skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> don’t need a universally justified definition, I’m just looking for an objective, scientific one. A definition that would help us say for sure that a particular cognition is or isn’t a product of reason.

Unfortunately, you won't get one. We simply don't know enough about cognition to create rigourous definitions of the type you are looking for.

Instead, this paper, and the community in general are trying to perform practical capability assessments. The claim that the GSM8k measures "mathematical reasoning" or "logical reasoning" didn't come from the skeptics.

Alan Turring didn't try to define intelligence, he created a practical test that he thought would be a good benchmark. These days we believe we have better ones.

> I just don’t find this kind of critique specific enough to have any sort of scientific validity. IMHO

"Good cognition" seems like dismisal of a definition, but this is exactly the definition that the people working on this care about. They are not philosphers, they are engineers who are trying to make a system "better" so "good cognition" is exactly what they want.

The paper digs into finding out more about what types of changes impacts peformance on established metrics. The "noop" result is pretty interesting since "relevancy detection" isn't something we commonly think of as key to "good cognition", but a consequence of it.
I hope I never get to share road with you. Oh wait I won't, this crazyness is illegal here.
Thanks for pointing this out, it's an existing discussion started half a day ago with 5 comments:

The Part of PostgreSQL We Hate the Most (2023)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41892830
Fishman has been doing these with guitar pickups for several years now. It's supposed to allow for greater consistency and also make it possible to do some stuff that couldn't be done with an actual coil of wire.
Bees are plagued by mites and parasites. It could be that pesticides lead to fewer attackers for the bumblebees.
So what do you do about stress? How do you recognize it's happening? I found this part informative:

"Stress reactivity occurs specifically in situations that diminish one’s control and where the prospect of being negatively evaluated, rejected, and/or shamed are contextually manipulated (Dickerson et al., 2004)."

I find I get the most stressed when I'm excited about a new challenge -- a new work project, seeing a path to achieving a goal I've been working towards for a while. When I start to feel too excited (or in the framework of this paper, I start to expend too much energy and my heart rate is elevated thinking about all I want to do to overcome the challenge), I can generally reign in the stress by reminding myself that failure happens, my peers will understand it, and I don't have complete control over anything anyway.
At work we use Temporal and ended up using a dedicated workflow and signals to do distributed locking. Working well so far and the implementation is rather simple, relying on Temporal’s facilities to do the distributed parts of the lock.
I consider the Fermi paradox nothing but a fun game.

There are so many unknowns that we can literally say nothing about it. Nothing. We have no idea. We have a sample size of one and virtually nothing to even calibrate any of the scales for any of the parameters in any model. For all we know abiogenesis (life from non-living matter) is phenomenally rare to the point that there is an average of less than one example per galaxy per billion years. Or it could be common but complex life could be rare. Or, or, or, or... the or's become infinite because we have no information to constrain them. It's even worse than an endless theology argument since at least there you're arguing within a set of theoretical philosophical boundaries. This is literally unbounded.

We have only barely started to explore a tiny fraction of the vastness of the universe. It's far too early to make statements like these.

I do think exploring it is a fun way to enumerate all the possibilities for what we might or might not find out there, but it can at times get problematic. You have "longtermists" out there who actually cite the Fermi paradox in political, social, or ideological arguments, arguing for real world policies on the basis of an unconstrained untestable hypothesis.
I understand that. What I'm hung up on is, why does the storage system feel it is at liberty to just invalidate a lock and thus let someone else reacquire it without any sort of acknowledgment (either from the owner or from the communication systems connecting the owner to the outside world) that the owner will no longer rely on it? It just seems fundamentally wrong. The lock service just... doesn't have that liberty, as I see it.
This is the best analogy I have yet read. It perfectly sums up my experience.
How Heartbleed Could've Been Found (2015)
What does consciousness or subjective experience have to do with the relationship between language and cognition? I’m not following your argument.
Just my luck. I get stuck with a race that speaks only in macros.
The possibility of delays being zero does not imply that negative delays are possible.
I think the solution to these kinds of issues is a coordinated campaign in small claims courts across the world.

If people decided to take the time to simultaneously take this issue before a judge who will give them a default judgment when a company like LG no-shows it'll start to hurt them and the publicity from this will force change.
VCs don’t care about “challenges” and “skeptics”. They care about FOMO, hype, and bragging rights on podcasts and Twitter. They’ll keep piling on as long as the other fund down the hall does the same thing.
I feel like this comment is emblematic of a dramatic misunderstanding of blameless post mortems. They're pretty simple; systems that fail can be attributed to teams, practices, systems of understanding, etc which is diametrically opposed to individuals. Blameless culture isn't a culture without blame, in fact there's plenty of blame that should be listed in contributing factors - including the accountable team (if there is one). There's just no, "John Smith did x and y failed" because that's rarely, if ever, succinctly how systems fail.
Hmm, I'm a Californian and I pronounce daemon as demon, understanding the first vowel as the same vowel as for Aesop. Indistinguishable from the vowel in "beam" and "niece".

But I pronounce the first vowel in aesthetic differently. For me, it's somewhat in between the vowels in "bed" and "bad" but closer to the former.
That seems an odd take. This is a technologist website, and a good number of technologists believe in building robust systems that don’t fail in production. We don’t stand for demos, and we have to fight off consultants peddling crapware that demos well but dies in production.
I own a Tesla, despite my dislike of Musk, because it is an insanely fun car. I will never enable FSD, did not even do so when it was free. I see even the best teams have production outages. Until Tesla legally accepts, and the laws allows them to, legal responsibility, and until it’s good enough that it doesn’t disengage, ever, then I’m never using it and nobody else should.
Anyone tried this?
that would require you to set up a domain name and use DDNS and trust your registrar, or to just always have your computers at a static IP with no NAT blocking you whatsoever.
Risk and Sports
A genuine question to commenters asking to "put a grownup in charge of the thing" and saying that "Kahle shouldn't be running things": he built the thing, why exactly he can't run it the way he sees fit?
I feel like the full self driving cars should have a "budget". Every time you drive, say, 1000 km in FSD, you then need to drive 100 km in "normal" mode to keep sharp. Or whatever the ratio / exact numbers TBD. You can reset the counter upfront by driving smaller mileage more regularly.
A couple of them went bankrupt and got bailouts.
That's a false dichotomy. You can easily run the computer in a cupboard and communicate with it over the local network. I run my own private "cloud" services today. Of course, that might not be how it turns out because data is too valuable. But the headset should just be a display for the computer in your cupboard.

Just for the record, I'm not even a little bit excited by this, nor do I expect I'll ever buy such a device. I'd want the full matrix experience before I went in, so that I could do things I can't do in real life. However, chances are I won't want to do those things any more if/when it ever becomes a possibility.

I also share your concerns about how this stuff will likely be implemented (ie. on their cloud). But tbh that's already lost at this point.

But I can't deny that getting away from keyboards, monitors, desks etc is hugely valuable.
A lot of blabla, no technical data.
Suspicious.
I'd be worried about blisters/rashes/rubbing if the weights slide around. I use an exercise-bike like device and realised I was getting a blister on my hands from the constant motion of the grip.
Tauri2.0 has been released This "Rocket" is supported by mobile terminal
I don't know. I reimplemented large parts of Git in order to get a better understanding of it and I still manage to mess up sometimes.
Actually, it does. Because of relativity events that occur at the same time in one frame of reference do not occur at the same time in another. A delay of zero between two different points implies that there is a reference frame where the delay is negative.
Thank you!

Just shoot an email to support and mention HN. I’ll read and reply.
Monopoly is famously and on-purpose cynical, to pick a familiar example.
You can work backwards from this - the vast majority of people in the US don't agree with that statement. You might be able to get them there, if Americans didn't have to be as car dependent due to their built environment. But because so many people are already car dependent, it's hard to make those changes.

The one theory of change I think is approachable suggests allowing dramatic increases in density in places that are not car dependent - the people who live there are much more likely to agree with us, so letting the number of people who live there 10x or even 100x could lead to this kind of change you propose.
There are no other phenomena which we accept as real - where “accept as real” is an ability to correctly predict and manipulate, ie, create technology - based purely on qualia. This is the essence of physicalism. The hard problem of consciousness is therefore broadly acknowledged.

“Reductive physicalism” doesn’t need to be saved; there’s nothing else; physicalism is the fundamental philosophy of science, the prerequisite for a functional, predictive physics.

Consciousness is the quandary, not physicality.
Maybe one could modify an existing server based file sharing app and add a public/private key mechanism that only people who have shared their keys with the server will get to keep their files on the server, if they key doesn’t match what the client signed with and was pre-registered it gets deleted instantly. That would prevent CSAM etc from a hostile intrusion. Of course it requires vigilance of the group. I envision this working for small groups who have email or Signal contacts with each other. It needs that “it takes a village to manage a friends share” mentality.
it's pretty far still. I don't think Apple prioritizes power users much. Their products tend to cater for less tech savvy folks.
Optical mice have similar cameras.
Got it, thank you for clarifying this.
I bet something like Forth would work better on such a microcontroller. It is known to produce very high code density and embedding assembly is usually very straightforward.
Twofer

I wrote a flame simulation in x86 assembly language. Total hoot.

I also wrote an Easter egg that shipped in a major software company’s software and is immortally burned onto thousands of DVDs slowly rotting in landfills. This one was fun and challenging because I had to mask the names of the product team from easy detection, I had to convert string text to my own custom 8x3 pixel font for rendering, I played with palette animation to create some fun raining effects, and I packed it into just a few Kb of the DOS end of a Windows executable (back in the day, 16-bit Windows apps could be linked with a custom DOS loader in case you tried to run the Windows app from the cmd line).
I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting people be held accountable for bugs which are ultimately accidents. But if you knowingly sign off on, oversea, or are otherwise directly responsible for the construction of software that you know has a good chance of killing people, then yes, there should be consequences for that.
Nice. I like the short paragraph on "Why hasn’t anyone done this before?" at the bottom of the page.

tl;dr: concept very old; C-Motive combined incremental improvements
That's why you can install through F-Droid right?
Hey, I've seen some of your IOCCC entries. Even had some fun trying to understand them back in the day.

IOCCC gang rise up. This is mine: https://www.ioccc.org/years.html#2005_persano
I recently took the night train from Innsbruck to Hamburg in a brand new sleeper car run by ÖBB and those are a blast.

Searching for more routes I stumbled across this map and a pretty neat database of available European connections https://back-on-track.eu/night-train-list

Hope to see more connections in the coming years.
The hard problem of consciousness is hard for a reason. There's no obvious way to link the experience all of us (solipsism aside) are having at each and every moment with the mechanism that generates it. It's a category error to confuse the two, misidentifying the map and the territory. Stating as above, that qualia can be reduced to an illusion of qualia merely restates the problem in an effort to elide it. 'I'm imagining that I have a feeling' isn't qualitatively different to 'I'm feeling the feeling'. Given that it's fairly trivial to link affect and self awareness to concrete adaptive advantages, and that each can be diminished through neurological damage - we know that phenomenology is both useful and organic. What we don't understand is precisely how it comes into being and 'where' it resides - besides using words like 'emergent' in nonspecific and hand wavy ways.
> Some crime analysts and supporters of the law cautioned against reacting to the striking statistics, noting that the increasing number of young people accused of crimes since 2017 mirrors the overall rate of crime in the city, which experienced a surge of violence during and immediately following the pandemic.
Better yet: decouple front and back ends. Let them talk over a stable interface and evolve independently. The SQLite ecosystem is evolving in this direction, in fits and starts.
Apple's position is different, because Apple never let you have this kind of access.

Android/Google Play review keep restricting APIs and replacing them with less capable APIs, or keeping the APIs and reducing functionality.

It works again, but I had a USB endoscope that stopped working because Google pulled APIs and took a while to replace them. I can't use location sharing in my choice of apps anymore because something on my phone blocks either app runtime, app internet access, app location, or gps decoding and I don't use it often enough to be motivated to delve through logcat to figure it out, if they even still let me use logcat?. I'm sure it helps my battery life, but it reduces the functionality of the phone.
There are lots of other areas where intentionally violating FCC regulations to transmit harmful signals is already technologically feasible and cheap, but hasn't become a widespread problem in practice. Why would it be any worse for cars communicating with each other? If anything, having lots of cars on the road logging what they receive from other cars (spoofed or otherwise) would make it too easy to identify which signals are fake, thwarting potential use cases like insurance fraud (since it's safe to assume the car broadcasting fake data is at fault in any collision).
It's like that ancient meme where a programmer starts at Hello World, ascends through corporate complexity, then comes back to Hello World.
I wish they had some examples of what RPM, torque, weight, and size specs were for a few possible applications. They seem to emphasize low RPM, but is that 200 RPM or 2000RPM? With other electric motors being capable of 10k-20k RPM, the "low" RPM mention is very vague.

If it's capable of up to about 3000 RPM, and it doesn't weigh too much it could be interesting as an ultralight aircraft power plant.
I am guessing that you think sperm and eggs have no consciousness. But, humans do.

When do you imagine it started? Does your mental model explain this physically/algorithmically? (Honest question, I consider this often and really have no clue)
This has been the general word on the street ever since Win11 came out. Why is it all of a sudden news now?
An analogy https://youtu.be/5H8aRCyEGnU
Doesn't the combo box input field already do this?
Electrolytic capacitors are a perishable good. Age even when sitting on a shelf unused.
Just FYI this is illegal in many areas.
> I support archival of films, books, and music, but those items need to be write-only until copyright expires.

Which means no one alive today would ever be able to see them out of copyright. It also requires an unfounded belief that major copyright owning companies won't extend copyright lengths beyond current lengths which are effectively "forever".
But you are thinking and talking about that specific thing? Which means that you could care less.

The moment you say “couldn’t care less” you’re already technically incorrect because you obviously could..
If someone is unable to kill an animal, should they eat the animal? It is another matter to ask everyone to raise their own livestock.
If you're a windows users this is really the least of your problems with the new "trusted computing" measures microsoft will implement with the new requirements.
According to the theory, an attention model. Here's artificial consciousness in three steps:

1. Have a robot build perception models of its environment and itself

2. Have the robot allocate computational resources and sensory bandwidth to the models using attention

3. Have the robot control attention using model predictive control

Because the attention model is less detailed than its actual attention, by virtue of being a model, it doesn't represent the mechanisms of attention or modeling accurately. Instead, it uses non-physical concepts such as "mental possession" to model itself or other agents paying attention to things, or "qualia" to denote the recursion that occurs when percepts we attend to are summarized by the attention model (which in turn can be attended to, and so on).
Israel Preps for Strike on Iran, Top Secret Leak Reveals
Because Windows 10 is going EOL next year. People who couldn't or didn't want to upgrade to Windows 11 are now under more pressure than before.
A student I know texted me, the ai detector kept falsely flagging his work. “This is how I write!” I gave him some tips to sound less like ai which is funny because we train ai with rlhf to sound more and more like humans.
No, I have to ask customer service to enable it, my EdgeRouter X supports IPv6.
How to move around the content isn't really a problem I'm trying to address. As far as I can tell it's a solved one, has been since Napster. Different users like to manage their media differently, I'm not going to tell them how to do that.

Same thing for managing user identity. Whether you want to build an organization around that problem or slap together a CLI and let the users fend for themselves, again not something I'm trying to weigh in on.

These are app-level decisions, not a protocol ones. And neither of them really lend themselves to on-chain solutions.

The unsolved problem I see here is that you've got a community of users, all with identical copies of a file, and they want to build consensus on how that file should "cite its sources". In the case of music, that's a bunch of fans wanting to pay the musicians, but it's structurally the same as if you're trying to give feedback to authors of a paper or claim that researcher X found vulnerability Y in code Z: you're building consensus on a directed graph between datasets and actors such that other actors have something to reference when they communicate (or send payments) to each other about those things.

That's the only part of the problem that's likely to come under attack by incumbents, so it's the only part you need a ruleset and computational verification for. Everything else can be handled "the normal way", by appealing to the good behavior of the incumbents.

People (e.g. Sony) are going to try to get paid for music they never played. People are going to take credit for research they didn't do (or did poorly). People are going to try to misrepresent the trustworthiness of things that they built and want to charge you for.

You can't put that on AWS because nothing on AWS is more trustworthy than its least trustworthy admin. You can't leave it to the courts because only the powerful can use the courts to their advantage, for the rest of us they only serve as a system for mutually assured destruction.

Which people get credit for which data is too contentious of a topic to trust to the hands of people who have pinky promised not to use it in their power games. If it weren't, there'd be no reason for Subvert to exist in the first place. I hope they can manage it by just being very careful about how they allocate trust among their owners, but history has given us centuries worth of reasons to be skeptical.

Meanwhile, other data that the powerful would prefer to tamper with remains intact in the various blockchains that protect it. The rules continue to be followed. There are a lot of problems with that space, especially at the interface between the rules-governed parts and the pinky-promise parts, but we've only been chipping away at those problems for decades. They feel a lot more tractable than anything involving the insufficiencies of the law.
> nowhere near enough people actually put their storage where their mouths are.

Typically because most people who have the upload, don't know that they can. And if they come to the notion on their own, they won't know how.

If they put the notion to a search engine, the keywords they come up with probably don't return the needed ELI5 page.

As in: How do I [?] for the Internet Archive?, most folks won't know what [?] needs to be.
Wouldn’t it need to at least go through the middle man as a relay for webrtc to work? Most people are behind so many layers I don’t see how webrtc could work any other way for the average user.
New Paradigm Institute UAP Global Disclosure Day 2024 Livestream
I use BitWarden on iOS, PC and Mac. Now I have to find an alternative. What a sad day.

I'm a premium member @$10/year as well. There goes lost business because of shady practices.

Is there a way to export and move to an alternative?
I'm using Syncthing to sync documents between devices and I own a mac fleet and an iPhone. The Möbius Sync[1] client (no affiliation) works great for me.

[1] https://mobiussync.com/
The _abstract_ is there; the full paper costs $29.99 or you need a university access id.
Shit, this was the app I used to sync my obsidian notes through multiple devices.
WebGPU-Based WiFi Simulator
Here is the YouTube link to listen to this new single https://youtu.be/cElWGY5QA1A?si=cJhUgYfk1BXuS_4O
That doesn't make any sense to me.

First of all, polarization is irrelevant when looking at the sun. It only affects light that is reflected off things like other cars' windows, or water on the street. In fact, it's often recommended not to use polarized sunglasses while driving because you can miss wet or icy patches on the road.

Secondly, standard sunglasses don't let you look directly at the sun, even a setting one. The sun is still dangerously bright.
I run KDE on my "TV" and the media controls and clipboard sharing are worth it. I occasionally use my phone as a trackpad too.
Shit, this is the app I use to sync my obsidian notes through multiple devices. R.I.P.