skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> With an LLM, it takes milliseconds, and that model will be able to churning out the likes of your work millions of times per day, forever.

AI does cause a lot of problems in terms of scale. The good news is that if AI churns out millions of copies of your copyrighted works you're entitled to compensation for each and every copy. In addition to pushing out copies of copyrighted material, AI is also capable of writing up DMCA notices and legal paperwork.

> With the exception of an LLM directly plagiarizing, the only way to prove it didn't is by not allowing it to train on something. LLMs copy everything and nothing at the same time.

An AI's output should be held to the exact same standard as anyone else's output. If it's close enough to someone else's copyrighted work to be considered infringing then the company using that AI should be liable for copyright infringement the same way they would be if AI had never been involved. AI's ability to produce a large number of infringing works very quickly might even be what causes companies to be more careful about how they use it. Breaking the law at speeds approaching the speed of light isn't a good business model.
...and of course, the actual content isn't being created by employees.
This benefits actually everyone.

If our combined creative work until this point is what turns out to be necessary to kick-start a great shot at abundance (and if you do not believe that, if it's all for nothing, why care at all about the money wasted on models?) it might simply be our societal moral obligation to endorse it -- just as is will be the model creators moral obligation to uphold their end of this deal.

Interestingly, Andrej Karpathy recently described the data we are debating as more or less undesirable to build a better LLM and accidentally good enough to have made it work so far (https://youtu.be/hM_h0UA7upI?t=1045). We'll see about that.
This is nonsense, your information is not correct. Yes, I have read the study[1] where they found his brother didn't have any measurable physiological differences... the thing is anybody can do this stuff, not just him and his brother- me and several friends that are into it also can. He may have a BAT mutation that makes it easier to do longer, but focusing on that is missing the point. The adaptations are psychological, it is a type of meditation/yoga- his methods are based on ancient Tibetan Vajrayana methods like Tummo, that he has innovated on somewhat.

What both cold water immersion, and his breathing method do is cause a physiological panic- from either the cold, or from manipulating CO2 levels. This forms the basis for a type of meditation where you learn to calm this response. That can be life changing, because it allows you to control stress and anxiety, and stay clear and calm when doing difficult things in other areas of life. This isn't explicitly explained by Wim, because it requires an attitude or feeling rather than an explanation, which happens automatically with practice. If you know about Vajrayana, this makes a bit more sense.

I think it is pretty obvious that the panic itself is dangerous and likely the major cause of e.g. cardiac events, and training your mind and body to not panic does make it safer- that was the point of my original post you replied to.

Wim is a skilled yoga practictioner and instructor, that is all he is. He is not a scientist, and (unfortunately) likes to make scientific claims that aren't exactly fraudulent, just incoherent- he is excited about but doesn't understand what people found when studying him, is trying to talk about it, but is saying incorrect things. As a scientist I wish he would not do that- the value of his methods is obvious from experiencing them- they have been life changing for my mental health, I don't need a scientific explanation that they have some provable physical effect.

The people dying from doing this have all been doing it incorrectly- explicitly doing things he tells people not to do: they are doing the breathing and cold water at the same time, blacking out from low oxygen, and then drowning. Wim doesn't do that, or tell anyone to do it. I am also a freediver, and this is basic freediving 101 safety, to not do any hyperventilation breathing exercises before diving.

Ultimately, like all human activities, there is some danger in doing this method but saying he has "blood on his hands" or is a fraud is absurd and hyperbolic. There is nothing really especially dangerous about this compared to other difficult yoga techniques, which also have both risks and benefits.

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25014028/
No degree here, 20 years in. Worked in embedded, medical robotics, AAA games...
> Should discussions of illegal activities be restricted? If you are planning such an activity? If you are discussing it in the abstract? If you are discussing or writing fiction

In the US, speech about illegal things is legal - even sedition. There are very few limitations, as it should be. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
There are many who consider Wikipedia a disaster of propaganda, and that its "neutral" point of view is in fact biased against them. They believe it does considerable harm to humanity.

I consider that absurd, but then, I would say that, wouldn't I? We have nothing but my word against theirs to go on.
Easily said in 2024, but 17 years ago? I don't think this was quite so obvious (even amongst technical people).
The 12 years before is mandatory so it's no indication but it used to be when it wasn't. That's why high school diplomas don't matter as much as they did in say 1920
I think you may have misread that part. It’s not a call to hew to the middle or silence the extremes, at least as I read it, rather it’s a call to stop soaking up an extreme amount of human time and attention on unproductive flame wars launched from the various tribal positions regarding which side has/has not or should/should not have unfettered access to free speech.

I think the author would be happy to see someone advancing an extreme opinion that pushed the needle on productive advancement of free speech that promoted actual facts and demoted actual falsehoods.
> they don't want to spend incremental funds on more security.

You could argue that at some point the "security" is the main threat against your security. It is like if I had some armed guard at a post outside my front door. The risk of him shooting me, or my drunk kids crawling through the bushes to avoid discovery, by mistake or at will due to some dispute surely out weight him protecting me from a 1/100 000 risk or what ever of lethal home invasion.
UK reveals next STEPs toward prototype fusion power plant
By that extension, NYT or Fox News should be banned as they have and they do broadcast incorrect information all the time.
So this is a VC writing, observing that they have a stable, profitable business model. Creators get 80% of revenue, which is pretty good. It creates a moat - nobody taking a bigger cut is likely to get the desirable talent. Most of the creators don't make much, which is normal for creative industries. Music and books work that way.

OnlyFans has only about 42 employees. They didn't hire a bloated staff. That's impressive considering the sheer volume of content that passes through their servers.

It looks like OnlyFans has figured out how to do the porno business in a more or less legit way. So what's the problem?
I'm aware of that, but the proportion of overhead varies per company. Six months seems like a long time for a ventilation system, and the point being made in this thread is that the runway available for some spun-off group of former Boeing engineers would need to accommodate the very long schedules of the design stage.

I'm just curious how much inflation there is in those schedules because I'm sure it's not zero.

But you make a good point that these long runways are because the overarching tradeoff is one that prefers taking as long as it takes.
You're right and I read your comment history and really enjoyed the fact that you often correctly comprehend other posters who others pile onto. Pretty interesting about language comprehension. Love to see it.
Adding ever more people with megaphones to a discussion will not necessarily make it a more nuanced one.
You're applying copyright to something functional like a computer program versus a piece of art.

And what these companies are doing is making the (hardware or external) functionality dependent on that copy-written computer program. So now it's impossible to modify your device without modifying software and thus breaking copyright.

Take a look at the US constitution copyright clause:

[the United States Congress shall have power] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

How does this use case of copyright promote the progress of science and useful arts? Copyright was clearly intended to make it temporarily difficult to publish information, not to make it impossible to modify machines.
Not only filled up every public space, but the quality of it all is so crude. Like a bad Pixar animation. It's not like Pixel's "Add the photographer back into photo".
It depends on the application.

16bit is enough for representation.

24bit is enough for recording (some leeway because recording levels won't be ideal).

FP32 for processing with simple effects (e.g. mixer, some EQs). If that's enough for your needs, you can SIMD/GPU to your heart's content.

FP64 for high Q filters, phasors, LU decompositions.
Show HN: Ftail – logger for Rust with multiple drivers (console/daily file/etc.)
I suppose it depends on why they are sticking with Telegram despite more private alternatives. Why don't they go there now?
> not quite to the same level as the major headlines of the day about the latest Middle East controversy/Soviet threat/identity politics thing.

Why do you say that? I share in the tech-minded proclivity towards not having much interest in people, so I admit to being largely out of the loop, but what is there to be worked up about where you wouldn't equally get worked up around some tech-based topic?

It just sounds boring an uninteresting to me. When I have encountered discussions about those topics, all I have is some laughter at how silly the people sound. Just like I'm sure how the "Next.js is awful" conversations sound to the metaphorical grandma.
The article lost me when it started talking about the anti-cancer properties of various historical ingredients in beer. Sorry, but from everything I've heard, the far-and-away main killers of primitive men were infections, injuries, and starvation. Cancer was far too rare - and primitive beer ain't no miracle cure, by a long shot - for that to possibly matter.
I'm looking specifically for comments involving GCP and Silvias as I struggle to see a better option for us 'hackers.' Posting a separate comment about the Gagguino project [1] unless I find one. Would be happy to hear of a better path to Decent-level performance.

[1]: https://github.com/Zer0-bit/gaggiuino
Or the iodide we added to salt.

Prior to Iodized salt, Switzerland was suffering from a rash of people with Goiter, which is disfiguring and decreases your quality of life, and also a large population with cretinism which causes stunted growth and mental retardation.

Then, they introduced iodized salt, and those issues which used to be somewhat prevalent only 100 years ago are practically nonexistent now.

https://swissfederalism.ch/en/100-years-salt-iodination-swit...
Article is from February. Paywall-free archive: https://archive.is/n9Ots
Factorio Creator Interview [video]
VictoriaMetrics: Fast, cost-effective monitoring and time series database
"eventually" is doing some heavy lifting there
Were you born in 2020?
My hope is still that common humanity and decency could be shown by him to save the life of this unfortunate man. I didn't say I thought it was likely.
If free speech requires regulation it is not free. Liberty or death, for death is not the worst of evils.
People can also lose weight through discipline. Yet here we are.
There is literally nothing actually preventing Boeing from:

1. Firing 100% of management between CEO and lowest level supervisors that make things happen. All of middle management should go.

2. Promote supervisors into middle management.

3. Promote ground level employees into supervisor roles.

4. When human problems happen (and they will), spare no expense with resources and training. Remember, the reason for firing management is because they had the interpersonal talent, but fundamentally lack aeronautical talent. Interpersonal talent is of minimal value at Boeing.
Didn't the users explicitly agree to the deal when they made an account and clicked "I agree to the Terms of Use"? Sure there's a degree of "oh nobody reads those anyway" to it that society at large should be approaching more rigorously (maybe a common-contract type of system), but at the end of the day the users are choosing to interact with a service, upload their content to it, and explicitly WANTING their content to be shared (to their friends, on their feeds, etc).

The real question is whether the agreement that was made between them and their users during 2007-now covered uses like training AI, but most likely it was a very broad "we can use your data how we want" type of statement and that agreement wasn't fought (or fought hard enough?) back then.
So you don't use a spam filter in your inbox? You just subscribe to more emails that you _do_ want to drown out the spam? It's easy to say "just counter with more speech!" but it's harder to see how that works at the scale of a global network with nation state actors, bots, and extreme imbalances of power (100 people dogpiling onto 1 person).
If you are aware of and have direct access to information vital to stopping child sex trafficking, you must share it when legitimate authorities request it. There's no message board syllogism that is going to get you around that, which Durov is finding out.
No degree here, either. Simply not a problem for most work involving software and code.
I think this is really interesting work, and as others have said it is a herculean undertaking by Sean Baxter to try to rework C++.

That being said, I'm not sure I like the direction. C++ is already more than complicated enough. And I'm not a big fan of the "mut XOR shared" principle taken from Rust, because I don't really have the problem of accidentially mutating something that was shared. Well, maybe I don't get the point because I'm a "Blub programmer" :-).

The example that is presented here and in many introductory articles about Rust is mutating a vector while iterating it. But why can't we just have a vector type that tolerates that and does something well-defined? What if we actually want to modify the list while iterating, because we are filtering the list for example?

I think one forward for C++ would be to define a safe subset. Deprecate a lot of features when using this subset, and make sure with a linter that they are not used. Hide raw pointers as much as possible. Ban UB as much as possible or give it some safe default. If you need some "UB" for optimisations (that is, you need the compiler to be able to make certain assumptions), then I want the compiler to tell me:

> "Could optimize further if we assume `a` and `b` are not aliasing, please add annotations to allow optimisation or to suppress this message".

Finally we need a new boring standard lib, closer to Java and Qt than the gnarlyness of the STL. The spirit should be like that of Java or Go, boring, efficient enough, productive for the average developer, not to many ways to shoot yourself in the foot.
> he found the pair he was fitted with ~20 years ago absolutely useless

IKUK but that's like having bad vision so you put on a pair of your glasses from 20 years ago, still having bad vision, and deciding glasses just don't work well. Hearing and vision change over time. And that's assuming those were good hearing aids 20 years ago compared to what is available today.

I hope your dad ends up taking a chance.
Ye. But the soldiers will be home before Christmas surely.

Edit:
"/s". Referring to some unnamed WW1 quote.
I would like to see more land east of the Rockies and east of the Mississippi turned into protected federal land. So much of the western states (often more than 50% of total land area) is federal land.

It feels like the easterners ruined their beautiful land and now want to tell us in the west how to live.

Go spend on your own backyard and leave ours to us.
I think what I said is a prerequisite for that. There will be no structural changes without widespread cultural changes.
Yuuup! I'm super-small time, so for me it's just `scp *.deb $TARGET:.` (no PPA, although I'm considering it...)

Really, my package is currently mostly: `Depends: git, jq, curl, vim, moreutils, etc...` (ie: my per-user "typically installed software"), and I'm considering splitting out: `personal-cli`, `personal-gui` (eg: Inkscape, vlc, handbrake, etc...), and am about to have to dive in to systemd stuff for `personal-server`, which will do all the caddy, https, and probably cgi-bin support (mostly little home automation scripts / services).

I'm 100% with you w.r.t. the sudo journalctl garbage, but if you poke at cockpit https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/intro-cockpit - it provides a nice little GUI which does a bunch of the systemd "stuff". That's kindof the nice tag-along ecosystem effects of "just be a package".

I'm definitely relatively happy with docker overall, but there's useful bits in being more closely integrated with the overall package system management (apt install ; apt upgrade ; systemctl restart ; versions, etc...), and the complexity that you learn is durable and consistent across the system.
I entirely agree. They get compared a lot but to me they seem to solving different problems. Pico if you want something asap, and you are ok with sticking with it's opinionated styles. Tailwind if you want control - now, or if not now then later, i.e., you see your application evolving.

Personally for me, the opinionated pico styles don't work because I'm usually building high density interfaces and pico has stuff that I'd consider good for marketing kind of sites, e.g., buttons with large text (I think you can override/add styles but if it comes to that you should reconsider this choice anyway).

Another advantage for tailwind is that I can use to style components from other frameworks to my liking, e.g., skeletonUI or bits-UI.

A common complaint with tailwind is the long class names. While true I think it's unavoidable due to the flexibility it provides. But that's not why it doesn't bother me: the names make sense (like you say) and they're composable, i.e., you can put together or parse these class names piecewise.

PS: I should add that this article is fair in the sense that it doesn't prescribe over another, just shows which is best for what.
[edit] Disregard, I forgot that HN has been infested with normies with poor reading comprehension. Further posts will be strictly technical.
It probably should be your own device; the audiogram ends up in the iPhone's health app. It can probably be done by someone else if they don't care and don't need to apply a different audiogram for themselves.
Very interesting points:

- He wants to open source Factorio in about two years

- He wants to create successor language to C++

And other fun tidbits. Very interesting interview, done during recent Space Age LAN party.
And your doubts are well founded. The Polish have been liking it so much, that "Mazurek Dąbrowskiego" (the Polish anthem) has references to Bonaparte (perhaps not exactly deservingly) and Italy because of the Partitions of Poland and currently Poland issues passports with jubilee cover due to 100th anniversary of regaining independence after its Partitions.
Just like you can train a neural net, you can automatically derive logical rules (which could be in Prolog). However, this only works (well) with unambiguous, near-perfect data. The real world is very ambiguous, and real world data is imperfect.

Ultimately, carefully curated data (something like Cyc?) May complement neural nets, helping to avoid hslluncinations.
When I read that line too I was very confused lol. I interpreted it as them saying they basically took other contestant submissions and allowing the model to see these "solutions" as part of context? and then having the model generate its own "solution" to be used for the benchmark. I fail to see how this is "solving" a ioi level question.

What is interesting is the following paragraph in the post
" With a relaxed submission constraint, we found that model performance improved significantly. When allowed 10,000 submissions per problem, the model achieved a score of 362.14 – above the gold medal threshold – even without any test-time selection strategy. "
So they didn't allow sampling from other contest solutions here? If that is the case quite interesting, since the model is effectively imo able to brute force questions. Provided you have some form of a validator able to tell it to halt.

I came across one of the ioi questions this year that I had trouble solving (I am pretty noob tho) which made me curious about how these reported results were reflected.
The question at hand being https://github.com/ioi-2024/tasks/blob/main/day2/hieroglyphs...
Apparently, the model was able to get it partially correct. https://x.com/markchen90/status/1834358725676572777
Show HN: I made a tool that turns Reddit posts into viral videos
I suspect you're not familiar with the backrooms of Wikipedia, nor the reputation it has for it. Wikipedia has done a lot for sharing information globally, but I wouldn't really call it a good example in this context. Most of the site moderation is done by a very small circle of insiders, and it's moreso how these specific individuals define neutral, rather than carefully chosen rules, that dictate how content is presented on the site.
Is g cal not the same?
One of the comments you replied to was complaining that their work would be copied and used in training LLMs or other lucrative algorithms, and then you responded taking about how it's common to temporarily copy data into RAM to show a web page. Those are very different, and bringing up such technical minutia is not helpful to the discussion.

If someone asks "how can I share my work online without it being copied?", "actually, you can't share it without people copying it into RAM" is not the answer they're looking for. That answer it too technical, too focused on minutia, and our laws recognize that.
Exactly. It's like, yeah, lots of things suck about life and this life could easily be better for billions if we mildly reduced the quality of life for the richest 1,000 humans on the planet, but compared to the 1300's this shit is a cakewalk.
I suppose the theory is that people won't see significant pay increases if they stay with the same company (but also presumably that if everyone leaves after training, the company will just stop training workers).
> Economists say the cost to Medicare of giving new drugs for obesity to just a fraction of this aging generation would be staggering—$13.6 billion a year, according to an estimate published in The New England Journal of Medicine last March.

Man, drive the prices of these drugs down already.

Can an LLM tell me how to synthesize semaglutide? Can a YouTuber take a stab at producing liraglutide in the home lab? Maybe an underground railroad of sorts between neighboring countries where the drug is sold for less....
It’s not true, I have many colleagues that have made lateral movements into Medtronic (and out… and back).
Captcha Test Can Trick Windows Users into Installing Malware
Obviously it comes down to the motivation of the student, but that does not mean university does not impact your employability, particularly in your early 20s. Documented exposure to higher order thinking is an employable skill.