skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm missing something. Shouldn't any llm that's 'natively multimodal' somehow include embeddings which are multi-modal? for ex here's googles blogpost on Gemini

Until now, the standard approach to creating multimodal models involved
training separate components for different modalities and then stitching them
together to roughly mimic some of this functionality. These models can
sometimes be good at performing certain tasks, like describing images, but
struggle with more conceptual and complex reasoning.

We designed Gemini to be natively multimodal, pre-trained from the start on
different modalities. Then we fine-tuned it with additional multimodal data to
further refine its effectiveness. This helps Gemini seamlessly understand and
reason about all kinds of inputs from the ground up, far better than existing
multimodal models — and its capabilities are state of the art in nearly every
domain.
All good stuff, I’d add though that for many numerical routines you end up testing on simple well known systems that have well defined analytic answers.

So for e.g. if you’re writing solvers for ODE systems, then you tend to test it on things like simple harmonic oscillators.

If you’re very lucky, some algorithms have bounded errors. For e.g. the fast multipole method for evaluating long range forces does, so you can check this for very simple systems.
I presume you meant to say "Accurate", but it made me think of a off-brand Picard that says "Actuate" instead of "Engage".
To be fair, he is a mathematical consultant who uses computer tools, not a specialist in computer tools.
The games are naturally small - there is after all, limited hardware on offer - and people are not expecting AAA studio quality graphics and audio, because they are impossible on the platform.

Let's suppose then that you are living somewhere where you can live comfortably off a couple of thousand dollars a month. There are many, many parts of the World like this. Many you can live quite well on just a few hundred dollars a month.

Now let's suppose you can build a game in 2 months, and it will sell over its lifetime - say, 5 years - a thousand copies. And each copy nets you $2. It doesn't take a genius to work out that this not a bad lifestyle business investment of time and effort.

I think these guys are going to do OK, depending on where in the World they are. Most people in the US and Europe are spending an order of magnitude just to survive than the rest of the World, and think the hot stuff is in the software that takes years to build with multiple rounds of VC funding - there are alternatives.
I mean, huge bots are doing just that.

Your own non-approved bot might get rate-limited hard though.
CPython's Garbage Collector and Its Impact on Application Performance
I mostly loved mine... While it lasted. I owned a 12th gen, and it ran really well. The stories about running hot, draining battery while sleeping and the lack of firmware updates are all true. I could live with that. I live in Argentina, and had to travel to SF for work. I ordered the tougher hinges in advance (the ones that came were very flimsy, but they fixed that in newer models). I changed the hinges, and it was a breeze, so they delivered there. The thing is.. the laptop never booted up again! I called support, and they instructed me several things to try bring it back to life. Nothing worked. Last message was: you're out of warranty, sorry. Which I'm ok with. But then it got me thinking about repairability. I'm by no means a hardware expert. For sure I messed up when changing the hinges. But still, the whole situation just fell awful, and the promise if repairability just stopped selling for me. I still want framework to exist. I love their mission. But I needed to work, so I ran to an apple store and bought a MBP. After 20 years of using Linux, it breaks my heart a little bit, but the hardware is unbeatable. I'm kind of hating macos tbh, but I can live with it. And who knows, Asahi might get good enough at some point...
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41649354
> I like that Bluesky’s federation model makes it harder for them to do an “open platform” bait-and-switch like Twitter did.

Why would it? They can still lock everything down and few Bluesky users will even notice. This is similar to what Twitter did, or what Google Chat did, etc. Compare this to other federation platforms where a server that locks itself down loses access to a huge chunk of the network, once the other servers reciprocate.
Eh, I find the idea of brains working with some sort of a spatial/vector storage and retrieval metaphor to be quite interesting. That we can for example build a memory palace where memories are literally spatially stored is one facet of this idea.
> At least with USB-C Apple "donated" their designs.

What do you mean? I've always thought that it was designed jointly by the same standards committee as the previous iterations. The first USB-C device I know about and have used was the Nexus 6P. This was early enough in the standard's life that no one had any USB-C cables (or had any idea that it's a thing) so I had to carry my own one at all times in case I wanted to charge my phone. Apple started putting USB-C ports into MacBooks a year or so later, iirc.
Use your imagination for just a moment.

The torrent is an example of the system I am describing, not the same system. Torrents cannot work for live streams because the entire content is not hashable yet, so already you have to rethink how it's done. I am talking about adding a p2p layer on top of the existing streaming protocol.

The current streaming model would prioritize broadcasting to high-bandwidth users first. There should be millions of those in a world-scale stream.

Even a fraction of these millions would be enough to reduce Netflix's streaming costs by an order of magnitude. But maybe Netflix isn't interested in saving billions?

With more viewers, the availability of content increases, which reduces load on the centralized servers. This is the property of the system I am talking about, so think backwards from that.

With a livestream, you want the youngest block to take priority. You would use the DHT to manage clients and to manage stale blocks for users catching up.

The youngest block would be broadcast on the p2p network and anyone who is "live" would be prioritizing access to that block.

Torrent clients as they are now handle this case, in reverse; they can prioritize blocks closer the current timestamp to created an uninterrupted stream.

The system I am talking about would likely function at any scale, which is an improvement from Netflix's system, which we know will fail -- because it did.
Self-registration is usually an anti-pattern in my experience because it introduces globals. Sometimes you can't avoid it, but if you only have a few things to register it's usually better to just list them explicitly.
Ouija-board safety. Sometimes it hallu--er, it channels the wrong spirits from the afterlife. But don't worry, the rest of the time it is definitely connecting to the correct spirits from beyond the veil.
Candy Japan got credit card fraud somewhat under control (2016)
Not liking ORM I can understand, db table <-> object impedance mismatch is real, but "reducing boilerplate is bad" is an interesting take.

Can you elaborate and give some examples of why reducing boilerplate is generally "bad"?
Did they control for weight? Because overweight and obese people are likely to have both shorter lifespan and more sedentary lifestyle.
> the weird pipe + xargs instead of just `-exec

I think that part makes sense though as it's simply the older idiom before -exec existed. (That's the reason why both find and xargs have specific flags related to /0-delimited filenames that are basically counterparts to each other)

Also, shouldn't the two be roughly equal in efficiency? To my knowledge, xargs (without -i) does the same command aggregation that -exec ... + does.

So the number of "grep" processes spawned by the two commands should be roughly the same, I think.
If it were fake, I don't think Google would issue this statement to CBS News:

"Large language models can sometimes respond with non-sensical responses, and this is an example of that. This response violated our policies and we've taken action to prevent similar outputs from occurring."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-ai-chatbot-threatening-m...
The training data in this case is feedback from users - reported responses. It's only logical that as that dataset grows and the developers have worked on it for longer, the 'toxic' answers will become more rare.

And of course, 'caution' in this case refers to avoiding bad PR, nothing else.
It is sad to see such a comment come from someone with such high karma and seniority. I hope that it is not reflective of the ethos of this community.

I feel we have way too little humanity in tech. With the advent of AI, that does not promise to improve.
You don't need to get consent, you can just use it until they terminate your account.
If you change your SSH port on your Linux machine you might be misidentified as Windows machine, because these usually does not have SSH, thus next step will go for RDP. Nothing there either.

Sure next step can be going for a port scan, but how big scan do you want to do before fail2ban or similar will lock you out?
I have been crawling hacker news to get domains. It would be great if I could download this datset.

Please, provide the link to dataset
This is the first thing everyone thinks about before donating a kidney, I think.
I think some questions to add to this list:

What if your kidney isn't compatible with that of your family member, and they'd have to rely on a stranger's donation? How would you then feel about never having donated in the past?

What if you donate your kidney to a parent, only to find that a year later your child needs your kidney?

What if you donate your kidney to a family member and they later end up ruining your life?

There are so many "what-if" scenarios possible. Ultimately I think it boils down to probabilities vs effectiveness.
Google gave this statement to CBS: "Large language models can sometimes respond with non-sensical responses, and this is an example of that. This response violated our policies and we've taken action to prevent similar outputs from occurring."

I think they would have mentioned if it were tricked.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-ai-chatbot-threatening-m...
Interesting. But if tuning parameters to their best values were easy, shouldn't the kernel just do that in the first place?
> Why would it?

Since migrating your personal data was a thing they thought about since day one, migrating to another network than the current one would be way easier than any centralized service and also easier than ActivityPub.

Seems there is one piece of the puzzle missing yet ("AppViews") in ATProto to be able to run completely independent, but seems they're currently working on getting that in place now.
A huge chunk of corporate bio R&D now goes into finding workaround reimplementations for patented publicly funded research.

Just opening public research wouldn't help us get remuneration from overseas use though unfortunately.
A laptop lets you leave your work at your desk and have entertainment on the go at the same time.
LLMs cannot explode. People need to be educated that LLMs are as trustworthy as a random page or post on the internet.
When they say viewers want it, they mean just about 90% won't notice. Most people haven't been close enough to a running helicopter to understand.

I'm having problems watching movies at all, there is so many things breaking my immersion. :-)
I mostly agree with you. The three body problem (3+) is chaotic at those timescales. But I suppose all thats needed for predicting this lensing is a two body problem if they're isolated enough, which is much more predictable
There are numerous arguments wrt life and entropy, and one of it is that life must be more-efficient-than-rock form of increasing entropy.

The blind pseudo-environmentalist notion that life other than us are built for over the top biodiversity and perfect sustainability gets boring after a while. they aren't like that, not even algae.
I'm curious how the case/when version performs. Unlike the author, I don't think that is any smellier than the list/map solution they've come up with.
You're right that eyewitness testimony can be unreliable, and that the supporting evidence - multiple independent radar traces from multiple different radar systems (ship and aircraft systems are built by different manufacturers, have different sensitivies, etc.), plus the video, plus the eyewitness testimony, plus the fact that while the raw data is not available to you to analyse the people who have analysed have sworn under oath that it all corroborates each other - may not be enough to meet your arbitrary bar, but I'm prepared to accept witness testimony which says "we don't know what that was, and perhaps we should figure that out some more", rather than your claim that because you can't independently verify it, we shouldn't figure out what it was because a guy on youtube can explain one single aspect of that evidence in a way that doesn't actually align with the entire scenario.
We now know it was more than 60m streams. I think it’s either a record or approaching one for a live stream.
I wonder if Apple will allow code downloading in the EU, now that they have to allow alternate app stores anyway.
To be fair, we're already starting to see this without AI. Seems like every company under the sun is looking for 'senior' and 'lead' and 'staff' level employees now, with very little consideration put into entry or junior level roles. Seems like the days of anyone learning on the job have been over for a while now, and everyone is instead expected to hit the ground running 4 minutes after being hired with the exact skill set needed by the role in question.

I can definitely see AI making it worse though, given how less effort needs to be given to menial/entry level work when its implemented.
I'm amazed how well the Send/Sync bounds work.

Finding all possible data races in arbitrarily large and complex programs (even across 3rd party dependencies and dynamic callbacks) seems like a challenging task requiring specialized static and dynamic analyzers. But it turns out it can be reduced to automatically marking structs as safe to move to a thread, and type annotations on mutexes and thread-spawning functions.
I daily drive an AMD Framework 13 with Fedora. I do light software dev, writing, some gaming, and run a variety of local LLMs without pain. I'm happy with the machine and Framework's support, and I do like their vision of repairability/upgradability and I've taken advantage of that already. On the downside, it just clearly isn't as good of a machine for the cost compared to what you could get -- several aspects are just middle-of-the-road: the webcam, speakers and the battery life stand out for me as not great. The AMD chip is also new enough that I still run into glitches with kernel updates on occasion, and power efficiency was initially much worse but has been improving.

In the past, my jam has always been to buy used Thinkpads and run them into the ground. If my Framework got stolen today, I don't think buying another Framework would be a slam-dunk decision for me but I'd still consider it.

tl;dr: happy enough with the laptop and Framework support; hopeful that the dream of repairability/upgradeability pays off; but it does feel like a bit of a compromise on quality.

p.s. I'm quite sensitive to noise and really did not want a machine that ran its fan all the time; the AMD Framework 13 is pretty good for this unless gaming or under some other high load and then it's a rushing sound not a whine.
You could still migrate all _your_ data to another service in Twitter quite easily, and most definitely you could in Google Chat. This did not change things.
Agreed, it's clearly a data poisoning attack. It's a pretty specific portion of the dataset the user is in after so many tokens have been sent back and forth. Could be some strange Unicode characters in there so it's snapped into the infected portion quicker, could be the hundredth time this user is doing some variation of this same chat to get the desired result, etc.

It is weird that Gemini's filters wouldn't catch that reply as malicious, though.
See comment in this thread: „I’m donating through the national kidney registry, which means that I (and five close family members) will pop to the top of the transplant list if I ever need one.“
>why would anyone go to all this work if not for some financial incentive?

People die for altruistic causes. I don't think its unheard of for people to run websites for fun or fame.
To answer your (rhetorical) question, it is common to file patents for moat-building purposes, i.e. to prevent competition. This is one reason lots of obvious and frivolous patents are filed, and why some companies have cultures that encourage filing as many as possible. There is not necessarily a direct return in the case where you stifle competition, (or threaten to), though it's good for the bottom line.

Alternatively, you have patent trolling which gets a return not through direct use of inventions, but through litigation. It's again not so much that the invention has value but that it interferes with value generation in a way that helps profits. Both cases are abuse of the system, and both cases are common. I'm sure those are the kinds of patents that GP referred to as "cruft."
It depends on workload. This tool generates recommended config for that specific machine workload. App Nodes can have completely different recommendations vs Database Nodes. It will be completely different for Workstation.
https://archive.ph/DOuEU
Advancing NeSy AI with Abstract Urban Simulation
The deficit is big because lawmakers actually want those programs for their constituents
I've been using mine (13-inch) for a couple years now. Like others, I would've got the AMD mainboard but it wasn't out yet, so I settled for the Intel 12th gen.

When I first got it, the touchpad didn't click properly. There was a bit of back and forth with support (they wanted to see video of the issue) but all in all, they shipped the replacement part within 3 days of the report. That's acceptable, in my book.

Then there was a very strange issue where the machine would randomly shut down while sleeping, seemingly related to using Windows 11 with the 12th gen CPU. Turns out you need to disable 'connectivity in modern standby' if this is the case:

POWERCFG -SETDCVALUEINDEX SCHEME_CURRENT SUB_NONE CONNECTIVITYINSTANDBY no 0
POWERCFG -SETACVALUEINDEX SCHEME_CURRENT SUB_NONE CONNECTIVITYINSTANDBY 0

Anyway, aside from that, I've had no issues.

The main benefit in my view is that you don't need to worry about 'timing', in terms of generational improvements in the hardware. In my case, I didn't get the AMD CPU I wanted, but when I decide to upgrade, I can do so for a pretty reasonable price: https://frame.work/gb/en/products/mainboard-kit-amd-ryzen-70... . Likewise, if any component breaks, I can be confident it's not going to cost me the whole machine, and I can do all the servicing myself.

This would be inconceivable in any other laptop, especially one of this form factor.
> You could still migrate all _your_ data to another service in Twitter quite easily

Yeah? I don't remember being able to migrate from/to Twitter and taking followers/following etc with you without having to ask/request others to do something too.
The US industrial revolution was based on it: Samuel "Slater the traitor" memorized designs from a factory he worked at in England and became rich after bringing them to the US.
One possible hand optimization is to push the aggregation below the joins, which makes the latter a few hundred rows.
Not very, at all, because they produce miniscule amounts of power. The main practical point is they keep going for a very long time, well beyond the point where a chemical battery, which might be able to hold more energy, would self-discharge.
From reading through the transcript - it feels like the context window cut off when they asked it about emotional abuse and the model got stuck in a local minima of spitting out examples of abuse.
Your deliverability is going to be trash in Gmail if you’re keeping a bunch of free users who don’t open your emails on your list.

Email is expensive on purpose to incent customers into following good practices. Otherwise you attract all the worst customers (“let’s email everybody who’s ever interacted with us for a decade, regardless of if they want our emails!”). Then Gmail starts putting all emails sent on the cheap platforms IPs to spam by default.

Based on your practices, it sounds like these pricing models are doing their job of correctly scaring you away.
Here:

<input type=”date”>
I'm not surprised at all. LLM responses are just probability. With 100s of millions of people using LLMs daily, 1-in-a-million responses are common, so even if you haven't experienced it personally, you should expect to hear stories about wacky left field responses from LLMs. Guaranteed every LLM has tons of examples of dialogue from sci-fi "rouge AI" in its training set, and they're often told they are AI in their system prompt.
Home inspections are notoriously claimed to be pointless. Until housing turns into a lemon market.
grifters gotta grift.
Can’t agree with MailerLite. I have 6,000 subscribers and literally all I want to do is send them an email maybe once a month, along with:

- An API to sign up to the list
- A welcome email automation

That’s all. And I pay like $700 annually for that. When they sent me an email the other day of all of the features my plan has - none (not one!) applied to what I actually use it for! I don’t need ecom functions, a website builder, AI, none of that. I’m frustrated that there doesn’t seem to be a product for me.
Nobody in official doc is saying it's evidence of ET life.

In fact, while evidence of intelligent ET life visiting this planet would be shocking to us a species philosophically, theologically and scientifically, it would in any many ways be better than the hypothesis they are actually trying to prove/disprove:

That an adversary has an advanced aircraft that can outrun allied aircraft with ease, and can embed itself into restricted airspace easily, at will, and we don't know what the intentions are.

This isn't an experiment in finding ET. This is an experiment in defending national and international airspace from an unknown phenomenon that could be a threat.

People hand-waving away the explorations of this stuff has done more harm to national and international security than any other train of thought from the scientific community. We're meant to be interested in learning new things, not just finding things that fit our existing models - especially when that new thing could be a weapon from some unknown adversary.

Consider the madness of a Chinese weather balloon not too long ago - why is this somehow not as important?
Now if only China would share all that stolen knowledge
The point is that if the problem was different depending on the user, it will be in a distribution layer, not in the encoding or production layer

That eliminates a whole raft of problems.
The title kinda glossed over the fact that they started out with working, fast code, and then broke it. Sure, their fix was faster than their most broken version, but it's less impressive than starting with slow code and improving it.
It is definitely a bit-flip type of glitch to go from subserviently answering queries to suddenly attack the user. I do agree that it may have formed the response based on deducing cheating, though. Perhaps Gemini was trained on too much of Reddit.
Excellent example. Unfortunately lands in a weird self-contradictory knot on half the country: wasn’t a real problem, was a real problem but China did it on purpose, maybe real but we couldn’t have detected it sooner and also it was China’s responsibility to detect it, and also they lied about the non-existent virus’s existence, etc