skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I was wondering if we had something to follow up the amazing Voyager I and II and so asked one of our A.I. friends. Unfortunately it listed spacecraft that I don't consider "deep space", so perhaps New Horizons is our only follow-on:

"Voyager 1 and 2: Both are still communicating with Earth as they journey through interstellar space, but their aging power sources mean they may go silent sometime in the 2030s.

New Horizons: Based on its plutonium power source, New Horizons should still be operating in 2034 as it studies other Kuiper Belt objects after its Pluto flyby.

Juno: NASA's Juno Jupiter orbiter should still be operational in 2034, with its mission currently extended into the 2030s.

Parker Solar Probe: With its solar electric propulsion and generous power supply, Parker should still be studying the Sun's corona in 2034 and perhaps even in the 2040s.

So of the deep space assets listed, the most likely to still be actively sending data back to Earth in around 2034 are New Horizons, Juno, Parker Solar Probe, and potentially the two active Voyager probes if their power holds out that long."
> I was not familiar with the BSL license.

> It's interesting that it will "automatically" switch to GPLv3 in 4 years (as specified in the license).

> Would be nice if more closed source software were released with such a license.

And it would be nice if there was a better term than "source available" to describe licenses such as BSL and SSPL, and ideally to differentiate usage grants. GitHub project under BSL with the above very constraining usage grant vs GitLab project BSL with "do whatever you want just don't host to sell to others" vs code with no license thrown on a .zip on an FTP are all "source available".
People have been hating on this or that language. In particular PHP for the better part of 15/20 years now. It’s just human nature and tribalism at this point I guess. There’s the potential to create insecure code in any language, it just happened most often in PHP because of how accessible and cheap it was for the masses with shared hosting is all.
> maintaining semantics is held sacrosanct

But Google Translate doesn't do that. It often translates things very literally.

As an example, it translates "You should step in when a conversation goes south." into Romanian with the literal words "heading towards south" which is not an expression in Romanian. It's very confusing. ChatGPT translates it as "goes down the wrong road", which is an expression that makes sense.
I have seen more and more of this stuff lately and just try to keep my mouth shut. "autistic people don't like exercise the way neurotypical folks do". I'm just like... ???
Phi-2 was useless for practical purposes except if you want to show your friends that it can write a poem, llama3 8b was slightly better but is still same category, it’s complete trash with coding vs gpt4. Llama3 400b “iS OPen SoURce!” But no you will need to pay to access because most one can not practically afford an A100 and set it up properly.

What I’m trying to say is that user experience is now as key as the model smarts and these barely touching gpt4 models cannot beat OpenAI right now as a whole package.
Maybe the backend uses more energy compared to Google translate?
0123456789 are best called "European", I think, as Arabic numerals would be: ٠١٢٣٤٥٦٧٨٩
There are some interesting solutions out there, such as bit-banding used in some ARM Cortex CPUs. This maps entire bytes in the high part of the address space to single bits in the low part of the address space, so that you can make an atomic set or clear of a single physical bit by writing to a byte of memory. https://spin.atomicobject.com/bit-banding/
There's an app called Private AI that will let you run models locally on Android. It has a few smaller models available for free to try it out, but the larger models like Llama 3 (or the option to use your own downloaded models) require a $10 unlock purchase.
I wonder when the battery pack needs replacing. Is that counted? Got to cost a bundle.
"Others are questioning whether or not this kind of layout is needed on the web at all — they aren’t sure that well-known websites will use it."

Would it instead be possible to exclude anyone with that attitude from a discussion about an open standard? I know this sounds toxic, but I would argue that approaching public design this way is ultimately more toxic wrt the outcome and those affected by it.

Or maybe I misunderstood that part since everyone seems to not be bothered by it at all here...
Functionally yes but the VRF (variable rate flow) which leads to more efficiency gains is a bit more added on top just an inverter valve. Otherwise the heat pumps would be cycling on and off. That’s also why ACs are typically oversized here in the US. Because they turn on one massive load for a little while then turn it off (cycling). With VRF they’re running steady at a variable output over longer periods of time.
With bigger 7B and 8B models, the battery life goes from a over a day to a few hours on my iPhone 15 Pro.

The 8B model nominally works on 6GB phones but it's quite slow on them. OTOH, it's very usable on iPhone 15 Pro/ Pro Max devices and even better on M1/M2 iPads.

Every framework: llama.cpp, MLX, mlc-llm (which I use) all only use the GPU. Using the ANE and perhaps the undocumented AMX coprocessor for efficient decoder only transformer inference is still an open problem. I've made early some progress on quantised inference using ANE, but there 're still a lot of issues to be solved before it is even demo ready, let alone a shipping product.
I created a new account recently and I had to complete a captcha. It was the Google kind that is easily defeated by either bots or mechanical turk, though.
I did even capitalize ZERO so that's on me. But also no one has pointed out any public libraries in this thread to my knowledge. Just private ones
Stop Looking for Your Forever Home
Big O's Kitchen
Not on merit but simply by being the only allowed option on iOS. Nobody chooses Safari because it runs WebKit instead of Blink.
Generally ownership of a physical item confers a monopoly on its distribution and sale. Those rights are common parts of the property rights bundle that we call ownership. Whether they're a good policy or not copyrights share those features with other property rights.
If something is less readable on your modern display than on an older display then the problem is with your modern display not the website.

In other words: Turn on display scaling instead of expecting every website to increase the font size.
If I never again in my career have to encounter the God Function that everything in the system calls one way or another and takes 9 arguments, all of which are something like "either a string identifying an ID, or a function yielding a string, or a function that yields a list or an iterator of strings, or an object with a GetID method, or if the third parameter was falsy, a function to be called if the user is not authenticated", I will be pleased. Or the function that has literally 40 parameters, 36 of them optional, and while each of them may be individually reasonably well defined you will never work out what all combinations of them do, and you can also know there is no test and no spec for all possible combinations. (Unlike the former which is characteristic of local codebases and bad discipline, the latter is the basis of major dynamic scripting language libraries.)

Dynamic typing doesn't have to get that messy, but it takes discipline that is very hard to enforce at scale. Static typing can sort of approximate that level of mess but it takes a lot more work, and perhaps even more importantly, it's a lot safer to fix. But every significantly-sized dynamic scripting code base I've encountered has certainly had at least one of those two issues deeply, deeply ground into it.
Which ones? Genuinely curious because I'm only aware TK Park (paid membership sponsored by... True? Or someone like that)
I've heard that, sometimes, buying ads in a prominent public place like this can be the best way to influence one or two crucial executives that you're trying to target. It can be worth the cost just for the one or two impressions.
Just answering #5 first: on a long enough timeline the only safe way to store information is plain text.

I’ve been caching bits and pieces of information I’ve found online since the late 1980s and anything more sophisticated than plain text has gotten me burned. Anything proprietary is guaranteed to suffer from business development needs pushing for incompatible upgrades to an undocumented format followed by an “our incredible journey” termination of service.

Have learned the hard way that you cannot rely on anything staying online long term, even without organizational change or dissolution. The needs of the business change and one day the entire archive you've been relying on for reference has been removed.

I got into the habit about a decade ago of using Evernote as a stash for items like web pages only to find its web page snapshots frequently looked like they grabbed the content of a page only to lose it some time later. So, back to stashing items in a filesystem.

So…if it’s something I find useful I grab it and stash it in my laptop filesystem (which I back up to my own split geo NAS setup).

I don't know how you build a product to satisfy someone like me because you end up having to fight the distrust that's built up over decades, no fault of your own.
Least bad mistake for who?

Boots on the ground is never popular with the American public. Letting Ukraine hang on with life support while running out Putin's life is.
The strategy you outline is classic BATNA. Your BATNA is your best alternative to negotiated agreement - your walk-away position. The stronger that is, the more leverage you have in negotiating. By improving lead times, your friend improved his BATNA, as you say, so much that he no longer needed the negotiation.
This is true, but what's different in this case is that they seem to rely fully on their developer community to create the end-user value.

The iPhone was a Browser, a iPod, a Phone.

The iPad was a Browser and a Reading Device.

The Watch was a Wellness/Fitness companion.

The Vision Pro is TBD, depending on what the community will come up with...

The only thing that's clear and well-prepared this time is, that Apple gets a share of any revenue someone may create with it.

If there's one company that can keep putting money into this until someone comes up with value, it's Apple.

-

I believe Apple's end-game is, that every user is wearing this all-day and Apple becomes the master-profiler and gatekeeper to any type of consumption also in the real world.
But until they can execute on this direction they need to come up with a reason for someone to put this device on his head in first place...
tell that to Hertz!
`Even without the drop in value of the cars it bought, Hertz struggled with collision and damage repairs on an EV running about twice that associated with a comparable combustion engine vehicle, Scherr told investors on a 2023 call.`[0]

[0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/18/business/hertz-ceo-departure-...
I’m aware.

In the keynote Nvidia is quoting FP4 performance for Blackwell specifically. Frontier and every computer that has ever hit the supercomputer top 500 is measuring fp64. This is why I qualified my statement above by saying if you’re willing to compare apples and oranges.

But I think this is where things open up to debate (and/or personal interpretation). My view is, if all you care about is AI workload (Specifically LLMs), then you really are seeing a full two orders of magnitude improvement. And if we are trying to get a feel for the space, and what that even means, then there really is nothing else to compare Blackwell to other than frontier, in terms of scale alone.

Above I say “one or two orders of magnitude”, the “one order of magnitude” is a value I got by taking Blackwell’s FP4 values and dividing by 16, to try to conceptually convert back to a value that can be compared to fp64.
—
I’m perfectly happy to admit that all I’m really capable of doing here is using estimates to compare a completely new thing (the new compute architecture of Blackwell) to what came before it (the majority of the history of the supercomputing 500). But that’s okay, because that’s my only goal.

—-

Believe me, I get it. Blackwell will never post a linpack score. Blackwell will never run big scientific computing jobs like… global weather simulations.

But as computer science nerds, how could we not be excited to see such a big move: changing the computer architecture to better suit a specific compute workload (LLMs)?

I know Bitcoin has its asic processors, but to me Blackwell’s mission statement of “computing intelligence” is a lot more interesting.
It is not an explicit requirement - the new legislation just lists a number of things that are kinda hard to do without being online.
> Hard to say without knowing more specifically what you are referring to.

Every single assertion of fact you made upstream in this conversation, or in the entire thread.

You have an impressive Motte and Bailey, Dumb Farmer (or at least I hope, for your benefit) routine going on.

If you would like, later I can go through the comments and choose some assertions you have made, and you can respond with proofs for each, which I will then critique. This seems like a fine way to demonstrate the superiority of your cognition, what do you think of the idea? Are you up for it? Can you participate without resorting to rhetoric and evasion?

And regarding your link and the very clever ontology it is based on: science is not composed only of the scientific method, it is also composed of human scientists. And if one is to replace "the scientific method" with "scientists" in that piece, the truth value of all of the statements changes drastically.

In my experience, scientists and their fan base don't like speaking with this level of precision, and will typically respond in a predictable manner, using predictable dismissive/evasive phrases, not unlike how a large language model behaves (which shouldn't be all that surprising if you put a bit of thought into it).
I've emailed you with my thoughts.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numerals
What’s the point of doing this at a brand level.

What would seem more relevant is the type of car, so SUVs vs Sedans etc even if you want to group it further by brand after that.

I can’t imagine a truck would have the same maintenance as a compact.
Fedora Linux 40 Available for Download as a Wonderful Upgrade
Research, especially in academia, isn't usually that interested in the single concrete task that is under study. Translation is just one case where you need to find some good functions to map sequences to other sequences.

The "Attention Is All You Need" paper frames the problem and contribution as:

"The dominant sequence transduction models are based on complex recurrent or convolutional neural networks in an encoder-decoder configuration. The best performing models also connect the encoder and decoder through an attention mechanism. We propose a new simple network architecture, the Transformer, based solely on attention mechanisms, dispensing with recurrence and convolutions entirely."

Translation is "just an experiment" for the general architecture and they study other tasks in the paper too.

In a sense, all applications of basic research are "accidental".
1. Just feeling an urge to consume something right now.

2. All the times, typically during the conversation

3. Any time I want to dig up with my old crap

4. A lot of HDDs

5. Backups: how to not lost the info because of either tremoring hands or the war which is going on.
And honestly, that's a ridiculous claim. Two very popular websites I can think of right away are Pinterest and VSCO. (Perhaps VSCO on the web isn't as popular as the mobile app, but the company continues to use masonry as the design evolves.)
So you want to run mission critical workloads on Postgres and do a vector similarity search on the same DB?
Question my family thinks I have autism how do I get tested without insurance?
MiniKanren, then?
How would you feel if you didn’t have breakfast today?
For the reason above and many more, it is simply wrong that we have been trying democracy.
I don't think that they are inadequate, these devices are perfect for most of my family. They do some calls, messages, a couple of pictures here and there, basic word processing and web browsing but not much more on these devices.

I had a Macbook with 8GB RAM and 256GB disk as my daily driver for work until last year running Docker and my fat IDE without too many issues. It's a similar story with my phone - I bought the bigger storage version because I thought I'd need it but after 3 years of using it I'm still not close to even using 128GB.
Kardashians have 3 orders of magnitude more views so burden of proof is on you
I am curious which requirements you think this applies to?
Russia's only real "red line" is invading their territory, the rest is part of a relentless propaganda campaign including dozens of nuclear threats with no teeth.

https://vatniksoup.com/en/nuclear-threats/

Don't let the ridiculous, empty threats of Russia warp your perceptions of what's possible.
A bottom would mean there's only one way to go ... up? Why are they using that word here? Is it a common usage in this case?
Very responsive; can't say the same for most browser games so well done.

I managed to complete it in one shot. The old dog still has it :)
Recent American efforts at regime change have fared poorly in hindsight. Attempted during the fall of the USSR, led directly to the oligarchs, and eventually Putin. Deposing Saddam left destroyed a middle class secular nation, who cheerfully began the ethnic cleansing, so that Iraq is now Kurds, Sunni and majority Shiites, none and turned Iran into a regional power by eliminating Iraq, as well as Afghanistan. Our man Musharraf, a loyal ally? Ditched him too, and the ISI showed its gratitude by rearming the Taliban. We got Gaddafi! Turns out he was burying enough people migrating from Africa to be a firm deterrent. Those people flooded into Europe, and the liberal democracies we allegedly want to nourish in other lands were pushed to the far right. Now Germany is beginning to arm itself, and France is following. Japan also, which will agitate the Koreas and China greatly. So the risk here is replacing the Pax Americana, fantastically lucrative for American by the way, with the spectre of proliferation, which the Pax had blocked fairly successfully.

One wonders where (ugh) Kissinger's Realpolitik would have led us. Regardless, what we do know is that the Norks are hardly pro-american after years of indoctrination.

>It's not like theyr'e happy about a dictator running the country doing international crazy stuff and oppressing them.

As are we. It'd be way worse too if not for The Leader's clearsighted vision in acquiring nuclear capability, against our best efforts.
Of course it's better with context, but my second example isn't something dependent of context, it's a single accent.
Hasn't Carrier made heat pumps for many years now? I thought I remembered them from the late 1980s.
> but by the time the Beagle voyages were over the cost of a good chronometer had fallen to under £40 (now £4,200)

Reminds me of the "wait calculation" paradox, where it's always better to wait to start building your interstellar spaceship, because if you wait another 50 years, you will be building a better spaceship that will shave off more than 50 years of your flight time. [1] (Ok, in the original research paper it's not a paradox, but I like to think of it as one.)

1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260275150_Interstel...
One area in which Claude seems to unambiguously beat Google Translate is classical Chinese. I recently tried both on a paragraph from a book written during Qing (paragraph 13 of [1]), and it wasn't even close. Some examples:

> (GT:) Ten years after Yongzheng's reign, the platform experienced many turmoils, but there was never any attempt to mobilize troops to suppress the troops.

> (Claude:) After the tenth year of the Yongzheng reign, although there were frequent disturbances in Taiwan, there were no instances of dispatching troops to suppress the harm caused by the indigenous people, indicating their weakened state

(note GT's mistranslation of 臺地 (Taiwan) as 'platform', and the crucial chronological difference between 'After the tenth year of the Yongzheng reign' (correct translation of 雍正十年以後) and 'Ten years after Yongzheng's reign' (incorrect))

---

> (GT:) Since the establishment of trade in the Western Kingdom, his ships have often traveled behind mountains and landed on reefs in the wind. Many people have seen that their appearance and clothing are different, and they cannot understand the language, so their lives may not be saved. In the future, provocations may inevitably arise from various sources! Why conquer it?

> (Claude:) Since the opening of trade with Western countries, their ships often sailed behind the mountains. If they encountered storms or reefs and landed, the indigenous people, upon seeing their strange appearance and clothing and being unable to communicate with them, might not spare their lives. Future border conflicts may inevitably begin with these indigenous tribes! How can we deal with this?

---

> (GT:) In the sixth year of Tongzhi's reign, an American Roman merchant ship was caught in a storm and ran aground at Guizaijiao, south of Langqiao, under the jurisdiction of Fengshan County.

> (Claude:) In the sixth year of the Tongzhi reign (1867), an American merchant ship, the Rover, encountered a storm and ran aground on Guizai Cape south of Langqiao, Fengshan County, breaking the ship. The captain and several sailors swam ashore but were killed by the indigenous people, who also injured a military officer

(note how GT simply silently dropped a whole sentence (船主與數水手鳧水近岸，被番所殺，續又傷其兵官一人) about what happened to the the captain & sailors!)

---

> (GT:) In the spring of the seventh year, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang wrote to the governor of Fujian, saying that although Shengfan was not legally bound, the land belonged to China.

> (Claude:) In the spring of the seventh year (1868), Prince Gong, the Minister in charge of foreign affairs, sent a letter to the Governor of Fujian, stating that although the indigenous people could not be restrained by law, their land still belonged to China

[1] https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=en&chapter=149754#:~:text=%E4%B...

Direct link to Google Translate version: https://tinyurl.com/6juv4nkd (what you see may differ slightly from mine)
That's a very mid-1800s position to take, given you're complaining about "calculating productivity like it's the 1800s" — owners getting rich from reinvesting the profits of labour is one of the big things that Marx was cross about.

> We can just decide to change it. Doesn't require magic or even much imagination.

Many have tried. What's the quote?

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.” ― H. L. Mencken

Some attempts have been more successful, some less successful, but the governments which think economics is easy have done the worst, regardless of if they were Communist or Capitalist.
True, I wish I could know what that culture of repair is though.
SkyNet Is Not Coming to Kill You
> Even if there's some exotic whatsit we have somehow not been able to detect thus far, something that lives outside of our existing scientific theories, that would simply require updating those theories, and then figuring out how to follow the same steps biological systems do.

Assuming the whatsit could fit into the materialistic/mechanistic framework. But that's not necessarily the case.

> You similarly have no direct evidence that there isn't a bottle A&W root bear on Europa, but our understanding of the history of humanity (and root beer and space travel) makes it very unlikely.

I didn't make a claim, I asked you how you can be so sure of your claim.