skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it's a different argument with respect to famous media celebrities* too.

If someone clones a random person's voice for commercial purposes, the public likely has no idea who the voice's identity is. Consequently, it's just the acoustic voice.

If someone clones a famous media celebrity's voice, the public has a much greater chance of recognizing the voice and associating it with a specific person.

Which then opens a different question of 'Is the commercial use of the voice appropriating the real person's fame for their own gain?'

Add in the facts that media celebrities' values are partially defined by how people see them, and that they are often paid for their endorsements, and it's a much clearer case that (a) the use potentially influenced the value of their public image & (b) the use was theft, because it was taking something which otherwise would have had value.

Neither consideration exists with 'random person's voice' (with deference to voice actors).

* Defined as 'someone for whom there is an expectation that the general public would recognize their voice or image'
Progress requires a generational shift.

At-least in US we are looking at average age of presidential candidates 79y, senate 65y, house 60.

50% of wealth is owned by Boomers. They control majority of wealth and policy.

Even the current generation will be long dead before they have to reckon with climate change.

Until we get a big shock event where millions die, and the death from extreme natural causes is very evident, it won’t be something most governments take seriously.

All major governments dragged their feet through 2020 regarding Covid.
Not only that, I don’t think Disney wants this precedent. They may also want to get back on her good side. Either way given they own a number of movies with her in starring roles I wouldn’t be surprised if they were happy to help in her lawsuit with the legal fees.

Hell they may sue on their own or join as another damaged party.
Sounds like a blockchain startup in the making!
A "Copilot". Like someone who stands there and makes sure you make the right decisions. A "minder", if you will.
It’s gonna take a lot more than that if they want to do it in house. The moat is financial, and it is wide and deep

Also I gotta say their billboard on the 101 outside of SF really irritates me
Percent vs percentage points. It's slightly confusing but the title is correct.
For me, it's a time, and more important attention, tradeoff. I have never once needed to bisect commits to figure out why/who made a change. A blame can lead to a PR, which is usually auto linked to a ticket or has some relevant convos. Commit messages feel like a relic of the past (to me, and my teams workflow). Ymmv!
When you clip the board, the conductive layers are also being smooshed together and touch despite the non-conductive layers, which seems to persist during the enlargement of the cut. I imagine the goal of the flat filing is to remove more material from the top layers an “terrace” the layer lines until they don’t touch.

As far as the repair is concerned, it seems like the cut only goes through continuous ground or voltage planes. So in a sense, it is lucky no important traces or logic lines are harmed in the process.
I've found myself being on the downside. One job in particular was especially egregious in how "pitch meetings" were simply where the art director let people toss out ideas only to dismiss each one and at the end toss out their idea. Suddenly everyone in the room loved the idea. It was obvious the art director just wanted to be able to say that they were open and listened to ideas from the plebes. After the third one of these meetings where I started asking for more details from the brilliant pitch, it was clear that I was no longer a fit. Eventually, the glitch was fixed so to speak.
I think it would be interesting to check differences in multiple countries/regions.
Yes as noted on the page

> You can always pay out your funds using our standard schedule (2 business days) for free.
Not OP, or the replier, but I think the longer answer here is that if Scarlett Johansson <insert any wealthy and/or popular figure> can't win a lawsuit against a company that has effectively:

(1) Used content she has created (vocal lines) in order to train a generative AI with the ability to create more of that content (vocal lines), without permission or payment, let alone acknowledgement

(2) In doing so removed the scarcity of the content she provides (Generative AI is effectively unlimited in the lines it can produce once effectively trained)

Then no smaller time actor, voice actor, artist, musician, etc, is likely to have any chance defending themselves against the theft of their work for AI purposes.

And, with that precedent set, the legal and financial landscape of art and creativity will have changed in a way that discourages anybody from creating original works for financial gain, because we've systematised the creation of original and derivative works with no legal or financial ramifications.
Interesting web.
In what scenario would you be exposed to the aerosolized coating, assuming it is aerosolized at all?
I’m sure someone here can have chatGPT craft up a blog post that caters to the narrative you have in your head about the topic :)
Freewrite Alpha Review: For People Who Just Want to Write
Another option is a "frozen conflict" -- for Ukraine to accept a cease fire with current front lines, but not to recognize Russia's claims of sovereignty. Leaving open the possibility of a final counteroffensive after Putin croaks. Some 43 percent of Ukrainians are open to some form of negotiations, according to a recent poll (independent of Russia's deranged narratives).
As I understand it (though I may be wrong) in music sampling cases, it doesn’t matter if the “sample” is using an actual clip from a recording or if were recreated from scratch using a new media (e.g. direct midi sequence), if a song sampling another song is recognizable it is still infringing.
Sam is aligned with the Elon playbook.
What do you mean by "for anything serious it isn't open source"? I didn't see any red flags in the apache variant of timescale, just constant pleading to try their hosted option.

https://github.com/timescale/timescaledb/blob/main/LICENSE-A...
I'm sure a brown paper bag of cash can be convincing
I literally thought this exact sentence when I saw this article.
On the contrary, footnotes on a webpage belong in the margins. Putting them at the foot of the article in current year is like banging rocks together.
Notably absent from article: the surprisingly equanimous opinion of Boz —- Agrippa to Zuck’s Augustus. I have to reread his post on perverse incentives now

https://boz.com/articles/incentives

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39277516
I haven't seen the commercial, but I feel like it's also probably not identical. My read of the case is that the context connecting Midler to the ad without her consent was a key feature, which makes me think Scarlett Johansson would be in a similarly strong position if she brought a case.

But ultimately I'm also not sure. There are some differences that courts could find important. I hope she sues and refuses to settle, so we can find out!
I'm surprised that it wasn't any closer to any other non-power/ground traces.
Did anyone say no to him other than Prince?
They could buy ads on the platform, bypassing the market and giving more directly
Go for the throat ScarJo!
I found quicken to be enlightening. It took me two months to master my family’s finances and budgeting and I’ve never looked back. Learning it’s ins and outs and why it is what it is and provides some features but not others was a wonderful learning experience.
I'm beginning to think this Sam Altman guy isn't so trustworthy.
Last time I went in the dude mentioned offhand that my current model of brake pads wouldn’t be for sale by the time I needed new pads because mine were sintered (with?) copper.

Might be state by state but sounds like it’s on people’s radar at least.
Isn't the point closer to, humans simply go "hey that seems to be taking a little long?" when a program doesn't halt, so why couldn't a machine? Basically a fairly obvious constraint on the solution space is "completes in less then N wall-clock time".
Yeah god forbid those nerds get laid and/or smoke a joint. Can’t have that. That’s only for the beautiful people.
Effective Altruists are just shitty utilitarians that never take into account all the myriad ways that unmoderated utilitarianism has horrific failure modes.

Their hubris will walk them right into federal prison for fraud if they’re not careful.

If Effective Altruists want to speed the adoption of AI with the general public, they’d do well to avoid talking about it, lest the general public make a connection between EA and AI

I will say, when EA are talking about where they want to donate their money with the most efficacy, I have no problem with it. When they start talking about the utility of committing crimes or other moral wrongs because the ends justify the means, I tend to start assuming they’re bad at morality and ethics.
Especially what it takes to reprogram and re-pair NANDs and Macs together. It's absurd that NANDs not only encode board SN, but MAC ID as well.
This is such a math answer, lol. I love it.
You're correct for the time being. It's my hope some laws can be put in place since DNT is already built. And making DNT default undermines such efforts.
Yes you did:

> "Israeli politicians openly call the Palestinians "our bitter enemies"."

As I said the bulk of statements from Israeli military, politicians, and government, in Hebrew and in English say that the war in Gaza is not against civilians but against Hamas. If you insist on cherry picking some statements and building your story on those then I would respectfully ask that you reconsider.

I would also urge you look at surveys and see what Gazans think about Israelis instead of obsessing with the (IMO not true) idea that Israelis consider Gazans their bitter enemy. Find me surveys before Oct 7th that show that Israelis had more negative opinions about Gazans than Gazans held about Israelis overall and I'm open to changing my position. I also urge you to see footage of Oct 7th and ask yourself a question about the mindset towards Israelis leading to these actions.
Kinda. To the degree that the object of increase is also a percentage the statement “increasing X (where x is quantified as a pct) by Y %” could mean that X of 20% is increased to 70% or to 30%. It would be more clear to state “X increases from Y% to Z%.”
> I'm not sure why you think it would be more expensive to study the safety.

Because you'd have to run a much larger experiment. The end point you're measuring (RTAs or possibly deaths depending) is significantly rarer than just running a light. But you're still trying to collect enough data to achieve confidence, so you'll need a larger experiment.

My very strong impression is that your priorities are messed up and what you're looking for isn't safety at all, so that no matter what studies are done you'll find another excuse as to why enforcement isn't a good idea, at which point of course any further study is a waste of their time.

For example you suggest in this comment that somehow police data would be good enough, and Chicago has police data showing the same thing, but no doubt you'll say you have a different reason why Chicago's police data doesn't satisfy you.
Maybe weapons? Certainly you could hit speeds that would nullify any kind of missile defense, though MIRVs already accomplish that anyway.

Depending on where you established infrastructure on the moon, it might be pretty easy to conceal the things you're doing in space. You won't see anything launched from the other side, and anything leaving the moon is going to fall towards Earth, so may be difficult to detect (e.g. no heat signature).

The moon is also a pretty decent staging ground for the rest of the solar system, so getting there late means ceding any potential resource or technological advantages that being first might have attained.

There's also a slim possibility that there are things that can only be manufactured in low or zero gravity.

I think the last two reasons aren't a great justification, but anything that materially impacts geopolitics on Earth, as weapons systems and spying do, probably are if you think there's a credible threat that your adversary is capable of them. And that's probably a big part of why the US stopped going to the moon. The cost and risks didn't stack up when the US already had a pretty compelling technological lead, better intel, and the USSR never signalled that it was serious about going there.

China are serious, though, and the way they've vertically integrated the world's manufacturing base means they actually have a lead on the US in a number of areas. That's probably why there's suddenly a lot more urgency and credibility about claims of wanting to go back.
Ted Gioia on AI's Threat to Music
And people who sell both of those things have an incentive to make the process of creating them as difficult to understand as possible by the public.
Seawater is rushing under Thwaites Glacier, potentially dire impact on sea level
Where is the German cockroach (Blattella germanica) actually from?
The "infinity train" is still under construction.

Due to launch sometime soon in 2024 (as announced in 2022) it's still yet to roll on it's maiden haul.

They are still hiring electrical techs though.
A rich investor dropping $10M on stock to get the inside track on the next president of the United States is a steal. Making money be damned.
> Presence of outliers (savants) doesn’t discredit the general correlation

You're now claiming a "correlation", but a correlation is meaningless so we don't need to credit it in the first place - since, you know, correlation is not causation. It is evidence against a useful causation.

(If the causation is "low IQ causes poor skills except when it doesn't" this isn't useful since it's a tautology.)

> No one is claiming skills cannot be learned

You were claiming that smart people are better at everything before this, but it's well known that they're not better at this even though it's a purely mental skill.

Strictly speaking you were claiming that people better at some test are better at every test, but presumably you meant to generalize there, since if they just had high "test taking skills" nobody would care. Also a likely circularity lurking in the definition of "test"…
They added much more Her like emotion to the gpt-4o version, so the similarities are more striking.
Can you say more about where you found this information? I didn’t see it in the OP.

I think rpi has made some compromises to advance business viability, which feeds their more altruistic endeavours.
The question was, why checked exceptions saw no love. A big part of the answer is that the stdlib did a very poor job showcasing them.

No wonder, it was an attempt to graft an FP-esque feature onto a deeply imperative OOP language, with a development team aligned with OOP concepts. I suspect the stdlib team lacked either the understanding or the means to make the use of e.g. IOException nicer. They didn't even have type parameters at their disposal yet. It was botched as a result, and deprecated.

It's an interesting mental exercise to try and design a better implementation of the idea within the constraints of Java. (Implementing the monadic approach is likely the easiest and cleanest way.)
That is what discovery is for. If this would ever get to that phase.

Someone from OpenAi hired the agency who hired the voice talent (or talents) for the voice data. They sent them a brief explaining what they are looking for, followed by a metric ton of correspondence over samples and contracts and such.

If anywhere during those written communications anyone wrote “we are looking for a ScarlettJ imitator”, or words to that effect, that is not good for OpenAI. Similarly if they were selecting between options and someone wrote that one sample is more Johansson than an other. Or if anyone at any point asked if they should clear the rights to the voice with Johansson.

Those are the discovery findings which can sink such a defense.
Today's AI models are impressive. Teams of them will be formidable
Just like selling Bibles to churches who can’t make campaign donations. Everything with him is a grift. People need to remember that.
Hot take. The lesson for OpenAI is to STFU. Always. This is always the best thing to do. STFU. You wanted to emulate her voice? Should have done it anyway and not told a soul. You know why? Because there are tens of thousands of women who sound like that. It's a very generic voice and accent. Let's be real here. Many of us have seen her movies and had we not read the controversy we would not have made the connection. All OpenAI had to do was move forward with intent and let HER prove its HER voice, and not a generalization of many similar women's voices that could be found in the public domain applied towards a process that collapsed into something resembling her and many other women's voices.

In the not so distant future, when the world's top AI models can generate endless accents and voices at will, the probability of one of those sounding just like you (and thousands of other people) will be high. It will be VERY high.

All this dealing with Hollywood and music industry and all the crap i've been reading about OpenAI trying to wiggle their way into those industries is absolute damn nonsense. What is Sama thinking?! GO BACK TO BEING NERDS AND STFU.

If you really believe you are going to create a real AGI, none of this is relevant. No one is going to thank you for creating something that can replicate what they value in seconds. Do it anyway.

And remember, STFU.
https://archive.ph/ilYK9
> Your entire premise is based on some random quotes from an individual?

Among genocide and ethnic cleansing peddling, over 500: https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-databas...
Sounds like a fantastic way to maneuver and get credit for someone else's proactive engenuity
The title is correct. But I agree that saying "50% increase" conveys less information than saying "1% to 1.5%" (because you don't know 50% of what), and seems to have been used only to make the title more dramatic.
> spill some of their greasy secrets like which corrupt cop is cheating on their wife or whatever

> Do this publicly, name and shame

I think these are the parts that are most likely to trigger dangerous retributive action. I think a less dramatic approach is to make sure everyone's on the same page about how much cops take from our communities and how little they add.

I sometimes look at the pay information for my city. A lot of the people making over 400k are cops whose overtime pay is significantly more than their salary. But whenever I see cops, they're just standing around chatting. Even "responding" to some situation, there will be 3 cop cars blocking traffic so 5 of them can chat while one talks on the radio looming over a homeless person in cuffs on the sidewalk. And they take forever to do anything. I watched them take a whole day to try to get a trespasser off the roof of a building across the street. Eventually they ordered several pizzas told the trespasser that he could have some food and ice water if he came down. Then the cops just ate and chatted with each other while blocking traffic and causing a scene for multiple more hours. But sure, they're all legitimately doing 60 hours a week of overtime that's totally necessary police work.

This is the kind of thing that can get moderates and conservatives annoyed: those cops are probably making more money than you as they hang out and gab, and they're causing traffic and transit delays. Tell your friends.
Yes, it's editorialized. The actual title is "June 2024 pricing update for Instant Payouts for businesses in the United States"
Boost::graph feels like one of the dustier corners of the Boost libraries. I have used it, it worked, but it took a long time to wrap my head around the design and actually adapt it to my project. It is not great for getting simple things done, but it will get them done, with the power and flexibility as stated in the article. You will likely never see the Boost interfaces poking through whatever facade you end up erecting around it.
Case law says no.

There have been several legal cases where bands have sued advertisers for copying their distinct sound. Here are a few examples:

The Beatles vs. Nike (1987): The Beatles' company, Apple Corps, sued Nike and Capitol Records for using the song "Revolution" in a commercial without their permission. The case was settled out of court.

Tom Waits vs. Frito-Lay (1988): Tom Waits sued Frito-Lay for using a sound-alike in a commercial for their Doritos chips. Waits won the case, emphasizing the protection of his distinct voice and style.

Bette Midler vs. Ford Motor Company (1988): Although not a band, Bette Midler successfully sued Ford for using a sound-alike to imitate her voice in a commercial. The court ruled in her favor, recognizing the uniqueness of her voice.

The Black Keys vs. Pizza Hut and Home Depot (2012): The Black Keys sued both companies for using music in their advertisements that sounded remarkably similar to their songs. The cases were settled out of court.

Beastie Boys vs. Monster Energy (2014): The Beastie Boys sued Monster Energy for using their music in a promotional video without permission. The court awarded the band $1.7 million in damages.
Not commenting on open AI specifically, but I feel like actually acquiring the data is borderline impossible if you only follow legal channels.

Where can I insert my money to buy every penguin random house book? How do I pay every deviant art artist whatever amount they're owed?
I think you’re not talking about the same thing. There’s an expression related to time series data —- “high churn” and another “active time series”.

500 million active time series is extremely huge.

It does not have anything to do with number of data points.

Good time series databases can scale to 1M-10M writes per second without a hiccup.
> Furthermore, there's no way in hell Netanyahu gets his endgame (wiping Hamas off the face of the planet)

Citation needed. When the PLO and Arafat were becoming less militant, and more diplomatic, that's when Netanyahu and Mossad started sending tens of millions a month to Hamas, to keep it as the "public enemy number one". But if Hamas goes away, then Netanyahu has to explain why he won't support a two party state (because "from the river to the sea" has also been Likud's platform and policy).
Hamas only makes up 40,000 of Palestine's 2.3M.

Unless you're trying to claim that Israel has decimated 75% of Hamas, and is almost done, let's not try to diminish this.

The number has also been largely substantiated by press and aid agencies, it's not just Gazan propaganda.
Generally when states sign treaties it applies to the de jure state, not just what it de facto controls.

> Given Palestine is a signatory does it mean they have to take action to extradite the Hamas leadership to face trial? What consequences do they face if they fail to do that?

Almost certainly nothing. They are obligated to help, but realistically if the palestine authority had the ability to capture hamas leadership i imagine they would have done so a long time ago, as the two sides fought what was essentially a civil war a while back.
I don't know, that's what the experts say. I'm not a nuclear fusion physicist so I can't answer the question of what good funding looks like. Perhaps we could start with 1% of the defense budget. A cool $8.2 billion.

Just for reference I looked up what the moon mission cost. Adjusted for inflation it was $182 billion(multi-year so not directly comparable to annual budget). And this was just for flexing on the soviets.