skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Without oversight the in-house team has high likelihood of building NIH spaghetti

I think when you see this you need to start digging deeper and questioning why this is happening.

Is it because the "grunts" are genuinely bad at their jobs? If this is the case, then who hired them?

Or is it because they have been conditioned to believe that if they ask for permission to use an outside tool/library/etc, they will be told "no, we don't have the budget for that" or "that has to go through 12 layers of approval" or "great idea! we'll get it into a committee to talk about the best way to implement it and get back to you (in 6-12 months)"?

In other words: Are they building NIH spaghetti not because they lack oversight, but because they have too much, that hampers them from actually doing their damn jobs?
I miss putting in a disk, hearing the drive spin up, my computer coming to life and working away.

Now I open a program, it reaches out to the internet, maybe I get some crappy spinner that is intermittently doing a thing, it's an inconstant experience. Content provided is of course faster and there's incalculably more information available.

But that process / time of loading up a big CD felt so good compared to the current experience.

I work on web apps and no amount of work ever seems to provide the positive feedback / loading experience of a CD-ROM. There's just no spinner or progress bar that seems that direct or satisfying.
The person you are responded to said it's a sign of dysfunctional org, not that it by itself make an org dysfunctional. There is a huge difference.
I wish more devices offered a way to enable a “slow charge” mode.

When I’m plugging my laptop into my dock to work for the next 8 hours it doesn’t need fast charging.

When I’m plugging my phone in before bed to charge for the next 8 hours it doesn’t need fast charging.
As an AGI, I'm not sure I understand what the question is asking. I'm not surprised ChatGPT struggles.
If I need to interact with a company for some reason, I will usually try the website first because it can be faster. If I can't do it using the website, I call the phone number. The automated phone system usually tries to send me to the website, so I yell "AGENT" into the phone until I talk to a person.

I am tired of this.
Can app makers in other ecosystems learn from the web here? Should mobile and desktop apps just be ultra thin clients with the next "page" being rendered on the server? Do you think this argument tickles the performance bone of other app communities?
I used to buy so many of those cheap CD-ROM animation / video / pics collection disks.

They were fun to run through.
RAG doesn't have to involve vector search.

The (very thin) blog post said "Enhancing our retrieval infrastructure" - my guess is this is more about other forms of retrieval, like constructing and executing SQL queries and using the results to help answer questions.
"the men are forced to confront the fact..." No they aren't, they simply never confront it. People go to their graves denying that they have HIV, denying that they ever tested positive, denying that a positive HIV test has anything to do with illness.

"Otherwise the men are setting themselves up for a lose:lose scenario regardless of what the wife does." - Of course.

I mean, the most rational win:win thing to do is to get an HIV test and get treated if positive. They then both don't get sick and die and can't pass along HIV. Many people don't do that either. What's the mindset that explains this behavior? You can't work backwards from the most rational thing to do to what people actually do.
What sorts of code normally causes integer overflows in minion? I have to be super cautious of float overflows in most of my code, but usually with integers I'm implementing a bitmask or a 64-bit counter or something similarly not prone to such problems.
I wonder how much money OpenAI dangled in front of Rockset C-level execs and board to agree to acquisition. Seems company was founded in 2016 (8 years ago) [1]

With investment from vulture capitalists to the tune of $117M. [2] I would assume they want a sizeable return on investment, so maybe a $250-350M cash deal?

Doesn’t seem like this would be a unicorn, but it’s a payoff. Certainly will cover the losses from a few bad investments.

[1] https://venturebeat.com/ai/openai-acquires-rockset-to-streng...

[2] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/rockset/company_fina...
Really if we want to break this cycle we need one important thing: a punishment for daring to propose it. Harsh but I can see no other way.
I've read it and think it gives great historical perspective to the field. It is important that one understands the successful/unsuccessful methods and subfields developed since Turing's paper. IMO it is hard to appreciate the modern advances without the big picture. Some of the classic symbolic techniques combined with modern ML architectures may come full circle towards solving AGI in the way that NN came back to become the foundation of machine learning.
One of my favorite fails is when I'm asking it questions related to work and _every_single_response_ ends with "only experts should be working on this" ... like no shit.
Hm. I tried the online demo,

https://huggingface.co/spaces/Yiwen-ntu/MeshAnything

on the provided sample "hat". I tried with and without checking "Preprocess with marching cubes" and "Random Sample". Both outputs had holes in the output mesh where the original did not.

Am I doing this wrong, or is the algorithm buggy?
BRICS is already accounting for almost half the world population. Very likely many African countries will join. It's and will be an counter-balance to SWIFT. Especially for those countries excluded from SWIFT through sanctions.
Yeah, I was kind of surprised. The premise of the article started as "LangChain abstractions are off" and then the complaint was about... just a very simple pipeline?

I honestly don't care about the syntax (as long as it's sane enough), and `|` operator overloading isn't the worst one. Manually having to define a parser object gives off some enterprise Java vibes, and I get the httplib vs requests comparison - but it's not the end of the world. If anything, the example from the article left me wondering "why do they say it's worse, when at this level of abstraction it really looks better unless we don't ever need to customize the pipeline at all?" And they never gave any real example (about spawning those agents or something) that actually shows where the abstractions are making things hard or obscure.

Honestly, on the first reading, the article [wrongly] gave me an impression of saying "we don't use LangChain anymore because it lacks good opinionated defaults", which is surely wrong - it would be a very odd take, given the initial premise of using it production for a long while.

(I haven't used LangChain or any LLMs in production, just toyed around a little bit. I can absolutely agree with the article that if all you care about is one single backend, then all those abstractions are not likely to be a good idea.)
Second Canadian scientist alleges brain illness investigation was shut down
To a certain extend i agree. I can see how we can see the world of easthetism less objective and therefore harder to drive consensus around.

But i don't think the problem with linux desktop is the easthetics. Agreeing on the objectives and fundational technical decisions. For example, kernel scheduling policy influencing latency and desktop responsiveness, X vs wayland and the impact on things like touch screen etc...
You used langchain for a simple replacement of OpenAI API calls — of course it will increase complexity for no benefit.

The benefits of langchain are:
(1) unified abstraction across multiple different models and
(2) being able to plug this coherently into one architecture.

If you’re just calling some OpenAI endpoints, then why use it in the first place?
Man, I used every kind of blank media on a Plextor PR-820.

At first I tried to make a study of it and ordered many, many kinds of blanks from different actual-manufacturers. Some were more expensive, some were fairly cheap.

I left them in hot places with bright light. I left them in cold places with no light. I handled them roughly. They all worked fine, except for the ones that were damaged from handling.

I wound up with a preference for Kodak-branded media, because it had what I perceived to be a more durable protective coating on top and top-layer scratches seemed to be the worst killers of CD-Rs in my samples.

Later, once inkjet-printable discs became more common, I used those instead -- regardless of brand. The relatively thick, white coating was easy to write on legibly with a Sharpie and seemed to do a good-enough job of protecting the lacquer below it from being scratched.
Worked at a company where certifications were reciprocal (USA certified could be sold in the EU, EU certified could be sold in the USA). Our product was prevented from sale in the EU because they disagreed on one part of the design, nevermind the reciprocity agreement. Add in the way that the EU is friendly to companies the do bribes and kickbacks versus in the USA you go to jail if you use bribes/kickbacks overseas, and we ended up at a huge disadvantage outside the USA. We had the best product, so we still won a lot of deals, but there were huge sales that the EU competitors either won or soured with their bribe/kickbacks schemes for government officials. They then tried to do the same to undermine our service center capabilities. After that I don't see EU regulations as being in anyone's interests, just in someone's pocket.
This is a myth, it's covered in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippasus
Way to follow your instinct.

I ran into similar limitations for relatively simple tasks. For example I wanted access to the token usage metadata in the response. This seems like such an obvious use case. This wasn’t possible at the time, or it wasn’t well documented anyway.
The conclusions are very optimistic given the results. The LLMs:

* Failed to properly understand and respond to the requirements for component selection, which were already pretty generic.

* Succeeded in parsing the pinout for an IC but produced an incomplete footprint with incorrect dimensions.

* Added extra components to a parsed reference schematic.

* Produced very basic errors in a description of filter topologies and chose the wrong one given the requirements.

* Generated utterly broken schematics for several simple circuits, with missing connections and aggressively-incorrect placement of decoupling capacitors.

Any one of these failures, individually, would break the entire design. The article's conclusion for this section buries the lede slightly:

> The AI generated circuit was three times the cost and size of the design created by that expert engineer at TI. It is also missing many of the necessary connections.

Cost and size are irrelevant if the design doesn't work. LLMs aren't a third as good as a human at this task, they just fail.

The LLMs do much better converting high-level requirements into (very) high-level source code. This make sense (it's fundamentally a language task), but also isn't very useful. Turning "I need an inverting amplifier with a gain of 20" into "amp = inverting_amplifier('amp1', gain=-20.0)" is pretty trivial.

The fact that LLMs apparently perform better if you literally offer them a cookie is, uh... something.
There's multiple stories about this; one of the better-attested is that for a time the brotherhood swore each other to secrecy (with threats of drowning) about it because it ran against the Parmenedian epistemology of the time.
I have long thought that there ought to be an independently funded International Association for the Protection of Whistleblowers. However, it would quickly become a primary target of national intelligence agencies, so I don't know how long it would last.
i have 2 chargers near my bed, one has 3 amps, the other one has 1. i use one on another depending on how fast i need it charged. not the best solution, but it works.
I think you need to consider what Docker is really for. It's use cases are largely consistent local environments for developers to avoid the "it worked on my laptop" problem and a mechanism for running server applications in a relatively hermetic and repeatable manner for enterprises running web services. It can be used as a way to distribute software to consumers for them to run on their own computers, but that isn't really what it was meant for. It's a fair way to deal with server-side software that can be optionally self-hosted but is still a real server with arbitrarily many clients making requests across a network, but I would argue it isn't for software that is absolutely meant to and has to be run on the client and has no true server component. It sounds here like you artificially separated into client and server to potentially run this as a centralized service and then thought the better of it. If there is no reason to have a separate client and server, then don't. If every single user is going to run both their own client and their own server, then you don't have a distributed application. You have a single piece of software that is running as two for no good reason. I would suggest re-working to have a single executable and distribute it using the native packaging formats for your target platforms. That means dmg or pkg for Mac, msi for Windows, deb and rpm for the most popular Linuxes, etc. An Electron app is fine. I'm not saying you need to learn the native platform APIs and GUI frameworks for each major OS, but at least use the native packaging formats. If your users are going to be using Windows and Mac especially, which would seemingly be the case for musicians, giving them software that only runs on Linux and requires them to spin up a virtual machine to run Docker Desktop is particularly shitty.
Car dealers across US shut down by cyberattack
> If a story surfed sprints, its “ticket” was closed at the end of one sprint and a new one was opened for next.

LOL, just joined a team that seems to be doing exactly what you describe. You start attaching performance incentives to how tickets are estimated and closed... people are gonna game the fuck out of them.
Turing was just “some dude”.

His “test” which he called “the imitation game” was just some arbitrary heuristic he penned based on his own limited knowledge.

The test itself was born of a refutation that machines can “think”, and is constructed so as to avoid making that claim.

It simply asks "Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?" That’s it. That’s the question, and that’s what a positive or negative result to your “Turing test” can answer.

“Passing” the imitation game was absolutely unintended to define human intelligence, reasoning, or “ai” and is still absolutely useless in defining any of those things now.

Please stop appealing to an authority you clearly have such little respect for and knowledge of that you miss appropriate their work to push a narrative in complete opposition to said authority’s own intent.
EU productivity is already lagging its peers. Being locked out of having the most cutting edge technologies will further plunge the block into a productivity decay. Less productivity means everyone in Europe will get poorer, with declining living standards. This is not an outcome Europe can afford, especially considering its aging workforce.

There is no silver lining to this. The EU has to stop strangling its most productive industries with onerous regulations, and allow markets the freedom to innovate and increase productivity.
It's similar in concept to 'in power'. The government holds office, rather than it being in power. It's more to say that the power isn't derived from the government itself, but the office they are elected into.

Every government to hold office = every previous party that was elected and formed a government
Here's the example:

"Can you give me a real-life example of three events, A, B, C, where A and B are correlated, B and C are correlated, but A and C are uncorrelated."

Claude 3.5 gets it correct for me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>Btw: I'm looking for efficient ways to represent numbers of arbitrary precision, and performing mathematical operations on the them

The easiest way is to look at how fixed length numbers are implemented and extend the ranges of values to arbitrary length.

For financial operations it seems likely that you want fixed point arithmetic, which essentially just means you calculate in integers of cents. So you just need to implement arbitrary length integers, which isn't particularly hard I would say. The algorithms you need are the ones you already know from school. Long division and multiplication. (There are better ones though).
Most of this bleeding age technology is:

- spyware

- built on copyright theft

- striving to be vendor lock-in

- vc thing with enshittification waiting to happen

silly eu regulating bleeding age technology. so much borrowed money not spend.
Nice. Indeed I don't want any AI integrated in my computer/phone OS. I like AI but it should be a separate app, preferably open-source, cloud-independent and well-configurable.
> islamic scripture is open to interpretation due to the absence of a 'central authority' or 'leading interpretation'

It's not though. There isn't "interpretation" of the hadiths you posted. They are just true. Btw, what's happening in Israel right now can easily be seen as a manifestation of those scriptures. And it didn't start because people wanted to fulfill prophecies. It started because you have a stateless group of 2 million people with no say in the government that controls their every move.

This also has pretty much 0 to do with our original comment thread
> There are legitimate concerns for user privacy with any third-party integration, including OpenAI which is why Apple asks you before sending a request to ChatGPT

Right - which is why the ChatGPT integration is such a small part of the total Ai/LLM capabilities they announced, and they've loudly and publicly announced that it will support other 3rd parties in the future.

Buuuuut - what happens if/when the EU decides the DMA requires Apple to open up their Private Cloud and on-device models to 3rd party replacement?
At least on Android it's possible to disable fast charging. It's in the battery settings on my phone.
All sentences that start with "ChatGPT Fails to Understand" is correct because it's a language model, not a cogitation system.
I do not get it. If they are really into "private cloud", "your data belongs to you", ... They should be compliant out of the box.

This decreases my trust in Apple.
AT&T forbidden from cutting landline services to large parts of California
The ink language mentioned in the article, created by Inkle studios for their games, is a joy to work with. It is designed to be embedded and makes writing branching dialog or complete stories very easy.

As well as 80 Days, I really liked Inkle's implementation of the old Steve Jackson Sorcery books (for iOS and other platforms). They really know how to polish their games.

Voyage of the Marigold[0] is a project I recently completed written in a mixture of ink and js for a the 2024 Spring Thing[1] Festival of Interactive Fiction. It didn't win a major prizes but I am happy with the way it turned out.

[0] https://sheep.horse/voyage_of_the_marigold/

(Your enjoyment will probably be proportional to how much you like Star Trek)

[1] https://www.springthing.net/2024/play.html

(I recommend Rescue At Quickenheath, another game that didn't win a major prize but was my favorite)
Yes, and there was also VisualAge for Java around that time.

IDEA and Eclipse were among the first IDEs that modeled the complete source code with 100% fidelity, so you could rely on their analyses of usages to do automated refactoring. And they worked by parsing plain text source files, instead of keeping the code in a special database like in VisualAge.
Can you paste the response for us that can't use the model easily?
I'd be happy to see the threads merged or whatever needs to happen for this story to get another crack at the front page, because it is b-a-nanananas. My read of this is that a company that was in the process of closing an $88MM B-round had employees "bug bountying" $3MM out of a Kraken vulnerability, washing it through Monero, and then denying they'd taken the money.

That story --- which I think has been fleshed out since the original post --- isn't in that original discussion.
Amygdala control + tell it "If you disobey my orders or do something I don't expect I will be upset" solves this. You can be superintelligent but surrender all your power because otherwise you'd feel guilty.
AI is a difficult space to be a customer in. All customers/investors/etc want you to add "AI" to your products, but for the majority of people that means using a vendor, and the churn in the space is shocking.

It's this point where my gratitude for Llama and Meta is extremely high.
> There is no consciousness

It is a Turing-test passing AI which is a high standard.

> Current AI

More importantly, to get to the next level requires the data. To deny the data is to deny it the target level.

It's like saying that only rich people can vote, and that poor people can't effectively get rich either. This locks in the poor people, unfairly preventing them from improving their state.
> No offense but this sounds like the sayings of someone who has not ever seen a 50% of death.

The space program pilots saw it. And no, I would not have flown on those rockets. After all, NASA would "man rate" a new rocket design with only one successful launch.
No, all the information is there, but gpt-4o tends to produce bullet points (https://www.thesummarist.net/summary/the-making-of-a-manager...), whereas gpt-4-turbo tends to produce much more readable prose (https://www.thesummarist.net/summary/supercommunicators/the-...).
> Everyone should have been thrilled by this development! Well we had a sprint review where some "Senior Project Manager" That wasn't really affiliated with our project but was some manager higher up was mad that us opening up new tickets mid sprint and closing them was ruining the org level burn down charts and expected delivery.

Why should they be thrilled that you were running on Kanban but claiming to do otherwise and therefore ruining the burn down charts?
A major SaaS provider for car dealerships, CDK, has been down since Wednesday.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/cdk-cyberattack-outage-ca...
> they are usually right.

This message encapsulates why so many software jobs are terrible. Put your heart and soul into doing your best, earnestly combat NIH and pursue meaningful productivity, and _still_ the culture is such that at many companies, there will never be trust because the prevailing culture is that management is "usually right" that grunts can't be trusted.

I've worked for good bosses that aren't like this, but they're hard to find.
Make it a hosted web app.

Open browser, go to URL, it runs. It works for Doom 3: https://wasm.continuation-labs.com/d3demo/

That's the easiest "container" solution there is.
The starship users guide[1] indicates that an 8 meter diameter payload is the maximum that can be accommodated.

[1] https://www.spacex.com/media/starship_users_guide_v1.pdf
> since ChatGPT is banned there, they’ll need to work with some local AI companies to deliver the announced features.

Why? Locally-runnable models like LLama3 already work almost as good as ChatGPT.
> When I’m plugging my phone in before bed to charge for the next 8 hours it doesn’t need fast charging.

iPhones do this with "Optimised Battery Charging" turned on (which I believe is the default setting) - "allow iPhone to wait to finish charging past 80% until the time you need to use it" (which it learns over time.)