skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I don't like the idea of it being trained on anything I've written or created[1].

I'm more curious about this part - because I'm the opposite. I'm ecstatic that having open source code on github over the last ~12 years means that you have contributed to machine intelligence. What a wild thought and how super cool that everyone who contributed to the internet also gets to contribute to AI.

I can't imagine being upset that your output into the world is accelerated and incorporated into what eventually will be AGI. It's an honor, really.

And obviously I disagree with the rest of the post. But trying to add something useful to the discussion - why are so many people offended that AI is learning from them? Do they see it some other way? As exploitation? But you are the one who put the content out there! If you didn't want others to see and use and learn from your content, it has always been rule #1 that you shouldn't put it online. Is this not drilled into everyone by this point in time?

> These tools will improve ... I don't think this is a good thing.

First time I've heard this one. Who doesn't want the tools to improve? You don't want to have an option to be excluded from the AI training that you were so upset about? You don't want to have an option to get paid for being included in training? You don't want models developed that don't use copyrighted content? You don't want anything to be better?

You want ChatGPT to continue hallucinating forever? You don't want OpenAI to reduce the harm that comes from it hallucinating?

I find it hard to believe that people who are so viciously against AI really mean everything they say. To so confidently state you want the world to halt progress on the most innovative and useful inventions of our time that can measurably improve people's lives is a hot take indeed.
It seems to be a limit on the input length of the elements, if they have a larger name then it does not work
Cantor dust

https://youtu.be/C8--cXwuuFQ?si=xamOxGk2hpD5Mlmq

https://inside.battelle.org/blog-details/battelle-publishes-...
If people are too lazy to vote and yet complain about the outcome of elections... who's really the crazy one?
Yep. Just because I don't use copilot doesn't mean I'm not stuck reviewing a bunch of copilot code
The routers being exploited are, in many cases, supplied and managed by the ISP lol
23andMe faces lawsuit as hackers sell information on users with Jewish heritage
Energy is not really all that bottlenecked.
>It's not a replacement for search, it simply makes search worse.

I strenuously disagree with this. Search has become all but useless in the last few years. LLM's provide a huge jumpstart on understanding, specifically, what to search on to find the canonical data you are after.
I'm not white and don't think it would be easier for me to get a job in this market (I still have a good one tho)
all this is just hype games to drum up the importance of their product and have no real impact on any real biological research
I take it that your point is the opposite, but it's still a good one: the Blitz would have gone VERY differently had there been AA guns on every rooftop. It'd get pretty expensive for bombers to plunge into the Channel and pilots thrown into a POW camp.
I also have concerns about where mankind is going with AI and believe it will have a chilling effect on original content.

But… I disagree with almost everything this person has written.

The output from LLMs can be wrong. It can be inappropriate or misleading. But it is often astonishingly, breathtakingly accurate and leads us to discover connections and conclusions derived from other humans that we would otherwise have missed or spent much longer looking for.

In one regard, LLMs could not be more human : they are after all simply a reflection of ourselves, an entire corpus of human musings, discussions, interactions. So to say that “an AI can’t advise or suggest X Y and Z” when it’s mirroring existing human opinions is misleading at best, or even just plain wrong.
I'm not sure what your point is. Has there been a prosumer mesh AP product that runs OpenWRT on Kickstarter that I didn't see that failed? Quite possible as I don't trawl through Kickstarter for my wallet's sake. Ubiquity is in the middle of destroying themselves,
so something in the prosumer space seems like it would do well.
Yes, the image interrogation is exactly the point.
This all started out when my friend said that it would be cool to be
able to chat on IRC with an LLM running on his own hardware. And then we were
like, oh hey, we can get this thing to describe images for us
if we use an LMM.

The next thing we want to do is obtain some glasses with cameras and wi-fi and
send images to ollama from them for real-time description. The benefits
are obvious, especially for mobility purposes.
Desci Labs (1) do something like this - papers and all the associated data (raw data, code, analyses, peer review comments) are published and linked together - along with all the citations to other papers - in a big DAG.

I believe their data is stored in a p2p - it might interest you!

1. https://desci.com/
My best guess is that there might be a group of people who fear the fact that their behaviour can be modelled using straightforward formula, because that threatens their beliefs that there is some sort of cosmic protection.
Yes I did too. What's your point?
Not really the point but AI generated music recommendations have been great for me.
I recently signed up for Qobuz, which costs the same or roughly the same as Spotify. They have a significant amount of recommendations, writing, etc written by actual people. It is of vastly higher quality than anything automatically generated by Spotify. I've only occasionally found something I like through Spotify but have already found many things I like through Qobuz.
I'm a software developer, and I've thought about my home router almost never. I've updated it exactly never. I'm using the default one from my ISP, and I think I'm paying a monthly rental fee for the privilege.

I don't know how to tell whether my router is vulnerable, or what I could even do about it. If I'm not savvy enough for your proposed rules, which does seem quite possible, I don't think most people have much hope.
I know a high amount of people have ever tried it, but my primary reason for responding was the “constantly” qualifier, which admittedly I could’ve made clearer. I would’ve answered yes to that survey question, but I wouldn’t say I use AI tools constantly or that it is typically how I solve a problem at work.
this is a pretty simple cron system. curious if the authors investigated temporal and other similar workflow engines for the advanced cron feature set (https://docs.temporal.io/workflows#spec disclaimer: i used to work there)
"AI output is fundamentally derivative"

By that definition, so is all human output. Musicians spend years studying and practicing other people's music before writing their own, painters spend years trying to replicate techniques before mastering their own, programmers spend years reading other people's bugs before authoring their own. All expression of skill is ultimately derivative. Sometimes slightly, sometimes verbatim, sometimes outright plagiarism.

This is why we reserve "derivative" for cases where the output has a similarities and obvious connection, and why we have a hard time dealing with it in practice - it's impossible to disallow a human from using past experiences in future works.

We taught a pile of melted sand to think using principles of learning (very roughly) similar to ours, and now we get upset that it worked and they apply what they learnt because now only we are allowed to do that.
I'm sure their competitors aren't shamed - as they shouldn't. OpenAI, especially, has done tremendously good work. If it wasn't for them, perhaps Mistral wouldn't be news today?

Competitors are highly motivated to improve.

This is the good side of free markets, when they work well. And why the fearmongering calling for rent-seeking regulation of AI is shameful.
Why Javascript front end developers specifically?
I say we punish the car manufacturers for making easy to steal catalytic converters. Take it all the way up the chain. It's their responsibility for designing a flawed product they knew was flawed. It's not your fault the cat was stolen. It was the manufacturers.
I get it, but what if creativity isn’t your use case? Why so one dimensional?

I don’t want to do corporate training modules, but I don’t care if they buy stock art or generate it using gpt. I don’t want to talk to a customer service bot at all, but I’d rather talk to one that is well built and capable. I don’t want to write cover letters. Now I don’t.

There’s plenty of ways for tools to be used inappropriately, and if you simply stop believing that “AI” exists and try to understand it as another tool, you can avoid falling into the pattern of angst that keeps going around.
My first discovery was "Santauron"!? - by combining Santa Claus and Sauron.
Oh, I certainly agree with that, and was hoping this was considered the norm (as it has been in my experience).
I agree but most of this. Of course I would rather speak to a person, but replacing every chatbot with a person will increase cost (my cost). Do I really need a random person to read me a pre-written script when a chatbot can do the same thing? You think these people have permission to do things a chatbot can't? A chatbot can escalate your problem to a manager when necessary too.

You don't want AI music recommendations? Great, don't use it. Go speak to people. Many find discovery algorithms useful.

Want some custom art? Pay an artist. You can do this once a week at most before you're broke?

It's not a replacement for search? Google search was gamed by spammy websites and shitty people for years before AI.

It's idealistic. It's an easy opinion to have. You're not solving any problems.

AI has it's place and it's not meaningful art, a replacement for genuine human interaction or going to solve all of our problems. But it turns out at a REALLY GREAT autocomplete is a powerful tool. That's good enough.
AWS-Lite
I've worked remote for many years.

Anecdotally: During COVID when remote jobs started going mainstream, the number of weird and scammy applications we received spiked. We also had a couple problems with people joining remote but keeping their old jobs or getting a second job (discovered following investigation of their underperformance and inconsistent availability).

When we started telling interview candidates that we'd fly them in and put them in a hotel for the last stage of the interview, most of the questionable candidates started dropping out of the interview pipeline by themselves.

In many cases we didn't actually bother flying them out. Just the thought of having to come into the office for a single day was enough of a filter.

Was it perfect? No, of course not. We had one candidate who couldn't be away from his family for medical reasons and we happily accommodated. We also had one hire who went through the whole process and proceeded to do almost no work at all for 6 months unless a manager was breathing down his neck at every step.

But it cut down on the number of problem candidates massively.
It’s really uncanny - it give you an intense, unblinking stare
The idea seems so similar to the classical AMB ambiguous operator introduced by John McCarthy [0]. The implementation seems similar to what I've done a while ago, too, just in Lisp and using Lisp primitives rather than function decorators.

[0] http://www.randomhacks.net/2005/10/11/amb-operator/

[1] https://github.com/phoe/amb/
I’ve picked it apart myself elsewhere in another reply. Enjoy.
I don't have. It's something I thought about trying for an update of rv8 (to assign almost all RISC-V registers to x86 registers), but have never got around to.
Container breakout through process.cwd trickery and leaked fds
We're over the 80% hand hurdle now.
Get co founder? Lots of devs sitting around burning thru their savings.
I don't think your comment is in line with HN guidelines, you might consider making edits.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> We're going to have incredible Pixar/Disney/Ghibli-beating animation tools within months. Creatives stuck in low-autonomy roles in the Hollywood studio system can finally break out on their own.

Animators React 11: Mulan, Aladdin, Anime Rock Paper Scissors -- And some old school animators reacting to it - https://youtu.be/jQ_DfORb3kw?si=5pvu0OBOQGOqkY-8

And I'll also recommend Disney Animator REACTS to AI Animation! https://youtu.be/xm7BwEsdVbQ?si=0WrTOri3VQRldL1k

Yes, the tools are there... but a typewriter allowing someone to get past poor hand writing or a word processor allowing easier editing doesn't change the underlying creative choices.

... and currently going through the entire Foundation series (currently part way through Foundations edge) as audio books so I can't skip over the not as interesting parts... I'm going to say that I really don't want 1950s Asimov. I've had the entirety of my desires filled for that.
The problem is that so-called AI isn't just a neutral tool for generating and exploring ideas in the whole idea space, nor is it a particular human being with particular experiences and talents and biases and ideas and a particular personality that can generate something interesting and unique, large language models always give you essentially the average of the entire Corpus of human output given whatever input you gave it. So they are always guaranteed to give you the most lukewarm, generic, uncreative ideas and output imaginable. Just try to get it to write something arguing against a widely held position or for a unique position. You're very quickly find that you can't really get it to do that, because that's fundamentally opposed to how it's reward function works so of course it isn't going to do that. This is because the problem stretches even further than just affecting what kinds of ideas large language models can produce on their own, too, because if you are asking it to expand on and process an idea you've given it, that processing itself will be subject to reverting to the mean, and so even if you have a human inputting unique and interesting ideas into the large language model, all you will get out is eventually more generic sludge with all of the interesting aspects scrubbed out. So ultimately everything created with LLMs will be lowest common denominator populist sludge with no interesting ideas or defining characteristics. And your fundamentally not going to be able to solve that until you come up with a completely different method for doing this with an entirely different reward function, with the problem being that the only quantitative, data based way of determining whether an output is good is to compare it to what's common in the Corpus of human output, since otherwise you get very quickly into very complex philosophical questions of Truth and value and logic that just aren't legible to a computer system.
Thanks for the great work, Ian!

As far a second-generation Freenet, I heard i2p started out as a proposed re-factoring and generalization of Freenet's encrypted transport layer. Are there any plans on using i2p to carry Freenet traffic?
The section "Short-form video will cannibalize itself" notably fails to mention the literal self-cannibalization, already popular and rising, in the form of sludge:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/sludge-content-1.67161...
It's very strange how many Luddites inhabit the tech world. I would expect to find this diatribe in many places but not on a developers blog.
I've hosted interviews where candidates can use Google to look up documentation and such.

If I saw a candidate using Google or GitHub search to try to look up the entire solution then I'd stop them. That's missing the point.
Some people choose to grow food as a hobby partly because they believe it will help with climate change. Studies like this help them make a better-informed decision.
Spotify (and most other services) actually have a mix of human and algorithimic recommendations in things like discover weekly: https://www.theverge.com/2015/9/30/9416579/spotify-discover-...
Did LLMs not take time and effort to create? There's this ongoing sentiment in the AI detractors that for something to be meaningful it requires a human to have spent time making it. Meanwhile we live in a world where the overwhelming majority of things we see and interact with are already made by machines or are machines themselves.
At the point you're thinking AI is superior at generating Ghibli-like movies it essentially is as powerful as any human (understands the world and our preferences for storytelling), that is smarter than all of us by some margin. (I'm not talking about ASI yet.) Which by the way renders the whole argument (your point included) meaningless because you shouldn't even be giving it commands at that point. It should do have freedom to make its own decisions.
I'm blind, but I wouldn't know. I haven't used bard or gpt or any of that,
and I don't plan on doing so. I thought about playing with GPT back in
early 2023, when the hype really started picking up. But when I realized
that they wanted my phone number, I noped out.
>compares guns to social media, forces a public apology

I would LOVE, LOVE, LOVE for the GOP to force a gun manufacturer to turn around and apologize, it will never happen. Ever.

The "evidence" that social media is killing kids is far from causual. I feel confident there's a link, but that's feelings. I also can't help but feel there's a lot of scapegoating social media for the struggles of a generation that's facing a lot of headwinds. Educational infrastructure is crumbling, the generational wealth gap is growing, if you talk to kids you hear very real concerns about climate change, etc... Pinning all of this on social media is like saying sour patch kids is the root cause of diabetes.
My favorite is two bears, sitting a campfire, a hunter's clothing scatter around. One bear is telling the other "I love it when they play dead'.
Where Southerners Go to Fill the Tank and Feed the Family
Would you point to some completely open models if they exist?
As usual with language models, you have to put in the work yourself to have fun with them.

I laughed when "Vindaloo + Bubble" gave me "Burp", and "Burp + No Bacon" gave me "Sad"
https://archive.ph/ZHN29
Interesting to see how different teams approaches to the same issue. Often when reading this sort of thing I'm in PR mode and question why they did certain things the way they did. Then I realise that has probably been asked and answered a dozen times before it got released.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing this.
thank you, i'll get in touch with them again using the information
Probably turn out like the Mozilla Foundation and hundreds of other foundations giving piles of money to do good, which ends up meaning do good for the directors of the foundation.
I don't think that's a good analogy.

Car manufacturers are required to do recalls on cars that have airbags that explode rather than inflate. Even 20 year old clunkers. They widely publicize cars they think aren't actually safe anymore so customers can choose to update.

When food is shipped out to customers full of listeria, they don't say "you should have kept a full pcr lab in the kitchen and tested every bite, this is obviously the eater's fault", they flood the news with recall notices and take the food back and offer a refund. (and often are still sued because they too have responsibility).

The firewall stopped doing it's job, if it had done it's job properly the device wouldn't have been owned.
Why shouldn't firewall manufacturers be required to have some responsibility when the firewall is shown to not actually firewall?
100% agree this is a perfect use case for Cadence or Temporal.
The legal aspect of this is interesting.

It seems like leaving bystanders alone and removing the threat (what the FBI did) is in everyone's best interests. Nobody wants to get dragged to court over an old Linksys.

Still, this isn't a foreign warzone. These are devices that were presumably owned by Americans, working out of American homes. I wonder under what legal authority the FBI can hack into and modify American devices. What if they accidentally brick something? What if they find evidence of personal illegal activity?
I'm not trying to shoot the messenger, but that is pretty up there in the list of dumbest things, and accompanying reason for dumb things, I've heard in quite a long time

Also, I especially enjoy that control-f "iam" or "sts" on https://docs.aws.amazon.com/vpc/latest/userguide/aws-ipv6-su... is all hurp-durp as is $(dig sts.api.aws. AAAA) so I guess one should be sure to email themselves some credentials in any such IPv6-only EC2 setup. I wondered if it was just a documentation oversight but https://docs.aws.amazon.com/general/latest/gr/sts.html seems to agree

Now I'm just deathly curious and will try to remember to boot up one of these allegedly IPv6-only EC2 setups to see what running $(aws --debug sts get-caller-identity) does from one of those Instance Profiles
I'm pretty sure one of the varjo headsets had displays like you describe.
Aquaman + Amber = Amber Heard, lol
What's your take on this? Not an expert but I think some of these are (vaguely?) based on Studio Ghibli aesthetics:

https://old.reddit.com/r/aiArt/comments/17zmx1n/unreleased_1...
> I still think this is a design that mostly makes sense only if you have a problem domain for which both attenuation and delegation make sense.

I would argue that supporting attenuation and delegation (almost?) always makes sense. It's very common that I find myself wishing I could grant some piece of software some but not all permissions to some resources; this can be relatively straightforward when the authorization scheme supports attenuation and delegation, but is painful when it doesn't.

As you mention in the post, users often want to do things that the developer hadn't thought of - I'd argue that's still the case even for what you might say is a basic CRUD app.

(Yes, this is related to the old ACL-vs-capability-model debate.)

Now that said, I'm not saying Macaroons make sense for every use case - just that I think attenuation and delegation do.
You'd need high usage density to justify investing on a GPU just to run a 70b model locally.
> Chrome adding AI to every text field.

Horrifying! I'm going to hazard a guess that it won't be running inference locally... Should we tolerate changes like this?
He's probably seen the VC money being thrown at anyone who promises the coming AI utopia.
We have a slack reminder that executes on the hour, I’ve noticed that it take about 30 seconds to a minute past the hour for the reminder to actually fire.
The idea that machine learning like large language models and image generating systems exploit labor might be up for debate, but the fact that they are disproportionately damaging to the environment compared to the alternatives is certainly true in the same way that it's true for Bitcoin mining. And there's more than just those two aspects to consider, it's also very much worth considering how the widespread use of such technologies and the integration of them into our economy might change our political, social, and economic landscape, and whether those changes would be good or bad or worth the downsides. I think it's perfectly valid to decide that an emerging technology is not worth the negative changes it will make in society or the downsides that it will bring with it, and reject its use, technological progress is not necessarily inevitable in the way that every new technology must become widespread.
This is not a dialect thing, this is a factual thing. They are different, and anyone that uses macarOOn to mean a sweetly filled meringue sandwich is wrong.