skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While I completely agree, I think we've seen enough to realize that something as powerful as what OpenAI is developing shouldn't be freely released to the public. Not as a product, nor as source code.

Dangerous and powerful things like weapons and chemicals are restricted in both physical and informational form for safety reasons. AI needs to be treated similarly.
I generally agree that this is a big problem with Go, so I don't want to quibble too much, but the author acknowledges that the language doesn't have enums and that they're just trying to use this feature like enums (TBF, this is common advise on the internet and a lot of code does this): instead the author should be thinking "how do I solve this problem without enums since they don't exist?"

I'd be willing to bet that there's just a better way to do whatever the actual real-world example they want to achieve is (this was not entirely clear to me from the examples in the post).

Like I said though, that doesn't mean that (real) enums wouldn't be an even better way to do it than whatever the Go way is for a given problem, so I don't want to quibble too much since I think this is one of my biggest day-to-day complaints about Go, but it's worth pointing out that the premise can be flawed and that it's still a problem in the language, these two things aren't completely orthogonal.

TL;DR — Instead of pulling in a code generator and another library, it may be good to think of alternate ways to do the same thing without a lot of extra code footprint.
Getting an alpha version done in two days is a pretty mighty accomplishment. Congratulationa!

I have been working on a learning project to produce an interpreter of a sub set of Python written in Python (most arithmetic ops, assignment ops, if-elif-else, while-break, function calls) and it took me about 2 months to complete it in my free time.

I wish I could be more focused and motivated.
And yet lots of Google products get released with bugs. Buggy software is the default. Elaborate explanations are not required.

In concrete terms, what exactly could Google have hoped to gain from releasing an image generator that defaults to black Vikings? If it wasn't a mistake, what is the grand plan that it contributes to? And why has Google immediately about-faced and abandoned this plan? Did they think everyone would love the black Vikings?

In any case, the entire premise of this confected outrage (that AIs should be expected to produce historically accurate images for arbitrary inputs) is completely daft.
Go doesn't have enums and as such they cannot suck. Something that is non-existent can't be good or bad. The title is clickbait. Go has constants, and they have a great feature for defining constants (iota).
PostHog | Full-Time | product engineers and ex technical founder engineers | Remote (all remote) | Hiring GMT-8 to GMT+1 PostHog helps engineers build better products by combining product analytics, feature flags, session replay.

* open source, building a dev tool. We have a public handbook (posthog.com/handbook) if you want to learn how we work, pay and more in complete detail.

* we are a real business... nearly at $10M ARR / profitability in sight / lots of capital

* we are growing through more autonomy and transparency not through process.

* we have a ton of scale and a bunch of super interesting technical problems to solve

* we're building 20 more products over the next couple of years, so you could end up building one of those

* we need: product engineers and ex technical founders to build products, engineers with clickhouse experience

* we are also hiring: security focused SREs

posthog.com/careers
You tried Gemini 1.5 or just 1.0? I got an invite to try 1.5 Pro which they said is supposed to be equivalent to 1.0 Ultra I think?

1.0 Ultra completely sucked but when I tried 1.5 it is actually quite close to GPT4.

It can handle most things as well as ChatGPT 4 and in some cases actually does not get stuck like GPT does.

I'd love to hear other peoples thoughts on Gemini 1.0 vs 1.5? Are you guys seeing the same thing?

I have developed a personal benchmark of 10 questions that resemble common tasks I'd like an AI to do (write some code, translate a PNG with text into usable content and then do operations on it, Work with a simple excel sheet and a few other tasks that are somewhat similar).

I recommend everyone else who is serious about evaluating these LLMs think of a series of things they feel an "AI" should be able to do and then prepare a series of questions. That way you have a common reference so you can quickly see any advancement (or lack of advancement)

GPT-4 kinda handles 7 of the 10. I say kinda because it also gets hung up on the 7th task(reading a game price chart PNG with an odd number of columns and boxes) depending on how you ask: They have improved over the last year slowly and steadily to reach this point.

Bard Failed all the tasks.

Gemini 1.0 failed all but 1.

Gemini 1.5 passed 6/10.
Go's iota is probably one of the worst ideas in all programming languages.

Not a full typesafe enum type, the same clunky "enums" (assigned constants) available in C, but they bother to implement an auto-incremented counter.

So you can't depend on the enum for exhaustiveness warnings e.g. on switch statements, type checking, or correctness, but you do get a useless numeric association autogenerated with iota - so that you can lose the association if you re-order your enum values that you have serialized earlier and want to reload in the future.
The question wasn't if I could do a JIT compiler but if the LLM could. Which, there are limitations to the technology, but my opinion is it would go quite far at our current level of technology. Presumably you don't, bit you've shown no evidence that it can't. Whereas I've shown that it's able to decompose the problem and start dotproducting the problem.
> . if you dressed up gpt-4 a bit and removed all its rlhf training to act like a bot, you would struggle to differentiate it from a human

Thats just because tricking a human with a chatbot is easier to do than we thought.

The turing test is a low bar, and not as big of a deal as the mythical importance people put in it, just like people previous put incorrectly large importance on computers beating humans at Go or Chess before it happened.

But that isn't particularly relevant to claims about world ending magic.

Yes, some people can be fooled by AI generated tweets. But that is irrelevant from the absolutely extraordinary claim of world ending magic that really is the same as claiming that Voldemort is real.

> have you read OpenAI's plan for how they're going to regulate AGI, if they do achieve it?

I don't really care if they have a plan, just like I don't care if Google has Voldemort plan. Because magic isn't real, and someone needs to show extraordinary evidence to show that. Evidence like "This is what the AI can do at this very moment, and here is what harm it could cause if it got incrementally better".

IE, go ahead and talk about Soro, and the problems of deepfakes if Soro got a bit better. But thats not "world ending magic"!

> billions of dollars and the smartest people in the world

Billions of dollars are being spent on making chatbots and image generators.

Those things have real value, for sure, and I'm sure the money is worth it.

But techies and startup founders have always made outlandish claims of the importance of their work.

Sure, they might truly think they are going to invent magic. But the reason why thats valuable is because they might make some useful chatbots and image generators along the way, which decidedly won't be literal magic, although still valuable.
I think it's unknowable but most likely overvalued. It is in their best interest to convince everyone that it is more highly valued than it is as they try to diversify. Look at the recent investor gathering they had in Florida. People were desperate to get their attention, even people who have strong political disagreements with them. That only happens because everyone assumes they have a lot of money to invest.
They all genuinely believe themselves to be benign gods over the rest of us. They drink their own KoolAid. At a certain point, influence breaks your brain. Hairless monkeys with a Dunbar number of 150 can't cope with that amount of control over others, so the brain tells itself stories about how everything bad is not it's fault and everything good is.

Here's a hint: If you ever think "I can't trust anyone else with this", you are probably doing something wrong.
Ok, to be fair I should have specified Internet Technologies rather than Web Technologies. And of course there are exceptions to all cases.

But I would wager many people are like me, having made a comfortable income on the back of tcp/ip, dns, bgp, http, html, javascript et al. and it is hard for me to think of very many jobs in the TC range of FAANG companies where familiarity with those technologies is not a requirement.

My point wasn't: you should have been a web developer in 2000. It was: in early 2000s the Internet was the most important advancement in tech and you should have been learning all about it. I am arguing that the same holds for the recent surge in AI technology.
Ok, but that sounds like something that requires a change in legislation. Suing companies for doing something permissible under the current legal structure just doesn't make sense.
why would you want to curse your next generation with inherited wealth? Wouldn't you rather they learn how to work hard from you and to earn their living on their own?
It's billed as a payment system and proof of being a unique human while preserving anonymity. I'm a happy user and have some free money from them. Who's being grifted here?
I don't really want to defend Elon, because I very much dislike him, but there's a bit if a difference between OpenAI vs his own AI startups, which is that his AI startup isn't called Open AI. There's no compunctions about it being a for-profit enterprise, unlike OpenAI which kind of gives a veil of a non-profit.

Like, if a doctor in Manhattan found out that Doctors Without Borders was charging Manhattan medical rates to all the people it was treating in Uganda, that doctor might criticize them for doing that, and I don't think it'd be a good excuse for DWB to say "You charge Manhattan medical rates at your practice, how is that not equally concerning???" because the obvious retort would be to say "Yeah but I'm not pretending to be a non-profit.".
> Go has constants

That's literally what enums are: A set of named constants.

You might be thinking of what is traditionally known as sum types, which some people have recently started calling enums[1]. Indeed, Go does not have sum types.

[1] Presumably because of Rust using the wrong term when specifying its sum types
It is an analogy stating that dissipative systems do not have a Lagrangian, Noether's work applies to Lagrangian systems

Conservation laws in particular are measurable properties of an isolated physical system do not change as the system evolves over time.

It is important to remember that Physics is about finding useful models that make useful predictions about a system. So it is important to not confuse the map for the territory.

Gibbs free energy and Helmholtz free energy are not conserved.

As thermodynamics, entropy, and entropy are difficult topics due to didactic half-truths, here is a paper that shows that the nbody problem becomes invariant and may be undecidable due to what is a similar issue (in a contrived fashion)

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/13175/

While Noether's principle often allows you to see things that can often be simplified in an equation, often it allows you to not just simplify 'terribly difficult calculations' but to actually find computationally possible calculations.
Revenue. Your $20/month is going on the revenue line of accounting. The income line on the accounting can be negative despite your generous $20 donation.
Rather „not organized for the private gain of any person“
> The only thing they haven't done is release the weights.

Not at all. With GPT-3 they only released a paper roughly describing it but in no way it allowed replication (and obviously no source code, nor the actual NN model, with or without weights).

GPT-4 was even worse since they didn't even release a paper, just a "system card" that amounted to describing that its outputs were good.
They’re somehow only concerned with profit, but only concerned with profit in the EU, since their PWA changes only affected that region.
Let me know when both parties have equal power to come to the negotiation table on equal grounds, until then, nah.
>instead the author should be thinking "how do I solve this problem without enums since they don't exist?"

Which is exactly what they do in the post.

They still have every reason to complain about Go's oft suggested lame substitute.
A thing that so many enum solutions miss is that you have to have a path for a value outside of the current definition, or you lose a lot of flexibility in compatibility with any data that crosses wires or disks. Sounds fine for a lot of cases, of course, but in a world of mixed deployment fleets working on data, you pretty much have to have a way to allow a value that is not part of your current definition, or you are basically placing a "poison pill" on your system.
What they are listing is not the undefined behaviors, but rather the C++ language constructs which might lead to them.
Forgive me if this sounds callous, but how can users sign up for a platform, agreeing to a ToS that grants these platforms license to do whatever they want with your content, and then get angry when they do something with it?
Sounds like a good value prop. One thing that I'm hoping is to reduce dependency on a single private company, npm inc., in publishing and distributing modules. But you didn't list this as a value prop. (I notice other posters are upset at the 'fragmentation' of module distribution, but I see this as a strength, not a weakness.)
SEEKING WORK | London | Remote

Design & product partner for your startup.

I'm a design & product leader with 20 years experience. As a fractional leader, I partner with founders & operators to build winning strategies, and execute against them.

Think of me like a Chief Product-Design Advisor on demand, hands on enough to deliver staff level deliverables too. I've often joined teams as the first designer/product head to scale from 0-1, and then 1-many.

I love figuring out what people want, and how to build it, helping with:

• Product management: Minimising risk, maximising value

• Product design: Research, UI, UX, Design systems

• Leadership: Shaping vision & strategy

• Management: Hiring, growing & retaining teams, coaching & advising

• Deliverables: Design deliverables, functional specs, PRD's ready to ship

I generally work with:

• Technical founders who need a product-design thought partner

• Existing functional teams looking to lean on experience, and boost bandwidth

• Scaling teams (pre-seed to series B) looking for their next major growth levers, in some cases helping get into YC

Domain experience in: E-commerce, SaaS, mobile apps, social networks, decentralisation, designer & developer tools.

Read more at https://nad.is/fractional or book a call via http://cal.com/nadonomy.

Even if you’re not sure of the fit— reach out anyway, I love speaking to founders and meeting smart people. :)
I also think each year should start at spring equinox. However, I think that the day of week should be how it is rather than being the same day of week each time.
Actually, I think Solar Hijri calendar will be good, but using Scientific Anno Mundi (not the usual Anno Mundi, and not Hijrah either).
To make daemons easier to write, more uniform, and secure, djb created https://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html and used it for many of his projects

In the corresponding FAQ list, he says this about daemons that detach themselves:

> How can I supervise a daemon that puts itself into the background? When I run inetd, my shell script exits immediately, so supervise keeps trying to restart it.

> Answer: The best answer is to fix the daemon. Having every daemon put itself into the background is bad software design.
I had zero problems, worked on the first try without any re-naming.
They changed their minds and didn't change the name. That's all.
Grunge speak
> in light of their significant investment in supporting PWAs over the last four years

Investing in PWAs for four years is only going to get you so far when you’re eight years behind the competition.

Obviously I’m making numbers up here but to my perspective Apple’s recent investments (bringing them to a level still behind competitors) has a lot more to do with staving off legal threats to their 30% cut on native apps (e.g. the Epic lawsuit) than any benevolence towards the web platform.
> You mean that all the people on HN that use Cloudflare's very generous free tier are at risk of DDOS?

Yes? That's what this story is about. A random small website incurred a 100k charge because someone had the boredom to DDOS them today. Do you think you're not at risk?

> The Internet gets shittier because people are lazy, and I need better arguments to being complicit to this than "I need DDoS protection for my 100-visitor a month blog."

Gonna need you to explain the mechanism here. Because my argument is that Cloudflare is not the devil no matter how much you say it, and that using their service doesn't give them any keys.

What exactly are people lazy about and what are you doing alternatively that makes you different? Just not using Cloudflare? Because that's like not using condoms because you don't want to support a condom monopoly.
Location: Paris, France

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes, SF or NY

Technologies: React (+ Next.js), React Native (+ Expo), Node.js (+ NestJS), TypeScript, GraphQL (+ Hasura), SQL (+ PostgreSQL)

Résumé/CV: https://x.com/axeldelafosse/status/1757035797331525946

Email: axeldelafosse@gmail.com
I think that's common in Switzerland. They call it 80% contracts.
I don't think that follows; Apple is a closed-off, for-profit company, but I do think that a Macbook or an iPhone can be used to assist humanity in its quest for understanding and knowledge. I would agree it might be more helpful for them to be open, but it doesn't imply that it's inherently unhelpful if they're not.
Because the sun is “turned on” during the day, duuh
i wear a black one. Really nice one from charity shop for 7 pounds.. but I dont mind the occasional "steve jobs" snark
Watching this, a couple of questions came up in my mjnd:

1. Siemens rep physically touching things despite vibration sensors being in place - do they not trust the sensors? If they do not, how are they doing routine monitoring? Have someone sit atop the machine and feel for things 24/7? Or is that just the rep grandstanding for the cameras?

2. Time of grid sync only having hh:mm precision. Nitpick, but at 60hz, that is about 50s of imprecision.

3. The mentioned previous unsuccessful attempts - so went wrong? Dunno, I tend to learn more about systems from failure :)
When my failing to find a job for three months is no more painful to me than an employer failing to fill a role for three months, and when applying and interviewing takes so little of my attention that I can also do several other things at the same time (as a company is not paralyzed by conducting some interviews and reviewing some applications), sure.

Since that will never happen—no.
> Anywhere that accepts an Operation Enum type will just as happily accept an int. This is a real pain as it almost completely negates the work we have done here.

Is this a real problem? If there's a function signature that accepts `Operation`, the caller must explicitly cast the `int` to `Operation`. At that point, it's the caller's own fault.

So I'm not really following what this is solving. As demonstrated in the article, sometimes you want string constants, sometimes you want `iota`, other times you want `1 << iota`. I like that Go doesn't dictate which I have to use if I declare an "enum".
I'm not seeing a role for security focused SREs on the careers page, do you have a link to the job description for that one?

The careers page states one can always speculatively apply but you're calling out that role specifically here so I thought I'd mention it.
For JavaScript, it’s `date-fns` for me
In the Free World we call them Billionaires.
KPV LAB Edinburgh | Front-end Engineers | Full-time | Edinburgh, UK | Hybrid 3 days onsite

At KPV LAB we are creating new visually stunning and meaningful ways to explore and present information.

Our tight-knit team of 16 is expanding and looking for more engineers to join one of our two projects, 3D data visualisation, and knowledge exploration.

Web tech stack: TypeScript, React, WebGL (prior WebGL or shader experience is a bonus, but not necessary), Node.js, GraphQL, Postgres.

More details (with pictures of our lovely office in the centre of beautiful Edinburgh) see
https://kpv-lab.co.uk/jobs/
I think boneheaded is a good way to describe the evolution of go. It seems like the original authors were convinced most of the complexity of modern languages was unjustified and have slowly proven themselves incorrect over the years
Where can one read up on [2.]?
Doubtful like they said, while it's a 100,000 the fact is that thats still a drop in the swimming pool that is github, thats why it's lasting so long, because even though the number seems big when it comes to github its a relatively small number, which seems insane, and if a LLM is training it'll end up getting averaged out for the most part by the vast other swaths of code.
Right, but my point is that while regurgitation is not intelligence, the act of doing so is not enough to claim the regurgitator itself is not intelligent. Otherwise, you'd condemn a good half of humanity with the same reasoning.

Or more, if we're willing to consider most peoples' reactions to at least some political topics - they just ignore the context and repeat the dogma they've learned (some more than others). People rarely stop and think for everything.

The problem here is that the LLM has learned that everything is political, and can be responded to the same way.
Definitely learned the name "'skeeter eater" growing up, but I'm not sure whether that was a Virginian regionalism or my dad's eccentricity.
I have a 1931 model school built by the works progress administration.
The school had a dedicated clock circuit one of about 5 electrical circuits. The clocks came from Standard Time Company of Springfield Mass. It has a paper tape that represents the bell schedule for the entire year. The clocks being on the same circuit kept them in sync. The paper tape rang the bells on the schedule.
> but to claim that none of Apple's stated concerns—which are perfectly reasonable on their face

We don't need to speculate, cross-browser PWA work fine on Android and are secure.

No, Apple's claims do not seem reasonable or valid here since there's an existing implementation contradicting them.
Weekend project: Docker pull blog posts over DNS
The article is about enums, which are lacking in Go.
Not to speak about OpenAI specifically, but people who know what they’re doing still cost a buttload of $$$$.

Even I as a software engineer have a minimum salary I expect because I’m good at my job.

Just because it’s a non-profit doesn’t mean I’m going to demand a smaller salary.

And if the non-profit can’t afford me and gets a more junior dev and they’re not very good and their shit breaks… well, they should have paid full price.

That said, there ARE a lot of dirty non-profits that exist just to pay their executives.
lol, I invested in Google when they had the "Do no evil" thing. Now they removed it and are doing evil. I'm going to sue them!
Java generics aren't even proper generics. For that better look at Rust and C#.