skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your best example is something that doesn't even do the things that GPT-4 does, isn't available to use, and has seemingly only produced a few clips (some of which were edited).

If it were one of many, I think you would name something better.
Taking the risk of receiving the same fate as Protomolecule, but didn’t understand why he’s flagged

> Russia did so too

Didn’t Russia was indeed invited while others partygoer wasn’t? I’m more into <div> than politics but I do listen western news and it’s also my understanding of the events, even if bitter (INHM)

> On 30 September 2015, Russia launched a military intervention in Syria after a request by the government of Bashar al-Assad for military support in its fight against the Syrian opposition and Islamic State (IS) in the Syrian civil war.

I know it’s Wikipedia 0. The two sources Al Jazeera 1 and Los Angeles Times 2 seems to confirm it.

0 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_intervention_in_the_...

1 http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/russian-carries-air-st...

2 https://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-kremlin-oks-troop...
Toshiba fumbled the initial opportunity with NAND memory but went on to became a major player. The modern Kioxia is one of the largest makers in the world and a direct spin-off of Toshiba’s memory division.

They were motivated to claim that Masuoka was not the inventor of NAND because they would have owed him millions in inventors rights on the patents. Masuoka eventually sued and settled out of court.

Line wasn’t particularly innovative. It’s basically a WhatsApp clone. It was mostly developed in Japan, by a team of mostly Japanese engineers, working at the subsidiary of a Korean company. It succeeded because of good timing and execution, not because it was innovative.

The Mitsubishi Jet project had many problems. It was massively overtime and budget. Its design didn’t match the needs of foreign carriers. They didn’t have the right team in place to navigate the certification process. Seriously read the Japanese wiki page on it. It’s a good summary of where the project went wrong.

I don’t see how any of this supports the conclusion that Japanese people are “too capable for their own good” and “so capable they are incapable”, or “incapable of recognising good tools”.

There’s plenty of counter examples where Japanese companies have been innovative and pivoted. Look at Kodak vs Fuji Film.

Kodak invented much of the underlying technology for digital cameras but failed to capitalise. Instead their business was disrupted by Japanese digital camera makers, eventually driving Kodak to bankruptcy. Meanwhile Fuji Film saw the writing on the wall and successfully pivoted.
Imagine a single file full of complicated logic, where messing with one if statement might cause serious bugs. Here an AI will likely struggle, whereas a human could spend a couple of hours trying to work out the connections.

But if you have a code base with predictable software architectural patterns, the AI will likely recognise and help with all the boilerplate.

Of course there is a lot of middle ground between bad and good.
Copyright infringement is absolutely not theft.

Don't conflate the two.
Its been awhile since I've seen it but Spinal Tap was making fun of a lot of bands like that, its part of their fictional band's backstory. They start out much like the Stones with some simple catchy early 60's tunes, turn into a hippie band, then quickly transform into metal in order to follow the money.
What about user-mode Linux containers?
The benefit is that it's much much brighter. Human eyes adjust to any amount of light so they'll "look" similar, but unconsciously it makes you happier.
for the cynical folks, Codeium has been publishing blogposts with me on AI product thinking and its been remarkable to watch as someone with no vested interest:

https://latent.space/p/enterprise

yes, they started with "another copilot", and had one of the best years in code for enterprise ai this year.

here they are starting with "another cursor".

see the pattern?
Yes*, mostly

It can do any single expression, and the results are better than lldb, but it can’t do multiple statements and not everything in Rust can be one expression; you can’t use {} here
HTML has a fieldset that looks like that. But too many CSS frameworks wreck it. I actually like the look.

To prove it to yourself, place the following in a empty HTML file and see how it renders.

<fieldset>
<legend>Frame1</legend>
<input type="radio" id="html" name="fav_language" value="HTML">
<label for="html">HTML</label><br>
<input type="radio" id="VB6" name="fav_language" value="Visual Basic 6">
<label for="css">CSS</label><br>
<input type="radio" id="javascript" name="fav_language" value="JavaScript">
<label for="javascript">JavaScript</label>
</fieldset>
It's a word, like many, with a double life.

It's well known in a narrow field as an atomic unit of {environmental | cultural} information. - Not so popular now but it had some serious debate back in the day when Dawson published The Selfish Gene through the following decades.

Outside of the academic context it was picked up in narrow groups as mass forums such as Reddit grew in size and exchanging memes became a thing.

IMHO it's not widely known, middling at best, but not exclusive to one subgroup or libertarians.
Ok but that outlines a miserable user experience.
That is my point, the system is broken and political.
What we talk about when we talk about taste
Me too! I have VB3 opened right now in Windows 3.1 on qemu. I have not done anything serious with it in a long time though.
Awareness is exhibited in behavior. It's exactly due to the behavior be observe from LLMs that we don't ascribe them awareness. I agree that it's difficult to define, and it's also not binary, but it's behavior we'd like AI to have and which LLMs are quite lacking.
Inside The Trenches: Why Security Engineers Are Fighting an Uphill Battle
It's amoral (sic) to improve the accuracy of a journalistic publication you've purchased? I'm struggling to find a more charitable way to interpret your statement.

Or is just the usage of the word "duped"? Some people are more interested in sensational rhetoric than more even-keeled reporting. It's unfortunate that they're currently mostly taken advantage of by hucksters. I think the creation of publications genuinely interested in facts but that use more appealing rhetoric is important to preserving journalism as an institution.
Learning BASIC on a Commodore 64 as a teenager was a transformative experience. It allowed me to revive the excitement of playing Lego as a kid, but in a scalable way.

Thank you, Dr. Kurtz.
I think there’s a long way to go also. I think people expected that AI would eventually be like a “point and shoot” where you would tell it to go do some complicated task, or sillier yet, take over someone’s entire job.

More realistically it’s like a really great sidekick for doing very specific mundane but otherwise non deterministic tasks.

I think we’ll start to see AI permeate into nearly every back office job out there, but as a series of tools that help the human work faster. Not as one big brain that replaces the human.
> It keeps complaining that GitHub is spelled like Github, when it isn't

I feel like this is unfair. That's the only thing it got wrong? But we want it to pass all of our evals, even ones the perhaps a dictionary would be better at solving? Or even an LLM augmented with a dictionary.
I've had a play around with Integry and really love the premise
(I do actually plan to use it properly - just waiting for the right time).

I do wish the docs were a bit better though - we've found it quite hard to decipher exactly how to make it work. Lots of trial and error.

Great product though!!
M4 MacBook Pro Uses Quantum Dot Display Technology
"Here I Gather All the Friends" Machiavelli and Emergence of the Private Study
One time I used Power BI/Power query language to generate an Ed script that contained all versions of all XML documents in a database and turn them into a Git repo.

I still like writing scripts that generate Git repos but I don't use Ed much.
The hardest part of this is fighting Goodhart's law. You have to really be the skeptic that you say you are, not just declare yourself a skeptic and take the day off. You have to care about the truth of your positions, not how good it feels to hold them. Not how rational you feel for being such a skeptic.

Which is expensive. It's inefficient at producing confidence from information, and efficiency is fitness. Why do the work when you could just...not? But feel as sure as if you had?

There's also rarely a reward for caring. Few people choose truth over tribe. If all you get for challenging a core belief among your group is punishment, less opportunity and more cold shoulders, without even changing their minds, why even try?

You'd have to care about the truth to an irrational degree.

We've known a bunch of ways to be more rational for thousands of years, but who wants to use them? It's just extra work. The methods in the article are simple and effective—but they're mostly good for leaving you upset, a lot, because nobody cares and they want you to stop.
Sure. It’s got breakpoints, and conditional breakpoints, using the same engine as IntelliJ. It’s got evaluate, it’s got expression and count conditionals, it’s got rewind. It has the standard locals view.

Rust support has improved in 2024 pretty strongly (before this year it just shelled out to lldb); the expr parser and more importantly the variable viewer are greatly improved since January.
It seemingly built the modern world.

Ineffective seems harsh.
But it's only one value in the entire system. There is only one nil; there is no other false but nil. And there is no other empty list but nil.

An empty array or string are not false. Zero is not false.

In Lisp dialects with nil, we don't have endless discussions about how to test for false, or for empty, as the case may be.
Like several others here, my first programming language was BASIC. For this we owe Kurtz a debt of gratitude.

I know Dijkstra is famous for having said that we're mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration, but you know, I kinda think we didn't turn out half bad.
I can't tell if you're deliberately ignoring the point: people's public hobby projects may not be _about_ their area of expertise. They may be side projects specifically because they are outside of their main area. It isn't about ability to read code. It's about the difference between what you know well enough to build a career in (and produce non-public work) and what's interesting enough that you'll build it and give it away for fun. They may have very little to do with one another, even if both are expressed in code.
No we don't. Humans were capable of mathematics and analytical tasks long before the establishment of modern twelve year education. We don't require "installing" a program to do basic mathematics, as we would never have figured out basic agriculture or developed civilization or seafaring if that were the case. I mean, Eratosthenes worked out the circumference of the Earth to a reasonable degree of accuracy in the third century BC. Even primitive hunter gather societies had concepts of counting, grouping and sequence that are beyond LLMs.

If humans were as bad as LLMs at basic math and logic, we would consider them developmentally challenged. Yet this constant insistence that humans are categorically worse than, or at best no better than, LLMs persists. It's a weird, almost religious belief in the superiority of the machine even in spite of obvious evidence to the contrary.
I did see two objectionable articles. One about a 'car for woman that crashes' and one about the TGBL+ members of the Biden administration. This out of 10 or 20
Have a short introduction session before the live translation where each speaker says a couple of words like “hi, I am John”
These then can be used to pick up on the current speaker.
Since this 'Department' is a made-up thing with no official standing, who is paying the salaries for them?

First thing to cut: dubious quasi-government 'departments' with dark-money funding?
Show HN: I made Locket meets Pocket (minimal iPhone widget)
At least we can dream, ehh?
That seems less to do with scrum and more to do with salaried work culture where you're expected to attend meetings.
> the “behavior” breaks down in ways that would be surprising from a human who’s actually paying as much attention as they’d need to be to have been interacting the way they had been until things went wrong.

That's an interesting angle. Though of course we're not surprised by human behavior because that's where our expectations of understanding come from. If we were used to dealing with perfectly-correctly-understanding super-intelligences, then normal humans would look like we don't understand much and our deliberate thinking might be no more accurate than the super-intelligence's absent-minded automatic responses. Thus we would conclude that humans are never really thinking or understanding anything.

I agree that default LLM output makes them look like they're thinking like a human more than they really are. I think mistakes are shocking more because our expectation of someone who talks confidently is that they're not constantly revealing themselves to be an obvious liar. But if you take away the social cues and just look at the factual claims they provide, they're not obviously not-understanding vs humans are-understanding.
It is still pretty basic stuff. You shouldn't need a bunch of mouse studies to tell you to rest after a heart attack. The article is literally about the body's natural drive to rest and sleep so that it can heal after major injury.
Any discount codes for hackers :D
> Go back a few decades and you'd see articles like this about CPU manufacturers struggling to improve processor speeds and questioning if Moore's Law was dead. Obviously those concerns were way overblown.

Am I missing something? I thought general consensus was that Moore's Law in fact did die:

https://cap.csail.mit.edu/death-moores-law-what-it-means-and...

The fact that we've still found ways to speed up computations doesn't obviate that.

We've mostly done that by parallelizing and applying different algorithms. IIUC that's precisely why graphics cards are so good for LLM training - they have highly-parallel architectures well-suited to the problem space.

All that seems to me like an argument that LLMs will hit a point of diminishing returns, and maybe the article gives some evidence we're starting to get there.
Matrix Client Tutorial
Being aware and not admitting are two different things, though. When you confront an LLM with a limitation, it will generally admit having it. That doesn't mean that it exhibits any awareness of having the limitation in contexts where the limitation is glaringly relevant, without first having confronted it with it. This is in itself a limitation of LLMs: In contexts where it should be highly obvious, they don't take their limitations into account without specific prompting.
Right, hence my parenthetical. If we can do it at all, we should keep going. If we can't, then there's no good outcome available and we only get to choose between demographic collapse or biosphere collapse.
This is the smartest intentioned educational device I've found.

https://microbit.org/

It's rough around the edges, but what it does well is offer a wide array of sensor inputs, and very simple text output. And wraps it in a simple API.

You can compute temperature, direction, orientation, do GPIO, network via Bluetooth or direct radio, and drive it with a simple two button and marquee text UI.
For "fairness"
Either fidgeting or it just being too sensitive. I love weird right-brained UX but the problem is that I drum with my fingers all the time (the two aren't unrelated).=
There’s another option here though. Human supervised tasks.

There’s a whole classification of tasks where a human can look at a body of work and determine whether it’s correct or not in far less time than it would take for them to produce the work directly.

As a random example, having LLMs write unit tests.
You're forced make all of your code async all the way down to lowest crypto calls, even if you handle the async way higher in abstraction layers.
Indeed. And we should absolute pick that if we are presented with those two options.
I suspect we're very different.

I'm younger, but not new to programming (started in the early 2000s.) Mentality-wise, I like working on software because I like solving problems, but I only really do a day job to make a living, not to scratch an itch, so I continue to work on software outside of work hours. I basically don't care what happens once my software reaches the Internet. I publish some open source software, but not as a portfolio; just for the sake of anyone who might find it useful. I don't really advertise my projects, certainly don't go out of my way to do so.

I basically have GitHub for roughly two reasons:

- I use a wide variety of open source software. I like to fix my own problems and report issues. Some projects require GitHub for this.

- May as well take advantage of the free storage and compute, since everyone else is.

Honestly, my GitHub is probably a pretty bad portfolio. It is not a curation of my best works, and I disabled as much of the "social" features as possible. It's just code that I write, which people may take or leave.

Earlier in my career maybe I cared more, but I honestly think it's because I thought you were supposed to care.

I have worked with some stellar programmers from many different places, probably more than I really deserved to. I don't know for sure if any of them didn't have GitHub accounts, but some of them definitely did have GitHub accounts, barren as they may have been.
Even this can be done without a banner, as long as these analytics do not contain any way to link them to individuals/specific users

It's admittedly sound advice to create a banner for such a usecase however, as sanitizing all user data from these events is hard to guarantee, and you'd have to do just that to keep it legal
I ride in self driving cares basically once a week in SF (Waymo). It's always felt safer then a Uber and makes ways less risky maneuvers.
What do you mean LLMs can't count to 10,000 for known reasons?

Separately, if you are able to show OpenAI is serving pre canned responses in some instances, instead of running inference, you will get a ton of attention if you write it up.

I'm not saying this in an aggro tone, it's a genuinely interesting subject to me because I wrote off LLMs at first because I thought this was going on.* Then I spent the last couple years laughing at myself for thinking that they would do that. Would be some mix of fascinated and horrified to see it come full circle.

* I can't remember, what, exactly, it was far back as 2018. But someone argued that OpenAI was patching in individual answers because scaling was dead and they had no answers, way way before ChatGPT.
Grubhub sold for $650M. Four years ago it was worth $7.3B
Any idea how Codeium is able to provide users with unlimited access to Sonnet and 4o for only $10 per month? I can easily blow through $10 in API credits from either of them. Is that price going to be sustainable?
Hey, I live in London and would love to chat / tinker with this if you're open to it =)...

I built a full econsim for fun a while back with working markets based on order books and would absolutely love to chat to you if you're interested?
I’m the one who will fight you including with peer reviewed papers indicating that it is in fact due to tokenization. I’m too tired but will edit this for later, so take this as my bookmark to remind me to respond.
Haven't read the article, don't need to read the article: this is so, SO, so painfully obvious! If someone needs this spelled out for them they shouldn't be making technical decisions of any kind. Sad that this needs to be said.
We should put a model in an actual body and let it in the world to build from experiences. Inference is costly though, so the robot would interact during a period and update it's model during another period, flushing the context window (short term memory) into its training set (long term memory).
Thanks for letting me know! I'd love it if you could tell me which parts we could improve. Do you have a recommendation?
I agree that existing benchmarks are no longer useful now that there's basically nothing left in them that seems to stump LLMs.

But when I hear that models are failing to meet expectations, I imagine what they're saying is that the researchers had some sort of eval in mind with room to grow and a target, and that the model in question failed to hit the target they had in mind.

Honestly, problem with sentiments like these is on Twitter is that you can't tell if they're being sincere or just making a snarky, useless remark. Probably a mix of both.
I’ll take my chances. 99%of the people I want to talk to either email/text me first or are already in my contacts list (which I’m not really all that picky about). I’ll accept that failure rate.
Did you write more about it somewhere ?
You obviously didn't grow up in the 80s or 90s.
basic gang stand up
> There is SO MUCH we haven't figured out about how to use them yet.

I mean, it's pretty clear to me they're a potentially great human-machine interface, but trying to make LLMs - in their current fundamental form - a reliable computational tool.. well, at best it's an expensive hack, but it's just not the right tool for the job.

I expect the next leap forward will require some orthogonal discovery and lead to a different kind of tool. But perhaps we'll continue to use LLMs as we knownthem now for what they're good at - language.
> Dude tried a career in journalism.

> Had a crazy theory that a school shooting was fake.

This is absolutely not what happened. Jones is a grifter, and was never a journalist. He had no journalistic aspirations, and peddled exclusively in inane conspiracy theories either crafted personally or adopted selectively to inspire a constant state of fear and paranoia in a particular type of vulnerable person while aggressively channeling their anxieties into purchases of his prepper gear and phony health supplement business. This is a rare case of such a fraudster managing to accrue enough ire and attention that legal charges stuck and sunk him for the harm caused by one of his many careless lies. There are many like him who continue on with much the same strategy, some of whom have gained enough power and influence through their actions that they are now effectively untouchable by the legal system.
They are saying that your individual salary would be lower without the additional talent.
I don't think a rational calculus can be applied to voting in a US Presidential election, because it's irrational to expect that your vote could change the outcome of the election. That's never happened, not even in Florida in 2000. You have a better chance of winning the lottery, as evidenced by the fact that people do win the lottery. Voting tends to be more of a symbolic or "ethical" act than an rational act, though one vote has occasionally made a difference in much smaller, local races.

Frankly, voting "strategically" in a US Presidential election makes about as much sense as choosing lottery numbers strategically.

Rhetorical question: if the voters are rational, then how do we always end up with liars, crooks, and incompetents, a choice between the lesser of evils? When was the last time a President, or a Presidential candidate, has been among the best of us? No, elections are exercises in mass irrationality, glorified beauty pageants.
Phototherapy is so scary looking, but the NICU nurses made it clear to my wife and I that everything was going to be fine. That said, seeing your newborn in that state after you just welcomed them to the world is a real brain blast of trauma. I still remember the feeling as you described: hollow dread and fear.