skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My point was that you do not pronounce that word as "oh u". There's no glottal stop, nor are the vowels "separated". But I agree it's not a familiar concept to English speakers, nor is it easily expressed in romaji. If I were explaining it to a native English speaker who didn't know Japanese at all, I'd tell them to say "owe"...but that's not hepburn.

> 港南, on the other hand, does not have a "u" sound of any kind, it's simply a long "ō", which doesn't really exist in English.

Yes, that was exactly my point. It's a long vowel. The closest approximation in English is not "ko", but "kou".

I disagree that this isn't in English, however. It's an easy concept to map -- we have tons of repeated vowels -- which is why "kounan" gets the pronunciation pretty close.

Directly addressing the question I was responding to, there's no question about "ko un an" vs. "kou nan", because the former requires you to stop the airflow between the "ko" and "un" in a way that isn't natural for Japanese. Knowing that consecutive vowels will essentially always "smoosh together" allows you to pronounce the word -- so long as you know the vowel is long.
Nikon to acquire RED
Big question is, how do small startups manage to get funding for LLM products if they don’t have the “correct” background / pedigree?

The world of LLM startups is beginning to look like the world of hedge funds and private equity firms - where the prerequisites for seed/funding are:

A) Prestigious employment history / correct pedigree.

B) Solid network of investors ready to jump before any product has even begun.
At the risk of exemplifying the coder turned physicist turned coder again, I think we are really talking about two slightly different fields here. There is the world of computational physics, which we haven't specifically built this tool for. Then there is the world of controls and robotics. In that world, it's very common to use highly abstracted tools like Simulink, that try and hide away all the implementation details. We are trying to bridge the gap between these two styles, by offering a more lightweight series of abstractions that still allow composability. I actually agree that for many things the more explicit, less abstract, array-first approach is good. But we also think that composability and shareability will allow teams to work faster. I think it's a hard balance to get right, but that's our goal.
Out of curiosity, which is the internal framework used by VSCode ? Would like to take a look at that. According to Erich Gamma, there is no use of a UI framework just a conventional model-View-Presenter with JS/TS constructed HTMLElement components.
I'd love to see more algorithmic efficiency in ML. But hasn't ML been going in the other direction for at least a decade now? It seems to me that it's been going aggressively towards brute force algorithms. Specifically, figuring out how to do as much matrix multiplication as possible.
We cannot create life on the simplest scale, there have been experiments with the creation of life in the Miller experiment have only produced so called building blocks, amino acids.
However we are unable to create life in dead creatures that have all the building blocks in place.

What is happening is the belief that the laws of thermodynamics are probabilistic, like a law that can be broken.
Laws like gravity and thermodynamics are deterministic and the hubris of those who make claims of real intelligence in machines we create are going to be as disappointed as those who design perpetual motion machines.
Some teachers are now using ChatGPT to grade papers
Multiplayer games are extremely different from single player games though. Multiplayer games are on purpose made to keep you hooked, to keep your spending up.

Single player games have one off purchases (unless you are playing trash games), so the requirement is to just have an enjoyable experience.

For some weird reason we couple all of this under "screen time" and "videogames" encompasses both multiplayer and singleplayer, which is heavily different.
Sony didn't pay for them to do anything in this case.
There is a 10% tariff in cars from China into the EU (I’m sure that’s reciprocal).

> Europe levies a duty of 10% on cars imported from China. That compares with duty of 27.5% in the United States, and China's manufacturers have taken advantage to carve out a significant and rapidly growing foothold in the European

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/13/cars/europe-china-electric-ca....

Of course, Europe is more than just the EU. And I don’t think the EU will shy away from protectionism, since China does the same. But in that case I’m sure BYD will just open up a factory in one of the cheaper EU countries (if they haven’t started that already).
Canada, our government's happy to have companies bring in underpaid foreign labour instead of hiring locals. Sad that hasn't really gotten is anywhere in terms of attracting business investment.

I think maybe we should see through the corporate nonsense and stop pandering to these companies and their demands. There's more to being investment friendly than just offering low taxes and a surplus of cheap foreign labour.
Running NetBSD 10 Release Candidate 5
American Express credit cards exposed in third-party data breach
Dubai, Israel, Singapore. Why do you think only Europe can do this?
The US dominates North America because after the war of independance no other power on the continent was left to oppose them. Militarily, that is.
NOAA claims there is 1 gram gold / 100 million metric tons of seawater[0]. Even if you could refine it, there has to be other valuable materials at significantly higher concentrations with a plausible profit margin.

[0] https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/gold.html
How is this possible? Do you mean that the top 6% all get perfect scores and all get assigned 94th percentile, rather than 100th?

Anyway, this isn’t true in my experience. 167/170 in math got me 94th percentile. Far from a perfect score.
> The level of results does not scale well down to mass consumer hardware.

For now. I'm pretty bearish on all things "AI" but of all things one can say about the future, today's hardware is yesterday's news. And in this case, I'd say the same goes for algorithms.
Huawei: New magneto-electric storage device offers unparalleled density
Aaaah, now it's clicking. This is indeed really cool.
My kid gets pretty much zero feedback on written assignments. It would be great if there were feedback that was at least vetted by the teacher, even if it originated in an LLM.
The EU overall is in a less than reproduction rate. With less than two kinds per woman on average. With the boomer generation going into pension now there are a lot of jobs left unassigned. At the same time people are getting better educated and strive for higher jobs.

The notion that immigrants take away jobs is bullshit that has been fed to you by exactly those right wing shills. It's not the 2000nds anymore. We need so many workers l, especially in those low wage/low skill jobs.

At the same time employing an immigrant is much harder cultural wise that every employer probably picks a local over a immigrant when having the choice.

But feel free to talk to any recruiter.
I came to say the same as GP. In my world, if you don't solve time-dependent coupled PDEs in 3D you're not doing real physics. In someone else's world, if you don't have particle-in-cell functionality or symplectic integrators or P3M methods or whatever, you're not doing real physics.

To my mind any software that calls itself a generic physics engine is not doing "real" physics, more like "Blender physics".

Of course this can still be super useful! But the field of numerical physics is super broad and deep, and different sub-fields require dramatically different data structures and algorithms.
There are not that many of these startups actually. Most use cases of LLM can be backed with a fine-tune of an off-the-shelf foundation model. If you're training foundation models from scratch, you're entering a difficult-to-monetize market where the big boys could eat your lunch by just releasing a new foundation model that might be able to do more than 95% of what yours does.
It may have taken the public ~60 years, but the companies making them knew much much earlier.
CA here. The eye charts are a joke. They’re visible at all times so you could easily memorize them during your long wait (even with appointment); and the specific line they have you read is huge. I’ve never looked into it but I suspect it’s just to show you can read a sign on the highway.
> Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate regulations under section 553 of title 5, United States Code, to prohibit any manufacturer from engaging in shrinkflation.

So, this is a law which states that there SHALL be regulation--who knows what form--to solve a problem that, for all we know, can't be solved in any reasonable way... but once this law is passed, there will be a new regulatory process (I guess in this case attached to the existing agency, though watch there be new people hired to concentrate on this specific issue) which won't care if their ideas are pointless or harmful as they are legally mandated to exist?

I'd like to see a meta-law which prevents Congress from kicking the can down the road like this; if they don't know how to regulate something, they should form a subcommittee to investigate the problem and come up with a concrete solution that can be considered and voted on: it simply shouldn't be possible for them to make a law which says nothing more than "we all agree we hate X and so someone in the executive branch SHALL solve it for us within two years"... legislating should be the job of the legislative branch!
Yes I found it an odd piece also.
Even if all the computers can do is ask the right questions and it takes a big research project to figure it out, that would be an improvement in productivity.

I actually think it will come from the other direction. That people will get better at asking questions, because there is an automated tool that will build systems to answer larger problems than a single person could quickly answer.
looks like the Copilot BigBrother will be watching our code more closely
In the middle of nowhere, it's mostly sociopolitical where dumb money vies to belong to some trend or near celebrities. If you're not already absurdly rich, then trying to play that game is a fool's errand.
Seagull - actually lolled. Possibly the worst name for a car I’ve ever heard. “I’ve drive a Bring Your Dreams Seagull” sounds like I’ve lapsed into word-salad.
Pretentious leadership that only howls orders and no execution is toxic.
I don't disagree on the second part, but i highly doubt the author of minecraft envisioned that somebody would recreate a computer inside the game. From any point of view, that's an incredible exercise in creativity.

Also, having boundaries and getting bored is great for creativity
Yeah. The main differences are:

Plane: very small load, fast ( 1 day)

Train : small load, slow ( 2 weeks), obstructing regular traffic for long trains

Containers: huge load, slow ( 1 month)
Congratulations on creating a platform that combines fun and coffee together.

How do you combat spam submissions, considering that anyone can click and submit multiple times, especially when anyone can have multiple cups of coffees at one point of time.

I suppose you have some form of rate limit / throttling going on, but coming from experience it won’t be enough.
Sure, I think that is a fair view. I almost added to the comment the following, which i suspect you would agree with:
"obviously they should have some area of significant technical competence that is within an area the company cares about or works on. I just wouldn't necessarily expect it to be programming languages, and they should definitively not try to overstep their competency".

You are giving the case where either they have no area of technical competence, or one that, uh, charitably, is so far outside anything the company does/cares about that they can't explain it to you.

That one is a clear fail of this particular test :)

also obviously, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition to be a good CTO.
Another good condition would be "generally assumes the time of people 'on the ground' is the most valuable time the company has, as this is what directly leads to features/revenue/customers/etc".[1]

As such, the number of situations where such a meeting would be net positive for the company amount to something like:

1. you are about to save everyone 4.001 hours worth of work, increase per-employee revenue by 4.001 hours worth, etc, by talking at them for 4 hours.

2. The company is going under and therefore you are saving everyone 100% of their time :)

#1 is actually within the bounds of possibility, but I would certainly agree that it is much more likely that anyone who believes they are about to accomplish that is probably suffering from hubris of the highest order.

[1] I tend to believe that most management is not net positive value (whether they are necessary or not for various reasons is somewhat orthogonal), and managers/leaders who generate net positive value are rarer than they should be.

To the point of your article, I tend to believe you have to start as viewing yourself as net negative, and then trying to understand how to either lower your overhead, or generate enough value to overcome the overhead, or both.

Instead, i think you see managers/leaders who start by believing they exist as a net positive and think occasionally they screw it up and are only a little net positive.

On day 1 i would give them a 1 question test that says "do you believe you are already adding net positive value to your team by being here" and send anyone who answers 'yes' to the reprogramming station.
At what level is the book pitched? Detailed technical tome or pop-sci?

I was hugely disappointed by Blind Man's Bluff despite all the praise for it as it was written for a lay-audience.
At least it's not AI generated junk
I honestly don't see what the problem is. One can say the internet is just to "connect machines with wires and have a set of protocols allowing them to communicate". It's true, but the magic happens when simple ideas get scaled.
Interesting writeup(s) about the popular culture reasons and the more concrete technical reasons for the change.

Curious though of this move to more English-favoring mode when it seems in recent years in other countries as far as naming etc there was a move away from English/colonial/etc naming of places etc like Kiev to Kyiv (sorry that one's from Russian), and like places in India awhile back.... Similarly more use of Indigenous naming etc just off top of my head. I suppose that's formal naming and not language constructs but still.
I think unit pricing is already law in California, or at least lots of products have a price per unit. It's in smaller text on the price tag on the shelf, not on the items themselves.
This is the real learning here, but this truth can't be talked about. Boeing is a symptom, not a cause.
This guy's specialty is working at startups that get acquired
Our code?
> Israel did NOT rush in, and is engaging in effective counterattacks

According to all the experts I read, Israel rushed in without a political outcome planned. All warfare is a tool to achieve political outcomes (unless the outcome was to drive Palestinians out of Gaza or just destroy as many people and buildings as possible). All warfare ends only with a stable political solution; otherwise it continues indefinitely; an example is Afghanistan, where the US failed to achieve a stable political solution and so the war never ended - unfortunately the Taliban have acheived a stable political solution, to some degree.

> I have not heard those stories. Just desperate stories from the Palestinian side, which tells me the Israelis are being quite effective.

I agree that the Israeli military has spared itself the hubris and casualities they experienced when they attacked Hezbollah around 20 years ago.

But we still see stories criticizing the Israeli military, and we don't hear desperate stories from Hamas, only from civilians. A military killing civilians isn't accomplishing anything. The question is, are they being effective against Hamas and in establishing some desireable political outcome?

> it has very high population density due to the insane 8 children-per-woman population expansion of the Palestinians over the last 60-70 years.

Also from being unable to leave.
> One might object to the dominance of English as a lingua franca, but actually any other languages being the lingua franca would dominate the Romanization system as well

Kunreisiki is not a system dominated by any particular lingua franca; it's a system that directly reflects Japanese ways of writing Japanese. One could imagine e.g. a Spanish-influenced romanization system that would represent the は-line in a way that corresponded to Spanish orthography becoming popular in a world that was dominated by Spanish as a lingua franca, and that would have the same problems that Hepburn does. But Kunreisiki really is "neutral" in that sense.
Having the price per kg or liter on the label is great to compare across the similar products on the same shelf. I do it all the time and in some cases it's the only information I look at.

However it's not much useful to combat shrinkflation because if, let's say, icecreams shrink maybe you realize it only when you open the box at home and you get the feeling that something changed. Or if you notice that a pack of food that has always been 500 g is now 450 g. You can't remember with precision the old price per kg but you definitely suspect that the manufacturer is playing the shrinkflation game.
This is a perfectly reasonable point/benchmark. I don't know why someone thought it was so bad it needed to be flagged.
As other comments pointed out Airtable and Airplane share an investor in Thrive Capital, which made negotiating a deal probably easier. But yeah, Airtable probably didn't pay a lot for Airplane.

It still makes sense for Airtable, as they do get someone with a proven track record of building tech products in general to build out an important division of their company. You say that it's for something "unrelated", but integrating AI capabilities (Airtable isn't looking to build new foundational models I assume), should definitely be in their ballpark. Though of course that's a gamble with a very low bus factor.

So it's a win-win-win for Airtable, the CEO/CTO and the investors. Airtable gets a capable leadership person to de-risk their AI endeavours (where IIRC they were lagging a bit behind competition like Notion). The CEO gets to work in a less stressful position, and maybe something that's a more interesting topic to him. The shared investor is happy as it strengthens their already strong unicorn company at the expense of a company that probably wouldn't be able to grow to notable size for them. Many of the other investors that are individuals I'd wager were happy that their money isn't tied up in Airplane anymore and that they can place new bets in a hot AI market (just a guess based on who is on that list).

> Why not find a way to do right by their customers if Airtable truly isn't interested in the product? Open source it

Presumably because the cost of that is significant for little to no gain for them, especially if you factor in the opportunity cost.

> or find a company willing to take the product and customers on?

I think the buyers that make most sense there would be e.g. Retool, which are too close of competitors to Airtable that they want to directly sell marketshare to them. It's probably better for Airtable to let the customers spread across all their competitors.
A leader shows direction(s) and has followers i.e. those that execute.

To show direction, one needs to know his stuff well. Many qualify for this.
Getting followers that execute is very hard. Mountains have been written about this, with a lot of them being the typical business school stuff ridden with survivorship bias from following the success stories.
I beg to differ. Transformers are purely an optimization. It’s not exactly right to call everything “compute scaling” but we are still, at the end of the day, fitting polynomials.

And frankly, that’s probably not what our brains are doing.
I've just created a new benchmark to see how top LLMs do on NYT Connections (https://www.nytimes.com/games/connections). 267 puzzles, 3 prompts for each, uppercase and lowercase.

GPT-4 Turbo: 31.0

Claude 3 Opus: 27.3

Mistral Large: 17.7

Mistral Medium: 15.3

Gemini Pro: 14.2

Qwen 1.5 72B Chat: 10.7

Claude 3 Sonnet: 7.6

GPT-3.5 Turbo: 4.2

Mixtral 8x7B Instruct: 4.2

Llama 2 70B Chat: 3.5

Qwen 1.5 14B: 3.1

Nous Hermes 2 Yi 34B: 1.5

Notes: 0-shot. Maximum possible is 100. Partial credit is given if the puzzle is not fully solved. There is only one attempt allowed per puzzle. In contrast, humans players get 4 attempts and a hint when they are one step away from solving a group. Gemini Advanced is not yet available through the API.

What I found interesting is how this benchmark reveals a large capabilities gap between the top, large models and the rest, in contrast to existing over-optimized benchmarks.
This article does not debate the question in its title, makes ridiculous claims like “there hasn’t been any major breakthrough in AI in decades”, and does not offer any real argument.
My kid loves the maze activity. It actually is a lot of fun to her. While I will concede that many Sugar activities lean towards the ugly side (usually when images are involved), fun things don't need to be drenched in gaudy colors to be accessible to children.
They also abruptly cancelled their EV-subsidy which probably explains why the share of EVs is dropping.
Very hard water here. There’s a tank for salt in the bottom of the dishwasher, as long as I keep that topped up there’s no need for rinse aid.
Related source of discussion here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39624972
Leadership will eat themselves alive at the cost of valuable talent. I think leadership often needs to consider how valuable they are as a unit and work together and not build martyrs for causes. The number one problem in the failure of businesses is the ability to lead and do it effectively. Then something stirs up the dynamic the company faulters and loses that momentum. Then a divide forms where now they pit talent against each other this talent becomes a martyr for the leadership. This is a systematic problem when hirer level leadership fails to lead and creates rifts.
People who say things like "major breakthroughs" often imagine a cliff/steep rise. The reality is that most "breakthroughs" are small, incremental, almost invisible steps in all aspects of the field, and potentially even in fields that are only tangentially related.

Then, one day, they hear about it in the news, because there's now some hype, or some event that makes it newsworthy. This makes it feel like the breakthrough was instantaneous or steep, but in fact has been in the making for decades or even more.

I have no doubt AGI is coming, but it will be gradual and slow. It will be the accumulation of more advances in everything, including hardware, as well as software. It might even include economic changes.
If you can tolerate a state run by Mormons, SLC is chill and active. I'd sooner live in Denver. I went through Colorado Springs but it had California-like homeless issues.
I think this is a good move. Wayland has been stable for me for years. I hope it prompts companies like Slack to sort their apps out.
Nobody says "Bring Your Dreams" out loud. Also, "the gull" was a nickname for a few cool cars in the past - nothing bad about them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gull-wing_door
LLMs solve for the next word. Human intelligence solves for survival with many types of input, visual, audio etc. You can't create an AGI if you don't solve for the problems that created human GI.