skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> the authentic entity will speak against it and the society will rectify

Society is already speaking against stolen content and fakes produced using it. How are we rectifying this?
there was a time when senior kitchen staff, actually went shopping, for quality ingredients.
To top that, that QR code is distorted before printed, like rectangle. Happened to me in central valley.
It means everyone is staring at their phones once they sit down, can kill the vibe
QR is more compact and higher accuracy.
Much cruder fakes than you are describing are a huge problem in practice, costing billions per year in fraud to Americans alone. Just because you can detect them, doesn't mean your grandma can.

The societal implications of undetectable fakes are off the charts.
Poll: Should I compile my thoughts about addiction?
In my previous gig I encountered a lot of people with substance abuse problems. One of my alcoholic taxi passengers called me back ~2 months after her fare. Eventually her kids helped her finish sobering up. This one is doing quite well today, in spite of the State’s earlier attempts to punish her perimenopause-associated alcoholism away.

Dissident science has a pretty good understanding of ‘addiction’, but these findings are NOT widely implemented. Wikipedia’s article about alcoholism is mostly worthless.

Walking down the street ~3 years ago I found a prescription cast aside unused. It was thiamine (Vitamin B1), prescribed by a Veterans Administration doctor. This treatment was to hopefully prevent alcoholic brain disease: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6668887/

I was reminded of my previous experiences ~2 weeks ago, on my new gig with YCombinator. The ‘batch’ consisted of 2.5L of cheap liquor. My job was to get the 2 bottles from the grocery store and deliver them. The customer was nice enough to talk to, but everything about him said ‘lonely alcoholic’.

I often think of the blog post I never finished, about the sober passenger who helped me realize the simple fact of alcoholism in America: politicians need alcoholics & addicts to justify their protection racket. That was ~10 years ago. Nothing’s changed.

ASK HN: Why hasn’t “science” figured out how to effectively help people with the variety of addictions?

ASK HN: Does your country also implement a haphazard approach to substance abuse?

With the help of my passengers I basically figured out why people compulsively consume alcohol, and how to gently help them get their alcohol use under control.

But I don’t have a platform or credentials. Our beloved politicians haven’t reached out to me to help transform their make-work approach to addiction into something that would have a chance at getting people sobered up.

POLL: ARE YOU INTERESTED IN MY WRITE-UP ABOUT DISSIDENT SCIENCE’S UNDERSTANDING OF ADDICTION?
Yes, but only if you’re actually a Credentialed Scientist
No, addiction is simply a matter of willpower
No, addiction is a moral failing. Addicts can’t be helped. The only solution is to lock them all up
Yes, anything’s better than jail/prison for helping people with their compulsive behavior
Yes, and I pledge to help spread the good news of effective interventions for addiction
What I've been doing for fast-food is to order ahead of time, usually while I'm en route on the bus. Google Maps has a unified interface that links out to the various delivery services, and the restaurant's own website if it's available.

Then I order a meal for pickup, and it's all specified and paid in whatever app I used.

Then I arrive at the restaurant and my meal is all bagged up to go, then I tell the counter girl that this meal is "for here" and may I please have a knife? "No, we don't have knives anymore." How about a tray? "No, due to the COVID-19 pandemic."

So far they have tolerated my presence as I sit at a table and eat the meal on top of the paper bag.
But theirs obviously doesn't
hotwire.com for cheaper (than normal) hotels. Thank me later. :-)
Calling the current fakes a "non-problem" is one of the hottest takes I've heard in some time.
It's not exactly the same though. Attacks from spam networks out of extradition reach will become more sophisticated, and that's going to take more money or more annoyance to slow down. The same way phone call scamming from India is a billion dollar industry, fake ads impersonating famous people and things like that will have near zero cost to produce which means it's cheap to mass exploit.
Assuming it'll be true, I'm not sure it has to be just a bad thing. We got used to treating videos/photos as the kind of objective evidence that they never were. It's not hard for an image to be both factually correct/unaltered, and yet giving a distorted view of reality. Cropping out parts, leaving out some bigger, non-visible contexts, such distortions can be really easy to miss, too. How faithful an image is depends a great deal on how it was put together and presented. So what we should really be asking ourselves when we see images is how much we trust the sources. A proliferation of AI fakes could make the need for such reflection more obvious.
I promise you, this site is not as special as you think it is.

The majority of people here are incredibly average (like me!), just fortunate to be born at the right time, be exposed to technology at the right time, get a few other lucky breaks, and of course put some work in.

It’s super easy to convince yourself that because you’re successful you must be special. Remember that people tend to ascribe their successes to themselves and their failures to someone else.
> AI lacks insight and lack of insight is what can turn a succulent feast of a life into biweekly deliveries of Soylent.

Does a picture of a humming bird lack insight? Does collage art lack insight? Do remixes lack insight? Does mass-produced formulaic pop music lack insight?

Maybe. Or maybe some artists enjoy those creative processes and some audiences enjoy the output. Maybe oil painters who critique photography, and photographers who critique collages, and musicians who critique mash-ups, and DJs who critique modern production studios, and, yes, artists who critique the use of AI models in creative processes, are all just being pretentious assholes.

(It is possible I am simply misunderstand Cave. I take most of his writing to be artistic prose. It's possible that these are sincere metaphysics and that Nick Cave does literally believe in some sort of ur-religious "essential and unconscious human spirit underpinning our existence". In which case I think he's got a nutty religion and consider the fact that AI is an existential threat to that religion mostly a net good for humanity.)
If your company just using it for email, then migration wasn’t worth it. But if you wanted to build complex workflows on top of email in-house, then it was very good at that. Today everyone uses a bunch of different web apps to do what Notes did.
Problem with this for example is when LE uses it to incriminate you, and forces you to prove that their evidence is fake. We can see from the Horizon scandal that when they want to keep you from defending yourself, they usually succeed.
maybe "barely doing anything" is better than doing nothing, though?
Why do you want to use cash though? NFC tap to pay or QR code-based mobile payments, which is what everyone in China uses, are so much better. No need to carry around a heavy and bloated wallet full of physical coins, no need to touch dirty bank notes that have germs and even drugs on them [1]. As a child, my parents always made me wash my hands with soap whenever I touch money, since you never know where the note has been. It just seems so unsanitary to handle physical cash in a place that deals with serving food to customers.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contaminated_currency
I kind of think it's dangerous for science to "inform" our ethical values in the ways you mentioned. For example, the scientific fact that Earth circles the Sun shouldn't mean that we should also have a moral system that focuses on the Sun instead of focusing on Humanity. And the way math formulas work out shouldn't imply that we are somehow less important.

Popular science is often quite ready to sweep problems that it does not have an explanation for under the metaphorical rug. We already know that materialistically pretty much everything is made of atoms, and our planet is just some random speck of stuff within a huge solar system within a huge galaxy... so it's tempting to conclude that we are some kind of "accident" that randomly happened. But science does not have an explanation of "consciousness" (or "qualia", or whatever you call it), and science is unready to explain questions like "why are we right here, right now?" besides "oh that's just pure coincidence". But does this time and place we live in have some greater cosmic significance? Are humans (and other lifeforms on Earth) truly unique despite there being so much matter out there? I submit that the answer is we honestly don't know, and because we don't know the answer to questions like these, making moral conclusions merely on the small fraction of questions we do have an answer for, seems to inevitably result in a flawed or at least incomplete conclusion.

I mean, for all we know this universe could be an extremely realistic virtual simulation, and only after we pop out of it would we realize what it's all about. Admittedly if the simulation theory this is true and the simulation is watertight and has no backdoors, then it's impossible to know what's actually real or not. But that's kind of my point -- no amount of scientific knowledge should make us sure about a moral viewpoint (or perhaps anything at all). I mean it could definitely "inform" us, but more often than not people tend to feel more certain than they should because they perceive that somehow science is more "trustworthy".
With an adapter you still can use the controller (or you can also use a snes)
Humans don't fall for optical illusions? News to me.
Ah, yes, that would work.

But then there is reliance on an underlying platform to resolve the conflict by providing a globally unique identifier. Instead of process ID, there is the IP address mechanism.

So it's turtles all the way down, if I understand correctly.
In some locales sitting on the street writing down a list of people coming and going is legal, but leaving a camera pointed at the street isn't. Legislation like that makes a distinction between an action by a person (which has bounds on scalability) and mechanized actions (that do not).
Link to Netscape is broken.
It is an unrealistic expectation that a sufficient number of people boycott modern cars (with internal cameras) to change the vendors' offerings. Besides that, there will not even be a sufficient number of old cars for everyone (everywhere).

Your general point is quite correct, though, and I am avoiding surveillance more than most people.
Back before the Statute of Anne perhaps for games. For music a bit later.
> the artists should still have the right to refuse their art being studies.

Why? That certainly isn't a right spelled out in either patents or copyrights, both of which are supposed to support the development of arts and technology, not hinder it.

If I discover a new mathematical formula, musical scale, or whatnot, should I be able to prevent others from learning about it?
Wait until someone encodes an entire menu in the QR code.
I guess it depends on how you define "capable".

I defined it (implicitly) as "have they actually put humans in orbit". That's a pretty simple and objective definition.

If you want to include SLS/Orion and Starliner, you have to define the point at which a system becomes "capable". Is it when they designed it? When they approved the budget? When they tested it uncrewed? When it's less than 1 year from launching with humans?

Depending on your definition, India might already be "capable" of launching astronauts now.

Note also that both Orion and Starliner are working through technical problems. Are they very likely to resolve them in <1 year? Sure. But there's still a non-zero chance that they will delay for 1 year, 2 years, or even more.
in many ways, we already live in a world out of a sci-fi paperback.

I find it hard to fault people for thinking that we'll continue to progress at a fast pace, or at least thinking that we're a long way from a major plateau.
In that scenario, you are the one claiming we will "never" fly to jupiter.
How do you measure "benefit", and what does "net" actually mean?
Now that you mention it, my best teachers were all men who made careers for themselves in the military before retiring and going into education.
As a SMB, if your salary expense is $500k and your revenue is $500k, you are absolutely struggling, no matter the tax situation. In this case you "just" need another $100k in revenue. After all, you are throwing out theoretical revenue numbers anyway. So it just moves the needle somewhat for you to still break even. You could game it just a little if there's revenue at end of year that you can book in the following quarter instead -- companies do the reverse of this all the time. Perhaps you can shift some of the expenses as well.

Note that in year 2, you get 20% of the year 2 salary expense, plus 20% from year 1. So the impact is less. By year 5 you are "caught up".

Indeed the first years are harder.
Look up the Statue of Anne.
Did anyone ever make it past about 30 seconds into Ghosts 'N Goblin? It was, to the best of my recollection, impossibly difficult.
Apple genuinely have some of the weirdest “fans” I’ve ever seen.

To sit there and try to tell an audience of largely web developers that Safari’s reputation as the new IE is totally unfounded as though they don’t know for themselves exactly what the last ten years were like themselves.

Or as though multiple governments across the globe didn’t just spend the past couple of years opening multiple antitrust investigations looking at what a problem Safari had become.

No… apparently the problem is just you and your perceptions and whatever other weird gaslighting that seems to come with these defences.
The base model?

Given the article about GPUs, I think I was thinking more along the lines of a desktop with a consumer GPU.
under the new regs, software work is required to be classified as R&D.
> You can normalize to uppercase and get the same effect.

No, you can't (unless you do it very carefully). Not every lower case letter can be transformed to an upper case ascii letter and back to the same lower case ascii letter. Allow me to introduce you to the letter i (in Turkey).

If you naively uppercase('i') in an standard alphabet, you'll get "I" which isn't even the same letter if you are reading it in Turkey.

http://www.i18nguy.com/unicode/turkish-i18n.html
There’s an underlying issue here that there’s little incentive in most domains to convey truth or the best attempt at truth, culturally and societally, at least in my opinion.

On the consumer side, people want entertainment and interesting. Much of reality and its corners are interesting but there’s often a high barrier of entry in terms of prior knowledge and absorptive capacity overall to find the interesting bits and probe them. As such, information has to be conveyed to a general audience’s ability to understand things and often the nuanced interesting bits are lost. Many things just aren’t spectacularly interesting on a daily basis to any life changing degree.

Even outside the general audience, even science struggles with incentive for truth. Much research published these days is targeted around publishing papers and maintaining certain metrics to be considered relevant and drive future work (their livelihood). Science is a long twisted road with many failures and we don’t make it practical to travel. So people come up with incremental often very weak publications just to put food on the table. Occasionally a few go beyond publishing semi-useful to nearly useless results and go out and forge data or manipulate methodology in ways to achieve certain conclusions. It happens all the time. Combine that with the ever growing reproducibility crisis and while I give certain publication platforms more credit than a documentary, I certainly don’t put most as useful or in many cases even that credible. It’s not that I don’t want to, it’s just the way things are in our institutions.

And with the internet we have a platform for anyone to spew anything they want as truth. We have people who have a lot of incentives to put misinformation out there to their benefit. Businesses and their marketing/propaganda arms are at the forefront. Governments around the world do it. And now we have automated and widely available technology to produce all sorts of somewhat believable information.

These issues have always existed in our society of free speech but competition and economic incentives are becoming clearer for many in the value of lying over truth telling or at least attempts at truth telling. There’s just so much value to be had in manipulating information out there.

Now there’s still value in understanding or trying to understand truth. If you understand things you have a competitive advantage, but you also tend to have more advantage if you exclusively understand truth, so teaching others how to distinguish nonsense or presenting them with truths you discover is often putting oneself at a competitive disadvantage. So the more we pressure people and normalize and accept these pressures everywhere, we shouldn’t be surprised to see complete and utter trash information everywhere we look. And it’s only going to get worse.
Show HN: AskYoutube, Smarter Video Search
Extreme luck can't be replicated. The algorithms will not all it to happen again
> Why do you want to use cash though?

Privacy. I'm not opposed to using my card at restaurants or other stores, but I don't at all want a future where every single transaction is tied to an identifiable account.
> But many archaeologists and anthropologists—in critiques published in scientific journals, academic and professional websites, YouTube videos, and a letter to Netflix—argue the shows promote theories that don’t represent a scientific consensus

That’s not how truth works. The documentaries may be accurate or inaccurate, but the documentary’s claims being unpopular has no bearing on either.
It's less about being the best (no criticism of NASA) but rather engineering decisions to _guarantee_ the planned mission, which means you over-engineer and thus get extra performance/reliability. You're not willing to accept the statistical risk that may end a mission early.
I've been struggling with the Postgres vs. SQLite decision lately, especially since my app runs on a single server (and will likely continue that way for a long time) but the real reason I am still leaning towards Postgres is for the ecosystem of monitoring tools and plugins. For example a big downside of SQLite is that I don't have easily available tools that can give me reports on slow queries, full table scans, and other poorly written SQL "gotchas" which inevitably happen. I have to invent and implement monitoring on the application level.
As long as the detectors are other AIs, that's pretty self-evident
Wow, this article makes it sound like a combination of Outlook, Google Workspace, a database, Jira/Monday/Notion, and HR tools all combined in one platform.

Not bad before for a platform before we entered the world of Oauth and SaaS services.
I am in absolute awe of the results of research and engineering at NASA and many other space agencies for that matter. Nevertheless, I wonder: how much of the overperformance is in fact about playing it down in the first place?

For example, what requirements for the Ingenuity helicopter were set for the engineers? Five flights or a 100 of flights?
you say this as if walking didn’t have plenty of cognitive benefits
Homesteading and the Unfolding Feminist Revolt
This feels like it'll actually help make AI models better versus worse once they train on these images. Artists are basically, for free, creating training data that conveys what types of noise does not change the intended meaning of the image to the artist themselves.
Artist are now fully dependent on Software Engineers for protecting the future of their career lol
I like the idea but I watched the morse code one and the speech was almost certainly computer-generated but it hardly had any content anyway.
Who changes their mind after ordering?
Good point. In short, I would rephrase it as "if your measurement doesn't show the difference between trained and untrained teachers, maybe your measurement is wrong?"

There 2 other plausible hypothesis that the article ignores:

1. What if untrained teachers are effective because they learn on the job from trained teachers? Which means that you have to have certain % of trained teachers to keep the system alive.

2. What if trained teachers become less effective because they drop their standards looking at how untrained ones work? This is a common phenomenon at workplaces, and I've seen it happen in software development many times.
On the other hand, why would you choose to use spotify API for a start? Spotify doesn't have nearly the quantity of available music that Youtube has.

So many times when I try to find some music on my partner's spotify account it is just not there, and I give up and we listen to it via newpipe or freetube.
The idea is:
You can hire a R&D team for one year, fire the entire R&D team and still benefits from their works in the next few years.

In terms of tax, should we average out these expense over the years?

These can have huge difference because how complex our tax and accounting rules are.
I'll give the podcast a listen tomorrow :)

But, even if you only have a single action available, isn't communication with the customer key? We've pulled customer systems offline, and parts of the customer were glad because we could provide information and help with handling harsh situations they had.

And even if this isn't a 1% revenue customer, if they are receiving a DDOS-whopper you cannot happen, that would probably be a customer you want communication with. Even if the goal was just to figure out if there was glory in hosting them or to just fire them.

Just null-routing and being unavailable seems unprofessional, though I know quite well how .. well-structured these acquire-everything hosting providers are internally. Doesn't change that this is bad customer service.
You act like computers and ML models aren't just tools used by people.
Do you have average figures for how much each platform pays per stream? My colleague has his music on both and has said YouTube pays 2x as much per stream compared to Spotify.
Generating Stable Qubits at Room Temperature
+1 to this.

I’ve been working with their research teams on this and credit due indeed.

Some context:
https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/issues/2555#issuecomm...

https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/discussions/3965
I had a friend recently visit China and he needed access to the real internet and the VPN providers he had used before were blocked.

It took me all of 10 minutes to set up a OpenVPN server in East Asia on DigitalOcean. The container even comes with a client installer that has the parameters preloaded.

Worked fine.
> Use filters in your search, e.g. adding "min_faves:10" means only tweets with >10 likes will show up, which filters out dross.

Everything I've ever tweeted is dross :'(
They called the Chinese to help with their experience like 6 months after the start of the war as they realised some young people could access news outside the official channels.

They have been testing it since then.

In China once their AI systems or whatever decides that you are using a VPN you will be punished by increasingly blocking your Internet for more and more time.