skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m not sure if you are serious about this argument or using it as a rhetorical one for purposes of a historical argument, given GP’s context.

Regardless, I would hope that onlookers do not believe in these ideas scientifically because we know an lot about the liver and it’s place within the body.

> The liver is the store of your Emotions.

Emotions are not stored, they are experienced by way of the Amygdala within the brain. It is sensitive to neurotransmitters such as dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.

> Thats why its called "The Liver"

This organ was given its name long ago and its origin is debated (toss up between old Germanic/Norse languages or PIE). The true nature of this organ was unknown when it was named, however.

> Its where all that you intake, including food and alcohol get processed.

The liver does not process everything you “intake” but it does do a great deal, mainly acting as a catalyst for the decomposition of many types of molecules into useable substances.

> Alcohol is consumed to either enhance or suppress experiences.

Ethanol is a neurological depressant (as opposed to a stimulant) and prevents the normal operation of the brain for which the symptoms include impulsivity, reduction in reactivity, motor function impairment, memory loss, etc. it’s a poison that your liver is really good at breaking down.

> This is also why Alcohol has been a prevalent substance forever.

Alcohol has been prevalent because it’s easy to make, sterilized food while still being safe to consume, and (at high enough concentrations) would give you an altered state of mind that has had both cultural and religious significance throughout history.
While still then still changes nothing - the submitter is American according to their website.
Human created content is also filled with gibberish and false information and random noise… how is AI generated content worse?
I have a "pay it forward" sort of attitude personally. The open source world is probably the largest, most valuable commons in the world by monetary value. I can't even think of a competitor, honestly. There are plenty of communities that are very open about their skills and knowledge, but there is just no equivalent to the way I can pick up thousands or even millions of person-years of labor and just drop it into my project, and it does its thing without me having to study every subsystem individually or pay the the millions of dollars it would take to write it bespoke for me. For example, the 3D printing community shares a lot of designs but there is no design comparable to the Linux kernel, because, after all, how could a design or even quite sizable set of designs manage that?

My contributions, feeble as they may feel as a single contributor, is my way of making sure I'm not just taking from the world, but at least trying to give back. A payment of sorts. Open source may not generally demand such payment, but by Kant's imperative, if everybody takes and nobody contributes, there will soon be nothing to take from, so I really ought to try my best to contribute reasonably as well, even just in the form of reproducible bug reports, documentation updates, or a tiny improvement here and a tiny improvement there.
I have every expectation that they're doing what they believe to be the right thing for themselves. I have no objection to that, and it isn't meant to be negative toward them in any way. I don't actually know them, for one. :)

It doesn't make it any less sad, however. It's just... the end of an era, it feels like.

I also have issues with M&A practices to begin with. While I can't speak for this particular case, I do worry that in general the frequency of M&A is trending toward harmful to our society. That may be coloring my view.

I just hope they release the MOnSter 6502 someday. That thing is cool, and if I happened to have the money, I'd probably pay a grand to be able to hang one on my wall...
No that’s wrong. Toyota’s “Hybrid Synergy Drive” is greatly simplified on the ICE side. No traditional transmission, no alternator, no starter motor, and a not particularly complex Atkinson Cycle engine. Sure it adds one or more electric motors, but the overall complexity is not particularly high.
Nice work, looks beautiful and fun
There are if you go to a more fundamental level of values. Basically every human society wants to maintain human dominance of the ecosystem. No one wants there to be a higher alpha predator, whether that be wolves or AIs.
Awesome tool I purchased when I stumbled upon it.

I draw flowcharts for complex implementations in ASCII using Monodraw and embed them in source code.
It's clear that QLoRA has opened up finetuning to a wider audience with limited compute, which is a good thing.

One thing I've wondered about: what are the drawbacks to using QLoRA? For example if compute is not a limit, I'm guessing one should not use QLoRA and finetune in full precision instead?

Afaik when a model is first quantized to nf4 (before finetuning begins), model performance is degraded from baseline (see https://x.com/Tim_Dettmers/status/1661482614811918338?s=20).

Dettmers shows that after finetuning wrt the dataset, the result is as good as full precision. But afaik never explored the effects outside the finetuning data. Assuming the finetuning dataset is small, the model will just be the degraded nf4 version, right? Or perhaps finetuning will even skew the model in weird ways (trying to fix quantization errors).

Anecdotally models finetuned wth QLoRA perform well. Does anyone have any papers or a careful analysis of this?
FWIW, at least 10 years (maybe at 85°C) is expected of any µP/µC worth its salt outside consumer use. It's just that consumers have accepted somewhat junk-y electronics as a fact of life. (Ok, the improvement cycle is also still quite rapid, meaning a consumer might want to update after 3~5 years anyway.)

Considering warranty periods on some goods, you also really don't want to build stuff with lower rated chips—it'll come back to bite you. Imagine having to pay a professional to swap out the controller board on a smart heating system… people might have accepted swapping out their TV every few years, but for a stove or fridge we're not there yet (and honestly I hope we never get there.)

Leaving the consumer space, it's just expected. If your CNC mill has an x86 control PC, it's a ruggedized industrial build, and those use embedded CPUs with better ratings. Cars are off on a different planet for regulatory reasons, same for aviation or military use.
So how does that map to an operation that was done with success, but the reply lost?
'Amazon "search through reviews" is blindly just running an AI model now'
I wonder if restoring the process leader before doing the exec would work out okay, or if that's just going to end up being differently confusing.

I suspect, on the whole, this was a clever idea in theory with unfortunate consequences in practice (much like most of my clever ideas) and would be better just being reverted.

However, I'm not usually a zsh user myself so I'm loath to file a bug given there may be actual zsh users out there who like/rely on this behaviour.
> There are some scenarios in which a vehicle is accidentally backed into a pond up to the point where the occupants are in grave risk of drowning, but not many. If this is not one of these scenarios

The victim apparently said that it was one of those scenarios in a call to a neighbor when it occurred, so I don’t know why we need to speculate on autonomous driving being involved. It seems a lot more likely that, if a defect was involved, it was a “manual driving” control defect that contributed to the victim’s reported unintentional shift into reverse during the three-point turn, not a problem with autonomous driving.
Note that large amounts of natural gas distribution networks are hydrogen-capable, and adding decarbonization reactors to the supply allows CO2-free operation of formerly natural gas appliances.

IIRC the process is thermal cracking of the methane, which can use solar energy.
Tangent time. I genuinely don't understand what people generally mean when they use the phrase "anti-capitalist". I doubt most are Tankies or full-on Utopian Anarchists. I suspect a fair few mean "I want a mixed economy that's (a lot) fairer than the one we've got now" (which is probably my position).

But outside of these three positions - what do people mean?
Selling things isn't capitalism.

Capitalism would mean investors putting in money early and getting an ownership stake and payouts later.
The reason we know EU officials has spoken to Apple is because at least one has said so in public.
That's an interesting point: while formally a remote worker (my hand raised) have the entire world as potential market and nothing physically change between working today for a USA company, tomorrow for a Japanese while living in Swiss, in most cases jobs exists inside a nation border for fiscal reasons of both parties, and formally the salary pay worker works, not it's physical residence, so well formally there is no reasons to see a drop in salary WFH.

Another point is if the bigger salary many anti-civil companies offer to workers living in big cities is worth living there, considering cost of living, quality of living, climate, personal freedom and so one.

Hybrid works for me is absurd:

- you need to be anyway near an office, and the company need anyway office space;

- you need two desk instead of one, both under-utilized, or living a disgraced life moving laptops around, to use them as desktop replacers...

All of this just to keep a salary that potentially got wasted in city services, having an inferior quality of life, no thanks. I prefer competing with my skills against the entire world than having such kind of genital laces...

Beside that: personally I own an apartment in a big city, and I rent it, so far for a nice profit (I do not know if it will last, of course) and so far stocks perform really wall (it will NOT last, but again...) meaning: if you are from middle/high income cohort you earn more moving in the nature in a well served area and rent to poor in the city. I do think this situation is fairly common, at least in southern EU for middle/high income people, who happen to be those who made the downtown of big cities. If I'm right, without downtown white collar who spend much what's left in the city? How the city economics can keep up given the fact that after the 80s logistic revolutions most manufacturing have goes out, and now most high wages have done the same leaving just low/middle-low income people in the city mostly employed in city service economy, an economy that closely depend on inhabitants mean wages...
Your 60Hz inverters will use about as much copper (or aluminum) and steel as a 60Hz transformer, or a 60Hz generator. How much of it you need is mostly determined by the frequency, voltage, and current it will handle.

What is another advantage for the people in the article, because they still need DC/DC converters, but they have complete liberty to pick its frequency.
Honestly it just feels pretty good to make something and put it out there, regardless of whether or not it’s popular. Creating is a very fulfilling thing, even if just for its own sake. I don’t do it for money but if I got money (for the right reasons) I wouldn’t say no.
Are people prevented from paying for it?

Or do manufacturers simply not think it is worth their while / liability if Medicare and other governments will not pay for it?

If a billionaire went to the employees of Amylyx Pharma, and asked them to make this medicine for them, would they refuse?
What percent of FDA scientists and committee members who are in charge of approving drugs have been part of the “revolving door?” And how do we know this is inherently bad? It may be, but I can also see how niche expertise would cause you to float between entities as appropriate.

Keep in mind 90% of drugs fail clinical trials. The situation cannot be THAT bad.
The Tesla part seems pretty incidental to this unless their gear controls are unusually confusing and easy to misuse. My Honda controls are not the conventional automatic shift--although Reverse is very clearly differentiated from Drive and it would be hard to press one rather than the other absent just a real mental error.
How do the shifters work in teslas? A lot of the more recent shifters I've seen in cars just seem very dangerous compared to classic designs-- no feedback, etc.

I'm kinda surprised a ranch property wasn't equipt to get a car out of the water or break its windows.
Not arguing on whether free software is or not anti-capitalist, but want to point out that the act of monetizing goods and services isn't incompatible with anti-capitalism.
> By many standards, these student and newly licensed drivers are “not ready” but we embrace them

Because they must drive to gain experience. That's why it happens in phases: with a teacher, temp permit with another driver, etc. Without this process we wouldn't have drivers at all. Simulators can only do so much and they are costly.
It’s extremely hard for people to look past the current environment of, in general, knowing that whatever drug they can get their hands on (commercially) is going to at least be safe and probably quite effective.
> EDIT: Happy to see Milen's sibling comment about fixing breakage!! I realize you have to make a living -- is there a way to contribute for these new features (or is it a totally new app -- which is fine!).

I've considered the idea of letting other developers have access to the source code and help with the development. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure a way to make it fair - e.g., if someone starts contributing, do they start receiving a percentage of the proceeds? What's a fair percentage and what about multiple external contributors?

I could never come up with a workable model, so it's either fully open-source or proprietary. As I mentioned in another comment, I believe the way to go is an open data format which allows interoperability. This way there's no lock-in and competing apps (open or closed) can exist.

For what it's worth, the Monodraw data format is not secret, it's just compressed JSON. I haven't documented it because it's more of an implementation detail and I'd rather spend my very limited time on improving the product.

Hope that provides a bit more context.
There's a lot we can do with hydrogen alone. But yep, carbon capture from the air is very important.
Agreed. We put the things we want to believe, but don't have evidence for, in places where we have the least evidence lying around to contradict them. It's why there's a woo woo subculture that uses words like "quantum" in dubious ways.
Stallman and friends were always very clear that they love money. Even back in the 90's he was saying that selling Free software and making lots of money is one of the most ethical things you could do. That doesn't mean anyone actually could. I think you're all using the wrong mental framework to think about these things. Just because the Free software movement has used similar strategies to another famous group of historical people, doesn't mean they're the same group of people. Anti-capitalists love the Free software movement, because they can see what they're actually doing with their actions, and that it speaks to some kind of deeper value. I like to call that "moving leverage to the edge". If you do things like empower everyday people with access to knowledge and privileges they wouldn't have had otherwise, then they'll like you. It matters not what ideology you profess to have. People are simply attracted to alpha, and open source has always had lots of it.
Interesting. I have been spending a lot of time with Mermaidjs for the last year or so and love it but not around ERDs because of the inability to map field relationships the way I want. I will check this out.
There is a non-0% chance. You are looking at scenarios where evolution has selected for competition rather than nurturing.

So as a counter example:

A mom is a super intelligence compared to a baby. And yet does the babies bidding doing her sense best to make sense of the baby low fidelity crying.

Intelligence in AI is even more alien, it doesn’t need to have any survival instinct of its own at all
“People want to create [sic] things that are useful to other people.”

For me, it’s this. So many useful tools and projects helped me when I was getting started that I feel obliged to give back for life. If my abilities came from reading tutorials, books, open source code, etc then shouldn’t I give back? Must everything be for profits? My employer owns me from 9-5 but not my side projects. I can explore other areas of computing with those and share my findings with others. Whether or not you find it useful. I think the idea that if you create a successful open source project, you’re more employable is a farce. You’ll just be more busy. But it depends on the gravity of the project I guess.

From the other side, I look for open source projects from candidates to see if they know how to code. I look at the history and logs, the diffs, and changes. If they don’t have any code out there, I force them into a coding challenge. If you do have code out there, you don’t have to take the challenge. (Fair hiring practice I say)
I said appeared not invented.

If you want to put a carrot in front of yourself that can work a bit, but those pursuits are wonderful but not without it's troubles. Kids get sick, friends & family die, we get sick, we fail and much more. And in the end, we know when we are tricking ourselves.

You can experience meaning quite easily & daily without depending on tricks like that; but yeah the way of chasing external stimuli till our death is indeed the Western rational way.
Oppenheimer Couldn't Run a Hamburger Stand. How Did He Run a Secret Lab?
Lately, I’ve written several PRs to an otherwise one man show.

https://github.com/clarkmcc/ngraph

I added prebuilt binaries as part of the CI process for others like simdsim

Made a fork of transformers.js to make it work with bun (also some fixes for bun, and another on the way).

These things add up.
Thank you, that's the kind of point I was looking for.

Why does JxB scale quadratically? Because a stronger field can contain (linearly) more current?
What is the reason for not wanting the seams on the top of the shoulders? Aesthetics? Weightlifting?

Not seamless, but:

There are a lot of brands that offer t-shirts with "raglan" sleeves where the seam runs from the collar to the bottom of the armpit, instead of along the top of the shoulder.

Or: I personally have a number of the Durable Shirt from Ten Thousand [0], which has 2 seams on the front and back of the shoulder instead of 1 directly on top. This is so you can put a barbell on your shoulders comfortably, but I also like the aesthetic. It also looks like they are currently out of stock on these, but maybe they'll have more in the future.

[0] https://www.tenthousand.cc/products/durable-shirt?variant=39...
I have seen only one falsifiable test for if a mind actually has subjective conscious experience rather than just saying it does, and even that wasn't one which we can apply to humans or other animals, only AI, which means it will still be an open question if that test ever passes.

Saying "it is" or "it isn't" at this point is like early sci-fi speculations about the inhabitants of the Moon, Mars, and Venus — we know our own experience of qualia, but we don't understand how and why we got it, so we don't know what to look for in animals, let alone AI.
This should be obvious because forcing humans to "align" with other humans is immoral, and if AGI is truly like a human mind, this will also be immoral, which has been captured in many sci-fi stories like "I Robot".

The current alignment talk is about statistical inference on big data. "AI" is a misnomer and should have stayed in the area of cognitive architectures and completely autonomous agents. LLMs are just tools and are not alive, therefore cannot be intelligent.
What would you rather have in this scenario? Earlier phases almost certainly started on animal models. How do you know it will or won’t work in humans if you don’t do clinical trials? Keep in mind 90% of drugs fail clinical trials, and that’s almost certainly after showing success in animal models.
> The types of desires that motivate open-source developers are the same as those of creative people in other fields, including fields where the norms are to charge for your work and to not license it permissively. If programmers could somehow satisfy these desires without giving away their work for free, I believe most of the open-source developers would not be open-source developers. It is a means to an end.

This seems to miss that those same creative people in other fields very commonly give away their work for free. It's basically one of the staple means to actually surviving as an artist.

Digital artists and illustrators distribute their work for free and commonly allow it to be used free of charge for non commercial purposes. The same goes for musicians.

Freely distributing your work is basically how you survive as an artist. It builds you a brand (a "style") and a community of fans who end up networking your works for you. That's the underlying strategy for getting commissions as a digital artist nowadays.

The difference with open source software is that software developers tend to use formal licenses rather than informal "ask me first but I'll probably say okay" licenses. And of the licenses that open source devs tend to use, plenty of them use copyleft licenses that fill essentially the same "okay for non commercial" condition (but instead of com vs non-com it's closed vs open source).

So I think the bigger question should be "Why don't more open source developers use copyleft licenses when possible?". That question probably highlights the bigger difference between software developers and other creatives.
Twitter charging $250,000 for inactive handles
Oh, how to ruin a cool book!
I was kind of expecting the first paragraph of this paper to explain first and foremost how they solved the switching problem (i.e. a transistor) using optical only components.

After wading through the paper for 10mn, I still haven't found the answer. If someone spotted it, please point where they talk about it, I would be grateful.

Or I could go ask an AI to find the answer for me I guess.
> it explains nothing about why Street View is back in Germany

Au contraire. Did you read the last three paragraphs? Major changes can happen gradually.
What has the turning radius of the Titanic? The Prius doesn't.
They can't profit if it doesn't work. There is that bizarre case with the Alzheimer's drug, but that seems rare and not something they should pin their hopes on.

It sounds to me as if the drugmakers and the patient advocates are coming from the same place. They are desperate for it to work, and will convince themselves of it on any thin evidence. Probably something like "it did X in a petri dish so it must work eventually."

There are surely executives making a calculated risk, but I think they couldn't do it if there weren't also scientists who feed them over-optimistic guesses because they want it to work for the patients too.