skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Bars, clubs, supermarkets etc pay a fee to the organisation to sign up to it, and can play pretty much any music in return.

I worked for a company that was signed up for a similar service in the United States.

We had a blanket license for music, for which we paid a little over $1 million each year. This was around 2001.

A couple of times a year, we'd pull an intern aside and his job for the entire day was to sit there with a pencil and steno pad and write down all the music we used. That was typed into a report and sent to the licensing company which determined how much each artist would get paid.

These days, with advances in music recognition technology, it's probably all very automated and more thorough.
By this logic the Windows or MS office should have the price slightly higher than an USB sticker
I assume that's 600k repos tracked, not necessarily owned, by the customer. Which is still a lot, but to me seemed a more likely reading.
This approach is flawed because it attempts to use use prompt-injection-susceptible models to detect prompt injection.

It's not hard to imagine prompt injection attacks that would be effective against this prompt for example: https://github.com/gregretkowski/llmsec/blob/fb775c9a1e4a8d1...

It also uses a list of SUS_WORDS that are defined in English, missing the potential for prompt injection attacks to use other languages: https://github.com/gregretkowski/llmsec/blob/fb775c9a1e4a8d1...

I wrote about the general problems with the idea of using LLMs to detect attacks against LLMs here: https://simonwillison.net/2022/Sep/17/prompt-injection-more-...
An admittedly wandering defense of the SSO tax
I experience vastly more constant interference, inconvenience, bureaucracy, stupidity, and oppression from the massive corporations we allow to run our lives in America.
Yeah and social engineering is much easier to spot than your company approved search engine giving you malicious links
PostgreSQL in line for DuckDB-shaped boost in analytics arena
Even if ability wasn't a factor, time often is.

Right. Not everybody has spare time! Many of us are caring for loved ones, have disabilities, whatever.
Went through S12, and also talk to a lot of YC founders. A few thoughts:

1. Quality over quantity. "Talk to users" works best when you have a well-defined market or ICP. Talking to 10 users in your ultra-specific niche is way better than talking to 100 users across multiple niches.

2. Your script matters a lot. Asking leading questions will get you results you can't trust. I think The Mom Test (https://www.amazon.com/Mom-Test-customers-business-everyone/...) is a great intro on this topic.

3. Talk to enough users that you start being able to predict their answers. If you are running interviews and still getting new/surprising answers to your questions, then it means you either haven't spoken to enough people or have a poorly defined ICP... If you need #s, I generally find that after 10 interviews in a very focused ICP, you should start seeing patterns.

Finally, there is an exception to every rule. Your specific market might need more interviews, or you might have such a good insight that you skip formal interviewing all together.
Lack of documentation around performance related stuff and high memory usage because of immutable data structure.

Otherwise it's great. I try to do it in my free time since most of the clojure services are stable(in terms of features) and we are just scaling it up as we see increase in traffic but it's not really helping right now.
> Feels like saying "soreness is your muscles recovering from damage and you should avoid it."

Except this is an analogy not a true comparison of the systems. The act of growing muscles is due to muscle damage and regrowth (to really handwave), and that action causes soreness. It’s not cumulative damage to the muscles, ideally it should heal in between. The same experience is not true for skin. You’re not “improving the health” of your skin by being tan, and we know that damage to the skin is cumulative.

The health benefits of being in the sun seem to be a combination of mental-health (sun=happy) and chemical-release when skin is exposed to sun (eg vitamin D). This seems more like “certain side affects of sun expose are positive to the overall body, despite the growing damage to the skin”.
a stick for carving in the dirt enables you to create something that didn't exist before. there's nothing special about that stick.
I honestly don't think you'll be able to get very far unless the team is already onboard with the plan to switch towards a more asynchronous culture. If they lack the motivation, they won't bother improving their writing.

The tricky part is that they might be interested in the results you promise, but still lack motivation. It's common for someone who's interested in losing weight not to be very motivated to do it themselves. They don't want to lose weight themselves, they want to "be slimmed down by someone else". You may face a similar difficulty. That's part of the reason why changing a culture is so hard.

I know that's not a direct answer to your question, but I needed this context to say this: I think whatever tricks and tips you can come up with yourself are more likely to succeed. That's because you're already familiar with the specific needs and the specific difficulties people might face when handling the most frequent and repetitive issues.

Rather than thinking how to get fuzzy improvements on people's overall writing skills, perhaps you could try to focus on suggesting specific solutions for specific problems ("hey everyone, I've noticed that when handling X people usually forget to tell p, q and z. So let us agree on using this text structure '1) p; 2) q; and 3) z; whenever handling X"). I think that, by accumulating lots of small tricks like these over time, you'll be able to go further. Going bottom-up seems easier than trying to change things top-down.

I'm not sure this makes sense to you, for I'm not familiar with your concrete situation, but I hope it helps somehow.
The videos on WW2 bomber gun system and bombing computer are also very fun.

Too lazy to find specific videos, but this entire channel is A+

https://www.youtube.com/@WWIIUSBombers/search?query=computer
> there is certainly higher order synthesis and causal reasoning going on and its certainly not all from me.

why do you believe that's not emergent phenomena from its super vast training corpus?
But "before" you did not have an option and thus the need to wonder!

"One who has a watch always knows what time is it. One who has two watches is never certain about anything."
Do you intend to get to feature parity with pyright for ruff-lsp? I wasn't aware you were aiming to make it a full fledged lsp, despite using it daily.
The world would be a better place when airlines and ISPs worked that way too. (Roads work is usually communicated well in advance)

Downtime for these is critically impacting people, and you're damn right you should explain what went wrong and how you'll avoid this in the future. Because the only reasonable alternative is nationalizing them. "I dun fucked up, but meh" is not an acceptable attitude.
I wish arxiv.org would have a big "Booooo" banner for papers without code.
You're taking exponential improvements for granted. Only one human endeavour (ever) has made exponential gains for a long period, that of silicon lithography. And even that ended in the last decade.

The reason I say "always underestimate" is the obvious one. The easy problems are solved first, then the harder ones take longer because they're harder.

So that's fantastic that battery production scaled up. Only a fool would expect - would plan on - it continuing like that.
>Unless any random outage or terrorist/conventional strike against one’s early-warning radars, or errant satellite launch by a low-grade nuclear power, is automatic grounds for a universal MAD offensive.

They are, that's what Stanislav Petrov is famous for helping prevent. A single early warning satellite had an anomalous reading and everyone wanted to start nuclear Armageddon, only prevented because he didn't believe the US would send only a few warheads, to the point he was willing to bet his country on it.

Famously the US plans early on didn't really have any distinction as to who fired, and the only retaliatory option available was to go full send with everything on Soviet cities.

Specifically about satellite launches, yeah, that's a genuine concern, which is why they are talked about publicly, even when it's a classified spy satellite going up, why you are very loud and public about testing ballistic missiles anywhere you do so, and why both the US and USSR worked very very hard on making computers to quickly estimate the landing point of a ballistic launch.

Meanwhile the entire point of nuclear missile submarines is that ground based missiles are an explicit target of known enemies, and thus not likely to survive a first strike. They are not intended or planned to survive such a first strike, which is why we had SAC flying B52s 24/7 for like 40 years. Any missiles that aren't out of their tubes before enemy detonation are mostly assumed lost.

In fact, nuclear submarines have gone a long, long way to improve the situation, because now you don't have to rely on those ground based or air based warheads as much, so you can be more conservative in your judgement. If you're wrong and the soviets really did initiate nuclear war, oh well, Tridents will show them the error of their ways.

The biggest "eh, we should wait before we launch" cause is simply the lack of tension between world powers. Despite Russia's blustering, in official capacities they have not signaled that they are looking to launch nukes. They have not significantly increased their readiness, towards a large scale anti-NATO war, to the point that they are literally removing defenses from the border with Finland in order to divert those resources to invasion.

There has only been one "Oh shit oh god" moment that I know of; when an S300 missile (which I believe later turned out to be Ukrainian) landed in Poland and killed a farmer. There was a crisis meeting of NATO members.
Network effect. "Everyone" subscribed to Elsevier, so if you wanted your papers to get visibility and citations, you tried to get it published in their journals.

They are a relic of a bygone era. They made sense when journals were physical publications in the library. Elsevier was the one-stop-shop for all of the major academic journals. But with the internet, they make less sense and kept their position through inertia and rent seeking behavior.
What would a license solve?
Links to studies/surveys/interviews/anything with even the suggestion of proof for your claim other than simple assertion?
The dispute over the huge ship has been in and out of court – a magnified version of what to do with possessions that have no useful purpose but are held on to for reasons that cannot be articulated or clearly remembered.

Article author has some thoughts and opinions on the matter, huh?
Even if they're calling the same LLM, LLMs often get worse at doing things or forget some tasks if you give them multiple things to do at once. So if the goal is to detect a malicious input, they need that as the only real task outcome for that prompt, and then you need another call for whatever the actual prompt is for.

But also, I'm skeptical that asking an LLM is the best way (or even a good way) to do malicious input detection.
FWIW, some of the Allwinner stuff has fairly robust support in mainline Linux, and there are ongoing efforts to upstream missing bits: https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort

No vendor support is probably accurate, though.
You are absolutely right about the research part.

I guess I was surprised that it made it to the news, as it seems expected to me. If they would reach the opposite conclusion however, now that’s newsworthy.
I'm an experienced engineer and I've seen what I estimate to be a 2-5x productivity improvement in the time I spend typing code into my computer from embracing LLM-assisted development.

Typing-in-code is only 10% of the work that I do, but this is still a very meaningful improvement for me.

I've written a bunch more about my own experiences here: https://simonwillison.net/series/using-llms/ and here: https://simonwillison.net/tags/ai-assisted-programming/
I feel that online media stores should be barred from putting a [Buy $9.99] button next to [Rent $3.99]. Maybe use [Rent 48 hours $3.99] and [Subscribe Indefinitely* $9.99].

*Your content subscription has no set expiry date but is subject to copy protection and requires Internet connectivity to our licensing check servers.
People who get plenty of vitamin D through their diet still benefit from sunlight exposure

Ecological study of solar radiation and cancer mortality in Japan
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15551791/
No because most people have jobs and limited money.

It’s easier in most people’s existing lives to avoid taking extreme health measures. Most people don’t go to a gym or exercise for the suggested min/day, but most people go to their job instead of staying in bed.
What's the recommended/opinionated
Those are non-starters, but there is a lot that can be done in the space. Not autoplaying the next item is a good example. Look at how services handle things in kids mode. That's just one way to think about it.
Wikipedia writes: "Ahmed developed a practical DCT algorithm with his PhD students T. Raj Natarajan, Wills Dietrich, and Jeremy Fries, and his friend Dr. K. R. Rao at the University of Texas at Arlington in 1973." [1]

So perhaps it would fair to give due credit to the co-workers as well.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrete_cosine_transform
> If I see "for (...", I only know that the subsequent code will iterate

And then someone slaps do {} while(0) in a macro.
Well that's a problem. I'm not willing to pay anywhere near as much for public transportation as I am for a private vehicle and everything that goes with that.

But I do think you are on the right track. I think public transportation in the form of buses doesn't make a lot of sense. But if Musk had been able to deliver on his promise of self-driving cars, then a giant city operated (or at least funded) fleet of small autonomous vehicles offering door-to-door service and route flexibility could change everything.
When you are for example referring to some word or phrase instead of trying to use it in its normal place in the grammar of a sentence. Mean can have many meanings. You may be more familiar using quotes for that.

https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/N...
Why not adopt the law school approach? Let the grad students publish the journals.
Tens of millions in extra infrastructure costs to save a lot of trucks tiny amount of gas per ride, over many rides per year, over decades? That's literally what infrastructure is meant for.
Until the AI means “system thinking capability that can analyze the codebase and give real suggestions” I don’t buy it. Everything I have seen so far is waste of my time and resources and at best is useful for generating tests or docstrings.
You have it backwards there. You’re describing lossy compression.

Lossless is formats like Flac and zip. Lossless compression basically stores the same data in more efficient (from a file size perspective) states rather than discarding stuff that isn’t perceived.

The clue is in the name of the term: “lossy” means you lose data. “Lossless” means you don’t lose data. So if a zip file was lossy, you’d never be able to decompress it. Whereas you cannot restore data you’ve lost from an MP3.
Not exactly.

It's an issue of misaligned incentives - the Standing Committee sets some high level KPI, and every functionary tries to hit that KPI.

This leads to a tragedy of the commons, which is further exacerbated by how devolved China has become since the 1970s, because now individual provinces are heavily invested in companies directly competing with each other, but cannot downscale or shut them down because laying off thousands of employees at SoEs is politically untenable.

Everything from overproduction to over-compliance of COVID Zero policies to BRI can be attributed to misaligned incentives between top level policymakers, mid-level decisionmakers, and businesses.
> Your use of the word rudimentary implies some sort of spectrum

Yes, it does. See my reply to abainbridge downthread.
With programming languages, all you’re doing it picking which problems you don’t want to have to worry about and which ones you do.

When a team decides to switch programming languages, which would be a major undertaking, it’s typically for one of the following reasons:

1 - There is a deeper understanding of the problem space and the initial language doesn’t actually help the team from creating bugs that would be determimental to the continued operation of the business (eg, choosing Erlang when 9 9s of uptime is of absolute importance or a systems language when nanoseconds matter).

2 - Time has passed and there are many frustrations the team is dealing with in either maintaining - or extending - the current codebase. And there is now a belief that switching everything over to $LANGUAGE will solve those problems. This is rarely true and almost always a red herring as (typically) institutional knowledge of what the original set of problems $ORIGINAL_LANGUAGE solved are forgotten/ignored due to them not ever being a problem. But as soon as you flip the switch, the team will be acutely aware of them.

In the end - unless it’s made for a legit business reason (see: #1) - more time will pass and the same team will be frustrated with a different set of problems.
Nah, Elm doesn't need the rec keyword and could be argued to be a ML descendant
No, but that's also not what I'm saying. Open your mind a little bit. Here's my reply to someone else: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41303877

There is a world where services are engaging, fulfilling and not harmfully addictive.
Can relationship success be predicted by asking the right questions?
Oh, but burnouts are not the reason why I take breaks. I feel it's the other way around, I take a break from "chilling" when I'm too bored and/or money is running low.

I have burned out in the past and it had to do with other factors; anxiety, low income, ...
Energy savings isn't the point though. The point is so that large trucks won't slow down traffic having lost a bunch of energy from braking to get on a cloverleaf.
Do most people really need to learn college level writing? I would ask, what is the motivator of learning how to write well? One reason could be communication. However, if we can communicate easier and faster than ever before with an AI, that subject no longer needs to be taught.

College writing will go the way of calligraphy. Colleges and the faculty that staff them need to keep up with the times or risk being obsoleted. Instead of teaching students to write, they should instead offer courses on prompt engineering and how to get the LLMs to spit out what is needed, in a minimum amount of time.

And let's face it -- most people are being prepared for the life of a corporate worker or laborer. I'd argue a great number of people don't need college. Cheating is widespread because there are people in those courses who aren't interested in the material. A quick course in how to compose an email, workplace communication should be all that is needed for most white collar workers. Those who really want to study writing should be offered the courses as an artistic, historical and anachronistic pursuit and those courses should definitely not be financed on the tax payer's dime.
> In this it's claimed that Intel is doing a direct framebuffer copy.

Sounds like marketing speak for "vnc with an intel logo".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFB_protocol
GitHub? It still is, and has been, the “social media” for devs (as much as I detest that term)
Yeah, there's some craziness here: Many people really want to believe in Cool New Magic Somehow Soon, and real money is riding on everyone mutually agreeing to keep acting like it's a sure thing.

> we still can't get LLMs to distinguish trusted and untrusted input...?

Alas, I think the fundamental problem is even worse/deeper: The core algorithm can't even distinguish or track different sources. The prompt, user inputs, its own generated output earlier in the conversation, everything is one big stream. The majority of "Prompt Engineering" seems to be trying to make sure your injected words will set a stronger stage than other injected words.

Since the model has no actual [1] concept of self/other, there's no good way to start on the bigger problems of distinguishing good-others from bad-others, let alone true-statements from false-statements.

______

[1] This is different from shallow "Chinese Room" mimicry. Similarly, output of "I love you" doesn't mean it has emotions, and "Help, I'm a human trapped in an LLM factory" obviously nonsense--well, at least if you're running a local model.
One thing that bothers me about the incremental approach is that we seem to be at a local minimum[footnote]. It feels like any small amount of ownership of the means of production we transfer to the workers will be clawed back into the hands of the owning class, because they have the means to do the clawing back, and we do not. There's a couple examples I know of in this regard, namely Allende in Chile, the PKI in Indonesia, and of course the nationalization of oil in various middle eastern countries in the past century (Iran, for example).

For a more western example, look at Corbyn's loss in the 2019 UK elections. Part of his platform was actually a plan to get closer to workplace democracy, by offering collectives of employees a first option when a company gets sold (or something to that effect). Exactly the kind of incremental step I imagine you're talking about. I cannot help but think his loss was inevitable due to who owns the media (the owning class).

It seems to me that any small step we take will be fruitless if there's this big behemoth looming in the background.

I appreciate you putting your thoughts to paper. More than my one line question deserved.

[footnote] Actually local minimum implies that things aren't getting worse, while they are. E.g. neoliberal European governments are systematically underfunding all sorts of public institutions, which will eventually lead to them being privatized, because the free market would do a much better job than the government, which has been making a mess of it for years. Starving the beast has us barreling towards a minimum, but we're not there yet.
Different roles. I could have agreed if you said, say, PLOS. arXiv is a preprint repository, Elsevier publishes peer-reviewed journals.
Organic advertising? As in, showing prospective importers how cool it is to have abundance of $thing.
I don’t remember which book
I got idea from but idea is to work in different modes. When you work as programmer then there are no deadlines and etc. So sometimes you have to put different hat, e.g. CEO hat. It took several months to work out but overall result is reasonably good.
As somebody without Twitter, is there something I can read/view?
> I agree that politics shouldn't be in software, but this is not exactly that

Of course not. There are good companies (Microsoft, Alphabet, Apple, Meta) which are supporting "our democratic governments" and bad companies (Yandex, Tencent) which are supporting "our enemies". /s
>They are using a service called Article Galaxy, which is just a proxy that pays for per-article access when individual users request it. MIT Libraries get the bill from Article Galaxy.

I'm surprised services like these haven't been shut down yet. IANAL, but what they're doing (ie. acting as a proxy between end-users and the publishers) seems similar to what Aereo was doing[1], which the supreme court ruled was copyright infringement.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Cos.,_In....
I don't think it's always necessary if the paper makes it really clear how things were done. And just because the code is available, it doesn't mean that it is actually reproducible or comprehensible.