skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This misses half of the risk management equation - likelihood of risk. Something with high severity, but low likelihood will have a different mitigation plan than high severity and high likelihood.
Thanks, I had a similar idea and tried this with Meta's `sorted_vector_map` (https://github.com/facebookexperimental/rust-shed/tree/main/...) but found the performance to be slightly worse than a `BTreeMap<u32, u32>` for my test case. I did try to change it a bit to do fewer binary searches (`range` tried to find the end immediately) but the binary searches seemed to be slightly worse than finding starting intervals in the map.
> They've made it quite clear that they want the war to continue until something in Russia breaks.

Huh? I'd expect most non-Russian-aligned parties would be happy to see Russia retreat from Ukraine, pay reparations, and call that a peace. Russia only needs to break if Russia persists in occupying other countries.
It's not about me finding anything, I'm saying that your expectations probably need to be adjusted. It seems like you thought you would post a one word title and have everyone just post compliments with no questions.
> training code and training data would be worthless to anyone who doesn't have compute on the level that Meta does

I don't fully agree.

Isn't that like saying *nix being open source is worthless unless you're planning to ship your own Linux distro?

Knowing how the sausage is made is important if you're an animal rights activist.
> I actually think this is one of the rare times where the small guys interests are aligned with Meta

Small guys are the ones being screwed over by AI companies and having their text/art/code stolen without any attribution or adherence to license. I don’t think Meta is on their side at all
Meanwhile the author also says this

> Rust would have prevented this incident irks me.

That's exactly everyone's point.

and

> Think of… an innocent buggy unwrap() call if the code actually used Rust.

Sure but would you not just ban usages of unwrap with static lint for a kernel program?

This is more or less like clickbait to me.
AI Headshot Generators: Top Compared (2024)
I'd suggest making browsers soft-enforce it with e.g. a yellow URL bar, giving server operators a window of time to fix things.
> What do you gain from an unsound type system?

The ability to type most idiomatic javascript circa 2014. It's definitely a Faustian bargain.
Some builds of SQLite (e.g. the default macOS version) don't allow extension loading. Local policies may equally disallow extension loading.

(I think it's definitely useful as an extension but I can appreciate there's situations where a core feature is easier.)
go or java, in that order
there is no such thing as a lump-sum transfer, this will shift expectations and incentives going forward and make future large capital projects an increasingly uphill battle
> as as close to a basic income as you can currently imagine.

More like as far as I can imagine.

Basic Income has to be provided to everyone, not just the ones who don't have a job. That's the whole point. It's not that the amount must be sufficient to live off of, that can be worked out later, but it has to start with everyone on board and that's what makes it "Basic".
What if you structure the "lists" so that each "freelist" contains all slots >= 2^n units of time? Then you only ever need to search the list that's the next size down from your target slot?

This will be bad for write performance, but solves the problem of needing to do multiple searches to find the next available slot, and you mentioned that you might not mind sacrificing write performance.
InstructLab and the Granite Models from IBM seem the closest to being open source. Certainly more than whatever FB is doing here.

(Disclaimer: I work for an IBM subsidiary but not on any of these products)
Gonna tear into the criticism of the product for a moment.

>Falcon is a product typically installed on corporate machines so that the security team can detect and mitigate threats in real time (while monitoring the actions of their employees).

Infosec here.

Some of the proposed "real time behavioral analytics" tools I have heard about are creepy and draconian, but this is a malware detection software. "Monitoring actions of employees" is not what I understand the tool to be used for.

Second, the privacy absolutists on HN have yelled at me before for defending MITM devices like web proxies and DNS filters for "degrading the security of TLS". If we don't do security on the network, then the only place to do it is on the host. Which means, in a perfect (security) world, the endpoint has some kind of intercept layer looking at all incoming/outgoing traffic, anyway.

In other words: This product AFAICT isn't human-behavior analytics, and endpoint security is the future of infosec as TLS gets better so it isn't "whether this is good software for companies to have" it's "is this version of the software reliable and functional".
Chat with Meta Llama 3.1 405B
ITER fusion project confirms more delays and €5B cost overrun
You don't need to take the author's word for it. The blue text are links to the formal research pieces being cited.
> This example seems crazy to me […]

To be fair, this is sort of pointless in JS/TS because an async function returns a promise type by default, so the return value has to be ‘await’ed to access the value anyways. There are linter rules you can use to ban ‘return await’.

The only benefit to ‘return await…’ is when wrapped with a try/catch - you can catch if whatever you ‘await’ed throws an error.
405B and the other Llama 3.1 models are working and available on Together AI. https://api.together.ai
Why does the resume button exist at all?

I am surprised that someone could not come up with this on their own: because it is more convenient than bringing the car back up to speed, getting it where you wanted it, then hitting the "CC" button again. Hit the brakes, then press the button and let the car bring it back to speed. It's not life changing, but a nice convenience feature. And it's been in cars for at the least the 50 years that I've been paying attention, probably longer.

The button that always mystified me was the "cruise control ON/OFF" button. Hit the ON button, but you still have to set the cruise control. Umm, why isn't it just ON all the time? Some cars had it, some didn't. I have never come to a reasonable UX/engineering reason for this.
With effects this small UBI is clearly not something worth doing.

The 3.6T are for everyone getting an additional 1k a month. Which is exactly what the study tested and which had negligible effects. If the effects of 3.6T free money are negligible, then spending less on the same thing is obviously more negligible.
Is it really open source though? You can't run these models for your company. The license is extremely restrictive and there's NO SOURCE CODE.
How would your code generate all the appointments for a given day?

Requirement: Must be able to handle appointments that span a day, i.e. show all Sunday appointments when there's a party appointment that starts at 8PM Saturday and ends at 2AM Sunday, or in your data model, Saturday 20:00 for six hours.
That's sorta the history of Apple in a nutshell. For every actual innovation, there is a ton of commoditizing things that exist and repackaging them for locked-in Apple consumers that were previously unaware of them.
y'all really don't understand how these actions would seriously harm capital markets and make it difficult for private capital formation to produce innovations going forward.
Some Practical Considerations Before Descending into an Orgy of Vengeance
> Most of the content in training datasets like The Pile are not licensed for redistribution in any way shape or form.

But distributing the weights is a "form" of distribution. You can recover many items of the dataset (most easily, the outliers) by using the weights.

Just because they are codified in a non-readily accessible way, does not mean that you are not distributing them.

It's scary to think that "training" is becoming a thinly veiled way to strip copyright of works.
People don’t typically modify distributed binaries.

People do typically modify model weights. They are the preferred form to modify model.

Saying “build” llama is just a nonsense comparison to traditional compiled software. “Building llama” is more akin to taking the raw weights as text and putting them into a nice pickle file. Or loading it into an inference engine.

Demanding that you have everything needed to recreate the weights from scratch is like arguing an application cannot be open source unless it also includes the user testing history and design documents.

And of course some idiots don’t understand what a pickled weights file is and claim it’s as useless as a distributed binary if you want to modify the program just because it is technically compiled; not understanding that the point of the pickled file is “convenience” and that it unpacks back to the original form. Like arguing open source software can’t be distributed in zip files.

> Say I have a farm of 100 A100's, could I reproduce the Llama model from scratch today?

Say you have a piece of paper. Can you reproduce `print(“hello world”)` from scratch?
If not, it is questionable if they should train on such data anyway.

Also, that doesn't matter in this discussion - if you are unable to release the source under appropriate licence (for whatever reason), you should not call it Open Source.
Running a business is so much more work and most businesses fail. This is terrible advice.
I'd be pretty interested in working on this kind of critical infrastructure. Any tips or pointers for an experienced SE/SWE on getting into your world?
Tuning Your Cognitive Strategies – LessWrong
This doesn't require all software used by Switzerland to be open source. Per the article:

> This new law requires all public bodies to disclose the source code of software developed by or for them unless third-party rights or security concerns prevent it. This "public money, public code" approach aims to enhance government operations' transparency, security, and efficiency.
I agree that you need training data to build AI from scratch, much like you need lots of really smart developers and a mailing list and servers and stuff to build the Linux kernel from scratch. But it's not like having the training data and training code will get you the same result, in the way something like open data in science is about replicating results.
There's also the issue of money. If you are turned down for a job that would have paid 20% more because of working in a controversial industry that can have a big impact on your life. I'd prefer to be able to have civil discussions about politics with coworkers, but I don't care enough to sacrifice even 1% of my salary. This entire Ask HN is about income maximizing after all. I think getting into vice or anything controversial is a bad long term move, even if it includes a sizable temporary bump in compensation.
Looks like it's easy to test out these models now on Together AI - https://api.together.ai
It would be nice if one didn't need to be a TLS expert to understand the post -- particularly since the whole point of Let's Encrypt was to democratize TLS access.

I have no idea if this means my setup will break even after consulting the docs of my ACME client.

Can I still use ACME Tiny[1] with nginx? Any reason to think that will break? How can I tell if I'm using OCSP or CRL?

Totally incomprehensible blog post.

[1] https://github.com/diafygi/acme-tiny
I would argue that the whole point of the post is: nothing in the world can save you from bad practices.

There are at least 3 bad practices here:

- releasing of untested SW/config files

- bypassing of final users' rollout policies

- unconditional faith of final users in crowdstrike
There is no system where everyone benefits from redistribution.

It is literally impossible to imagine a system where everyone benefits, unless you have a free energy machine of course.
I'd like to see big programs to increase the amount of cheap, clean energy we have. AI compute would be one of many beneficiaries of super cheap energy, especially since you wouldn't need to chase newer, more efficient hardware just to keep costs down.
Proof of work essentially allows for a periodic leader election, where the leader has sufficient time to propagate its state update along with a verifiable proof of authority in a permissionless decentralized system.

Decentralized cooperation in society likely wouldn't be permissionless, in most cases you would probably want to assign some voting power per human/citizen/share certificate/whatever. I'm also not sure if decentralized, verifiable randomness is easier to achieve outside of computer networks (for example, source some verifiable randomness from the universe based on a pre-defined algorithm).
I'm curious how much of a factor this is. How often do certificates get revoked before expiration? I would think the only reason to revoke a certificate is if it was compromised.
> 3,000 is plenty to retaliate against an opponent with 30,000. More doesn't provide a benefit.

I think a big part of this is that the long-distance missiles, when all of this was invented, were not very accurate. Sending 10 to do the job of 1 might have been necessary just to hit the intended targets.

Modern missiles are quite capable of precision strikes.
VR. Tried a VirtualBoy back in the 90s, then those VR glove things, then eventually an HTC Vive and Oculus Quest. They were all cool and fun for a few hours, but having a sweaty heavy thing on my head quickly got tiring. And the games were generally crap that focused more on an "experience" than a gameplay; they felt like barely-interactive movies rather than the nuanced and complex gameplay that's usually on PC. Then Apple tried to take it the ultra-luxury route and that was an even bigger turnoff. I think by this point I'd only be interested in some barebones monitors-in-glasses for watching movies or doing work on, none of the other unnecessary stuff.

--------

Also, home assistants. Alexa and Google Assistant seemed to hold so much promise at first, but they're still so bad a decade later, the third-party ecosystem is awful, and both companies seemed to have completely given up on improving them at all. Maybe the AI boom will revive interest in them at some point (with a natural language to API layer), but I guess there's just no money there, so probably not...
The programming notary should be expensive per line.

If a function gets certified and a decent description it can be published for other developers to further scrutinize and use the same.

With user.script or greasemonkey scripts it is kinda expected to read the script before use. Short scripts are easier to check.

Funny example

https://userscripts-mirror.org/scripts/show/179526

If the potentially dubious part can be isolated the notary, the publisher, the other developer and the user can easily review it. It seems much better than the current installing black boxes?
For the EU, I'm guessing you're talking about the EUPL, which is FSF/OSI approved and GPL compatible, generally considered copyleft.

For the CH Open, I'm not finding anything specific, even from Swiss websites, could you help me understand what you're referring to here?

I'm guessing that all these definitions have at least some points in common, which involves (another guess) at least being able to produce the output artifacts/binaries by yourself, something that you cannot do with Llama, just as an example.
My opinion of Thiel hasn't changed, but YC's management has, as has my take on collective action in our industry --- I can be supportive of a pressure campaign to divest from a bad actor if it's part of a widespread and general mobilization across the industry, but I find it a lot harder to get wound up when a single, small target doesn't cave to a loud fringe, which is what we ended up being.
China to raise retirement age as population gets older
Open Source AI needs to include training data.
Thanks, that’s helpful, I’ll checkout that book
Meta can call it something else other than open source.

Synthetic part of the training data could be released.
Definitely possible! I tried doing something similar which stored the ranges in a single `Vec<(u32, u32)>` but found the performance a bit worse than just using the ordered map.
That enabling competition in kernel mode antivirus is the actual problem, and that a more widely used product (which isn't true anyways, the MS product is used more) doesn't imply a better product.
Sounds like amazing material for a CCC talk.
I am guessing these are prices on services like AWS Bedrock (their post is down right now).
Fair point. They mention they do a regular construction and then reduce it to the QBVH, so was wondering if the BIH approximate sort trick could be used effectively.

Again not put a lot of though into it.

Sounds like a fun challenge though.
What Does It Mean to Be Wealthy?
You are joking, but I think City-based timezones would work well on today's internet. We have better than ever computers to do time math and scheduling/coordination for us, let's leverage that. It's easier than ever to go to more timezones rather than fewer, because we don't have to make train companies happy anymore and because some people would get better sleep if their local time was closer to their solar time and because DST is easier to get rid of with smaller timezones. (DST is, among other things, a hack around our timezones are too wide.) The IANA timezones are even already primarily city-based, so a lot of software wouldn't even need to update anything but their IANA tzdb.

Now might be a great time to do something like that. It doesn't sound like a serious proposal, but there would be interesting benefits to city-based timezones again in the modern world. We actually have the technology to scale smaller timezones now. We aren't relying on mechanical clocks like the train companies were and paper calendars like early multi-timezone companies like GE were. We could make local time resemble solar time a lot more again, and solve it as a software problem.
I don’t think it’s that simple. The source is “the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it” (to use the GPL’s wording).

For an LLM, that’s not the training data. That’s the model itself. You don’t make changes to an LLM by going back to the training data and making changes to it, then re-running the training. You update the model itself with more training data.

You can’t even use the training code and original training data to reproduce the existing model. A lot of it is non-deterministic, so you’ll get different results each time anyway.

Another complication is that the object code for normal software is a clear derivative work of the source code. It’s a direct translation from one form to another. This isn’t the case with LLMs and their training data. The models learn from it, but they aren’t simply an alternative form of it. I don’t think you can describe an LLM as a derivative work of its training data. It learns from it, it isn’t a copy of it. This is mostly the reason why distributing training data is infeasible – the model’s creator may not have the license to do so.

Would it be extremely useful to have the original training data? Definitely. Is distributing it the same as distributing source code for normal software? I don’t think so.

I think new terminology is needed for open AI models. We can’t simply re-use what works for human-editable code because it’s a fundamentally different type of thing with different technical and legal constraints.
> You're justifying the use of the term "open source" by saying it's logical for Meta to want to use it for its popularity and layman (incorrect) understanding

I'm actually not a fan of Meta's definition. I'm arguing specifically against an unrealistic definition, because for practical purposes that cedes the term to Meta.

> the term "open source" is misleading for a product where the "source" is the training data, and the final product has onerous restrictions on use

Agree. I think the focus should be on the use restrictions.

> When a company says "open source" but it's not free, the tech community is quick to call it "source available" or "open core"

This isn't consistently applied. It's why we have the free vs open vs FOSS fracture.
Well ping me via email and send me your blog and I’ll be more than happy to ask you about it because I love reading blogs.

My address is on my profile here on HN
I don’t doubt the competency of representatives & staff when it comes to writing bills. I just doubt who they are writing the bills for…
Unsure if anyone has specific hardware benchmarks for the 405b model yet, since it's so new, but elsewhere in this thread I outlined a build that'd probably be capable of running a quantized version of Llama 3.1 405b for roughly $10k.

The $10k figure is likely roughly the minimum amount of money/hardware that you'd need to run the model at acceptable speeds, as anything less requires you to compromise heavily on GPU cores (e.g. Tesla P40s also have 24GB of VRAM, for half the price or less, but are much slower than 3090s), or run on the CPU entirely, which I don't think will be viable for this model even with gobs of RAM and CPU cores, just due to its sheer size.
I used a company called Greenback.
>how does the money affect competition, both for goods/services and labor?

We have the entire 20th century, when many countries tried exactly that. Production is decreasing, labor participation decreasing, good availability decreasing. Mass famine, millions of deaths from starvation. Governments have to decree force labor to overcome famine and totalitarian oppression to avoid revolutions and protect the progressive achievements of general welfare. Last part centralizes authority even more and gives the government tools to remain in power no matter what.

>Or we can raise the payroll taxes to cover the payouts.

This is exactly where the spiral of death begins. Hieger taxation (when there is welfare) - less work incentives - fewer workers - less goods availability - you need bigger welfare share, so even hieger taxes. And so on until people have literally nothing to eat. Not once or twice, always.
For the freedom to change to be effective, a user must be given the software in a form they can modify. Can you tweak an LLM once it's built? (I genuinely don't know the answer)
Whoa there. I've not done the polling but I suspect most EDM consumers think of themselves as music lovers the same way other people like jazz etc. I tend more to agree with your assessment that the vast majority of it is not in the same category as "real" music but I don't think attendees of a rave would go along with that.
This blog post is dated 5 days prior to The Intelligent Transportation Society of America's publishing of its Cybersecurity and Transportation Safety Issue Brief.

The original author of the blog post was invited to speak at an ITSA.ORG conference, and present as through the eyes of an attacker. Thus, the perspective he posits.

There is nothing untoward in his observations but I can see why DefCon might hold off on letting him present his findings.

The ITSA is based in Washington D.C. and has a fairly large membership consisting of state's DOT's (primarily western U.S.), tech companies, car companies, engineering design companies, consulting firms, etc.

Their vision is a better future transformed by transportation technology and innovation. Safer. Greener. Smarter. For all.

A lot of automation is factored into that vision including the use of autonomous vehicles, high-speed inter-connected systems, their attendant technologies, and of course, cyber-security.

Personally, I'm dismayed the U.S. in only now awarding grants for these studies. Maybe the whole thing got sidetracked when our focus shifted to COVID, I don't know. But it does seem as though we're behind the private and governmental initiatives going on in Asia.

1: https://itsa.org/

2: https://itsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Cybersecurity-an...

3: https://itsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2026-ITS-America...