skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Show me the use cases you have supported in production. Then I might read all the 30 pages praising the dozens (soon to be hundreds?) of “best practices” to build LLMs.
I think the part that might raise eyebrows is the “programming language designed for making perfect software”. Perfect is, after all, highly subjective, yet at the same time a maybe unnecessarily hyperbolic term.

I don’t mind the language though. I have no doubt that you’re at the top of your game and the problems you’ve outlined in the post do indeed sound challenging.
Reminds me a lot of "The operation failed with an error: success"
Thats fun too.

function foo(x,y,num){
for(i=y; i<y+3 && i<10; i++){
for(w=x; w<x+3 && w<10; w++){
if(grid[i*10+w] == num) return true
}
}
return false;
}

https://jsfiddle.net/gaby_de_wilde/ycx159kg/1/
> I have a theory that a lot of mental biases could be explained by energy minimization - changing beliefs requires brain reconfiguration which is expensive, so we tend not to do it... unless it's imperative to survival.

I am pretty sure this is a very variable trait among humans, some change their mind easily others almost never change their mind. Its expensive as you say, probably communities survive best when some change their mind easily and most keep their mind steady and only change when presented overwhelming evidence (usually from the minority that easily change).
Consoles will get us the rest of the way there.
The same FDA that approved oxycodone, fentanyl patches, benzodaizapines, is having issues with the potential for abuse of MDMA?

Maybe my own experiences with people hooked on opioids and benzos and not MDMA have colored my reaction. I would be greatful if someone at the FDA could point me to the homeless encampment or recovery facility where all the MDMA abusers are hiding.
I thought this as well, but I also think it depends on how you’ve structured your code. If errors aren’t used by the algorithm (they’re just used for early exit) then yes it won’t make a big difference, but if your algorithm is handling errors nearly as frequently as the happy path then you’ll see a difference using the boolean.
> Admittedly, this used to be true! And is still mostly true. But it’s increasingly becoming less true.

So the headline is bullshit then.

The thrust of this article is essentially “LLMs are trained on the internet, _but wait_, they are also trained on other stuff in these very rarified and specific cases”. So even you concede that, LLMs are still, for the most part, trained on the internet.
It is not unfeasible. It is absolutely realistic to do distributed finetuning of an 8B text model on previous generation hardware. You can add finetuning to your set of options for about the cost of one FTE - up to you whether that tradeoff is worth it, but in many places it is. The expertise to pull it off is expensive, but to get a mid-level AI SME capable of helping a company adopt finetuning, you are only going to pay about the equivalent of 1-3 senior engineers.

Expensive? Sure, all of AI is crazy expensive. Unfeasible? No
IDK what you mean. There are loads of niche fabless car companies. They won't be the next VW or Toyota so you wont find their dealerships everywhere and models for every budget, but they're fine catering to the wealthy man or woman who wants something different than your average mass produced luxury German, British or American car, to stand out.
>Why else, for example, would the ID3 have an infotainment system with a SoC clearly not capable of handling the software it was tasked to run?

That definitely wasn't about penny pinching, obviously the increase in quality of a better chip would completely outweigh the costs.

Issues like these exist because of a very large and diffuse organization which develops cars over many years. At some early point in time a chip is choosen (by the time the car is built it is already outpaced by cheaper chips) and resources on that chip are allocated to different development groups, which then have to fight one another and themselves to get their software done within the resources allocated them.

The problem is that the moment any of the initial assumptions about the engineering are violated, the chip becomes insufficient and UX suffers. At that point in time changing the chip would actually delay when the car can be produced, so the internal politics increases to figure out how to make it work.

The ID3 was also especially bad since it was the first car of a new Platform and obviously in the planning of the E/E for that platform the need for processing power for the Infotainment system was severely underestimated. And while that decision certainly concerned money, it definitely wouldn't have been made if the consequences had been visible at that point in time.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella resigning from Starbucks board effective immediately
Google Rolls Back A.I. Search Feature After Flubs and Flaws
NB: anigbrowl, I think you goofed your URL on this submission.

Should have been: <https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08555>

Submitted was:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-022-01742-6
Sounds like you need an agent system, some libs are mentioned here: https://lilianweng.github.io/posts/2023-06-23-agent/
Lisp: Icing or Cake?
Seems pretty logical to pursue your own interests, which are inherently human and personal. We don't know the interests of the individuals who choose to live in Phoenix, so we're not in a position to say they're right or wrong, logical or illogical to do so. But, we can guess. It's easy to guess interests which would make the decision to live there completely logical. They may not be your interests or mine, but then again they're not obliged to share your interests or mine. Put another way, if it "justifies" (i.e increases the likelihood of getting) what you want, then it's not that it appears logical. It is logical.
I’m not saying the industry is wrong. The two words have clear and distinct meaning.

My point is only that fretting over the distinction between the words serves nearly zero utility in day to day software engineering. It’s like “less than” vs. “fewer”. Each has a correct use, but nobody is confused when you use the wrong one. Many confuse the two, to the point that it’s becoming less and less wrong to use one when the other should be used. “Method” and “function” are similar.

In twenty years, nobody is going to care that they once had a distinctive purpose because that distinction serves little utility.
I agree that this is not an easy problem. I have written a status bar for a fairly widely used open source build tool in java. I hijacked System.out and System.err globally and added all writes to a queue that I line buffered and interleaved progress bars at the bottom. There was no noticeable performance degradation relative to not having the progress bar since all the queue management was handled on a background thread. I would characterize the volume of output as medium. The tool is chatty compared to some, but we aren't talking about managing massive amounts of data coming in.

At some point though, I stopped working on this tool because it and the compiler it was primarily used for were way too slow and started focusing on compiler design. I am currently working on a compiler that is self hosted and compiles itself in 1 second but I expect to get that down to under 100ms.

You don't need progress bars when your build is that fast.

I was undeniably rude in my initial post, but I also want to challenge you to be even better as a programmer. I had to write many compilers before I figured out how to self host as quickly as I now can. That is the advantage of working in isolation. I have thrown out more working compilers than all but a handful of people have written. My language is not public because I am still iterating but I wrote the bootstrap compiler in about 10 days of 4-5 hours per day and the self-hosted compiler took about 3 more weeks on top of that. It is ~4200 lines of code in itself. The next version will likely be fewer.
What's food-unsafe about cured urushi?
This message means something analogous to: “You loaded a file, but now the file doesn’t exist anymore (on disk), so I can’t update it with your changes. You can discard the loaded copy, but consider copying its contents first and create a new file from it, because for some technical reason I can’t do this myself.”
Um, what? It's literally what we're talking about haha
you don't have to zip down at high speed on the lane markers when you ride a motorcycle.

It is like the stupid people who say all cyclist burn the lights. They are just so jealous they only see the one that do and completely ignore those that stop at the lights.
TLDR; The book is “The Shadow Work Journal” by Keila Shaheen about “Shadow Work” (integrating your Shadow self) based on Carl Jung’s theorys.
Have you been to downtown Detroit lately? It's beautiful (and easily navigable by car anytime the Detroit GP isn't going on...)
> You're being naive if you think we wouldn't have those laws if not for Napster. If not that pretext it would be another. Floppy disks and flash drives could have been it.

To this day, if you can find a place to buy a cassette tape or blank CD, you will have to pay a tax (bundled into the price) which goes straight to the record industry as "compensation" to offset the presumed loss of revenue due to unauthorized music sharing.
wow it's beautiful. Amazing job. Can you still use it in a dishwasher or microwave?
It's going to launch on top of SLS going forward, which has its own one off bespoke design problem of its own
I would rather prefer a round clock design: mathematically it’s linear but more stylish and simpler to implement (no reverse movement needed). But then you’d probably want to mount it vertically))
Yep.

It should (hopefully!) be self-evident that "hot loops" in which single-digit nanosecond performance differences are meaningful, are (a) exceptional; and, more importantly, (b) not a place where you'd make any kind of function call in the first place!
I'm not sure if it's actually any easier to read. When lots of things are changing it honestly becomes harder to read and figure out what's important and what's superfluous.

With the old progress system, everything was on one line. This honestly isn't horrible to me since I can easily glance text from left to right to figure out what the gist of the text is. When it's changing between the same two steps it still isn't too much of an issue since the information is all still in the same place and it's not actually changing too much between each stage. I can identify each step, figure out what's changing between them, and look for that information specifically.

The new progress system dumps a lot more information at the user, most of it detailing what file is being analyzed and compiled, each one taking maybe 2-4 frames of screen time, on an excessive number of lines, just a complete barrage of pointless information. None of this is really important to me since the only time it would be important is if a file or step took more than 3 seconds to be processed. With items constantly appearing and disappearing, the things that are taking time on the more macro scale like build-lib and build-exe steps that are more important to me will constantly move around the terminal. It's much much harder to read something if it's jumping up and down randomly every 2 frames vs if it's being swapped to share a single line. If the line literally leaves my field of view, it becomes frustrating to follow.

I much prefer the Bazel approach to this problem. When running a series of actions concurrently, the 6 actions taking the most amount of time will be visible in the action list showing how long they're taking, but all other actions will be minimized to a "and X other actions..." line.

This looks cool on the surface, but in practice is not that good at giving you progress information. Which is what progress indicators should do! At best this is a better indicator of how much work is being done, not how much progress is being made. Like a bunch of bleeps, bloops, and random LEDs toggling when a computer does work in a sci-fi TV show.

I think this would be better if individual files being processed got removed unless they start taking too long. Keep the build-exe and build-lib steps around but make them a little sticky. When they complete, have it say "Done" and then remove things in groups or on a set interval. Don't change the number of lines too often and don't reorganize lines either. Generally, it should be easy to parse what's going on and frequent changes to the number of lines and how much information is on each makes that hard.
Congrats to the author, but I really can't stand Lua. It takes its commitment to simplicity too far IMO, especially with regards to tables not really specifying between (in Python terms) "dict-like" and "list-like" tables. Recursively searching through a table of tables can for this reason be annoyingly difficult.

Every time I write it, I find myself wanting a language with just a few more batteries included.
Data is valuable so for example; I don't understand why Reddit and Stack Overflow gave their valuable data to OpenAI and Google for pennies, when they could've made their own chatbots and beat OpenAI and Google at their own game.
If you make the bus better than driving, people will take the bus.

Ideally, you'd do that by improving the bus rather than accepting the current shitty bus situation and degrading driving to the point that it's even worse...
Stack Overflow did try this but imo their LLM wasn't that good
And yet it did include protecting people. That old "eye for an eye", for example.
It’s really much more like JavaScript (due to its prototypical nature), where “everything is an object” is effectively saying the same thing.
Things falling off planes just as we’re starting to forget the terror rollercoasters to which they subjected hundreds of people before their death. Organic indeed.
The problem with ChatGPT is that you might not know to check the original.

If the original text is “I’m getting married on the 10th July”, you’ll know to check the handwritten note if it says “I’m getting married on the l@ July” but not necessarily if it says “on the 16th July”. ChatGPT seems to do the second quite often.
I literally haven’t thought about the Vision Pro even a single time in months.

Wild for such a hyped-up technology product. It just shipped and vanished.
So after few iterations they decided to give up and get the quick buck? So shortsighted from them.
I used ta do Web corpus. I still do. But I used ta, too.

(Apologies to Mitch Hedberg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqHA5CIL0fg )
How much of that is just the flood of traditional engineers into the space and the fact that collecting data and then fine-tuning models is orders of magnitude more complex than just throwing in RAG? I suspect a huge amount of RAG's popularity is just that any engineer can do a version of it + ChatGPT API calls in a day.

As for lora - in the context of my comment, that's just splitting hairs IMO. It falls in the category of finetuning for me, although I understand why you might disagree. But it's not like the article mentions lora either, nor am I aware of people doing lora without GPUs which the article is against (No GPUs before PMF)
I don't consider a small 8B model to be worth fine-tuning. Fine-tuning is worthwhile when you have a larger model with capacity to add data, perhaps one that can even grow its layers with the data. In contrast, fine-tuning a small saturated model will easily cause it to forget older information.

All things considered, in relative terms, as much as I think fine-tuning would be nice, it will remain significantly more expensive than just making RAG or search calls. I say this while being a fan of fine-tuning.
Only exceptions are thrown. Errors are not necessarily exceptions.
Same for me, fasting or low carb, whatever keeps you in ketosis makes my memory sharper, my brain function better, and is for me at least, non optional for living a productive life.
Actually, it has been shown that removing cars increase commerce.
Read a book? Watch videos on a phone? Play videogames? I've done all of these on the train before. I wouldn't dare do these while driving.
In your example, replacing bulky self-checkout machines (analogous to removing road/surface parking real estate) offers a significant benefit to everyone. More room for what everyone actually wants most: books. The preference for self-checkout machines forces a cost on everyone for the benefit of a few.
This has been true for a very long time. It's not a modern phenomenon.

There was probably a "golden age" in the middle of the last century when it was a good idea to be a company man. But before that, and after that once the MBA mentality took over, workers have been treated like disposable units.

It only makes sense for a worker to strategize to maximize their own career and income, instead of placing their loyalties in a company that not only doesn't care about them, but actively propagandizes in an attempt to make its workers feel like "family."
Colorado with 300 sunny days a year is a great place for motorcycles. Most of the year it's warm enough too with somewhat decent clothing and a pair of balls. I'll take the bike any day the road is dry and temps are double digit. But if you really want to increase throughput [FWIW, I don't care that much], just enforce driving on the right lanes when not passing. Then anyone who feels they need to go 15 over the limit can safely do that while at the same time funding the police that the metro is trying so hard to defund. Everyone wins. Bam.
apparently by 2023 it got upgraded to working:

https://www.democracymatrix.com/online-analysis/matrix#/char...

after further looking it turns out that it was also categorized as working before 2020 and after 2020. the difference being 0.01 points. in 2020 it took a dive in rules settlement and implementation for which there is an obvious culprit: covid.

https://www.democracymatrix.com/online-analysis/country#/Uni...
Dokku is a great and matured tool for managing lifecycle of applications. But that's heavily on CLI. They have some web UI also but in Commercial version.

My focus is to build a PAAS which will have a great GUI to interact. So that anyone with little less knowledge of linux can even deploy apps with swiftwave.

Whenever we deploy in Heroku, Render or Railway to deploy app, we don't need to think much about underlying stuffs. I want to create similar kind of experience with Swiftwave.

Swiftwave handles many stuff other than lifecycle of app. It handles

> Application Deployment from git/image registry/uploaded code + Application Monitoring + Web SSH console for application + Webhook to trigger re-deployment of apps

> It uses docker swarm, so easily deploy apps across cluster also. Swiftwave completely support all the stuffs to work across cluster.

> Managed Ingress (HAProxy for TCP/HTTP/HTTPS, Custom built udp proxy)

> Domain + SSL Management (With Let's encrypt integration with auto-renewal support)

> Persistent Volume Management (Check size, Backup [local+s3], Restore of volume)

> Server Management ( Easy Onboarding + Server Monitoring + Web SSH Console for server )

> It has also a integrated app-store to install app at single click.

You may check the website to learn about all the features - https://swiftwave.org/
Escape Tutorial Purgatory (2020)
QR-cartridge: Make Games that fit on a QR Code
https://youtu.be/Z4oYSByyRak?t=161

Software Should Be Perfect - A journey of questioning assumptions and building a new programming language

This has been my goal since the beginning. I wasn't kidding
In this hypothetical I am the cobbler, thus I'm the one with the problem. Even if I wasn't the cobbler, if the same circumstances are repeated across a large number of industries I have to be worried when a large number of people are made effectively unemployed and unemployable in a short period of time.

The cobbler has money left over from before the time China became more efficient. Remember how I mentioned there was a change from where China was less efficient to a time where China is more efficient.

Since you apparency have great difficulty with the concept that things can change with time I'm going to consider any further discussion on this pointless and will not respond to you any further.
You could write a userscript for this, or go a step further and write a small browser extension.

If you use Joplin, there's already a web to markdown plugin for browsers.
> I don't consider a small 8B model to be worth fine-tuning.

Going to have to disagree with you on that one. A modern 8B model that has been trained on enough tokens is ridiculously powerful.
This is a universal outcome with research to back it up?
I think the response gets right to the point!

Using something like Haskell for ROOT is ridiculous for a lot of obvious reasons. A simple and dismissive "no" invites the cautious reader to discover them on their own rather than waste engaging in a protracted debate. Maybe it's better to reject the idea out of hand and spend our time elsewhere.
So what's the problem? Solves the problem, right?
(Yes, I drive motorcycles)
"the message does not exist in our system, only in your browser as text, copy and save it if you want to keep it, if you refresh this page the text will disappear"
This reminds of a choice I once saw between the following:
“Save this Credit Card”
Or
“Never save this Credit Card”

With hashing and things, the latter is certainly possible, but I got a good chuckle out of it.
I have a lot of technical respect for the project, especially in how carefully they have selected a goal and always develop towards it. And gaining expertise in lua is almost like taking a master class in language design: you are nearly forced to learn about the underlying constraints and how they have been addressed. It definitely improved my understanding of coding more than most languages have.

All that said I simply don't like it very much and don't think it's a good choice for most things I see it used for. When I see people talking about how much they enjoy it it's usually on small projects, or solo projects, or both. The simplicity of the language and variety of runtimes and distribution methods means every significant lua project is a totally unique framework with homegrown standard library.

It also really badly needs better string handling utils. I appreciate the constraints they're working under and admire the decisions they've made in respect to them. But one of its most common practical uses is as a DSL or scripting extension to another environment. I agree with the decision not to include regex, and patterns are incredible for what they are but they aren't sophisticated enough for many cases. Some parser rudiments or even a peg engine built in would completely solve the problem. But if that's too big just a dozen or so common string tools would go pretty far.
I did a similar thing in opposite order, I compile js to scheme. https://github.com/u9g/js2scheme/blob/main/example.js

Not a serious project, made purely because I had a class that mandated writing scheme for the homeworks.

I think the coolest thing to come out of that project was that I learned that it is possible to convert branching if statements to lisp constructs. That was a fun project :)
Really cool stuff. Thanks for sharing.