skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The industry is mature and trying to squeeze out every cent it can from as many customers as possible now.

Boring flat UIs are more amenable to being endlessly tweaked and AB tested by product managers with no vision other than “make metric go up”. UIs are thoroughly tested to ensure people will engage with the product as long as possible, in the ways that are most beneficial to the product owners.

It’s the difference between hanging out in your friend’s backyard, and hanging out in Disneyland.

As a user, it sucks. Only way out is to actively pursue and use software made by small, human developers rather megacorps. There is still fun, quirky software out there but it doesn’t have $100M marketing budgets so it’s on you to find it.
I'd say ChromeOS works fine with 4Gb RAM too. The problem with the Duet is it's 4Gb RAM and a lame 2020 smartphone processor which pushes memory reclaim latencies firmly into the noticable range.
I was thinking that "disdain" might be overdramatic and too broad of a generalization - until I read the replies to this comment.
There's a subtle distinction though; if you're able to filter out illegal behavior, the move quality conditioned on legality can be extremely different from arbitrary move quality (and, as you might see in LLM json parsing, conditioning per-token can be very different from conditioning per-response).

If you're arguing that the singularity already happened then your criticism makes perfect sense; these are dumb machines, not useful yet for most applications. If you just want to use the LLM as a tool though, the behavior when you filter out illegal responses (assuming you're able to do so) is the only reasonable metric.

Analogizing to a task I care a bit about: Current-gen LLMs are somewhere between piss-poor and moderate at generating recipes. With a bit of prompt engineering most recipes pass my "bar", but they're still often lacking in one or more important characteristics. If you do nothing other than ask it to generate many options and then as a person manually filter to the subset of ideas (around 1/20) which look stellar, it's both very effective at generating good recipes, and they're usually much better than my other sources of stellar recipes (obviously not generally applicable because you have to be able to tell bad recipes from good at a glance for that workflow to make sense). The fact that most of the responses are garbage doesn't really matter; it's still an improvement to how I cook.
Client-side inference will be a bigger opportunity for AI in the browser than client-side training, in my opion.
Concise mode is honestly better anyway. I’d prefer it always be in that mode.

But that being said I bump into hard limits far more often than I do with ChatGPT. Even if I keep chats short like it constantly suggests, eventually it cuts me off.
So we can agree that cancel culture is bad?
That's simple logic. Quoting you again:

> Machines are good at applying rules, so when they fail to apply rules correctly, it means they have incorrect, incomplete, or totally absent models.

If this line of reasoning applies to machines, but LLMs aren't machines, how can you derive any of these claims?

"A implies B" may be right, but you must first demonstrate A before reaching conclusion B..

> I think we are discussing whether LLMs can emulate chess playing machines

That is incorrect. We're discussing whether LLMs can play chess. Unless you think that human players also emulate chess playing machines?
Wow, I had no idea Anthropic was doing $850m revenue.

I know they have high costs, but as a startup that’s some phenomenal income and validation that they’re not pure speculation like most startups are

Edit: founded in 2021 and with 1000 employees. That’s just wild growth.
How aware of them do you consider yourself to be? There's an entire field of literature called critical theory that's explicitly dedicated to challenging the status quo. My own field (anthropology/archeology) does it so commonly that there are multiple terms for slightly different shades of it (public, applied, postcolonial, etc).
Great advice—there’s definitely a lot of UI work we want to do :)
>Maybe the author just doesn't understand ECC and always assumed it was consensus-based.

That's likely, or it was LLM output and the author didn't know enough to know it was wrong. We've seen that in a lot of tech articles lately where authors assume that something that is true-ish in one area is also true in another, and it's obvious they just don't understand other area they are writing about.
Fascinating. Is there a book about the history of microphones?

I find this to all be in the realm of "I don't believe you that any of this works at all" if I didn't have a lifetime of experience with the fruits of successfully-functioning microphones.
The Moats are in the GPT-wrappers
“Microsoft warned of a vulnerability in Windows' print spooler”

How much I hated just seeing this process. Print related tasks should never run when not needed.
Makes sense! We’re pretty focused on the construction vertical at this point but when we do expand into others I imagine we’ll be a bit creative with the pricing/features.
I don't see why this isn't a good model for how human reasoning happens either, certainly as a first-order assumption (at least).
I disagree, stuff today is un-boring mostly in a bad way: Is this a link or a button? Is that a checkbox or an option box? Where'd my scrollbar go? Is this two-state control already on or off? Is this row of text labels a bunch of tabs, or a bunch of new panels? What zones are right-clickable, and does right-click even work? Will this website hijack key combos used by my browser? Does this app even have key combos, and why can't I discover them by looking for an underlined letter? Is there a cheatsheet somewhere? ...

In contrast, a lot of classic 1990-2010 stuff was stable and boring because it had reached a point of working well and the visual indicators were consistent.

Now it's more like "pandering to the lowest common denominator of a touchscreen interface, and doing it badly", or "sacrificing good UX in the name of looking different".
I was a young child in the 90s, and I barely used the Internet then, but I remember how people talked about it. It was Cyberspace and the Information Superhighway. It looked like blue and purple grids suspended in black space. It wasn't real in the same way a pen was real. It was an alternate reality.

At some point between, say, 2000 and 2012, everyone forgot that. The Web became an extension of the real world. Now, in 2024, the Web seems to have displaced the real world as the locus of public discourse.

> It names an experience of paranoia and anxiety that by the end of the 2010s was widespread among people with meaningful connections between their online personas and their ability to maintain their standard of living.

This kind of thing always struck me as a poor choice. The great thing about maintaining one's anonymity on the Web, or, to be more precise, adopting a collection of alternate identities, is that they can be discarded easily. A faux pas needn't follow you around, and can't follow you to where you make your living.

> The last and most most dangerous weakness of the Dark Internet Forest as a frame is that it positions the broad landscape of connection as something that “we” can simply do without—and without which we will indeed feel better and be more productive.

> On the level of the individual, this is true for certain values of “we”: for people who are, in any sense, established; people who already have the social status they required to succeed in their field; people whose work doesn’t depend on them needing to find (and re-find and re-find) readers or customers; people whose professional and personal networks are already strong enough to catch them if they slip; people with money.

> So what about everyone else? Should people without those forms of access and capital simply forgo all the benefits afforded by access to broad networks?

Through the twentieth century, as aristocracy gave way to meritocracy, people learnt how to climb the greasy pole without access to these broad networks. Social mobility is largely a consequence of the structure of the economy, and not necessarily a consequence of networking. We are often told that, 'It's not what you know, it's who you know,' but maybe the people who found other ways to the top simply aren't as effective at sharing their secrets as the shmoozers.

> This all stops being an individual problem and becomes a collective one when bad products of the social internet get worse, as when platform turmoil and manipulation helps remodel the offline world in the image of the most grotesque parts of the online one.

Conflict is coming. We've reached a point, I think, we're it's inevitable. I don't think it's clear exactly what the ideas underlying the conflict will be, or what factions will contest it, or in what spaces it will be contested, but there is a range to choose from. The winning move in this situation is to keep informed about events, but otherwise to keep one's head down. Don't challenge ideas you find objectionable, but agree in a mostly-disinterested way. Take it from someone with family members who still have the machete scars.
It's not more general, it's more specific. Berserker hypothesis is basically grey goo that goes interstellar. The Dark Forest is about how lack of trust, unpredictable technological jumps, and speed of light being dog slow, force civilizations to preemptively destroy any other civilization they spot, while themselves trying to not get discovered.

Berserker event is effectively an implementation detail of one of possible events in the Dark Forest.
Awesome! Happy to get you demo access if you want to use Fresco to make those punch lists, just shoot me a message at arvind@fresco-ai.com
I spent time in gentoo myself, and know what you mean about packages, but the package name in Apt is ‘clisp’ and I double checked by pulling and firing up the repl in Ubuntu 24.04 on a Pi4.
You are right, and I actually thought of that, but I suspect it’s usually still dominated by, or at most roughly on par with, static class count. Dynamic proxy classes, for example, are cached. And one probably shouldn’t dynamically create classes based on uncontrolled external input.

The other thought I had is that if AI-generated code takes off, this could explode class count. On the other hand, AI could then also be instructed to refactor to minimal class count.
Lurking for awhile and this particular case is interesting in it's absurdity. Everyone comments on something as their first post, eh?

And doesn't HN look down on ad hominem? Anyhow, I don't work for Google if that's what you're implying. Just use their services, like the majority of normal people.
I have a Honeywell thermostat with companion app. It’s trivial to configure compared to traditional thermostats, even the UI on the device itself is pretty simple.

Problem is with the proposed thermostat here is thst it’s covering a single type of schedule. These products need to be able to cater for all sorts of variations.

At least with mine when you configure in the app on your phone it is very clear what you’re choosing.
>That just means that the word "breakthrough" has lost it's meaning.

This. Small, incremental and predictable advances aren't breakthroughs.
The moats are ultimately who owns the point at which its consumed.
I don't know if its still the case but 5+ years ago, Netlify was a pretty robust Jamstack host with built-in CI/CD deployment via git if you didn't want to manage your own VPS.
> As is it's going to be really hard to compete against GitHub Copilot they effectively block others from scrapping GitHub.

Hire 1000 people in India to do it then?
I don't think you can. This kind of laser devices is wildly dangerous.
Today I learned that there is a 5 PB soft capacity limit for Azure blob storage: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/storage/common/scala...

Also, a 200 Gbps egress limit.

How does that compare to S3?

Mind you, at this scale the storage cost is about $15K/mo, so it would be cost effective to throw some developer time at the problem of scaling out between multiple storage accounts. Or just call support to have the soft limit cap raised…
GARM has never had a single defector.

It is also run by a WFA board member.
Yes, that's exactly what we've done - I walk every day now, almost everywhere I go. It's nice.
What I mean is training something like GPT-3 in a distributed manner using a large number of regular browsers or laptops with average WebGPU support/power and WebRTC for communication.

Does it even make sense to ask this? Is it reasonable or feasible?

I understand there are many nuances, such as the size and source of the training data, the size of the model (which would be too large for any browser to handle), network overhead, and the challenge of merging all the pieces together, among others. However, speculative calculations suggest that GPT-3 required around 3x10^22 FLOPs, which might (very speculatively) be equivalent to about 3,000 regular GPUs, each with an average performance of 6 TFLOPs, training it for ~30 days (which also sounds silly, I understand).

Of course, these are naive and highly speculative calculations that don’t account for whether it’s even possible to split the dataset, model, and training process into manageable pieces across such a setup.

But if this direction is not totally nonsensical, does it mean that even with a tremendous network overhead there is a huge potential for scaling (there are potentially a lot of laptops connected to the internet that potentially and voluntary could be used for training)?
Using the "outline" style for fonts is, sadly, a lost art. I feel like that went away almost entirely around the turn of the century.
Lute (Learning Using Texts) v3, a tool for learning languages through reading
OpenAI is funding research into 'AI morality'
> Also, you can try to explain how individual proteins arrange themselves into bilaterally symmetrical, organ-infused organisms of astounding complexity, using only protein recipes.

The problem is that you’re conflating “I don’t understand it” with “it must be magic”

A hallmark of charlatans and pseudoscience pushers has been to find something they can claim is the boundary of scientific knowledge (often incorrectly) and then assert that everything past that line therefore is magic.

It’s a tale as old as time. Yet every time we make new discoveries they just move the line a little further and claim the magic must be over there now.

Another classic move is to make extraordinary assertions (magical hidden forces) but then when anyone objects they try to push the burden of proving the opposite on to the other person. That’s something you’re doing throughout this thread perhaps with realizing how irrational it all is.
UFOs, boats and castles: Surreal photos of Japan's most peculiar 'love hotels'
I only wish this website would be adapting to the viewport width. It's good awful to look at on mobile
You know the craziest thing I’ve seen ChatGPT do is claim to have made a change to my terraform code acting all “ohh here is some changes to reflect all the things you commented on” and all it did was change the comments.

It’s very bizarre when it rewrites the exact same code a second or third time and for some reason decides to change the comments. The comments will have the same meaning but will be slightly different wording. I think this behavior is an interesting window into how large language models work. For whatever reason, despite unchanging repetition, the context window changed just enough it output a statistically similar comment at that juncture. Like all the rest of the code it wrote out was statistically pointing the exact same way but there was just enough variance in how to write the comment it went down a different path in its neural network. And then when it was done with that path it went right back down the “straight line” for the code part.

Pretty wild, these things are.
This applies to a lot of things in my life as I get older, it’s nice.
"all LLMs" - OP only tested OpenAI LLMs. Try Gemini.
Trivial, m is not invertible in that case. By contrast, measuring devices need to be invertible within some domain, otherwise they're not actually measuring, and we wouldn't use them.
> You keep showing up in these threads to repeat the same "this is how it is" shtick, but you're seemingly terrified of the "what could be" aspect.

You have to understand the way that things are in order to effectively advocate for the way that things should be. If you approach the world with a broken mental model and try to use that broken mental model to advocate that the world needs changing, you'll accomplish nothing.

We have spent years with people thinking that if they could just charge for their apps outside of the App Store that they'd magically be able to avoid the fee. That was never the case, it was never going to be the case, and I'm just here to clear that up. If you want to abolish the 30% fee, you need to ask for something besides abolishing the anti-steering provisions because the fee was never about the payment method.

People can advocate for whatever changes they want, I'm sincerely just here to try to make sure we're all talking about the way things really are, because otherwise it's just hot air.
Can Paxton be countersued for violating the 1st Amendment (Association)? Preferably in a way that is not just theatre?
Hmm?
Impressionism is noted for extreme lack of detail, that still is suggestive of something specific, because the artist knows what details your brain will fill in. (8bit pixel art is impressionistic :-) )
That’s funny, but open weight, local models are pretty usable depending on the task.
String literals are interned, strings in general aren’t.
I think it is hard because we live in the 21st century but it seems very difficult to "adjust the humanity" to so many accelerated changes since the 19th!
Very strange, I cannot spot any specifically saying that ChatGPT cheated or played an illegal move. Can you help?
> I think it's fair. It's the same thing humans do with their own art.

No, hold on. The key part is that you have a quiz that purports to test the ability of an average human to tell AI artwork from human artwork.

So if you specifically select images for this quiz based on the fact that you, the author of the quiz, can't tell them apart, then your quiz is no longer testing what it's promised to. It's now a quiz of "are you incrementally better than the author at telling apart AI and non-AI images". Which is a lot less interesting, right?

I'm not saying the quiz has to include low-quality AI artwork. It also doesn't need to include preschoolers' doodles on the human side. But it's one thing to have some neutral quality bar, and another thing altogether to choose images specifically to subvert the stated goal of the test.
I mean, they might make back the $4b on the value it brings to programming alone.
LinguaCafe: Self-hosted tool to help language learners get vocabulary by reading
I've started to notice that GPT-* vs. Claude is quite domain (and even subdomain) specific.

For programming, when using languages like C, python, ruby, C#, and JS, both seemed fairly comparable to me. However, I was astounded at how awful Claude was at Swift. Most of what I would get from Claude wouldn't even compile, contained standard library methods that did not exist, and so on. For whatever reason, GPT is night and day better in this regard.

In fact, I found GPT to be the best resource for less common languages like Applescript. Of course, GPT is not always correct on the first `n` number of tries, but with enough back-and-forth debugging, GPT really has pulled through for me.

I've also found GPT to be better at math and grammar, but only the more advanced models like O1-preview. I do agree with you too that Claude is better in a conversational sense. I have found it to be more empathetic and personable than GPT.
just buy a real scanner
I was lucky enough that video about my extension blew up on tiktok (it wasn't even my video lol), which bring around 34k users. After that extension started slowly getting more traction from here and there (tech sites, personal newsletters, etc), but that didn't bring any substantial audience, to this day (1.5 years passed) tiktok was the biggest success and provided most of current audience, partially because I stopped actively working on the extension about year or so ago
It's a column with a byline, making it reasonable to take it as the opinion of the author.

Of course they can take a stance by choosing what to publish, but that probably isn't what is going on here.
Picks and shovels...
Three years ago I had a hybrid job based on Silicon Valley; it was fully remote during COVID but switched to in office once per week when restrictions were lifted (this switch did not come as a surprise; we knew throughout the pandemic that full remote was a temporary situation). I wanted to buy a home in Santa Cruz County, but I kept getting outbid beyond my (admittedly small) budget of about $525,000. I then considered rural areas; I even drove to an open house near Lake San Antonio about 30 minutes northwest of Paso Robles to see a brand new house that sat on a one-acre lot. The home was around $450,000, and it was located in Starlink’s service zone.

After some consideration, however, I ruled out living so far away from town. One significant factor was access to health care. Specialty doctors could be hard to find, and if I’m in an emergency, it’s a long trip to either King City or Paso Robles. Another major concern, though this is not a universal problem, is the exploding cost of home and fire insurance, especially in fire-prone zones like many of California’s less-populated areas near hills and mountains.

I like the peacefulness and beauty of less-populated areas, but I rely on city services, and so I prefer to live in or near a city.
The python example is the pure naive recursive algorithm. It isn't meant to itself be optimized, but rather unveil the capacity of the interpreter. The raku code is, of course, unreadable gibberish, but I assume it contains some basic optimizations. At that point, it's unsurprising it performs better and in fact the runtime is somewhat embarassing, though probably comparable to the performance of a similar algorithm in python.
> to increase the number of active weekly users?

what is the motivation to seek this goal? Is your extension paid?
Yes, from earth rotation the INS could figure out true north if the latitude is known. Or figure out the latitude if current heading is known. But normally it's aligned with a starting position from pilot input or GPS.
> The UK government was basically forced

Forced? You clearly don't know the history.

It was a long campaign but the moral argument had won broad support in the population and parliament. It was literally the UK government trying to get this passed. Prime Minister William Pitt was an abolitionist as was his successor William Grenville that passed this bill. This specific bill was passed by a near unanimous majority.

Earlier bills under Pitt had passed the commons but fallen in the more conservative Lords claiming to protect "the national interest". I believe the strategies that helped tip the balance was salami-slicing to just abolish trade rather then total abolition while arguing that continued trade would lead to slave rebellions as had been seen in French colonies thus it needed to be stopped not just out of moral necessity but national interest too.

You seem intent on corrupting history to do what? Attack some straw-man concoction of British national identity? Stop it.
If you aren't using LLMs for most knowledge work you're probably wasting time somewhere.
That's really great!

The one game that I used to love, but never got translated into the modern world, is Oxyd[0], which was later re-released (in a fashion) as Enigma[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyd

[1] https://www.nongnu.org/enigma/
If omitting it for brevity on a website, they could have just shown the signature and commented out the body ...