skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not the math dude it's ensuring I'm understanding what the table is trying to say.

Maybe stop being an ass and try to be useful?
> What the author would probably say is “All my hats are green” means the liar is either lying about All or Green. Either all their hats are some other color or only one hat is green. This means you have to assume the liar has a hat. How do we know that?

This is almost certainly not what the author will say, and it does have some tangential connections to computing so it's worth expanding on briefly.

In computing you often reduce problems to smaller problems, this can be done with recursion but it doesn't have to be, dynamic programming kind of is the reverse of it; whatever. When you do that though, you get these questions about really small collections, sets, lists, data structures.

Just for a quick concrete example so that we're not an abstract theory land, is a one-element list sorted? Is a zero element list sorted? Is [5, 5, 5] sorted ascending, descending, both, or neither? If you choose the wrong answer, then it means that your algorithm needs to be more complex, you don't trust zero-element lists to be sorted so your quicksort HAS to pivot on a median of 3, you don't trust one-element lists to be sorted so your quicksort HAS to pivot on a median of 5, or maybe when you see that you would recurse into a list of size 1 you generate a new median-pivot or something.

In mathematics, there is a convention which attempts to generalize this idea that an empty list is always sorted. In fact, an empty list is also always randomly sorted. It is always sorted descending, too. If it's an empty array of ints, all of those ints are greater than 1000—and they are also less than 50.

The mathematical convention is, in lay speak, “if you are talking about nothing, pretty much anything you say is going to be true unless it's gibberish.” If I said every int is green, well, synesthesia excepted ints don't really have colors, that's crap.

Everything else is “trivially true.” More formally, any predicate of the form {for all elements in S, this is true of that element} is taken to be “trivially true” when S is an empty set. It is something like the code,

let agg = true
for (const element of mylist) {
agg = agg || f(element)
}

where no matter what f is, if mylist was empty, agg is true. (“Trivial” here is sometimes replaced with the word “vacuous” because “trivially” is also a common English word meaning “easily,” so something “trivially true” might also by normal English rules mean “is easily seen to be true, is easily proven to be true, we can debunk the opposite with a 5 second look at the Wikipedia page,” etc.)

So that's the convention and besides making base cases much easier, one reason to do this is that the negation of any “for all Xs in the set, Y” is always perfectly specified as “there exists an X in the set such that not-Y.” The other convention you'd have to negate as “Either the set is empty or (...)”.

So the claim is that the perfect Liar is lying according to mathematical rules of Truth and falsehood, and according to those rules, this statement “all of my hats are green” can only be false if there exists at least one hat belonging to the liar which is not green. If there are no hats then the statement was trivially true.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.06768

It's not something that new, I like it.
breaking crypto, for one
No you're simply wrong. This is how a "classical Western" musician thinks of music, but this is not necessarily what music is. Timbre is the main expressive content in many cultures.

Check my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=gnulinux#42368137
> Not to mention that a liar doesn't necessarily have to mean someone who tells a falsehood in every single statement.

FTA:
>Note: this question was originally set in a maths
exam, so the answer assumes some basic assumptions about formal logic. A liar is someone who only says false statements.

I think it's pretty clear how on definitions
Given that TOML is intended primarily as a format for configs, a config where the root value is an array or a primitive value is hardly a relevant scenario.
> You know that people can see you as you sit there sharpening your teeth.

I'm an engineer and a filmmaker. I've lived with 5 AM call times and shoots that ended at sunrise. I've rented ridiculous $300,000 glassware, lifted heavy items from the top shelf of the prop house, dealt with talent issues, struggled to memorize lines, had post production drop projects on the floor, and dealt with so much bullshit - that world sucks.

The film portion of this market is bending a little bit differently than illustration, and these changes are presenting a huge opportunity for filmmakers and animators.

Film needed studios historically because (1) distribution was hard (YouTube and Netflix have addressed this) and (2) films are logistically complicated, capital intensive, and require lots of people. Gen AI is changing this last bit in a big way.

Film is basically getting its "Steam" moment. Just like indie devs can make games, indie authors can write novels, or indie musicians can work on a DAW and publish to Bandcamp, filmmakers will soon have the ability to build their own universes and audiences - something that wasn't possible before. (While there are writers, comedians, and animators like Vivienne Medrano, Joel Haver, and Zach Hadel, GenAI makes this happen in a big, repeatable, and sustainable way.)

20,000+ film students attend film and animation school every year. There aren't enough projects currently to have all of them be autonomous or pursue their own vision. That's changing.

And why would you want to build in Disney's ball pit and play by their rules when our own minds are so much more expansive? So many ideas wither on the vine and never see the light of day due to the intense capital requirements and the bland general audience algorithm of the existing regime.

Ask yourself why there are 20,000+ fantasy books but only 50 fairly generic fantasy films and TV shows.

This is all a good thing. Art is going to explode and fill into every niche and interest you can imagine.

The market will grow, not contract, and the artists will have their own brands and audiences.
Have been to a few pods. a few meetups.

Conferences has not been that great. Tried a couple.

The course option is very interesting. Have not tried something there.

Does it make sense to be part of some existing course? Or Should I create one?
Sans ICS HyperEncabulator (2022) [video]
Sounds like you could write a series of blog posts I’d like to read!
The Global Climate Change Consensus: My Experiment (2007)
Peter Norvig does his own research: "When faced with a controversy like this, the great thing is that you can do your own research. If you suspect Oreskes or Peiser (or both) might be biased, you can look at the data yourself."

Also, AFAIK, one of the first uses of "do your own research" in the modern sense. Google hits before 2009 do not use it in this way.
[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=%22do+your+own+research%22&t...
There are only certain kinds of computing tasks which are amenable to an exponential speedup from quantum computing. For many classical algorithms the best you get from a quantum computer is an improvement by a factor of sqrt(N) by using Grover's algorithm.

The other tradeoff is that quantum computers are much noisier than classical computers. The error rate of classical computers is exceedingly low, to the extent that most programmers can go their entire career without even considering it as a possibility. But you can see from the figures in this post that even in a state of the art chip, the error rates are of order ~0.03--0.3%. Hopefully this will go down over time, but it's going to be a non-negligible aspect of quantum computing for the foreseeable future.
The main part for me is reducing error faster as they scale. This was a major road-block, known as "below threshold”. That's a major achievement.

I am not sure about RCS as the benchmark as not sure how useful that is in practice. It just produced really nice numbers. If I had a few billions of pocket change around, would I buy this to run RCS really fast? -Nah, probably not. I'll get more excited when they factor numbers at a rate that would break public key crypto. For that would spend my pocket change!
The slightly mind blowing bit is detailed here:
> https://research.google/blog/making-quantum-error-correction...

“the first quantum processor where error-corrected qubits get exponentially better as they get bigger”

Achieving this turns the normal problem of scaling quantum computation upside down.
I hope he gets away. If only because the resources wasted on this murder investigation are a waste of taxpayer money. After all the other 100 NYC murders every year don’t get any resources. Why should this ordinary citizen?
We need to seriously think if our systems/society are even remotely ready for this.
Discerning intent is a waste of time and resources in cases like this.
From Apple to Starbucks, Western firms' China dreams are dying
Earth orbits at 2pi AU/year by definition, so it's 29x faster than that. In fact it's not even possible for an object bound within the solar system to move that fast, as the radius of an orbit at that speed would (per the back of my envelope) be well inside the sun itself.
It’s not the vram number that’s the problem on windows side.

It’s the throughput. For whatever reason they’re a good 5-10x lower.

Even if it’s a large amount and gpu accessible if the throughput sucks that badly then 70B models aren’t usable

What puzzles me is that the even the newer AMD APUs have this issue. The upcoming strix halo is rumoured to be around 140 ish which puts it at very bottom end of Apple devices
You missed the point.

The code purported to be vulnerable is not slow because of the length of the string. The "example exploit" is slow because the reports use slow methods to construct the string under test. When timing the affected methods, they are _not_ slow.
Of course domain registrations are also subject to national law. .io in particular is (currently) under UK jurisdiction.
Can't wait for AI to replace humans in the "vomiting out barely-disguised marketing fluff" sector
I played with WS2812 for a while, but now I have an AlphaPix system from HolidayCoro. My starter kit was ~$500 with 100 lights. They are large C9 bulbs, now permanently installed on the house eaves.

The popular free software, xLights, has a ton of features (and pitfalls). You can export the sequence to Falcon on a RasPi.

I would rather get back to programming my own sequences. That was a lot of fun on Arduino with WS2812.
It is specific to cases where a quantum algorithm exists that provides speedup, it is not at all generic. The complexity class of interest is BQP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BQP

Also of note: P is in BQP, but it is not proven that BQP != P. Some problems like factoring have a known polynomial time algorithm, and the best known classical algorithm is exponential, which is where you see these massive speedups. But we don't know that there isn't an unknown polynomial time classical factoring algorithm and we just haven't discovered it yet. It is a (widely believed) conjecture, that there are hard problems solved in BQP that are outside P.
> Do quantum computing folks really think that we are borrowing capacity from other universes for these calculations?

Tangentially related, but there's a great Asimov book about this called The Gods Themselves (fiction).
As I think you would hope from a practical standpoint -- you don't want to have to handle a special case of false and always check if the array is empty.

I agree it's only logical in engineering contexts like that though, not in everyday language.
Some of the comments and feedback I'm seeing in the reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/PorkBun/. But then again I don't have any firsthand experience with these issues, so who knows. Are you having good experiences with Porkbun?
I agree.

It reminds me of the math "puzzles" on Twitter which go:

1 shoe + 1 shoe = 2

2 shoes + 2 shoes = 4

3 shoes + 2 shoes = ???

And the answer isn't 5 because a) we're not counting shoes and b) the shoe laces were different colors. There's nothing clever, it just teaches you to be hyper cynical and question every little detail which isn't relevant to either Math or the real world.
You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Music theory from other cultures are of course music theory as well. Each composer can (and almost always will) have their own idiosyncratic music theory as well. There is nothing contradictory here.

Also I'm a composer with extensive knowledge of how to make, orchestra, and mix acoustic or electronic music. This thread has an extreme Western bias, just because something is studied in a particular way from Western music theory perspective, it doesn't mean it has to be that way.

Check my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=gnulinux#42368137
I've texted so many people in here, but so far all of them have ignored me or disappeared after a few texts. Why do you do this? So many of you claim to be lonely and to have no friends, yet you refuse to talk to me. It makes no sense.

It always felt like a backwards problem (although I have no data). What’s the chance that everyone around is unfriendable? Having no friends or at least people you see often is more of a state of mind than a real situation.

That said, I’m a professional ghoster myself (separate topic from above). Never found interest in people, only in topics. Have a topic, I join. Have to talk about nothing, I pass. No negativity, just sincerely not interested and don’t want to explain, cause now that brings negativity and my guilt on the table, cause I’m aware that the other side feels abandoned. Learned to better avoid that, cause otherwise half of communication will be managing others expectations, which are not my problem and solving it encourages similar demands in the future. Ignoring forces them to solve it on their own and either return back with a more healthy (imo) attitude or choose to go somewhere else.

Idk how many of “me” out there. But I remember going through the above and forming my set of communication rules.

I guess my advice is be the source of interesting things instead of longing, asking why you’re ghosted, or thinking that if you are ghosted, then they will never talk to you again. It’s not true, they likely just filter their communication to manageable levels. No one blocks you forever unless were annoying as hell for long enough.
things.every(thing => thing.type == 'hat' && thing.color == 'green')

now negating this gives:

things.some(things => thing.type != 'hat' || thing.color != 'green')

So liar has something that is not a hat OR has something that is not green

So only "E) The liar has no green hats" is true
The bandwidth is (potentially, depending on the Mac in question) much lower on the framework, which will limit the decode tokens/s
Are you sure about that?

When I say GPT-4 class I'm talking about being comparable to the GPT-4 that was released in March 2023.

The Llama 3.3 70B model is clearly no way near as good as today's GPT-4o family of models, or the other top-ranking models today like Gemini 1.5 Pro and Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

To my surprise, Llama 3.3 70B is ranking higher than Claude 3 Opus on https://livebench.ai/ - I'm suspicious of that result, personally. I think Opus was the best available model for a few months earlier this year.
Quantum supremacy was an absolutely awful name for what it was (ability to do something, anything, better than a classical computer, which remains 'supreme' on all problems of any practical interest).
The public backing by Google absolutely propelled Go into the spotlight, but Dart, also released by Google, hasn’t achieved anywhere near the same success. Considering how long ago Go was released, if the language didn't have its own merit, it would have fizzled out by now and failed to sustain its momentum or foster such a strong community.
Thanks. I was able to download the paper from https://webaudioconf.com/_data/papers/pdf/2021/2021_8.pdf (the original link didn't work). Is the PhD thesis also available somewhere?

What are your experiences with Rust? Was it worth it, or would you rather consider another language for similar projects?
Never answer these things, ladies and gents. Your boss uses info asymmetry against you. Respond in kind.
Is this using ionq or is this in-house from google?
>the more qubits we use in Willow, the more we reduce errors, and the more quantum the system becomes

That's an EXTRAORDINARY claim and one that contradicts the experience of pretty much all other research and development in quantum error correction over the course of the history of quantum computing.
Or introduce cruel punishments (many years of jail together with high damage compensation) for any false copyright claims.
Luckily, we have decades of experience in e.g. SQL, and existing and well-polished ISO specs on dates that can just be used as is without reinventing the wheel.
The new 3.3 70B model has comparable benchmarks to the 405B model, which is probably what people mean by GPT-4 class.
I was also really taken aback by this quote.

I have no idea who put it there, but I can assure you the actual paper contains no such nonsense.

I would have thought whoever writes the google tech blogs is more competent than bottom tier science journalists. But in this case I think it is more reasonable to assume malice, as the post is authored by the Google Quantum AI Lead, and makes more sense as hype-boosting buzzword bullshit than as an honest misunderstanding that was not caught during editing.
https://eagle.cool/ - image curation app

Raycast

Notability
> If you’re not pushing the envelope to be noticed more and build your promotion packet, you’re coasting.

No, I'd say that's just not being ambitious, which is different from coasting.
No, a true quantum computer will not necessarily solve NP-complete (NPC) problems efficiently. Quantum algorithms like Grover’s provide quadratic speedups, but this is insufficient to turn exponential-time solutions into polynomial-time ones. While quantum computers excel in specific tasks (e.g., Shor’s algorithm for factoring), there’s no evidence they can solve all NP-complete problems efficiently.

Current complexity theory suggests that , the class of problems solvable by quantum computers, does not encompass . Quantum computers may aid in approximations or heuristics for NPC problems but won’t fundamentally resolve them in polynomial time unless , which remains unlikely.
I'm reading Exhalation. I initially, upon reading to The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate, thought it was a well-told story, but ultimately another case of a time-travel mechanism that would not hold up through a pause of suspension-of-disbelief. A fantasy that required an uncritical reader: How could it be possible that the stories were so self-consistent, as if driven by prophecy and fate, with all their paradoxes?

I had an insight that made the story click for me: Discard the concept of free-will, and view the entangled system as a whole. The story we see is one state that, out of infinitely many possibilities, is self-consistent. A solution where the characters take an action based on knowledge of the future (etc) that changes this future, or otherwise causes a paradox, is simply not admitted.

This is analogous to a an invalid attempt at solving a differential equation. Out of all possible states, only a select few (or one, or 0) solve the bounds imposed by the system's rules and bounding conditions. This makes them self-consistent, in teh way someone's time-travelling adventure shaped their life recursively. With this perspective, the story is immensely enjoyable and deep.

I read Ted's discussion after regarding the mechanism inspiration from a Kip Thorne concept. Ted also mentions choosing an Islamic society for the backdrop due to its beliefs regarding the will of Allah, and how the characters justified the fates depicted.
Factoring. Reversing ECC operations. Decrypting all the data thought to be safely stored at rest in any non quantum resistant storage.

I do think ai algorithms could be built that quantum gates could be fast at, but I don’t have any ideas off the top of my head this morning. If you think of AI training as searching the space of computational complexity and quantum algorithms as accessing a superposition of search states I would guess there’s an intersection. Google thinks so too - the lab is called quantum ai.
Credibility of the article plummeted when I got to that sentence, and especially since using name dropping.
That JSON you get might be syntactically valid, but how do you know that it is accurate wrt your original input? That, for example, no values have a one-character-off misspelling?
sorry -- the results don't add weight to one view or the other. The interpretations are equivalent.
The beginning of the article quite clearly states "A liar who always lies", though.
It doesn’t make sense to me because if we can borrow capacity to perform calculations then we can “borrow” an infinite amount of energy.
Thanks for the links! I absolutely should follow Matt Pharr and Tom Forsyth's blog tbh - I've been out of the HPC world for sometime now but it's getting relevant again.
Yes we can because if there are no ten-foot tall men, then it is indeed true that "All ten-foot tall men have brown hair"
I agree with you completely regarding achievements. In SotC they feel especially jarring. I’m glad I still own my original copy.

You can apparently disable notifications for achievements on consoles and in Steam, which would potentially help this somewhat if you know to do it beforehand.
I forgot to mention that it's most valuable for when you're editing a long document, like a complex contract, in which you need to make a bunch of changes that would take a lot of time to locate and edit manually.

P.S. It feels a bit like magic watching it click around and write suggestions for you to approve, check out the video :)
But they are among the most impressionable and it is effective to target the parents via kids nagging them.
Careful, sharing that link is illegal in some jurisdictions
The article clearly defines someone who always lies to mean they only make false statements. It's not hard or ambiguous to determine various scenarios in which "all my hats are green" is false.

The solution article also discusses vacuous truths ("all my hats are green" is true if you have no hats, vacuously). Truth has a definition in formal logic too, but we've gotten far enough that this problem is already solvable and unambiguous.
It is unknown whether quantum computing makes NP-complete problems easier to solve. There is a complexity class for problems that can be solved "efficiently" on using quantum computing, called BQP. How BQP and NP are related is unknown. In particular, if an NP-complete problem was shown to be solvable efficiently with Quantum Computing (and thus in BQP), this open (and hard) research question would be solved (or at least half of it).

Note that BQP is not "efficient" in a real-word fashion, but for theoretical study of Quantum computing, it's a good first guess
I’m partial to Anathem by Stephenson on this topic as well
>content to the UK at certain times? Hope so!

We have no idea how/where it'd end up (with). If I understand anything about regulations (which is doubtful of course), the advertisers, themselves, would be on the hook.
Never-before-seen footage of San Francisco is unearthed at the Prelinger Archive
This was a very comprehensive overview. Kudos to the author. But it also made me think I'll stick to lineageOS.

I'm getting my first Pixel soon (the 9), mainly for the small size and years of upgrades.

Thought about trying graphene, but it just protects against a huge amount of things that don't matter for my threat model. If an adversary gets access to my phone, they'll almost certainly wipe and sell it, not hack into it.
Outlook has the same searching issue. I often have to resort to manually eyeballing through my email archives to find what I'm looking for. Very annoying indeed.