skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You are doing the thing of asking if I read the article without actually directly asking if I read the article. Please don't do that, at least without carefully reading the comment that you're replying to.

My specific point was that the article doesn't appear to support the assertions that it makes about brand loyalty.
So when I mix whey protein isolate into pineapple juice with plain Greek yogurt, is that considered an ultra-processed food? It seems like it would be, but I doubt the criticisms of UPFs really apply here. My understanding is that these are healthy ingredients, in a blend that's fairly optimal for strength training, despite one of them being highly processed.

Is there actually anything wrong with whey protein? Or can we find a better definition of the problematic UPFs?
> At least in the past people were celebrities for a reason other than the number of followers they had on social.

“Other than”? Obviously, as social media didn't exist. “Better than” or “more relevant to the things for which there celebrity status was used to direct attention”? Not particularly.
> MRV

Acronym for Multiple Return Values https://gobyexample.com/multiple-return-values
The privacy policy makes no sense.

> • We cannot see your YouTube activity.

You definitely can, the video id and title gets sent to your server.

> Your chats are only visible to you.

This isn't true either? You say that they get stored for 30 days so you're definitely able to see it.

> • We don't sell or share your data.

> • We don't tell anyone that you're using our service.

You share my data with Google Analytics, Mixpanel, Postmark (you specifically said you don't share my email) and looks like Sentry. You also share it with your "LLM service providers".

None of these services are mentioned in your privacy policy...
>> The AI doesn't even pronounce "AI" correctly.

You can call me Al.
This is a great idea- I hope that you are wildly successful.

I’m an AI skeptic mostly because I see people rushing to connect unreasoning LLMs to real things and as a result cause lots of problems for humans.

I love the idea of human-in-the-loop-as-a-service because at least it provides some sort of safety net for many cases.

Good luck!
I'm on Android using Chrome and got the following error.

"Access blocked: GenChess’s request does not comply with Google’s policies"

Kinda funny to run into that error for a product published by Google.
The thing is, Title IX addressed this by requiring some level of equity in funding, at least in theory.
Recognizing gifted students should not be just measuring IQ (which is known to be a flawed metric)
Lateness can be debated. But the US wasn't just coasting on history.

And your link makes clear the Barbary form of slavery had little in common with the extreme form practiced in the US.

The violent rejection of England and monarchy allowed the founders to make a dramatic break from the past. A new approach to human rights, a government of the people, for the people. Ideals broadcast and institutionalized via the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, ..."

All the mindful attention, negotiation and agreements, toward implementing a system explicitly establishing liberty and justice for all, adds a thick layer of criminal responsibility for the systematic exception made, to continue upholding one form of extreme injustice. The complete violation of all those principles, held dear, for one unfortunate group.
It's not "(next best) thing", it's "next (best thing)". As in the best thing that is coming up next. Not the thing that is next-best.
First thing I've seen from Google that gives me that old "Google" feeling of them shipping something cool and fun.
If chatGPT knows your IP, which it does, then it can know your location, maybe through use of a service like https://ipinfo.io
That's true, but that doesn't mean much as long as these particular users are free users that don't bring any money to the company (and cost a lot compared to similar users in other technology companies).

The real business is enterprise API endpoint billed by the millions of tokens, and in that particular domain OpenAI has literally zero market lock-in (and they probably depends more on Microsoft sales power than on their own brand value).

Unless OpenAI can show that they are able to make money from the mass of casual users, they are in a tough spot.
> that's exactly what these school policies in CA and elsewhere are attempting to do

Hmm… either I wasn’t clear, or we are talking about different things.

Maybe I should have added “lessen the imbalance of access to opportunities” to be extra clear.

California is creating equality of academic outcomes by reducing the access to academic opportunities — certain races can’t stand out if they simply aren’t given the chance to do so.

The examples I gave of Head Start and well-run gifted and talented programs focus on increasing academic opportunities.

One of these is inherently regressive, and the other is inherently progressive.

> Striving for less inequality in general will also help solve the inequality in education problem.

I think we are advocating for the same goal.

To be clear about the how, I strongly advocate for increasing access to academic opportunities rather than limiting access to academic opportunities in order to generate an equality of outcomes at an overall lower level.
They say the models are under 3b parameters. If only for voice generation it sounds pretty good, no ?
I don’t think what he works on burns a bunch of energy for nothing though.
Hugo more or less is "Jekyll, replicated in Go".

The core problem you will run into is that Go is a very static language, and Ruby is a very dynamic "free for all" language. Obviously up- and downsides to both approaches, but IMHO Ruby is clearly a much better fit for this sort of thing. On my own Jekyll website I do syntax highlighting with Vim's :TOhtml. I like how my Vim looks and I know how to tweak Vim syntax files. Kind of crazy I guess, but it works, and it's actually very little code. I would be hard to replicate this in Hugo, or any other Go-based site generator.

Similarly, doing a plugin like jekyll-sqlite will be hard. You can bake it in of course, but people experimenting with random stuff like this? Not going to happen with Go.

Not that Hugo can't be improved on by the way – I have generally found using Hugo to be highly complex and a forest of weird confusing errors that don't make much sense. But you will never really replicate Jekyll in Go.

I like Go. I have written tons of Go code over the last 10 years. But for some things it's just not a great fit, and this is one of those things.
Probably true in the long run, but at the moment OpenAI is making about 90% of their revenue from ChatGPT subscriptions.
Apple Rhapsody Report (1997)
If that’s true I feel much more at peace.
Taiwan gets slammed with 15,000 cyber attacks per second – 4X more than average
Maybe employees get a vote on who to fire.
And then turn them into hats....don't forget the hats.
Well if the sugar is ultra-processed, yes it does, doesn't it?
>> I'm surprised that tech workers ... end up being the most breathlessly hyperbolic.

We're not.
>Because the compiler will fail if you don't explicitly mention each possible exception.

But only the first time. Once you add `throws FooException` to the caller signature, the compiler won't complain about any future callees that also happen to throw FooException, even if you did care about handling their exceptions yourself. With callees that return Result you do get to make that decision for every callee.
Finland had quite a few far right figures in its government at the time who were obsessed with "Greater Finland", for which they needed to occupy and annex East Karelia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_military_administratio...
Historical context: the “Premier” and “Unified” releases planned here in 1997 got canceled, and all x86 work (Rhapsody for Intel and Yellow Box For Windows) got canceled after Rhapsody Developer Release 2. Rhapsody for PowerPC did see brief public availability as Mac OS X Server 1.{0..2} and shipped both in retail box (like mine!) and bundled with Server configurations of G3 and G4 towers. The “rootless” (only applications visible) Blue Box mentioned here eventually happened when Blue Box became the Classic Environment.

Even though it's actually usable for very little, Rhapsody remains my favorite “weird dead-end Apple thing” just for the novelty of having essentially NEXTSTEP 5.x (Display Postscript and all) with a Mac Platinum UI. Copland would probably hold that title for me if any of its builds actually worked, but Rhapsody has real stability, real application support, and a real POSIX environment via its NeXT heritage: http://rhapsodyos.org/ https://betawiki.net/wiki/Category:Mac_OS_X_Server_1.x_build...

Mac OS X Server v1.2v3 a.k.a. Rhapsody 5.6 is my favorite thing to run on my Blue & White G3 — the OG New World machine `PowerMac1,1`! https://cooltrainer.org/rhapsody-in-blue-and-white/
You would likely use this “food” to feed more traditional agriculture for human consumption. A better way of positioning it is processing the content of abiotic asteroids into a biological system capable of providing nourishment to astronauts and space colonists.
I wonder if we can stay above the API if we manage to stay in control of the prompt.

Prompt == "incentive" for the AI, we are still the boss but the AI is just an underling coming to us with TPS reports.

That was a very interesting read, thanks!
Si interpoisers are a pretty mainstream packaging technology nowadays, so that might help with the stacking bits.
That's true. Some business models succeed in the most unexpected of ways. They can pivot and change the recipe until it works.
I meant programs like No Kids Left Behind, so we are careful to make sure the least talented won't feel singled out in school, or to make sure that their egos get as little bruised as possible. We also tailor the difficulties to them so they at least learn something.
I believe that, in the future, prison labor in the USA will be recognized as one of the largest examples of modern slavery.

On top of that, we could argue that the concept of people depending on the good will of a specific employer/master to be able to survive will also be considered as the capitalist successor to slavery.
What machine learning algorithm have you worked on that leads you to believe they are capable of having a rich internal cognitive representation anywhere close to any sentient conscious animal?
GP seemed more worried about maintaining invariants in the face of mutability, so that's what my answer spoke to.

For modeling the data in the first place, just use the right combination of sum types, product types, and newtypes - that's not specific to functional languages. I'm sure GP knew this already without me saying it. Sum types may have been a "functional programming" thing a few decades ago but they aren't anymore.
It seems like the points you're making are in support of the statement you are quoting - if most people don't know the concept of an LLM or a provider, why would that make it difficult for them to switch? Seems like ChatGPT's only competitive advantage here if I am understanding what you wrote correctly is name recognition. If ChatGPT's "game" to lose here is just staying relevant in the public consciousness, it would appear to me that the main point of this article, that building LLM's is not going to be a great business, is largely correct. I would expect a company such as OpenAI with such fantastic claims they make to have some kind of technical advantage over their competitors.
'Kipps', is the novel H G Wells, reportedly considered the most favourite amongst his works.
Transformers have been around for 7 years, ChatGPT for 2. This isn't the first few samples of what could be exponential growth. These are several quarters of overpromise and underdelivery. The chatbot is cool and it outperforms what awful product search has become. But is it enough to support a 3.5 trillion dollar sized parts supplier?
I think such a technical advancement would parallel a moral one.

I’ve been vegan 25 years and would be happy to silence the “but what about plants” people once and for all.
And pulp fiction is even older!
What is good for a society and what feels just are often disparate things.

But it is not unjust on a human scale that some people are born with lower potential than others. It’s just an unfortunate fact of life.

What is just then?

To whom is it just to invest 2x the resources into a person that will never likely tinder a significant benefit to society?

To whom is it just to -not- invest in people who are particularly likely to bring benefits to society?

We know that the vast majority of significant advances in engineering and science are brought to life by people that are significantly above average capability in their fundamental capabilities, gifts that were evident even before they entered school.

We know that significant advances are unlikely to be contributed by people for whom day to day life is a significant cognitive challenge.

This comes down to the harm / benefit of investing 2x the effort into one person.

The best likely case scenario for the bright student is that they go on to create something remarkable and useful. Advancements in technology and science are responsible for millions of lives saved every year, and billions of lives saving trillions of man hours they would have spent in tedious, exhausting work. This then translates into higher investment in children, creating a virtuous cycle of benefit.

The best likely case for the dim bulb is not so different than the no-intervention path, but with a slightly better quality of life. The best argument is probably that it might make a difference in how he approaches parental responsibilities, since his social crowd is likely to be of slightly better character.

I would say it is unjust to the many to focus your resources on the least productive in society, unless the reason for their lower potentiality is something that is inherently fixable (IE lack of education). If the problem is endemic to the individual themselves, it makes little difference or sense to invest a disproportionate effort in their education.

OTOH if you have a student that can absorb information at double or triple the normal rate, it makes sense to fast track them to a level of education that they can produce benefits to their society. To let them languish in a classroom developing a disdain for their teachers, whom the often know more than, only creates habits and preconceptions that guide them into dubious but interesting activities and away from the paths that might lead them to greatly benefit society at large.

Either way it’s kind of a shit sandwich though, so who knows.

Anecdotally for me, G/T was great for my eventual development, and probably moved me farther away from a life of high achieving white collar crime, which seemed like a worthwhile goal when I was 9.

Showing me that other people understood and valued my intellect was a huge factor in deciding to try to do something admirable with my life.

It also was largely a waste of money paying for me to launch mice to half a mile in spectacularly unsafe sounding rockets from the school track. The astronaut survival rate was not great.
Yeah but early stronghold brands don't always keep the market. Before word there was WordPerfect. Before Excel there was lotus 123. Everyone swore by both but they have been dead for decades.

It's funny because ChatGPT is such a bad mainstream branding. Technical name, hard to pronounce, nobody even knows what GPT stands for. They really got overwhelmed by their own success otherwise they would have done more on the branding side to appeal to mainstream users. But their first mover advantage won't last forever.
A browser puzzle, based on "Knot Theory". Not sure I learned anything from playing this, but that was fun:

https://brainteaser.top/knot/index.html
Yes, it ‘looks like a duck,’ but carriers like the new USPS mail truck
This is something not talked about enough. I think it's one of those things where people really struggling with weight should be told CICO (calories in calories out) just to get their head in the right place but it's not strictly true for all the reasons you mentioned and others
Find other work or be grateful for stability?

You could go deeper inside, like a samurai code monk, and let nothing of impermanence affect you.

Either way, the burnout comes the days after the crash! Best way to not burn out is not crash!

Stay off stimulants, eat decently and exercise regularly, these will clear the mind and stave off burnout like it is a pesky cold that only comes when you are too lazy in your ways you didn’t see it coming!
kinda cool, I want to download the images!
> Give it time. Progress is fast.

Why pick 2020 as your starting point? That is simply around the time the current set of techniques came about.

We had generative art back in the late 90's - my screensaver has been generative art for over 20 years now.

Obviously generative art has come a long way but people have been working on various approaches to it for at least 30 years.
Look how easily they just fabricated 100% of a game's assets, with a consistent, high quality style, and then put them right into the game environment. That's the takeaway IMO. Very tight GenAI loop.
Yeah good point, kinda glossed over that part of the original post. Don't think that that's possible fwiw.

IMO. the fun part of compression algorithms is that the set of files that become smaller is as narrow as possible while the set of files that become bigger is as big as possible, so _most_ files don't compress well! The trick is to get the set of files that get smaller to be just the useful files and nothing else.
This is an extreme example, also this person would never lose their job that easy if there were laws protecting workers.

But what I have seen here in Sweden is AI voiceover used in news reports where people have hidden identities. So clearly this has taken a job from someone who used to do this voiceover. But it's working, we have to adapt to these small changes that AI is bringing.
One of my semi-frequent routes is between MCO (current home) and ABY - a small airport in Southwest GA where my parents live.

There are only two commercial flights a day, both on Delta and both to ATL. A round trip ticket is $540 for two 1 hour segments (MCO - ATL - ABY).

A round trip ticket from MCO (Orlando) to LAX (Los Angeles) is about the same price

Of course I know the trick for former - book through a partner AirFrance for 17K miles
They're showcasing 3d sprite generation capability; it's pretty big for game-dev, if it also generalises well.
How is a very off putting start a good thing?
It's worth pointing out that childhood malnutrition has a significant negative impact on IQ that persists into adulthood.

See: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3796166/

Black children are far more likely to live in poverty than the other three groups presented in the parent comment. I'm really curious what the numbers would be were that not the case. I also wonder how much the rise in black IQ over the decades can be attributed to school lunch programs.
what this is showing is simply more of google abusing their monopoly. making linking to maps from search harder and inconvenient for users does not help the users, nor smaller independent companies, nor really anybody at all. but that's because even with complying with the law, google is purposefully using its monopoly to make compliance as annoying and unhelpful as possible.

what should be happening is that the provider of the maps app is nothing to do with google search and then if your favorite map provider can plug-in to the search results in a seamless way it wouldn't be an anti-trust issue at all. it would benefit all parties. instead google opts to, and who can expect different, maximize the annoyance to their already captive users and minimize their negative business impact (e.g. sending anyone to somebody else's map app).

but they certainly aren't going to voluntarily break themselves up because some regulation that can be implemented in a way that's annoying to their users. who still have no viable other options, btw.

the root cause of the annoyances the users are now facing is both caused by googles monopolistic behavior in the first place and then them weaponizing their own captive users to push back on any regulations trying to stem it. a significant contributing factor is regulations like these are do more harm than good.

the right answer for abusive monopolies is to 1) don't let them form and 2) break them up when they do. chicken-shit regulation like this will only have the predictable result - avoidance, annoyance, no-real-change. and, as you alude, simply make everything worse for everyone.
Elon Musk learns how EV charging works from Pete Buttigieg
I think the mistake is that in the media it is extrapolating linear growth but in practice it is a wobbly path. And this wobbly path allows anyone to create whatever nearrative they want.

It reminds me of seeing headlines last week that NVDA is down after investors were losing faith after the last earnings. Then you look at the graph and NVDA is only like 10% off its all times high and still in and out of the most valuable company in the world.

Advancement is never linear. But I believe AI trends will continue up and to the right and even in 20 years when AI can do remarkably advanced things that we can barely comprehend, there will be internet commentary about how its all just hype.
I bet that appreciating what they’re really talking about would require digging into a broader debate about the best approaches to, and attitude toward the writing of, good literature, which was a decades-long topic among a bunch of major figures in literature in the late 19th and early 20th century.

I mean, there are probably always such debates going on to some degree, but this is a specific one that saw James and some fellows on a side opposed to a bunch of other authors. I only know about it because I happen to have read part of a book of criticism of EM Forster earlier this year, and I gather that debate was kinda the major topic among that set for a long while (Forster was on the opposite side of it from James)
Thanks for your response in an otherwise dead thread.

Unfortunately `C-h m` seems to show the bindings as defined by the mode and not what they actually are. So in the example of Magit, `z` is supposed to be bound to `magit-stash` but it's not because `z` is already used by Evil, so another package, evil-collection, fixes this situation by binding `magit-stash` to `Z`. And that is the key I use even though numerous places within Emacs show it as `z`.

Maybe this has been fixed more recently though? My Doom Emacs is probably rather out of date because for the most part it just works. If I look up a command with `M-x` it always shows correct key bindings there.

In terms, of writing about bindings in static documentation on the web (for example) I think it's unfortunate that many Emacs package authors choose to write the default key bindings when instead they could simply write the Emacs command (or both).

Indeed, we got lucky that the `C-h` binding that you suggested is bound exactly to what you intended, but it would have been just as effective to tell me to run `describe-mode`. :)

This is a great advantage of Emacs over the Vim ecosystem where changing bindings generally means binding a new key to point to the default one. So all the bindings are just about _keys_ and not _commands_. I much prefer the Emacs way for all the obvious reasons.
Congratulations! And thanks, this is a great reminder about how MVPs should be created.
Two years ago we had ChatGPT and Midjourney. Now... we also have those?

The accelerationism argument made a little bit of sense two years ago, but now, after two years of marginal improvements at best? Really?