skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Isn't using f-strings to build SQL queries a large footgun? I can imagine a junior developer introducing a SQL injection by not completely grasping the sqlbind API.

Using the quickstart example, visually both lines are very similar and both are functional, but one of them may introduce a SQL injection:

sql = f'SELECT * FROM table WHERE field1 = {q/value1} AND field2 > {q/value2}'
sql = f'SELECT * FROM table WHERE field1 = {value1} AND field2 > {value2}'
I think what you're saying makes sense, but you are also making an assumption that communist <=> fascist politics exist on a one dimensional spectrum, which is not really true. There are totalitarian and libertarian axes as well.. More so, the problem w/ all the examples we see is that these 'errors' are aligned particularly well with the corporate-progressive party line, while there are less errors in the other direction. You would expect to see multiracial Zulu warriors too if we were to believe the explanation you provided, but we only see multi-racial Kings of England, which amounts to a quasi-racist cleansing of historical data. This happened via either a bad system prompt, RLHF implemented by biased tutors, or tutors w/ biased instructions or some combo of all three.
I use chatGPT every single day. I use it more often than google search, and google search at this point is just a frontend for reddit for me.

Can anybody say anything even remotely similar about gemini? Would you even consider using gemini for searching anything after realizing that a core feature of it seems to be distorting reality and lying to you?

Google has burned a ton of goodwill with this garbage. How long until this type of AI is being used for moderation on youtube? Will I be allowed to send emails to other people without a warning after an LLM decides the content of the email is problematic?

This might seem far fetched, but ask gemini some uncomfortable questions, and look at how it responds, and it won't seem so far off anymore. Downthread I gave an example of asking it which parks in Palo Alto have the least violent drug addicts or homeless encampments, and it not only refuses to respond, but it scolds me for even asking the question. Finding and correlating information like that is *exactly* the type of thing that AI should be good at.
If we plug this in without telling anyone, nobody will know we caused the outage
No, there's not.

There's the Monty Hall problem and then there's the "can I get away with falling back on claiming the question was somehow wrong after embarrassing myself by getting the Monty Hall problem incorrect" problem. No one who claimed it was unclear or ambiguous did so before getting it wrong.

It's really tiresome to have to always pretend to assume good faith when it's really clear what's going on.
i feel like this could be its own social media idk.
The common narrative among mobile developers seems to be that on iOS people will pay for your stuff, less so on Android. Note that I'm not a mobile developer (with the exception of some industrial Android apps that don't count), but this is my impression so if i wanted to sell a mobile app i'd start with iOS.

It's possible that a lot of software developers and/or companies thought like me and only did iOS apps.
I agree having grown up on sci-fi about that but increasingly wonder whether we’ll get enough AI to change the cost dynamics for sending fragile meat-bags to a harsh environment instead of robots. Also, I suspect climate change is going to force NASA to direct an increasing percentage of their work to earth, but I hope the symbolic potential keeps us from looking completely inward.
This android wallet has an internal browser and it incorrectly strips www. from hosts. This also affects their permission system, meaning this is the perfect bug to phish users.

They didn't answer multiple mails in 30 days, so it's being disclosed.
Homes are not only for investment contrary to what people want you to believe. You are correct that most homes will cost you a ton in maintenance/overhead/taxes etc over the years. You buy a home to live. Something to call your own. Something where you don't need a landlord to tell you what you can or can't do (be careful of shitting HOAs though in the US). Something where you most likely grow/build a family.

If you own a home, yes be ready to spend shit ton of money on shit ton of expenses and then sometimes, more things will break which you didn't plan for. So plan for those.
Correct, I didn't say it's a bad thing. I said it's not clear that it's a good thing (i.e. an asset)
Generalising From Thin Slices of Behavior: other people as "cognitive surfaces"
I think most stressful development environments happen because a manager either isn't familiar with how software development is done (resulting in unreasonable expectations), or the manager isn't communicating expectations upwards effectively.

It's important to understand when the business needs a certain capability, and that should be communicated to the development team (so that the correct scope tradeoffs can be made). Bonus points if the business can communicate the challenge they're trying to solve as opposed to the desired output. (Sometimes, you can start with a simple shell script that relieves the pressures of the business while iterating towards a more feature-rich solution.)

It's also important for the business to understand that the goal is a minimum functional implementation for the capability, and that there are development quality standards that must not be sacrificed to hit a date (bad code is a liability). Also, they have to understand that the date they are communicating to the development team is a "I would like it by this date", not a deadline / guarantee that they'll have that software capability on that date. (As a consumer, I do not set deadlines on a provider in many industries.)

Finally, a manager needs to understand the project health on a regular interval and communicate progress and confidence levels as the project continues. This is usually where expectation management goes wrong -- because the conversation about the work becomes metrics driven (instead of talking about the true story of what is actually happening with the work).

Everyone involved needs to understand the flexibility required to develop a useful, trustworthy product -- and that the time required will vary depending on a number of factors (some knowable / mostly unknowable).

As long as there is trust and expectation management between all stakeholders, a program will usually go positively (and relatively stress free).

(Lessons learned from shipping enterprise software applications & running a development consultancy.)
Could this be used to efficiently model an hierichical comment thread for example, like HN or reddit?
In addition to the "100 door" formulation that helped me a lot, the way I rationalise it is that:

* When you choose your first door, the chance the car is behind that door is 1/3, for obvious reasons.

* When Monty opens the goat door, nothing actually changes that is relevant to your odds. He is always going to open a goat door, whether your first choice is a car or a goat, so it's basically irrelevant. He hasn't move the car, he hasn't given you any information you didn't already know when you made your first choice. So the odds of your first choice being correct can't have changed. They are still 1/3.

* The only possible outcomes are that your first-chosen door has the car, or the other remaining door has the car. The probability if your first-chosen door having the car is (still) 1/3, and the probabilities of all possible outcomes must add up to 1, so the probability of the other door having the car are 1 - 1/3 = 2/3.
There is a common cause.

Humans.

You mention both Cost Savings and Design Mistakes. Those are common, and will occur in future projects.

Don't think totalitarian Gov has any monopoly on hiding design problems. Every company does it.

Those are both things, drives, that the US has shown to be incapable of administering. All industry is rife with cost cutting. And "safety" is very much cut in the name of profits. It happens today, just not 'obvious'. We don't hear about it until there is a meltdown.

I do hope that new designs are better. But I am absolutely not confident that humans have learned anything and wont subvert any improved designs again for cost savings.
Armor is a one time expense, that's the thing. But more men is a no time expense unless you are at war. This is before the establishment of (modern) standing armies, and the occasional armored units victorious over larger unarmored ones were the closest thing to an exception.

The initial decline of the knight was perhaps less about firearms than about pikeman tactics (tercio and all that) with the various revivals of heavy cavalry mentioned, e.g. under Gustavus Adolphus, being merely reactions to shifts in the balance between pike and shot. When it's pike and shot vs pike and shot they will eventually try to outbid each other in focus on shot, until they become vulnerable again to the heavy cavalry charge that had been deemed obsoleted by pike.
2.5% a year on the total endowment of a university is higher than the wealth taxes of virtually every country in the world that implements them.

This wouldn't be treating them the same as trillion dollar corporations, this would be treating them worse. The original Jacobin article says:

> And unlike the federal tax, this tax would be on the schools’ total endowments, not just the income they make from it every year.

I think it's unlikely this bill will pass because if it does, it would be tax-advantaged to operate a for-profit corporation for the sole purpose of making yearly donations to a school than just giving the money to the school directly. 21% corporate federal income tax + 8% massachusetts state tax of a 5% yearly return is effectively a 1.45% tax on wealth which is a better rate than schools get (there is no corporate wealth tax in America).

Even if one agrees with taxing universities the same as any business, this particular implementation treats private universities worse than businesses.
Sounds like a great reason to disincentivize University donations through policy.

There's no reason to donate thousands of dollars to a private, wealthy university that isn't to curry favor.
All of these examples are end-products. "AI" itself will not be. The winner in AI will be whoever permeates other products/brands most successfully, and end-user brand familiarity doesn't matter much for that. Familiarity among engineering and product leaders is what matters.
You say problem, true Martian hears challenge. Turning a desert into paradise probably starts with raising air humidity a bit.
It would be hilarious if one of the bullets were “42”.
Malcolm Gladwell has a podcast in Revisionist History where he likens museums to dragons (hoarding art); I think that's wonderfully apt. Whenever I see institutions, like Harvard, endlessly accumulating wealth above-and-beyond what they "need", I always think of them as "another kind of dragon". I think this interacts with Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy[1].

[1] https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html
But the base model, when its trained on the whole internet, will have some extreme biases on topics where there's a large and vocal group on one side and the other side is very silent. So RLHF is the attempt to correct for the biases on the internet.
I expected, from the title, to see locales in the world where predicted dystopias came to pass… not movie sets.
What scientific term or concept ought to be better known? Brian Eno answers
Nice find! I have wondered this. It's easy to say after you have come around that you had first misunderstood the scenario and done the math right in that context, even if in truth you (implicitly) understood the scenario but just neglected to account for the constraints.
This twitter account is well known for posting misleading and inflammatory content meant to further certain conservative narratives.
why would anyone choose to invest in something
that could potentially incur losses

It's a house. They'd LIVE IN IT, or they'd rent it out.
It's definitely cheaper to own than rent in the long run, but like 15+ years.

House appreciates and keep up with inflation, but not a great investment vehicle because the nearly break even ROI. It's not all sunshine and roses contrary to common wisdom.

In my view, owning a home primarily acts as a safeguard against inflation, it represents a "safe" investment option for "lazy" individuals who reluctant to learn more complex investment strategies that could yield higher, riskier return.
https://lop.parl.ca/sites/ParlInfo/default/en_CA/legislation...

Here's the data. Seems like they're doing a fine job to me.
If there are a lot of them and there is a b-tree index somewhere you might find it useful to scan them in alphabetical order.
My general assumption is not that they’re random, but at least that they’re not correlated; in particular that Amazon is not in the habit of handing out, like, account IDs 676363687000 - 676363687999 to a single organization. Even if they did hand out a sequential batch of 1000 account IDs, it would be more likely to be 676363687541 - 676363688540 than a set with a single consistent prefix.

Odds are that an account wildcard match like 676363687* will just match a few hundred entirely random AWS accounts.
You have a point. China is going wild on call. In industrialised countries, coal is being pushed out though. (Your graph shows the US and Germany.)

So it's do-able, but we haven't quite reached the tipping point yet in China.

The thing is: I am confident that Solar will push out Coal, even in China.

China is building a lot of new factory capacity for PV modules. Factory capacity is proportional to the acceleration of PV power production: It's a second derivative. The more battery capacity gets added, the faster PV capacity will start growing. The more PV capacity grows, the more clean power will be produced, competing with coal.

http://www.earth-policy.org/mobile/releases/highlights47
There is a difference between a design flaw and an implementation flaw though. It seems like for PDFs, those are mostly design flaws, e.g. doing potentially malicious silent tasks in the background without the user's knowledge. Although it could be argued that the OS should be the component guarding against those types of attacks instead of the PDF implementation.
I always feel a little dirty when I have to go on a discord to find some information.
That would be anything hosted by the Eclipse Foundation. Either Java-based or abandonware or sometimes both.
I have this question too
So. The people waving Trump flags at the convoy. Not political?
I just read the pamphlet "Silent Weapons to Quiet Wars" that you suggested and would say it is not worth reading.

There is not much in it, besides a (presumably) faked origin and typesetting, a brief analogy to physics and electronics, hushed talk of banks and domination, and a lot of hand waving and winking at the reader
I haven't tried this model yet (they seem to be under high load). Mistral's previous top model (Mixtral 8x7B) wasn't quite as good as GPT-4, but it seemed close. Clearly way better than GPT 3.5. Many Mixtral responses were better than the GPT-4 ones.
A nice goat, you say? How much for a mean goat, jaded from years of being the spoiler prize that nobody wants?
I know you're joking, but the government had asked for comments on some of this work previously, and part of the C++ committee did in fact respond.

I had read all 200+ responses, and was planning on writing up a post about them, because it is interesting, but I've had other things going on this month, and they actually shipped this before I managed to do so. Oh well, maybe I'll still end up doing this.

Anyway, there's a lot of junk in there, but out of major organizations, the vast majority were pro, a few were ambivalent, and the committee's response stuck out as one of the only strongly anti responses. (It was also weird for other reasons that turned out to be a benign misunderstanding.)
They were also more specifically authored by the same individual!
Grievous is absolutely the right word -- stocks, flows, and dimensions are cherry picked to have maximum verbal impact without looking at whether the underlying measure even makes sense.

One of my favorites is something like "the richest 10 people have more net worth than the bottom 40% of Americans SUMMED". Well the bottom 40% of Americans are in debt, so if you have $1, the above statement is true for you too!

The sleight-of-hand happens with the word "net worth" which usually means financial or in-bank net worth. For most of the population, their actual worth is stored in their human capital. If you account for that, I assure you the top 10 or even 100 richest Americans do not have greater worth than 150 million bottom Americans (to proxy this, look at income).

A easier way to visualize this is to consider the statement "Joe Biden owns more cars (3) than the bottom 30% of the US SUMMED (0)". Cars is such a weird dimension of inequality.
Trump wants to unravel Biden's landmark climate law. Here is what's most at risk
I don’t think Ben was trying to say it’s a cultural agenda thing. It’s clear to me he wants to avoid that third rail for his point. I think he spelled it out well on his subscription only podcast Dithering with John Gruber.

They were afraid of being criticized for only white men when you asked for a picture of a CEO (likely based on input data) or a woman for a nurse or some other traditionally stereotypical profession.

So they seem to have put in something to ensure diversity to try to correct for bias in the input data. That seems good to me.

But they overcorrected in a way it just wouldn’t show you white people. Turns out the Nazis and founding fathers were more diverse than I was taught. Oops.

But worse, and the big problem Ben pointed out, was there was no way this wasn’t known internally. And the company culture seems to be at a point where either you can’t speak up or it’s ignored because diversity is good even if it’s at the cost of all accuracy on easily verifiable facts.

And that’s a problem. They avoided the culture war so hard out of fear they crammed themselves back into the culture war and it blew up in their face. It was an unforced error that they must have seen coming. So this whole incident seems very indicative of a culture/management problem inside Google.
Dunno, but for example I tried to compile Stalker SoC and it was very messy adventure. It took me whole day to build it (deps problems, compile errors) and it was such an disappointment because game just crashed. Maybe I will try again one day.
Depends on many factors, we're often spending hundreds of thousands or millions on "smart bombs" to blow up structures that probably cost thousands.
The key is that if the contestant chose a goat then Monty is FORCED to reveal the other goat. It’s this which skews the odds. He has (often) added information to the game.
In Northern Europe, you definitely need Wind power and probably some natural gas dispatchable capacity.

In most other places, you can overbuild the PV panels. Which isn't too bad, since you do not have to overbuild inverters or grid connections.
Well, it really didn't save any ROM space since nothing in the ROM used it! Woz has since said that he thinks that the Apple BASIC interpreter (in ROM) could have been shrunk by 1KB (5KB->4KB) without any loss of performance by selective use of SWEET 16, but that never actually happened.

https://www.apple2history.org/museum-a-l/articles/byte8501/
I want my elite institutions to be exclusionary.
> Profiting off an inmate's desire to communicate with their family seems egregiously "unreasonable", for starters

How much is profit versus heightened cost, e.g. monitoring?
Building PlantHub: A Data "Plantform" for monitoring plants
> Monty isn't a contestant. Monty's action and outcome is part of the fixed description of the problem. He opens one of the doors and reveals a goat. Full stop.

Incorrect and I invite you to cite the line of the prompt that says otherwise. This is the critical missing piece of information that makes it the commonly understood “Monty hall problem” and not the improperly stated prompt that we actually have.

“Monty did this” != “Monty would have done this regardless of your previous choices”.

Unless this is stated, you just have an incomplete problem. If you don’t know the mechanics by which Monty decides to share information, it does not give you probabilistic info.

Probability questions frankly often require you to make judgements about the probable starting conditions based on information given so far. You frequently need to recognize that your current situation is the result of prior processes that are or are not defined.
I do hope so! (Just as I'd hoped that the government's earlier blunderous and heavy-handed fines for news links from Google and Facebook might move Canadians to looking into other sites like DDG, but it didn't seem like that really happened).

What would CoSocial.ca do about the risk of being held legally accountable for "harmful" content on your platform? The incentive to censor such content with a broad brush may be, if anything, stronger for you than for big companies like Facebook which have legal teams. Some content (like hate speech) might be pretty obvious, but there might also be reasonable content that your platform could still risk a legal battle over. What if -- say, it's early 2020 -- and someone writes a post arguing that Health Canada's official advice about masks is incorrect? Now it's your responsibility to decide if the government is going to deem that post "harmful".
What? Of course they should be comfortable
I think the GP is talking about granting access to a particular bucket to an unbounded number of customer AWS accounts — probably in requester-pays config. (Think: static data used by an Amazon Marketplace virtual appliance.)
DevOps Bookmarks
From what I heard Gemini might be better at translation tasks than GPT4.
Humans don't backtrack well :)
Disappointed to not see A Clockwork Orange and Thamesmead

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_(film)
> AI will make it far easier to keep people in line.

An alternative explanation is that AI companies are using RLHF to help the 90% understand that a lot of things aren't black and white but that there is relevant context to keep in mind. For many cases, that's probably useful (like if someone is asking if one movie is better than another movie). At the extremes, which are hopefully rare (are a lot of people really wondering if Hitler is better or worse than some Twitter posts), you get nonsense.
50k per driver per year sounds low. This page [0] suggests the low end is 60k and that's just what the driver makes, not the full loaded cost of the employee with benefits. I've seen the estimate for a loaded cost to be 25-40% more than the salary. So it ends up being more like 75k per driver.

[0]https://careers.sf.gov/role/?id=3743990001605626
[1]https://www.sba.gov/blog/how-much-does-employee-cost-you#:~:....
You're missing the point (either on purpose or accidentally). LLMs give wrong answers to questions all the time, because they don't have the ability to actually internally reason. Whatever your moral platform, even simple ethical principles require a couple stages of basic induction ("X is wrong, Person A does more X than Person B => Person B is worse than Person A"). Getting an LLM to flawless and unobjectionably execute moral syllogisms of this type is really, really tough, even if you accept a basic axiomatic view of morality. Hitler vs Elon is an obvious case that people are waving around because it looks bad, but to me it seems far more reasonable to make an MVP which refuses to address moral issues entirely, rather than improperly execute a weird edge case where training data is sparse or even biased (ex. "is Narendra Modi worse than than Xi Jinping").
Canonical's Open Documentation Academy
Strong enough AI, probably. Until then, light speed dictates that even remote robotic exploration would work better with a command&control facility at the scene.