skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been trying to figure out to respond to this for a while. I appreciate the fact that you are pretty much the lone voice on this thread voicing this opinion, which I also share but tend to keep my mouth shut since it seems to be unpopular.

It's hard for me to understand where my peers are coming from on the other side of this argument
and respond without being dismissive, so I'll
do my best to steelman the argument later.

Machine learning models are function approximators and by definition do not have an internal experience distinct from the training data any more
than the plus operator does. I agree with the sentiment that even putting it in writing gives more weight to the position than it should, bordering on absurdity.

I suppose this is like the ELIZA phenomena on steroids, is the only thing I can think of for why such notions are being entertained.

However, to be generous, lets do some vigorous hand waving and say we could find a way to have an embodied learning agent gather sublinguistic perceptual data in an online reinforcement learning process, and furthermore that the (by definition) non-quantifiable subjective experience data could somehow be extracted, made into a training set, and fit to a nicely parametric loss function.

The idea then is that could find some architecture that would allow you to fit a model to the data.

And voila, machine consciousness, right? A perfect model for sentience.

Except for the fact that you would need to ignore that in the RL model gathering the data and the NN distilled from it, even with all of our vigorous hand waving, you are once again developing function approximators that have no subjective internal experience distinct from the training data.

Let's take it one step further. The absolute simplest form of learning comes in the form of habituation and sensitization to stimuli. Even microbes have the ability to do this.

LLMs and other static networks do not. You can attempt to attack this point by fiatting online reinforcement learning or dismissing it as unnecessary, but I should again point out that you would be attacking or dismissing the bare minimum requirement for learning, let alone a higher order subjective internal experience.

So then the argument, proceeding from false premises, would claim that the compressed experience in the NN could contain mechanical equivalents of higher order internal subjective experiences.

So even with all the might vigorous hand waving we have allowed, you have at best found a way to convert internal subjective processes to external mechanical processes fit to a dataset.

The argument would then follow, well, what's the difference? And I could point back to the microbe, but if the argument hasn't connected by this point, we will be chasing our tails forever.

A good book on the topic that examines this in much greater depth is "The Self Assembling Brain".

https://a.co/d/1FwYxaJ

That being said, I am hella jealous of the VC money that the grifters will get for advancing the other side of this argument.

For enough money I'd probably change my tune too. I can't by a loaf of bread with a good argument lol
Funny though, we all implicitly buy into "QUIC is the new http/2" or whatever because fast = good without really understanding the details.

It's like buying the new 5G cell phone because it is X times faster than 4G even though 1) My 4G phone never actually ran at the full 4G speed and 2) The problem with any connection is almost never due to the line speed of my internet connection but a misbehaving DNS server/target website/connection Mux at my broadband provider. "But it's 5G"

Same thing cracks me up when people advertise "fibre broadband" for internet by showing people watching the TV like the wind is blowing in their hair, because that's how it works (not!). I used to stream on my 8Mb connection so 300Mb might be good for some things but I doubt I would notice much difference.
But the daemon doesn't need to know them all that precisely.
What is FMCW Radar and why is it useful? [video]
> Today, [Douglas] Trumbull is a highly regarded special effects supervisor

Love this article and its maniacal detail orientation, but man what an understatement; the late Doug Trumbull is highly regarded, in the SFX/VFX context in much the same way as Einstein was a highly regarded physicist.
Is an 8bit camera an off-the-shelf part? Or do you just mean data streaming in and out in general?
If I understand correctly, we experience time at nearly the speed of light. What I mean by that is that any particle’s 4 dimensional velocity vector has the magnitude of c which means that if it is mostly at rest in space then time has to be the major contributing factor but the magnitude of the vector. On the other hand something like a photon experiences to time at all as it moves through the 3 space dimensions at a total of c.
He is mentioned in the article but they left off Silent Running (1972) as one of his credits. Perhaps they think it is lesser known?

Also mentioned, Brian Johnson — but they leave off that he was The Special Effects Guy behind the TV series Space 1999.

Brian's comment in the article about "blimping" the projectors to cut down the noise is an interesting throw-back to when they would wrap a camera or projector in some kind of throw-together enclosure to try to block the noise it made. I believe in addition to using padding to dampen the sound, they sometimes used thin lead sheets to build the enclosure with as well.

How you vent a blimped projector that is probably running a 1000 Watt bulb to keep it from overheating and melting the film is something of a wonder.
I hope they'll comeback soon. They are just major part of the internet.
People visiting a foreign country can still expect to have to interact with local not speaking their language.
I guess OP means you don't need to buy above or sell below its value when "buying" or "selling" a metric shitton of small coins (like you would for gold for instance).

15 kilograms sounds excessive though, I bet the bank clerks hate that trick ;)
What's the catch? Who is paying for storage and maintenance?
1. local copy of the file on the sender computer

2. local copy in the send item once sent

3. a copy on the sender email server

4. a copy on the receiver email server

5. a copy on the inbox of the receiver

6. add one if the file is saved as a local copy on the sender computer

And this does not take into consideration backups (like local backups and email server backups). Also, the number increases obviously by the number of recipients (points 4, 5 and 6).

(edited for layout)
I'm a little confused. GP was simply pointing something out as maybe a good aspect of this kind of file transfer flow. It doesn't matter what "people think of environmentalism" in this case (and so many other cases). Environmentalism != the environment. Nobody was chastising you for having too big an email attachment.

In general I dont get this line where people think this stuff is all just a huge PR (as press relations) issue. It doesnt matter what you or I think. We are kinda way past that. There is no cultural battle to win, and even if there was, it really wouldn't matter!
It seems like the site got the HN hug-of-death.
Mirror: https://web.archive.org/web/20221130150047/http://brokestrea...

I have skimmed the TeX literate PDF (I did a number of times in the past too). Frankly isn’t it just like normal code with verbose comments? I have seen lots of code like that and it is not referred to as literate. The only difference is that this is a PDF, which makes it less practical and it is still not particularly readable as a book.

It might have great book-like typography but not the "narrative" structure that helps you properly understand how it works without getting bogged down in details first. There's no coherent outline, no chapters or sections for major systems or design decisions, no overarching overviews, no relating different parts and giving context. There's also no story of how it was built or a log of his thoughts throughout problem-solving process, that would have been another good angle. Instead it's just the code from top to bottom with embedded very local commentary. The code itself is actually rather hard to parse visually by modern typographic standards.

The issue is that probably I am misinterpreting what Knuth intended. The Literate Programming concept was a product of its time, and it has evolved into more practical modern documentation standards that are not so tightly linked to the code and don't exhaustively cover every line. The only problematic thing about it might just be the grandiose name Literate Programming, without that it's mainly good common-sense advice for quality documentation, but not necessarily a practical programming paradigm like the name implies.
> This overcomplicates things...

You're misinterpreting the problem described, and proposing a solution for a different problem.
The US Nickle (5 Cents) ways 5 grams. I personally think that wad done on purpose as a tentative step to move to the metric system.
I use ToffeeShare. It also uses WebRTC for p2p transfer. But it fallbacks to a central server if p2p can't be established (just like a TURN server)
All well said, and I agree on many of your final points! But you beautifully highlighted my issue at the top:

'Reasoning' is a specific type of thought process

If so, what exactly is it? I 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.

I personally have lots of thoughts on the topic and look to Kant and Hegel for their definitions of reason as the final faculty of human cognition (after sensibility, understanding, and judgement), and I even think there’s good reason (heh) to think that LLMs are not a great tool for that on their own. But my point is that none of the LLM critics have a definition anywhere close to that level of specificity.

Usually, “reason” is used to mean “good cognition”, so “LLMs can’t reason” is just a variety of cope/setting up new goalposts. We all know LLMs aren’t flawless or infinite in their capabilities, but I just don’t find this kind of critique specific enough to have any sort of scientific validity. IMHO
You should be just as mystified about the 4€ component.
NASA's Artemis Accords are laying the ground for global space cooperation
I switched to Linux from Windows and it was quite the burden for a while. Steep learning curve, a lot of time needed. I think for mass adoption it will need to coalesce around one distro and functionality. Iow, it's got to get really easy. Apple level "just works" before there is mass adoption.
It's a Long Now Foundation concept [0]. The idea is to encourage people to think on a more civilizational time scale, and avoid another 'millenium bug' problem in ~7095 years.

0 - https://longnow.org/about/
As someone who has worked in this space (approximate compute) on both GPUs and in silicon in my research, the power consumption claims are completely bogus, as are the accuracy claims:

> In this section, we show that L-Mul is more precise than fp8 e4m3 multiplications

> To be concise, we do not consider the rounding to nearest even mode in both error analysis and complexity estimation for both Mul and L-Mul

These two statements together are non-sensical. Sure, if you analyze accuracy while ignoring the part of the algorithm that gives you accuracy in the baseline you can derive whatever cherry-picked result you want.

The multiplication of two floating point values if you round to nearest even will be the correctly rounded result of multiplying the original values at infinite precision, this is how floating point rounding usually works and what IEEE 754 mandates for fundamental operations if you choose to follow those guidelines (e.g., multiplication here). But not rounding to nearest even will result in a lot more quantization noise, and biased noise at that too.

> applying the L-Mul operation in tensor processing hardware can potentially reduce 95% energy cost by elementwise floating point tensor multiplications and 80% energy cost of dot products

A good chunk of the energy cost is simply moving data between memories (especially external DRAM/HBM/whatever) and along wires, buffering values in SRAMs and flip-flops and the like. Combinational logic cost is usually not a big deal. While having a ton of fixed-function matrix multipliers does raise the cost of combinational logic quite a bit, at most what they have will probably cut the power of an overall accelerator by 10-20% or so.

> In this section, we demonstrate that L-Mul can replace tensor multiplications in the attention mechanism without any loss of performance, whereas using fp8 multiplications for the same purpose degrades inference accuracy

I may have missed it in the paper, but they have provided no details on (re)scaling and/or using higher precision accumulation for intermediate results as one would experience on an H100 for instance. Without this information, I don't trust these evaluation results either.
I had something similar happen to be on the tube in london. My ticket got demagnetised (combined intercity rail with travel card are/were still magnetic stripe tickets) and there were not staff at the station so I could not get the barrier open to leave.
I think you've misremembered a couple of them (or coins have changed since you learned those facts).

In this link is a table of the current weight of UK coins, including the ratio between each coin and the coin below it: https://chatgpt.com/share/67151004-3fd0-800c-b534-b5933a7305...

Confirmed with sources like https://thecoinexpert.co.uk/blog/what-do-uk-coins-weigh/ and https://www.royalmint.com/discover/uk-coins/coin-design-and-...

2p does weigh double 1p

10p does weigh double 5p

But 50p weighs 1.6x 20p

and £2 weighs 1.37x £1
Mind you, this is because Verne loathed the British Empire, and his heroes using private means to challenge its authority is meant as a rebuke to his own government for not challenging Britain enough.
> Instead of maybe retiring at some future date, working fewer hours now and having time and energy to spend on friends and family is the option that Independently Poorness offers today.

This, and saving enough money so that you are not "trapped" by your main job are some more realistic (an maybe healthier) goals than FIRE.
Should this be linked to the actual article rather than a reddit thread? Or is there something in particular in the reddit thread that's important?
Autopilot, FSD, etc.. are all legally classified as ADAS, so it’s different from e.g. your car not responding to controls.

The liability lies with the driver, and all Tesla needs to prove is that input from the driver will override any decision made by the ADAS.
I’m in the Matt Damon camp. Always pronounced it that way, never really gave it much thought. Just seems “right” to me.
Great to see DVC being discussed here! As a tool, it’s done a lot to simplify version control for data and models, and it’s been a game-changer for
many in the MLOps space.

Specifically, it's a genius way to store large files in git repos directly on any object storage without custom application servers like git-lfs or rewriting git from scratch...

At DagsHub [0], we've integrated directly with DVC for a looong time, so teams can use it with added features like visualizing and labeling datasets managing and models, running experiments collaboratively, and tracking everything (code, data, models, etc.) all in one place.

Just wanted to share that for those already using or considering DVC—there are some options to use it as a building block in a more end-to-end toolchain.

[0] https://dagshub.com
BTW, there is a YouTube user (1) that has created "video loops" that look like these displays from the film that you could use as a screensaver or what-have-you. Very cool.

1) https://www.youtube.com/@TheHALProject
The social media alternatively replaced the blogs. I don't even read the blogs nowadays.
For information, the current research shows that the intensity of the exercise is much less important than the duration. So if you did so little exercise that you get muscle atrophy, a weighted vest isn't going to do much for you.
Essentially, you reason that

1. If ChatGPT is turing complete, it can execute this BASIC program

2. It can execute this BASIC program

3. Therefore, it is turing complete

If you don't see the flaw in your reasoning, ask ChatGPT to explain "affirming the consequent" to you.
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41872962
Expose your idea with final product. Until then never do such.
What about o1? I think the world is sleeping on o1. Recently I misread a leetcode/neetcode problem (so I was curious that my version of the problem with an extra constraint could be solved in a different way). And 4o hallucinated incorrectly and double downed when asked follow up questions - but o1 solved it the first time what seemed like easily. It really is a major step forward.
I Built a Free Tool to Shorten URLs and Track Analytics – A Bitly Alternative
Sure you are a little bit responsible if your hiring manager hires a dud, but not as much. Similarly your hiring manager is not as responsible as the dud, accountability loses power in each chain.

You can fire your hiring manager and pick another one if he fails too often for example
I take it you disagree with the conclusions from TFA then?

> Sometimes a natural language such as English is a good choice, sometimes you need the language of mathematical equations, or chemical equations, or musical notation, and sometimes a programming language is best. Written language is an amazing invention that has enabled human culture to build over the centuries (and also enabled LLMs to work). But human ingenuity has divised [sic] other notations that are more specialized but very effective in limited domains.
Regarding your 3rd point, this is the same behavior we see when people say they're leaving the country if X candidate wins an election. They never leave, because change is hard and they're addicted to the attention they get when they complain.
12 hours on computer
An infinite speed implies instantaneous effect. So it wouldn't matter how you were moving. If two people launched something that travelled with infinite speed, one on the train travelling at 100mph, and one on the ground beside it, it would take zero time for both of them to reach their destination.

At least, that's what I surmise. I'm not a physicist.
>Imagine your photorealistic inversion AI putting a mole or a wrinkle in the face of somebody without any foundation in the actual hash. Just because it fits better to the trained data.

Seeing as AI was trained on 99999999999999 images of 9999 people, if the image in question is of one of those people, it's well conceivable that the AI will implicitly ID the person and attach their corresponding mole. Or in other words, it's possible a good portion of PhotoDNA's database is in the AI training set, so in principle there are cases where the AI does know.
Is that really true ? Queuing systems seem like a gross simplification of the instinct.

It seems more like the "survival of the fittest" instinct in American/Western societies has evolved from overt competition to more sophisticated and hidden forms within financial and economic systems (blackmail too recently).

I guess the masses don't engage in it because the elites exert extraordinary amounts of power/culture. See Elon Musk, See the House of lords, etc. The negative pressure they create is to simply keep their power.
Apologies for the harsh portions. After re-visiting, I feel I was a bit too harsh. As is probably apparent, you touched a nerve.
I see I'm being downvoted which is ok but to the down voters, I genuinely wonder why ?
For an observer, maybe
I'd honestly just use some ziplock bags and call it a day.
Your comment is complicated in and of itself, even without the enormous historical, legal-theoretic and political context surrounding that law and its enactment.
Proud to be one of those that ditched "the hellsite", and it remains ditched. One of the best moves I've ever made.
Buttercup[0] looks promising.

[0]: https://buttercup.pw/
This is the sort of question I think is useful to explore with ChatGPT et al, and of course you can ask for links.

In the meantime, Stanford and IEP are always good for this sort of thing (including as a background for conversing with the former):

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time/

https://iep.utm.edu/time/
The timeout must be much larger than the time required to do the work. The point is that distributed locks without a release mechanism are in practical terms very problematic.

Btw, things to note in random order:

1. Check my comment under this blog post. The author had missed a fundamental point in how the algorithm works. Then he based the refusal of the algorithm on the remaining weaker points.

2. It is not true that you can't wait an approximately correct amount of time, with modern computers an APIs. GC pauses are bound and monotonic clocks work. These are acceptable assumptions.

3. To critique the auto release mechanism in-se, because you don't want to expose yourself to the fact that there is a potential race, is one thing. To critique the algorithm in front of its goals and its system model is another thing.

4. Over the years Redlock was used in a huge amount of use cases with success, because if you pick a timeout which is much larger than: A) the time to complete the task. B) the random pauses you can have in normal operating systems. Race conditions are very hard to trigger, and the other failures in the article were, AFAIK, never been observed. Of course if you have a super small timeout to auto release the lock, and the task may easily take this amount of time, you just committed a deisgn error, but that's not about Redlock.
KeePassXC with Nextcloud client for Android is a perfect match for me. Using it for years with zero problems.
Read the comments about Guix, it's all about avoiding blobs in every process.

Even engines from Scummvm had to be cut out because the supported games didn't had a way to recompile those from source (Broken Sword, Drascula)...

And I think it's fair. If Broken Sword or Drascula were implemented with libre bytecode, I would be totally ok on redistributing the game data as freeware. But it's not the case. You are not redistributing game data with the bass, queen1, and the rest of packages under Trisquel, Debian or Ubuntu, but executables for a virtual a machine plus the game data.

It's the same as running a freeware Minecraft libre and free Java VM (OpenJDK).
"Has anyone ever written something that detects changes to a method/function, and then when you save your file it pops up asking if related docs need updating?"

I've got a partial solution to that: I have automated tests that introspect my code for things that need documentation and then fail if those items aren't at least mentioned in the docs. Works really well.

I wrote about that here: https://simonwillison.net/2018/Jul/28/documentation-unit-tes...
If you want to stay with the convenience of cloud without going back to sync conflicts due to moving a file around, Proton Pass is GPLv3 although I don't personally know what the self hosting story is like if they were to rug pull

https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClients/tree/proton-pass%40...

https://github.com/protonpass/android-pass/blob/1.26.1/LICEN...

https://github.com/protonpass/ios-pass/blob/1.12.3/LICENSE
Apple's macOS Sequoia lets you snap windows into position
Here's a great video explaining how, due to relativity, FTL travel can cause grandfather paradoxes: https://youtu.be/an0M-wcHw5A?si=RYFGOmQOlaC2t0bM

Edit: in short, not all reference frames can agree on the order of events, and FTL events propogate "backwards" between some reference frames.
Does Vaultwarden support passkeys?