and useful technology. But I think the arguments - from "it's not technically copying, it's just viewing copyrighted material and then producing its own version like a human is allowed to do" to "intellectual property/copyright is inherently flawed" - come from a lack of understanding.

Let's make an analogy that more people here will understand. If you built an app for your startup, and OpenAI trained on its source code such that any prompter could produce an app that's virtually identical with no effort - would that be OK with you? Would you claim that copyright is in fact irrelevant and that this doesn't constitute copying?
How much is the power bill, and how many watts are you using?

Barely paying for power does sound like too little, but enough money to pay back hardware cost in a year is definitely overkill.
> The first links are spiffy little metaphors, but apply just as much at "God could smite all of humanity, even if you don't understand how". They're not making any argument, just assumptions. In particular, they accidentally show how an AI can be superhumanly capable at certain tasks (chess), but be easily defeated by humans at others (anything else, in the case of Stockfish).

As I understand it, Yud is actually providing a counterexample to a premise that other people are using to argue that humans will probably not be disempowered by AI systems. The relevant argument looks like this:

P1: If intelligent system A cannot give a detailed account of how it would be bested by a more intelligent system B, then A will not be bested by B.
P2: Humans (so far) cannot give a detailed account of how a more intelligent AI system would best them.
C: So, humans will not be bested by a more intelligent AI system.

Yud is using the unskilled chess player and Magnus as a counterexample to P1.

> The argument starts with a hypothetical ("there is a possible artificial agent"), and it fails to be scary: there are (apparently) already humans that can kill 70% of humanity, and yet most of humanity is still alive. So an AGI that could also do it is not implicitly scarier.

Right, it's only an argument for the possibility of AGI catastrophe. It doesn't make any move to convince you that the scenario is likely. And it sounds like you already accept that the scenario is possible, so shrug.

> The final twitter thread is basically a thread of people saying "no, there is no canonical, well-formulated argument for AGI catastrophe", so I'm not sure why you shared it.

Maybe there is no canonical argument, but the thread definitely features arguments for likely AI catastrophe:

https://wiki.aiimpacts.org/doku.php?id=arguments_for_ai_risk:is_ai_an_existential_threat_to_humanity:will_malign_ai_agents_control_the_future:argument_for_ai_x-risk_from_competent_malign_agents:start
https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.13353
https://aiadventures.net/summaries/agi-ruin-list-of-lethalities.html
I suspect a good chunk of "AI safety people" are just orgs propped up by the big corps to protect their interest in AI and reduce competition.
> Anecdotally this does not apply to my laptop from 2014.

It doesn't apply to anyone device, this is a comparison of generation over generation changes. Your 2014 laptop is closer to a 2018 laptop than 2014 software is to 2018 software.
It may be non-trivial to dig yourself out of a performance hole if you didn’t account for performance at all in the design. The pervasive idea that you can make it fast later virtually never pans out.

In many cases, taking performance into account up front adds little overhead and won’t appreciably affect the design. But, if you codify some algorithmically inefficient approach into your public API, you’re going to find that hard to unwind. The engineering team should advocate for that when designing the product.
You are kind of on the right track but still messing up.

Interest rates are up in times of present scarcity and future abundance.

So given a supply shock that increases scarcity, there might not be enough resources for everyone.

Then you will see both crime and interest rates coincide.

Meanwhile if there are enough resources for everyone, it is obvious that simply working will get you the resources you need.
I wonder the same thing for my regular OS too. Sure the first time it boots on this hardware, it needs to see what's what. But the subsequent hundred/thousand boots, at least for my usage, will be identical.
vscodevim is a vim plugin for VSCode.
That's a matter of perspective. AI's do not make a copy of the source material. It very much just adjusts their internal weights, which from a broadminded perspective, can be seen as simple inspiration, and not copying.

Of course, just like a human artist, it could probably closely approximate the source material if it wanted to, but it would still be its own approximation, not an exact duplicate. As for plagiarism, we all have to be careful to rephrase things we've read elsewhere, and perhaps AI's need to be trained to do this a bit better... but it doesn't change the underlying fact that they're learning from the text they read, not storing a verbatim copy (at least, no more so than a human reader with a good memory)
I was surprised to see how much money Infowars was making shown in the court documents. "Let us make our prime target market idiots" seems to be a profitable path.
I think the big difference is that it's not a direct replacement - it feeds off of the existing people while making it much harder for them to make a living.

It would be as if instead of cars running on gasoline, they ran on chopped up horseflesh. Not good for the horses, and not sustainable in the long term.
Compilation speed can be an important trait of a programming language (or more precisely, a dev env / buildchain). I remember writing code in M68000 assembly, the compile step was lightning fast because you didn't need one. I do also remember going near cross-eyed tracing code flow down narrow columns of vaguely varied yet similar-looking statements -- hours upon hours!

If your daily task build is taking over an hour on modern hardware, it's likely you have organizational problems masquerading as tech debt. No language choice will prevent that; good technical leadership can help mitigate it.
A small societal elite of that small island got very rich off imperialism, much like in Spain or Portugal.

The broader enrichment of the British people was kicked off by something different, namely the industrial revolution. Spain and Portugal didn't have those and the average person there remained bitterly poor until deep into the 20th century.
For some reason the people complaining don’t agree with that either.
Re: hard figures retrospectively. I've been in this boat before. Here's what I did. I would tell the recruiter / hiring manager / etc that I made a little c conservative estimate from my notes. While it probably is less impressive than the actual number, I wanted to err on the side of correctness over unearned praise for when I couldn't get the exact number.

This also led to me updating my resume about 1x / quarter, which I am currently behind so time to take my own advice and do that this evening. But the goal here is to regularly update so you can find the hard numbers if you need to. Plus, the market being what it is, you'll never know when layoffs will come a-knocking.

(edit: typo)
The market doesn't help the post author precisely because GenAI researchers and organizations are claiming fair use in the particular way they are. The only way an artist can prevent them from appropriating artwork without permission is to somehow prevent anyone, anytime, ever from placing it into a training data set. If you make something interesting and share one copy with a friend, and that friend shares it with one GenAI researcher friend who wants training data - boom, it'll be in the training set and your only option was to never share it at all with anyone.
The full datasets are available here:

Occupation Codes
https://flowingdata.com/projects/2021/occ-marriage/data/occ_...

Top 20 Pairings By Occupation Code
https://flowingdata.com/projects/2021/occ-marriage/data/top2...

It would be interesting to map these to actual SIC codes, potentially using a tool like NIH SOCcer
The water belongs to the sietch!
> every animal seems to eventually become like a crab

Say what??? Reference needed. I can think of plenty of animals that are nothing like crabs.
Dev Containers are cool. There’s a VSCode extension.
Set up should be simpler than needing to manually copy codes into your settings app.

When a QR code is present on screen that resolves to a TOTP seed, an additional context menu option should be present to "Add Verification Code in Passwords" or "Set Up Verification Code" or similar.

Here's a screenshot I nabbed from a way-too-wordy article on the subject:
https://tidbits.com/uploads/2021/10/Add-Verification-Code-15...
> I don't use any syncing system, I'm not on iCloud, or use apps, or anything like that, so there's no mechanic for distribution of passkeys. Plus that wouldn't work if I wanted to log from my friends laptop, or something like that.

iOS and Android can also just keep local Passkeys where you scan a QR code, though of course if you don't backup anything anywhere you will always have a redundancy problem with any 2FA mechanism.

Passkeys are supposed to not be a single authenticator either, so you can enroll another Phone or a Yubikey (or also your local TPM, binding to your user account, for convenience), but not all services support that in practice.
Hydro can be compared to Blazor, but with some fundamental differences:
- Hydro uses HTTP requests for the client-server communication
- state of the components is persisted in the HTML document
- no web sockets or web assembly
- works with well-known Razor views (cshtml) used in Razor Pages or MVC
That is a brutally small user base given how much I hear about them on HN.
Assume I agree that copyright holders should be compensated for their works (because I do in some sense).

How would this compensation work? Let's say a portion of profits from LLMs that were trained on copyrighted work should be sent to the copyright holders.

How would we allocate which portion of the profits go to which creators? The only "fair" way here would be if we could trace how much a specific work influenced a specific output but this is currently impossible and will likely remain impossible for quite some time.
The Art of the Deal was published in 1987, before Bill Clinton was even president. Trump has been grifting for a long time at a fairly steady pace.

The reason "grifting went sky high" is because of the profit model of Internet media. Engagements = ad revenue. This strongly incentivizes grifter behavior, from Trump and Alex Jones to Oprah and Rachel Maddow. Also, grifting became a lot more accessible with social media. Anyone can grift, you don't need radio or television deals.
I thought the blog was great but "in summary" conclusion bad.

The summary merely stated that Java virtual thread are great. I expected a summary of the problem and solution, for example something like:

When using Java 21 virtual threads, you can end-up starved of carrier threads due to all carrier threads waiting on a pool exhausted resources with no thread available to free such resources. The solution is to wrap those resources in a virtual-thread aware object. In our case, we solved our problem by wrapping connections in semaphores.
Google Search Has Gotten Worse, Researchers Find
So you're saying that, we should stop pursuing art and prose? Because when you fine tune midjourney with 30 or so images of an artist, it can create any image with the artist's style.

You removed the value and authenticity that artist in 30 minutes, you applauded it, and defended that it should be the norm.

OK then, we can close down all entertainment business, and generate everything with AI, because it can mimic styles, clone sounds, animate things with gaussian splats, and so on.

Maybe we can hire coders to "code" films? Oh sorry. ChatGPT can do that too. So we need a keypad then, only the most wealthy can press. Press 1 for a movie, 2 for a new music album, 3 for a new book, and so on.

We need 10 buttons or so, as far as I can see. Maybe I can ask ChatGPT 4 to code one for me.
Tried using Google Bard. It gave me complete nonsense. It cited the sources for the nonsense, so I checked them: AI generated SEO spam pages. Gave me a good laugh.

(By comparison, Phind gave the correct answer, and high quality sources.)
I've thought about doing something like this. I have the income to buy all the equipment I could need, sprayers etc. Was also looking into pressure washing.
Everyone loves a good grift.
At 93, he's as fit as a 40-year-old. His body offers lessons on aging
I can't count how many times I needed a "until X" button, but it's an ever increasing trend.
> As long as devs spend their days with bugattis while writing software for corollas, this will continue to get worse.

That's BS. Like there was no such things as featuritis and unreasonable schedules.
Did you not pay them when you bought their book to read it in the first place? That dead trees don't lend themselves to that sort of payoff is a limitation of the technology. In music, sampling is a well-accepted mechanism for creating new music, and the original authors of the music they used do get paid when the new one is used.
but google doesn't do that ... they only show you a list of links (and granted some tidbit content you the web site can specify) pertaining to the search ... the product from google are those pages of list of links

which is really not dissimilar to what midjourney is giving you which is a result from an array of public(?) works if i understand (not an AI/ML expert)
Of course this all depends on jurisdiction, but e.g. in the US for example fair use does not show up [oops, see note] in the limitations and exceptions in the copyright definition (like e.g. government use does), but relies on case law, the "fair use doctrine". This means quite literally it is a framework for understanding the defence of a particular use based on precedent: the defendant(s) argued it.

It's a bit of a quibble to differentiate between allowable infringement or exception, here, so i've edited original.

[note: 0xcde4c3db points out correctly that it does actually show up since 1976, but in a way the defers much of the definition back to case law, so same effect]
Good catch, hadn't seen that.

So the researchers, shareholders, and leadership of OpenAI will be happy to give up being ridiculously wealthy so they can be only moderately wealthy, and everyone else gets a basic income?

I'm also just skeptical of UBI in general, I suppose - 'free' money tends to just inflate everything to account for it, and it still won't address scarcity issues for limited physical assets like land/property.

I've love to be wrong about both of these things.
Search engine caches work on an opt-out basis, which was found legal in Field v. Google Inc.
Yes it does, you have to manipulate the expression to make it adimensional. But this rule-of-thumb is only valid for systems whose response time is less than 500ms.
OpenAI is very much a for-profit company with the same incentives to make money as every other US for-profit company. I understand that there's another company that is a non-profit and that company bosses the for-profit company. In my opinion, that's more of a footnote in their governance story, it doesn't make OpenAI a non-profit. Their website says...

"A new for-profit subsidiary would be formed, capable of issuing equity to raise capital and hire world class talent, but still at the direction of the Nonprofit. Employees working on for-profit initiatives were transitioned over to the new subsidiary."

https://openai.com/our-structure
Fukushima's Evacuation: Worse Than the Meltdown? [video]