skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not at all. Remember what FISA stands for: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law was originally written to allow spying on Foreign citizens. They stoked enough fear to get Congress to amend and expand the law to allow targeting of U.S. citizens, implying we were all in danger of we didn't allow it and promising to use that power responsibly.

Now the FBI Deputy Director says: "I urge everyone to continue to look for ways to appropriately use US person queries to advance the mission" - that is, literally think about ways to use this power to spy on U.S. citizens. This absolutely is and should be big news.
NYT has an excellent summary on it. Life becomes very hard when they try to use their new sense in any meaningful way:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/29/books/review/comnig-to-ou...
> seems only good at enabling generative spam and disinformation.

That seems overly pessimistic. They're pretty good at generating summaries of text, simple machine translation, generating alternative prose, turning unstructured text into table-like data, providing a text interface over a corpus of facts, and probably a bunch of things I'm not thinking of.
What about it doesn't make sense to you?

LLMs aren't intelligent and the hallucinations problem is fundamental to the technology, and cannot be solved.

Therefore definitionally an LLM will never be fully trustworthy.

But it's great at generating plausible-sounding stuff, which makes it great for propaganda and disinformation.
I'm hardly screaming.

I find the rhetoric when you start touching on things people don't like to be so odd. Suddenly I'm portrayed as having some sort of temper tantrum about heritability or limiting the next generation's capability or whatever.

I think the next generation, like this one, will be fine. My whole point is that you can do things other than your upbringing.
He is either

a) extremely passionate about the idea that we have no free will

b) loves the paychecks that arrive after appearing on podcasts and selling books

c) is compelled to do all these things because he has no free will

edit: formating, code blocks don't work anymore?
So it turns out chrome os ships with a shared library to support L2 (since it's entirely in software). There's a patch to get it working on other Linux distributions.
Xi Jinping's Plan to Save China Through Science
Hint: according to his own account, he spent about as much time interacting with genocide and nazis as my own grandparents who also fled and hid during the war did.

That's all you got?

You were clearly attempting to impugn his character and credibility. Defamatory statements against living persons must be backed up with hard evidence. Otherwise it's slander.

In this case, against a Holocaust survivor no less.
What we've seen with AWS (and we only discounted like 2 services) is that if you commit to a monthly spend amount on a service you can get substantial discounts on that service.

There are EC2 plans as well, which I assume means that you can get discounts off the reserved instance pricing - but you'd have to ask your AWS rep about that.

If you spend > 4 figures on an AWS service you should ask for their discount plan. Nobody wants to say what they get discounted on, because they might lose them (and the contracts are confidential). So you have to ask your rep.
> There is Tesla AI for example that is building Robots etc. Musk's competitor to OpenAI (x.AI ?) has raised $6 billion at a $18 billion valuation.

This is just giving Musk more runway to make promises that Tesla will fail to deliver on. When the robot fails, he'll pivot to promising something different, and the cycle will repeat.
The argument from the other side is at least as frustrating.

> ...nothing has convinced me that if we turned off DRM we'd: 1) save money 2) not have issues with piracy proliferation

> That night our anti-piracy team took down 20,000+ illegal streams

You already have enormous issues with piracy proliferation. The money you spend on DRM may be "relatively insignificant", but it's still money being wasted on "protection" that has already proven to be utterly ineffective.

I am in neither of your three groups. I want to pay for content. I pay for a lot of music, for example. But you're not going to bully me into paying for your shit by making it as user hostile as possible. As a paying customer I expect at least the level of service that piracy groups have no trouble providing, but instead I'm treated like an enemy every step of the way.

In practice this means I avoid TV shows and movies, but when I do want to watch one I have absolutely zero moral qualms pirating a product that is not for sale. I'll even go out of my way to look for a DRM-free copy I can pay for first. This takes more time than pirating it once I inevitably find out that's not available.
The latter. It has been almost 20 years since I lived there.
NASA Contractor Warns That Boeing Launch Must Be Stopped
Not a frame-for-frame rip off, but clearly the same idea. It isn't a particularly creative or novel concept, though.
are there rss readers that just send you your subscribed twitter tweets?

I find twitter is really good at breaking news and typical rss is better for things like blogs that update slowly.
They're just saying it seems obvious that a person would be like their parents. Nothing more grandiose than that.
It would be nice if people at these companies were rewarded the same way as food delivery app employees.
Ive seen some of his content. Generally I find that he regards science and such well.

Something I've noticed going through a cannabis legalization. What we were told in the 1990s about cannabis was completely wrong. In their defense, because of it's classification it wasn't possible to do any studies. Only now can researchers actually research with it and we're overthrowing a great deal of ancient science from the past. But also paving way for future understandings.

Looking at the allegation, his main assertion is 'there is literally no research that has ever been done"

Sure because it was illegal. Now the studies are coming in and perhaps the best argument is that it's not settled science? Or perhaps that Andrew overstated positions?
As a disabled person, I admit to being made slightly uncomfortable by the uncritical framing of genetically modified people as "therapy" that all people should want. Where is the line between "gene therapy" to eliminate differences (such as deafness) and eugenics? If we have statistics that taller people have better outcomes in life, should we do gene therapy to make sure everyone is taller than 6'? How much diversity of human experience is too much?

Obviously, there are easy cases: this kind of technique to prevent conditions leading to abject suffering, for example. But, knowing and admiring deaf people makes me unsure about the idea of "curing" deafness, for example, as a goal of medicine.
Today we tried installing Claude with Slack and were told that it’s restricted to enterprise versions.
His book “Behave” seemed to be well done. He cites everything he claims (I’ve only looked at a few of them, but they seemed like legit studies). I haven’t followed much of his free will argument but it makes sense he’d go down that path because the premise of Behave is that our actions are just the result of many physical processes.

One thing that keeps me open-minded about free will is that, yeah my actions may be the result of natural processes, but I also have the ability to reflect upon those actions so that my responses change the next time. But, then again I would probably defend the idea of free will even irrationally. In my opinion even if I don’t have free will I still have to live like I do.

Edit: I just googled Behave citations and one of the first things to pop up was someone claiming he has bad sources. But, I didn’t investigate that person’s claims either. So, be skeptical I guess.
That's actually incorrect.

The second amendment is entirely about state militias, and anyone claiming it's related to resisting a tyrannical government hasn't actually read the documents they claim to have read.

Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution outlines militias as a duty of congress, and the function of the militias (note: resisting a tyrannical government is not listed!)

Article II, Section 2 defines the President as the commander in chief of the military and militias.

The above is what the second amendment is making reference to.

There are following acts of congress that clarify who gets to be in a militia: the militia acts of 1792, 1795, 1862 and 1903. These allow for people of different races and genders to join militias.

The militia act of 1903 clarifies that there are different types of state militias: formal and informal. Formal is things like the National Guard, Texas Rangers, etc. Informal is - in times of emergency, the state can basically just round up a posse for the outlined purposes in Article 1, Section 8. The second amendment does guarantee personal firearm ownership under this possibility, connected to possible service in an informal militia.

You're welcome.
This is super cool! Both the writeup and the app. It'd be great if the search results linked to the HN story so we can check out the comments.
Paper thin walls are more than a construction issue, they are substandard living conditions and the buildings should be condemned and the construction company that built them should be fined and forced to build better housing.
This is super neat. I would love to use this in a team setting if I could convince the org to pay for it.

I saw in another comment that it’s a patched version of Chromium. Are you using CDP for underlying communication?
I mean, sure, Trump could probably get things going with some graft, but I don't see it as something to aspire to. Even congress has limited ability, our government simply has lots of friction that no one is really interested in reducing yet.
The problem there isn't your receptors, which are UV sensitive. The problem is your lens, which filters it out. Remove the lens and you can see UV just fine.

Until you get eyeball cancer, that is. UV is mutagenic. That's why you filter it out.

People with cataracts get replacement lenses, and some exist that don't filter the UV. I think they're hard to get, what with the whole "eyeball cancer" thing. But if I get to my 70s and need replacement lenses (I do have a family history), I'm going to campaign to see if I can spend a couple of decades looking at the pretty birdies.
>Additionally, members of the program receive priority placement and “richer brand expression” in chat conversations, and their content benefits from more prominent link treatments. Finally, through PPP, OpenAI also offers licensed financial terms to publishers.

This is what a lot of people pushing for open models fear - responses of commercial models will be biased based on marketing spend.
The ROI exponentially decreases with language models. At this point, each percentage point of accuracy costs you tens of billions, and the projections show a solid wall approaching with the current implementation tricks.

It's an off the cuff comment, at this point though, HN apparently needs to bully everyone who refuses to go along with the zeitgeist, as if being negative near a thing would destroy it.

I guess the 'h' no longer stands for 'hacker.'
> I decided to download Moviemake and buy the Digital Plus pack r so I went to Microsoft.com.

I am now less ashamed for sentences that are broken because I inserted stuff late and didn't re-read them after editing r.

Previous submissions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34397436

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34396958
What does Encore do, exactly? From the comments here and the blog post it's not super clear to me.
The government has the legal authority to kill, imprison, and tax citizens. It can destroy entire industries with the stroke of a pen. The military can wipe other nations off the face of the Earth.

And you want to wield that awesome power for some trivial problem like spam on the Internet? This is exactly the kind of overreach the founding fathers intended to prevent.
There's no nicotine in cannabis, so I don't see how they are at all related
As per https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:

"In Comments

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."
Putting the word "desperation" in the headline is serious editorializing. It's a valuable story but Gizmodo is chasing clicks.
Show HN: I made a simple, gamified X/Twitter analytics
The first version of Ugly Duckling was killed by the Analytics/API changes last year shortly after gaining its first 100 users, but I've still decided to give it another shot this year with a focus on consistency and a somewhat gamified experience (leaderboards, weekly goals, etc.).

Demo: https://quack.uglyduckling.app/demo

It's simple, but with the new API pricing, I can't do much more. Keeping it this way and focusing on the gamification part allows me to offer it as a one-time payment instead of subscriptions.

Looking forward to your feedback! Thanks!
That's not what the GP said. They said Huberman's incorrect statements on something they understood made them more skeptical regarding his other statements, not that these other statements were definitely wrong because the first statements were wrong. It's about judging Huberman's reliability as a source of information, not deciding whether he's correct or not, ie whether it makes sense to take Huberman at his word or whether one should doublecheck the things that he says.
> Ultimately Congress should have written the law more carefully

Insane framing of “we know the spirit of the law but we are going to do everything we can to skirt it”.

>The FBI’s job is only to investigate to the maximum extent of the law

Wrong, according to the FBI itself:

“The mission of the FBI is to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution of the United States.”

https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/what-is-the-mission-of-the-fb...

Pray tell, how does warrantless spying on citizens help to uphold the 4th amendment?
Well, remember: heritability of scottish accents is near 100%, and heritability of two eyes is near 0%.

Why? The covariance of genes with accent is near 100%: almost everyone who speaks scottish interbreeds within the same geographical area.

As for eyes: there is almost no variation in the species between the number of eyes. Since ~everyone has 2, no genetic variation whatsoever discriminates.

The co-variation of a gene with an observable trait is irrelevant when vast amounts of cultural (, geographical, social, etc.) traits cause (irrelevant) genetic variation. So "heritability" is basically nonsense outside of cases when the experimenter is actually causing genes to differer between populations (it was invented for the case of engineering crops).
Amtrak no longer living hand to mouth after being funding-starved for decades
ugh, sometimes i think that i should've finished making the ai bot for my partner to help her boring media job at dotdash meredith, then cashed out. but working on it made me miserable, and it's not a valuable tool to society.

here is an etl where i was attempting to train it on southern living and food & wine articles so it could output text for those dumb little content videos that you see at the top of every lifestyle brand article: https://github.com/smcalilly/zobot-trainer
Integrating an AI tab organizer of which they’re very few and the chrome one is essentially garbage, would make this a definite purchase for me. The AI should organize my own tabs and the ones I share
How is this different from coderabbit, codegen and codium's PR agent?
The FBI is domestic law enforcement. They need admissable evidence. FISA grants warrants. NSA is operating on a different level with different objectives.
Perhaps we should have different words for voluntary (choosing to regain your hearing, etc...) and coercive (forced sterilization, etc...) "eugenics", since almost all of the negative connotations of the word are (rightly, IMO) attributed only to the latter.
Here are East Palo Alto's census stats.[1][2]

Percentage of black people:

* 1980 - 68%

* 1990 - 43%

* 2000 - 23%

* 2010 - 17%

* 2023 - 13%

[1] https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/eastpaloaltocit...

[2] http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/cities/EastPaloAlto70.htm
"Liberals are generally those buying EVs, while conservatives are more inclined to buy IC vehicles"

I don't think the divide is all that significant. There may be a slightly bigger percentage buying for a perceive environmental reason, but Teslas are mainly purchased by the rich, politics be damned.
But I thought that they are "unable to provide an adjustment or refund since the service was provided and contract is closed."
Mistral AI raising at a $6B valuation, SoftBank 'not in' but DST is
This article is so histrionic that it's a parody of itself.

>and most disturbingly (because they suggest destructive violence against children's toys, and against the child in all of us) a ceramic Angry Birds figure and a stack of rubber emoji ball.

Are you fucking serious man? It's just an ad
You’d lose that bet.

Source: I was there
Find an endpoint that checks the validity of the DRM token they have broken.

See if that endpoint just hinges on that DRM token, since its crypto-secure, why check any other fields?

Spoof other fields.

10k+ 0-day exploit.
China also leads in coal, oil and gas.
Games are no fun if they're too hard.

When faced with a challenge, you want to figure out as much as you reasonably can, and then learn what you were missing.

Struggling at the same problem for several sessons, or god forbid years, sounds like misery to me. I'd rather use that time productively learning, rather than struggling for the sake of it, because I refuse to learn from others.
Do you also refuse to call music albums "albums"? The etymology is the exact same thing. Terms stick as formats change, that's the English language as it is used and it's not new or wrong.
There's not an obsession with robotic animals in the book, it's an obsession with animals and keeping them as part of the new religion, Mercerism, and its hyper-focus on empathy, and consequently displays of empathy. Caring for an animal is part of that. The robotic animals are not meant to be recognized as robotic, they're surrogates so people can still display their care of an animal and demonstrate empathy even if they can't afford a real one. Real animals being rarer and more expensive, and of course dying much more easily than a machine, as happened to Deckard's prior to the events of the novel.
Yes. Hence the attached NVMe, which is the best thing available for random reads. EFS also sucks for high throughput IO. The aforementioned cache obviously won’t work for scanning petabytes of data, as it relies on having at least some locality. But that wasn’t an issue for this customer
That might have been truer when people were having 6+ children. With the modern average of 1.5, I doubt more than 10% lose their trust funds.
I understand your objection and of course you can't just naively get causality from observational GWAS. That is true.

Your rhetoric does not match the strength of your scientific objection. Let's imagine the worst case - these studies are absolutely useless for indicating any causality whatsoever. Even then, they are still extremely useful because they can explain away lots of environmental variation in a behavior of interest and increase the power of studies of human behavior. That's if they are purely non-causal and genetics actually has no impact whatsoever on behavior or the brain (a mechanistic stretch).

Sorry, but this simply does not match your rhetoric of 'pseudoscience' and closing entire fields down.

> Certainly, with correlation coefficients of ~.2, you're talking about pseudoscience either way. The causes would have to be extremely linear for such trivial correlations to mean anything at all, and they certainly arent.

I simply don't agree, but I can tell you won't be convinced on this point.
I think this says more about the benchmark than the capabilities of the model. If it were the case that 90th percentile performance on the bar exam mean that a model was a 90th percentile lawyer, and we've had these models for 15 months (in fact longer), where are all the LLM lawyers? The lesson here is that a test designed for humans may not be equally representative of capabilities when given to an LLM.
What's the actual real world evidence on that? Plenty of rich European families have been rich for hundreds of years, and I'm not talking about royalty. That kind of disproves the theory.

The ones who go broke fast are usually the ones who also got rich fast, trough luck instead of work or knowledge, like from lottery wins or speculations.
Tim Cook is a decent human being regardless.
Nobody forces you to buy the ipad if you think it's robbing you of so many experiences.
...I can't be alone in thinking the criticism of this ad is on the side of unnecessarily excessive overanalysis ...right?

My interpretation of the ad is limited to "this tablet does a lot in a small form factor". I really don't see a higher meaning here.
i bought them online during a sale, was that my problem?
Everyone but psychopaths wants to live in a stable society, conservatism is apparently a trend among the young, and the boomer generation is all but dead at this point. But go off.
This isn't a real statistic, it's an advertisement for wealth management.
You've hit the nail on the head.

The government could stop all theft if people couldn't leave their homes except with police escort. Obviously this is a ludicrous idea. Ergo we have collectively (and correctly) decided that tolerating some level of bad actors is better than melting away all freedom.
Early Retirement Aspirations Are Here to Stay, Fed Study Shows
> This is a disturbing, shocking ad, not just because of what it shows but because of its seeming obliviousness to the subtext that it turns into text, as well as the message it sends to every artist alive: the tech industry will crush you, destroy you; suddenly, violently, all at once.

It surprises me how upset people get about stuff these days
I generally agree with what you're saying, and I've lived it, but the examples are a touch extreme and muddy the message.

I left Google after 6 years by carefully, over months, thinking through what was happening, what my limits was, what I'd do next, and whether I could show senior leadership at the company and my division was aligned with me, even if immediate leadership was acting like it didn't matter and playing games and never talked directly.

Regardless, people are awful, people who previously over-the-top treated me like I walked on water and we needed to get the project done by any means necessary, treated me like I was having a sudden mental health issue by not finding a magical way to force someone who had found 1000 reasons to delay and not compromise.

I don't know that I'll ever work _for_ someone else again, and even with A) my full knowledge going in and B) support from professional mentors in the company and mental health professionals, it's taken me almost a year to get back to 90% okay with the world. There's no karma here, they stayed there getting checks.

I agree with your point, and have lived it, but I think you are doing yourself and others a disservice by painting in such stark absolutist terms.

I wouldn't be able to make the decision to accept leaving without numerous previous decisions to bite my tongue and vest.
It truly is sad if that is the case that those videos are staged, but, anecdotally, I worked in the eye glass business (lab manager) to pay for college back in the day and I assure you, I have personally seen babies see their parents for the first time clearly and there was plenty of tears to go around.
I think free will is simply a restatement of the fact the future is unknowable and the humans are agents.

You cant 100% predict what a person will do without duplicating the entire person and the world they are interacting with.

Even if everything is causally driven by historic circumstance, it is the human that synthesizes that history and computes an action