skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We want cheap(ish) desktop GPUs with 80G or more VRAM, so not only large corporations could meaningfully participate in AI research.

The price divide between “desktop” and “datacenter” GPUs is artificial and no doubt there is a collusion of some kind.
No, they can't. They'll still be randomly deciding if something is fake or not, so they'll only have a probability of being correct, like all nondeterministic AI.
And yet this is precisely what people like Altman say about their product. That's pretty tiring.
Perhaps that anarchy is the exact thing we need to convince everyone to revolt against big tech firms like Google and OpenAI and take them down by mob rule.
At least a separate smart device isn’t going to record everything I’m doing on my gaming console, which is connected to a different HDMI input.
> It certainly will affect the reputation of people that are consistently publishing untruths.

Oh? I thought there are a lot of very well identified people making a living from publishing untruths right now on all social media. How would PKI help, when they're already making it very clear who they are?
Deep Tech VCs or Angels in Europe
I am pretty familiar with the founder scene in San Francisco. Recently, I was approached by a friend who wants to start a deep tech company in Europe. He wants it to be in Europe because they want to target some specific customers in Europe. He asked me where he could start looking for investors and I couldn't tell him a single name.

Does anyone know some serious deep tech VC firms? A network of Angel investors? Something where they can start? Does anyone here have experience in the European ecosystem?

For context, they're aiming to secure approximately 4-5 million in investment.
> the choice to stop playing after the first win is not luck but skill

That would only be true if you said you chose to stop playing because you knew you were going to lose. But in the example (which was based on your point) the person is claiming they would continue winning if they continued to play.

Respectfully, I’m waiting for an answer from the author of the post. They wrote it, they’re the ones who can explain what they meant. This speculative conversation we’re having isn’t going to get us closer to the truth of someone else’s intention.
Can I boil water for my tea with it already, or should I wait next gen?
When I was doing SEO full-time, this is one of the ways we used to categorize content - via intent. As a result, my immediate question becomes: how long before those responses start to be subsumed by commercial intent responses? To me, this is an inevitability. A when, not an if.
>But you never checked the accuracy of your information before so

They didn't say that and that's not a fair or warranted extrapolation.

They're talking about a heuristic that we all use, as a shorthand proxy that doesn't replace but can help steer the initial navigation in the selection of reliable sources, which can be complemented with fact checking (see the steelmanning I did there?). I don't think someone using that heuristic can be interpreted as tantamount to completely ignoring facts, which is a ridiculous extrapolation.

I also think is misrepresents the lay of the land, which is that in the universe of nonfiction writing, I don't think that there's a fire hose of facts and falsehoods indistinguishable in tone. I think there's in fact a reasonably high correlation between the discernible tone of impersonal professional and credible information, which, again (since this seems to be a difficult sticking point) doesn't mean that the tone substitutes for the facts which still need to be verified.

The idea that information and misinformation are tonally indistinguishable is, in my experience, only something believed by post-truth "do you own research" people who think there are equally valid facts in all directions.

There's not, for instance, a Science Daily of equally sciency sounding misinformation. There's not a second different IPCC that publishes a report with thousands of citations which are all wrong, etc. Misinformation is out there but it's not symmetrical, and understanding that it's not symmetrical is an important aspect of information literacy.

This is important because it goes to their point, which is that something has changed, in the advent of LLMS. That symmetry may be coming, and it's precisely the fact that it wasn't there before that is pivotal.
Just don't connect it to your network and you're probably fine. Use a smart box for streaming services.
Having a stolen car means the easiest way to identify someone is now non-identifying. It’s a great precursor to avoid being tracked.
Honestly the most depressing thing about this entire affair is seeing not the entire, certainly but a sizable chunk of the software development community jump behind OpenAI and company’s blatant theft on an industrial scale of the mental products of probably literally billions of people (not the least of whom is other software developers!) with absolutely not the slightest hint of concern about what that means for the world because afterwards, they got a new toy to play with. Squidward was apparently 100% correct: on balance, few care about the fate of labor as long as they get their instant gratification.
> I can spend my time revieweing and correcting.

Do you really like spending most of your time reviewing AI output? I certainly don’t, that’s soul-crushing.
Do people really view so much content of questionable provenance? I read a lot and look at a lot of art, but what I read and look at is usually shown to me by people I know, created by authors and artists with names and reputations. As a result I basically never see LLM-written text and only occasionally AI art, and when I see AI art at least it was carefully guided by a real person with an artistic vision still (the deep end of AI image generation involves complex tooling and a lot of work!) and is easily identified as such.

All this "slop apocalypse" the-end-is-neigh stuff strikes me as incredibly overblown, affecting mostly only "open web" mass social media platforms which were already 90% industrially produced slop for instrumental purposes anyways.
Are you phishing for something or are you not sure how this actually works?

Everyone who is looking for proteins (vacines, medication) need to find the right proteins for different cases. For attaching to something (antibody design), for delivering something (like another protein) or for understanding a disease (why is this protein an issue?).

Covid research benefitted from this for example.

You can go through papers which reference the alphafold paper to see what it does: https://consensus.app/papers/highly-protein-structure-predic...
I think tech people underestimate how much people want to print things. My wife is printing stuff all the time. Proofreading things on physical paper is better than on a screen. You read more carefully and catch more mistakes.
Not exactly, read the exact paragraph in The Development of the C Language:

> [...] In all these cases the declaration of a variable resembles its usage in an expression whose type is the one named at the head of the declaration.

> The scheme of type composition adopted by C owes considerable debt to Algol 68, although it did not, perhaps, emerge in a form that Algol's adherents would approve of. The central notion I captured from Algol was a type structure based on atomic types (including structures), composed into arrays, pointers (references), and functions (procedures). Algol 68's concept of unions and casts also had an influence that appeared later.

Algol 68 by the way had a sensible type syntax that is akin to Go's. Ritchie "explains" the syntax difference by having the same syntax for the type and the expression, but that's not exactly why. For example there are actually two expressions relevant here, `*` dereference and `&` reference. Why was the former used? Why couldn't `*` be made a postfix at this point if the same syntax was a big concern? Ritchie himself never fully elaborated on those points, and I think that's because it was never his primary concern at all.

As you have noted, it is very important to realize that C did have their design goals (for which C did a very excellent job). On the other hand it would be very misleading to claim that C had some bigger visions even at that time and they validate its design! Ritchie and others were clearly smart but they didn't design C to be something magnificant, it was a rough product from various trade-offs they had to endure. So why this particular syntax? Well, because B already picked a prefix `*` which Ritchie didn't want to change at all, and he allowed it to infect all other aspects of the type syntax without much consideration. (Or more neutrally, Ritchie couldn't figure out any other option when he had to keep the B compatibility. But keep in mind that B have already changed that operator from BCPL.)

Technically speaking it was somehow designed, but only by following the path of the least resistance, not a solid reasoning, hence my use of the word "accidental". There are many other examples, such as the logical `&` (etc.) being renamed to `&&` but the bitwise `&` keeping the original precedence order because nothing was done. To be fair to Ritchie though, it is not his fault, but rather a fault of the whole software community that was fixated on this ancient language designed for specific purposes way too long.
perhaps the most important news to me here is that landsat 9 was launched in 02021. landsat 8 is also still alive and kicking!
That's insanely amazing.

Thanks for the share.
It would be ideal if OpenAI were torn apart to bankruptcy, because its creations are destroying society.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but to be affected, don't you need to have UDP port 631 exposed to the outside world? Apologies for being a bit blunt, but if you're exposing services like printing to the internet that shouldn't be exposed, well, then... you kind of deserve to get owned, right?
This all strikes me as very similar to promise pipelining and distributed capabilities from an OCap system like E.

Any code sending an outbound request in reaction to a write is causally related and could be represented as a pipelined promise. The receiving system can then proceed in its work until it needs to "await" the incoming promise and can see whether it was broken due to a failure to persist some earlier write. This could also be handled at the network layer if the receiving system was external.

I'm pretty sure I remember Kenton announcing that Cloudflare Workers now supports something like (or exactly) object capabilities and promise pipelining and his knowledge/interest in such systems is already reflected in Cap'n Proto RPC.

Very cool stuff if you ask me!
Not targeting the author as this appears not to be the case and he provided helpful advice, but it bugs me to no end how a not insignificant amount of people deals with security vulnerability and concerns. How casual, dismissive, aloof and many times straight up hostile and the most infantile ways they act when someone raises ( very valid ) concerns about security.

I've seen this over and over again with Linux people, granted this view might be skewed because of the public reach of the project, but still.. they seem to view any communication regarding CVEs or security concerns or design recommendations as adversarial and tend go into the "I know more about Linux than you" and "Everything is fine until you convince me it's not, which will be never" mode.

Not wanting to turn this into a dunking contest but, it's the general feeling I have about this.
In the other thread about this it was mentioned macOS and many flavors of Linux don’t install the specific package or invoke cupsd as needed and shut it down when printing is complete. The instructions given in the article state they’re just tuning off the network discovery package for CUPS.
What do you mean? What do privacy pop ups have to do with this?
Mentally it's not too difficult to throw $60 at a digital "Buy" button, but it's much harder to throw those $60 at a "Get access" button. I wholly welcome a change like this, even if it's just wording on the button.

One thing to worry about, perhaps, is how it might make it easier for companies to remove things that we have "Gotten access" to as it would be explicitly stated that we don't actually buy anything.
Quite miraculous.

Underlying paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.06208v2

Unfortunately, the algorithm seems to be a bit too complex to turn this into a party trick.
That's actually a good point. I'm curious to see if people will keep making selfies everywhere they go after they realize that you can take a selfie at home and have an AI create an image that looks like you are somewhere else.

"This is me in front of the Statue of Liberty

- Oh, are you in NYC?

- Nope, it's a snap filter"

Somehow selfies should lose value, right?
The hypocrisy of Musk around 'free speech' has been on full display since he bought Twitter. It's wild to me that you're still having to argue with people on this point. Twitter is a Musk Speech platform, and has very little to do with free speech.
Why not use a more suitable speech?

Also, I think it depends on how you come to these rituals. If it's just something you grew up with there's a good chance it's just some words you stumble through before a meal.
Just going to state here that as a rule, I boycott any creators, writers, or other people who use AI or LLMs in their work. I prefer to only read human creations, and not the internal reflections of the machine soul.
A proper electric kettle is what, 3 kW?

But if you plug two 5090s and some next gen Intel CPU in a very inefficient PSU, you have a chance...
They eliminated the "friction" associated with sports betting, threw in some easy credit and the result was exactly what you'd expect.
Why is your printer exposed on your public IP?
Will the price be 3000 or 5000 for 5090? With nice top of the line CPU you can a small space heater here. Must be nice in summer.
It was pretty much the only question people asked on Swappa, until they just added it as a required field for the listing.
If you ask a Swiftie what they love about Taylor Swift, I guarantee they will not say "the autotune is flawless".

They're not connecting with the relative correctness of each note, but feeling a human, creative connection with an artist expressing herself.
If it is good for a rat’s libido that's good enough for me!
The web being polluted only makes me ignore more of it.

You already know some of the more trustworthy sources of information, you don't need to read a random blog which will require a lot more effort to verify.

Even here on hackernews, I ignore like 90% of the spam people post. A lot of posts here are extremely low effort blogs adding zero value to anything, and I don't even want to think whether someone wasted their own time writing that or used some LLM, it's worthless in both cases.
Yes please, the whole world would be a better place if US antitrust laws would be updated for realities of the modern world

Saying this as a European who has no say in the US system but definitely feels it’s international influence
Also the most useful and expensive testcases require understanding of the whole project. You need to validate the functionality from end-to-end and also that system does not crash for unexpected things and so on. AIs don't have that level understanding as "a whole" yet.

For sure, simple unit tests are easy to generate with AI.
It’s only those with something to prove who do that. He has nothing left to prove. Probably never did; he just genuinely enjoys what he does.
South African Border War
I fully agree with this sentiment, also interesting to see Bas Dijkstra being featured on this platform.

Another article that touches on a lot of the issues I have with the place AI currently occupies in the landscape is this excellent article: https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-will-fucking-piledrive-you...
>I don't see the issue with gambling revenue funding a club.

Gambling revenue hurts society more than it profits the club. The answer is that if we absolutely need these clubs, we should more explicitly subsidize them with govt money. It'd be stupid, but less stupid than what we're already doing right now.
> It's taboo to criticize that though

In what world is this taboo? That critique comes back in at least half the HN threads about AI.

Watch any non-technical video about AI on Youtube and it will mention people being worried of the power of mega-corporations.

Your take is about as taboo as wearing a Che Guevara tshirt.
Exactly. The situation should be examined like the NTSB does for plane crashes, usually a proximate cause and other contributing causes.

Maybe we’ll see a return of The Club™
Not sure if this is exactly what you're looking for, but I suppose it will be of at least some help: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tf4qx1aMJp8Lo_R6gpT6...
I have nothing against gambling as a libertarian, but I don’t want to be liable for people who made poor life choices. I don’t want to pay for the welfare of people who ruined their financials or health, nor do I want to look at homeless people on my commute.

If what we’re going to have is a society where I’m paying for the housing and health care of other people, I’d like to be able to dictate with an iron fist what the other people are allowed to do and be.
Agreed. It is a zero sum game once you consider the extreme asymmetry in opportunities.
In the age of social media, it's a myth that you can 'create opportunities for yourself'. It doesn't work like that. You need the right social network; else you will create value but that value will be ignored and not integrated into the system; you will not be paid/rewarded for it.

Either you exist in a social environment where opportunities fall on your lap by the hundreds and you have to pass on 99% of them and only pursue the top 1%... or you exist in an environment where you have to work like crazy for 10 years straight to get a single mediocre opportunity and such opportunities are so rare for you that you recognize it instantly and you know you cannot pass it up.

The economy is a zero sum game at best and a negative-sum game at worst. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have such significant asymmetries in opportunities.

Just look at anyone who is earning a lot of money in our system... They're not adding value. They have shares in companies; they could sit at home all day and they'd get paid the same. How is that not proof that they're being paid for not adding value?

Ignore past stories of what these people supposedly did once-upon-a-time to get to their current positions. What do you call a system where, at any given time, most of the money flows to people who do the least amount of work and consume the most?

Probably 5% of the population could do a better job than most CEOs. Still, these people will never get the opportunity to become a CEO. There's just not enough room at the top... So people make up all sorts of nonsense stories about track records and connections.

Buy up my existing cryptocurrency shitcoin for hundreds of millions of dollars and my track record and business connections will magically appear out of nowhere. I don't need to do anything. Just a Tweet from a celebrity will do.
> Wordpress is past its prime. A nice api based platform will replace it very fast. The whole wp concept is wrong from 2024 perspective, cause much of it is API calls from web already and not PHP/html loads.

I wonder are you very young? People were saying this a decade, even 15 years, ago
This only truly works if sports gambling is illegal globally. The reason this doesn't apply too much with the US is foreign interest in US sport is limited.

For example http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/426092.stm is why british people of a certain age all know the phrase "Malaysian gambling syndicates" and associate it with random blackouts.
The person posting is not speaking about gambling, but about working and building businesses. I'm not sure why you are using a lottery as a comparison.

The reasonable worst case with any application of skill (e.g. don't put your entire net worth into a risky business) is that they end up roughly where they started.
You could use overlayfs with the upper layer on the SSD "scratch" and trigger a write operation
You know that their top tier datacenter card has "only" 80GB? Their workstation cards with 48GB are also reasonably priced... with 3-4k pricing.
So you're basically sheltering yourself and seeking human curated content? Good for you, I follow similar strategy. How do you propose we apply this solution for the masses in today's digital age? or you're just saying 'each on their own'?

Sadly, you seem to not be looking further than your nose.
We are not talking about just you and me here. Less tech literate people are the ones at a disadvantage and need protection the most.
It's the association. Things vary in value to us depending the brand it portrays. This is why people pay $150 for Nike shoes despite them being made by the same kids in the same sweatshop as the $10 Primark runners.

It's also why initiatives like ReiserFS died after its creator turned out to be a murderer.

As humans we're always looking for things that align with our values and "tribe". Maybe it shouldn't be that way and we should judge each product purely on its merits but for most of us it's just how we are.
I think a lot of the recent trading apps marketed to consumers give you a margin account by default though, I know Robinhood does. If you request a cash account you lose instant deposits and trading and have to wait for everything to clear normally.
Most states have the data publicly available if you know where to look or how to request.
Indeed - the luck of being born in the right family and not getting caught, respectively.
> > For example, many people think WP Engine is “WordPress Engine”

I thought WP Engine is Word Perfect Engine. /s
Socrates is also a big name. Never forget.
> dpkg showed it wasn't installed, but it was listening due to their horrible sidecar "snap" package system.

Oh no, there are two distribution-mandated package managers on my system but I refuse to acknowledge the existence of the second one because it offends my sensibilities. Well, add another step to your Ansible template, I guess: "apt autoremove --purge snapd && apt-mark hold snapd".
We have a Samsung TV in the UK (where consent is still required too!) and I recall it nagging for consent very often when we got it.

The default option from the TV controller is to give it quickly and easily, maybe it could happen by sitting on the controller.

It's hard to see how this would be informed consent.

I do wonder exactly how the EU and UK market models from the US and others, anyone got info?
definitely looks like an owl to me also.
What I'm really tired of is people completely misrepresenting the Luddites as if they were simply anti-progress or anti-technology cult or whatever and nothing else. Kinda hilariously sad that the propaganda of the time managed to win over the genuine concerns that Luddites had about inhumane working environments & conditions.

It's very telling that the rabid AI sycophants are painting anyone who has doubts about the direction AI will take the world as some sort of anti-progress lunatic, calling them luddites despite not knowing the actual history involved. The delicious irony of their stances aligning with the people who were okay with using child labor and mistreating workers en-masse is not lost on me.

My hope is that AI does happen, and that the first people to rot away because of it are exactly the AI sycophants hell-bent on destroying everything in the name of "progress", AKA making some rich psychopaths like Sam Altman unfathomably rich and powerful to the detriment of everyone else.

A good HN thread on the topic of luddites, as it were: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37664682