skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
All of the major cloud providers offer grants for public research https://www.amazon.science/research-awards https://edu.google.com/intl/ALL_us/programs/credits/research https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/azure-academic-research/

NVIDIA offers discounts https://developer.nvidia.com/education-pricing

eg. for Australia, the National Computing Infrastructure allows researchers to reserve time on:

- 160 nodes each containing four Nvidia V100 GPUs and two 24-core Intel Xeon Scalable 'Cascade Lake' processors.

- 2 nodes of the NVIDIA DGX A100 system, with 8 A100 GPUs per node.

https://nci.org.au/our-systems/hpc-systems
AT&T February wireless outage blocked more than 92M calls, agency says
>AFAIK, Anthropic/OpenAI/Google are not having issues with their weights being leaked. Why is it that Meta's model weights are?

The main threat actors there would be powerful nation-states, in which case they'd be unlikely to leak what they've taken.

It is a bad argument though, because one day possession of AI models (and associated resources) might confer great and dangerous power, and we can't just throw up our hands and say "welp, no point trying to protect this, might as well let everyone have it". I don't think that'll happen anytime soon, but I am personally somewhat in the AI doomer camp.
The Yew (React-like framework for Rust) tutorial uses Trunk and I find it to be a pretty good introduction: https://yew.rs/docs/tutorial
My primary goal is to maximize my income with the least amount of stress possible, and FAANG hits that spot just right.

I guess you can say I could maximize further by switching to finance or starting my own business, but the amount of extra stress is just not worth it at the moment, personally.
> and prevented more than 25,000 attempts to reach 911

Not good.
That's what I meant by "open steps", I guess I wasn't clear enough.
To verify client and server certificates. For certificate-based auth this is quite important, but it's also nice to, e.g., know that your server cert is not revoked.
GPL defines the “source code” of a work as the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. If Meta released a petabyte of raw training data, would that really be easier to extend and adapt (as opposed to fine-tuning the weights)?
Afraid to say that other than bumping into a talk about Deno, I haven’t played around with it yet.. So thanks for the heads up, will look into it.

Thanks for the bug report !
A Complete Guide to Timeouts in Node.js
> Today we’re taking the next steps towards open source AI becoming the industry standard. We’re releasing Llama 3.1 405B, the first frontier-level open source AI model,

Why do people keep mislabeling this as Open Source? The whole point of calling something Open Source is that the "magic sauce" of how to build something is publicly available, so I could built it myself if I have the means. But without the training data publicly available, could I train Llama 3.1 if I had the means? No wonder Zuckerberg doesn't start with defining what Open Source actually means, as then the blogpost would have lost all meaning from the get go.

Just call it "Open Model" or something. As it stands right now, the meaning of Open Source is being diluted by all these companies pretending to doing one thing, while actually doing something else.

I initially got very exciting seeing the title and the domain, but hopelessly sad after reading through the article and realizing they're still trying to pass their artifacts off as Open Source projects.
The duality of meaning (is it from or to the specified value) actually speaks against the feature for me, you just ruined it :)

Or fixed it, depending on which way you lean.
> getting a 250k job at a FAANG isn't easy either

Except, it kinda is for people that have the right background and are well suited to it. That is, the reason I think you're getting a lot of pushback is that many folks are just inherently risk averse. There are people who are smart, know how to work hard, and know that if they have a path laid out in front of them, they can succeed.

For entrepreneurs, there is simply much more variability. You can be smart, work hard, do everything right, and still fail in unexpected ways due to things outside of your control.

I don't think entrepreneurship is bad at all, but it's not surprising at all to me that people who want to go the FAANG route aren't well suited to starting their own business.
A few sellers on eBay are honest

Description:
This item is upgraded by 32 GB Pen Flash Drive to 2TB
32GB-2TB, the actual capacity is 32G, the computer displays 2TB, the detection is also 2TB, more than 32G things can be stored, but not displayed.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/234810575961

That's not bad. Most counterfeits I get are just 2GB so hardly useful. Still, the counterfeit firmware makes compatibility issues more likely, so better to buy one without the counterfeiting.
Sibling comment mentioned Govdeals, which is a place I'll look sometimes if I can find something near me or they're willing to ship.

You can look on Craigslist as well, especially if you live in a large metro area (I live in NYC so it's easy to find lots of corporate surplus). Companies will often need to upgrade all their infra and liquidate their equipment. My printer is a giant nearly 20 year old HP office thing that I got for $30 + $100 for the Uber back home from an office that did a full IT renewal.
> That's mostly a positive thing for buttons on the center console

No, it isn't. It's just fashion, like high heels. Not to mention that it's mainly a cost-saving measure.

Your fingers want a spring-loaded button that has some travel and resistance before activating. You can feel the button without looking at it, and rest your finger on it before deciding to activate.
Samsung dishwasher with capacitive controls on the front panel and no way to restart the wash cycle. Infuriating.
We also added Llama 3.1 405B to our VSCode copilot extension for anyone to try coding with it.

Free trial gets you 50 messages, no credit card required - https://double.bot

(disclaimer, I am the co-founder)
Great for Groq whos already hosting it but at what cost I guess.
Since you mentioned SIMD acceleration, did you look at things like QBVH[1]? I mean it would be kinda like a B-tree I suppose but with the min/max stuff.

[1]: https://jo.dreggn.org/home/2008_qbvh.pdf
It seems the star may have been flattened, at least the version that I know is supposed to be 3D.
> as if it's for the benefit of mankind

But it does benefit mankind.

More free tech products is good for the world.

This is a good thing. When people or companies do good things, they should get the credit for doing good things.
Is there an LLM with actual open source training code and dataset? Besides BLOOM https://huggingface.co/bigscience/bloom
So because it's really hard to do proper Open Source with these LLMs, means we need to change the meaning of Open Source so it fits with these PR releases?
>it was dismantled by Japanese carpenters who then reconstructed it here on two acres

>the Shōya house was reconstructed using the methods of traditional Japanese carpentry: Aside from complying with contemporary building codes, no nails or metal braces were used.
>Yes it seems odd how the medical community (and American patients in general) don’t really want to talk about obesity anymore.

That is not what it looks like to me. Body mass index (BMI), a proxy for obesity, is a relevant statistic in almost every wellness exam.

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/index.html

https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-...

The hottest new medicine is a medicine that reduces obesity. See Novo Nordisk market cap change:

https://companiesmarketcap.com/novo-nordisk/marketcap/
Wow! The benchmarks are truly impressive, showing significant improvements across almost all categories. It's fascinating to see how rapidly this field is evolving. If someone had told me last year that Meta would be leading the charge in open-source models, I probably wouldn't have believed them. Yet here we are, witnessing Meta's substantial contributions to AI research and democratization.

On a related note, for those interested in experimenting with large language models locally, I've been working on an app called Msty [1]. It allows you to run models like this with just one click and features a clean, functional interface. Just added support for both 8B and 70B. Still in development, but I'd appreciate any feedback.

[1]: https://msty.app
I think this is an interesting idea. It might have some of the same problems as the dense bitset designs I've tried so far though but I'd like to try it out. Is there a detailed description of this anywhere?
Llama 2, 3 and 4: Synthetic Data, RLHF, Agents on the Path to Open Source AGI
Govdeals is sort of addictive. I've only bought stuff on there a few times, but it's fun to look around and see stuff like "pallet of 400 laptops" selling for $600.
No, I would argue that from the three main ingredients - training data, model source code and weights - weights are the furthest away from something akin to source code.

They're more like obfuscated binaries. When it comes to fine-tuning only however things shift a little bit, yes.
The pile of downvotes drives the point home. No need to ridicule, education is better.

If you can't educate the poster, at least you educate other readers who also didn’t know, without the unnecessary noise of ridicule.
How do you get that option?
> acting as if it's for the benefit of mankind is disingenuous, which it is

Is it bad for mankind that Meta publishes its weights? Mutually beneficial is a valid game state--there is no moral law that requires anything good be made as a sacrifice.
I can vouch for our Toyota letting me set it at lower speeds. Our city has a speed limit of 25 mph and there are long stretches of wide avenues where I’ll set it. Then I can spend more time looking out for kids darting across the street than worrying about speed control.
Nobody has headphones with those connectors. Sounds like Bluetooth is for you.
> but there are a lot of people who just aren't going to be comfortable with that.

Actual LOL - who? I’ve worked at enormous orgs, Google, to medium sized orgs, to startups over my 20 year career, as a senior dev, engineering lead, CTO and now founder, I have hired and mentored hundreds, maybe close to 1000 engineers, hiring managers, project managers, and this has never ever been an issue, in one case we hired 20 engineers from Betsson, a huge (~400M/y) gambling company in Malta into a much larger organisation (non-gambling), and nobody from senior management, middle management or engineers ever even raised this point.

I think you are uncomfortable with it, and are projecting that starry-eyed wishful and naive thinking onto others by saying “a lot of people aren’t going to be comfortable with that”

I have 20 years experience working in 9 different countries, all with very different cultures, that says otherwise, nobody has ever mentioned it.
> eBPF isn't "watching the watchers"…

> …via a very picky sandbox…

When the eBPF is a CrowdStrike mechanism, and eBPF is “picky,” it is clearly “watching the watchers.”
When you work really hard at something, you get pretty good at it
This is really smart, and I hope this becomes the norm across all governments.

Governments not knowing what their software is doing is a recipe for chaos.

Hopefully this also leads to more audits of said code.
Of course but having an expectation of 100% reliability from AI when Humans aren't even close to that seems misguided.
I would argue strongly for poker. No limit hold 'em poker is a fantastic game!

My experience learning the game, alongside my wife, who we learned later in life is an exemplary player! (The story behind that involves a period of high work travel for me, a Playstation, and Doyls Room online poker and a $2K seed bankroll...)

...my experience is this game will, or can if you allow it, change how you think. Maybe the more accurate thing to say would be the game opens up more kinds of thought.
The core issue? Using Wintel.
Local Dev Should Use HTTPS Too
"just the inference code"

It's not the "inference code", its the code that specifies the architecture of the model and loads the model. The "inference code" is mostly the model, and the model is not legible to a human reader.

Maybe someday open source models will be possible, but we will need much better interpretability tools so we can generate the source code from the model. In most software projects you write the source as a specification that is then used by the computer to implement the software, but in this case the process is reversed.
I was under the vague impression that Manifest V3 was supposed to prevent this sort of thing. But looking at the extension, it is using MV3. Maybe it really was just about weakening ad blockers.
You can argue that obesity is the root cause, you can't argue that Latinos/Blacks were impacted more heavily as that's just numbers.
But the companies use of telemarketers isn't a net benefit to society. If the company instead spent on product quality, warranty services, employee benefits, or charity, we'd see more of a net-positive impact on the world around us. Generally, companies spending money competing for market share through advertising only benefits specific parties, and only financially.

The goals and incentives (for companies) aren't currently aligned with our needs & problems (as a society). So a lot of resources get spent on things like advertising, that (in theory) could instead be spent on solving problems related to housing, healthcare, infrastructure, if the incentives existed or the goals were set differently.
> Why do you think these private entities are willing to invest the massive capital it takes to keep the frontier advancing at that rate?

Because whether they make 100x or 200x they make a shitload of money.

> Why wouldn't NVIDIA be a solid steward of that capital given their track record?

The problem isn't who is the steward of the capital. The problem is that economically efficient thing to do for a single company is (given sufficient fab capacity, and a monopoly) to raise prices to extract a greater share of the pie at the expense of shrinking the size of the pie. I'm not worried about who takes the profit, I'm worried about the size of the pie.
Would you be open to mentoring someone curious about doing so?
There is no space to put big acoustic ports in the small gadgets, so they are replaced with usb-c instead. And I've had infinitely less number of problematic 3.5" ports than for example usb type-c ports across all gadgets I've ever owned. I.e. zero problematic 3.5" and so far two crapped out usb-c ports (I mean mechanically crapped, so they do function, but cables need to be shuffled around until contact is made and they are no longer held in place in the port).
The big winners of this: devs and AI startups

- No more vendor lock-in

- Instead of just wrapping proprietary API endpoints, developers can now integrate AI deeply into their products in a very cost-effective and performant way

- Price race to the bottom with near-instant LLM responses at very low prices are on the horizon

As a founder, it feels like a very exciting time to build a startup as your product automatically becomes better, cheaper, and more scalable with every major AI advancement. This leads to a powerful flywheel effect: https://www.kadoa.com/blog/ai-flywheel
In the only VW I ever owned, which was a manual transmission Golf, you could engage the cruise control at any speed, right down to crawling at idle in first gear. I truly don't understand the American+Japanese style of demanding a high speed to engage the cruise control. They should work on the ergonomics until it is a more useful feature to keep your speed under 20 MPH in cities.
The Apple ][ and TTYs and other old computers had "bit pairing keyboards", where the punctuation marks above the digits were aligned with the ASCII values of the corresponding digits, different by one bit.

Typewriter: !@#$%^&*()
Apple: !"#$%&'()
Digits: 1234567890

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit-paired_keyboard

>A bit-paired keyboard is a keyboard where the layout of shifted keys corresponds to columns in the ASCII (1963) table, archetypally the Teletype Model 33 (1963) keyboard. This was later contrasted with a typewriter-paired keyboard, where the layout of shifted keys corresponds to electric typewriter layouts, notably the IBM Selectric (1961). The difference is most visible in the digits row (top row): compared with mechanical typewriters, bit-paired keyboards remove the _ character from 6 and shift the remaining &() from 7890 to 6789, while typewriter-paired keyboards replace 3 characters: ⇧ Shift+2 from " to @ ⇧ Shift+6 from _ to ^ and ⇧ Shift+8 from ' to . An important subtlety is that ASCII was based on mechanical typewriters, but electric typewriters became popular during the same period that ASCII was adopted, and made their own changes to layout.[1] Thus differences between bit-paired and (electric) typewriter-paired keyboards are due to the differences of both of these from earlier mechanical typewriters.

>[...] Bit-paired keyboard layouts survive today only in the standard Japanese keyboard layout, which has all shifted values of digits in the bit-paired layout.

>[...] For this reason, among others (such as ease of collation), the ASCII standard strove to organize the code points so that shifting could be implemented by simply toggling a bit. This is most conspicuous in uppercase and lowercase characters: uppercase characters are in columns 4 (100) and 5 (101), while the corresponding lowercase characters are in columns 6 (110) and 7 (111), requiring only toggling the 6th bit (2nd high bit) to switch case; as there are only 26 letters, the remaining 6 points in each column were occupied by symbols or, in one case, a control character (DEL, in 127).

>[...] In the US, bit-paired keyboards continued to be used into the 1970s, including on electronic keyboards like the HP 2640 terminal (1975) and the first model Apple II computer (1977).
> Why choose being a service worker in gastronomy

The tipping money often exceeds the wage, from what I hear.
> because it's really hard to do proper Open Source with these LLMs, means we need to change the meaning of Open Source so it fits with these PR releases?

Open training data is hard to the point of impracticality. It requires excluding private and proprietary data.

Meanwhile, the term "open source" is massively popular. So it will get used. The question is how.

Meta et al would love for the choice to be between, on one hand, open weights only, and, on the other hand, open training data, because the latter is impractical. That dichotomy guarantees that when someone says open source AI they'll mean open weights. (The way open source software, today, generally means source available, not FOSS.)
This is literally a thread about a post on my blog. If you can’t find my body of work, I cannot help you.
The hardware sales I was talking about is their streaming box which is in no way dominant but is really nice. Also we have pretty much reached peak iPhone or close to it. These subscription services help keep people in the ecosystem as it raises switching costs a bit.

The article is implying that TV+ is losing money. I don’t know that it is but my point is that for Apple it is likely still worth keeping and growing the service even if they are losing money on it at the moment.
I am not deep into llms so I ask this.
From my understanding, their last model was open source but it was in a way that you can use them but the inner working were "hidden"/not transparent.

With the new model, I am seeing alot of how open source they are and can be build upon. Is it now completely open source or similar to their last models ?
Looks like you can already try out Llama-3.1-405b on Groq, although it's timing out. So. Hugged I guess.
"I'm not smart enough to imagine how something might work therefore it's impossible"
Sure, just on the training front, building and maintaining a broad corpus of properly managed training data with metadata that provides attribution (for example, content that is known to be human generated instead of model generated, what the source of data is for datasets such as weather data, census data, etc), and that also captures any licensing encumbrance so that consumers of the training data can be confident in their ability to use it without risk of legal challenge.

Much of this is already available to private sector entities, but having a publicly funded organization responsible for curating and publishing this would enable new entrants to quickly and easily get a foundation without having to scrape the internet again, especially given how rapidly model generated content is being published.
There is nothing to suggest that 1..100 understands math.
You're presenting this as if its a new idea, but the security industry tried the above (for the majority of the time that "computer security" has been a thing) and... it didn't work! That's the whole reason public disclosure came about in the first place -- there's quite a rich history there if you're interested.

Some other thoughts:

>You let the manufacturer know, and you let them decide for the next steps.

Which, as history has proven, the "next steps" is generally to sweep it under the rug and to be forgotten about until it's exploited by a bad actor.

>it's not your business

But, what about when it is? On-topic: I drive a car, so I care about vulnerabilities in traffic lights and they may directly affect me. It's also my business if my personal data is stolen, or my identity, or corporate data, etc.

>You helped: no lawyers, no problems.

No problems... Until the vulnerability is exploited and it causes me a problem.
Depends on the work culture certainly. Unlimited is, if course, not really unlimited. But whether (for a good performer) it's culturally 2 weeks or 6 weeks matters a lot. Even in an old-fashioned regular PTO company, I had people--though not my managers--incredulous that I would take 4 weeks of out-of-contact time.

More recently, someone I know who worked at a well-known unlimited PTO company told me that a newly hired head of corporate communications quit in short order because the CEO would actually go radio silence on vacation and they couldn't deal with that.
Getting to choose what I work on is great. Chasing down VC leads is not so great but I’m growing into it. I’m not sure what I’ll do if I run out of savings and support - I suppose I’ll look for a job with enough flexibility to let me keep building part time. Maybe contract work.
The most infuriating in this story is that VW had promised to remove some/all touch buttons from the cars and instead it was a big fat lie.
New Chat Platform
Startup guy who’s now at FAANG. I’m technical technical technical (IC track). I love building products. Prototyping to find PMF and then spinning that up into a staffed project, then onto the next new thing.

Get to work with excellent SWEs, PMs, PgMs, etc.

In startup land I was doing so much, pitches, recruiting, coding, landing page design, dev ops, pretty much the full stack.

In FAANG land I can just focus on existence proofs and then there’s a whole support structure helping that happen and bringing the product to market.

You could argue that setting up this pipeline is the goal of a startup, but it’s a LOONG road. The opportunity cost is immense. It’s immensely difficult to recruit. You have to effectively pause your life. Scary to have children with startup level uncertainty.

At a certain $$ where you can live a comfortable life, enjoy 95% of what you do day to day, get to be in an environment with top notch colleagues, it’s a tough sell to start something from scratch with all that risk.