skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here is a HN friendly poem that we should all know written by Edna St. Vincent Millay at the start of WW2, so also a somewhat cold feel.

If you are a data scientist or working in AI, this poem may speak to you like no other.

Sonnet from “Huntsman, What Quarry?”

Sonnet

Upon this age, that never speaks its mind,

This furtive age, this age endowed with power

To wake the moon with footsteps, fit an oar

Into the rowlocks of the wind, and find

What swims before his prow, what swirls behind—

Upon this gifted age, in its dark hour,

Rains from the sky a meteoric shower

Of facts . . . they lie unquestioned, uncombined.

Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill

Is daily spun; but there exists no loom

To weave it into fabric; undefiled

Proceeds pure Science, and has her say; but still

Upon this world from the collective womb

Is spewed all day the red triumphant child.
"There is no evidence that LLMs are the roadmap to AGI." - There's plenty of evidence. What do you think the last few years have been all about? Hell, GPT-4 would already have qualified as AGI about a decade ago.
I strongly agree. I stopped checking their page for news after day 2 due to video only announcements.
I think the question is why they aren’t also forcing Android Cast etc to work with Apple.
The intuition I’ve been building around LLMs is that they’re like search systems.

They encode their training data in their weights and do a kind of search on it given a prompt.

If leetcode problems are in their training data, then they’ll of course answer the question with ease.
It’s a British brand, even if it’s now owned by someone else. It even says so on the page you link to.
> But the same Apple is more than happy with providing the Apple Music app on Android as a means to boost their music revenue...
Exactly. On the other platforms they provide services because the services provide revenue. The big two things that people say Apple needs to open up are Messages and FaceTime - both of which cost Apple money to maintain and don’t have independent revenue streams. Airplay and CarPlay have similar development costs and I’d imagine that Apple would like to be able to continue to evolve their software without getting blamed for being anti-competitive because they broke some company’s flawed integration.

I’d imagine if Apple said “sure, we’ll open up FaceTime, Messages, Airplay, and CarPlay to Android devices as part of our Apple One subscription” you’d have people up in arms because Apple was charging for it. Which lays bare the challenge - for many it’s about wanting these services for free on a platform where Apple receives no revenue.
It’s because at higher resolutions you can see the flaws more easily.

They’d have to be implemented perfectly every time, otherwise the whole thing becomes a mess. Not everyone will bother to do this.

Also, often when creating designs, things look better the more you take away rather than add.
> There should be a programming language that enables arbitrary complexity through deterministic linear code, as humans seem to have an innate comfort with.

I agree that linear code is easier to read and understand. I've noticed that often when my own code gets confusing it is because it's too nested, or too many things are happening at once, or the order of actions is not clear. After gaining a deeper understanding of the problem, rewriting it in a more linear fashion usually helps but not always possible.

I'm curious how a programming language could enable writing complex code in a linear fashion if the complexity of the code is due to the interconnected nature of all its parts. In other words, there may be no way to connect all the parts in a linear way without oversimplifying.

Of course, sometimes the complexity is incidental, that is, if I were a little smarter or spent more effort, I could reduce the complexity. But some complexity is intrinsic to the problem being solved.

The question that really fascinates me is not why code is non-linear, but why literature isn't?
It's the same pain, since the resolution is the exact same. You have to rotate.
Maybe you were dog-piled because OpenAI will ship a successor to GPT-4o someday, whatever it's called.

In any case, the "behind schedule" rumors are themselves based on other rumors. GPT-2→GPT-3 took 5 quarters, GPT-3→GPT-4 took 11 quarters, so obviously GPT-5 (or its equivalent) will be released in Q4'2025.
Counterpoint: Pharmacies that delivery nationally make it faster/easier to get a prescription filled than ever.

Broadly, I'm not sure the virtue of trying to make it artificially cheaper to live in remote areas.
Loneliness is longing for connection to other people.

Loneliness does not need to relate to the number of people you talk to or that you know.
Theres no external constraint of customer relations or motivation management in the current project juggling cycle. I adopted it because I was simply frustrated that I wasn't making progress on A when working on B, and vice versa. Now, I can quell that frustration by saying "Well, A's going to be addressed in 2 days, it's all good"

I assumed to be avoiding the penalty of task switching, I'm not well read on the topic but I assume it's more pronounced trying to do X different tasks per day, than segregating one focus per day with a sleep in between them.

That being said, your comparison of time/effort ratio is very apt. Frequently I've found myself having to temporarily halt the cycle in order to focus on cranking out one project that needed much more attention before some date. The rates of each project progression are not equal, and a simple split does not address this at all.

The fear of focusing on one project at a time instead of juggling them is that each project's completion is probably on the time scale of many months- so to neglect all other projects in favor of one- for chunks of a year at a time, seems like it would be very stress inducing.

Maybe it's a good case to consider some compromise between the extremes, something less frequent than daily switching, perhaps weekly, biweekly, or more is a more appropriate time scale to approach this with.
fantastic I think the idea of locality of behavior is one that will not make sense to you
When AI Beats Us in Every Test We Can Do: A Simple Definition for Human-Lvl AGI
Nasty war-apologetic article
Which is why when people make it to mars it will thrive. No taxes, no debt and no government regulation. Just build, build, build baby.
Hopefully 3D printing and materials science will have some cool tech in the future otherwise it could be a slow start.
No, it's indeed a very real problem. I ran into with a very small service.
> Give AMD Engineers more compute and engineering resources to fix and improve the AMD ecosystem, they have very few internal gpu boxes relative to what Nvidia provides to their engineers.

This is real. We’ve found ourselves having to give hardware to engineers at AMD because they’re unable to get allocation of it internally.
There's nothing to it, it's just "git commit".

You then add your changes and "git commit --amend".

(These could be aliases. Mine are "ci" and "ca" respectively.)
“Full self driving will be here next year.”
How do you write a function in C that restricts its parameters at a type level to a subset of an enum's set of values? I'm aware of how to do that at runtime, but I don't think I've ever seen it done at a type level. Same goes for detecting two different usages of a resource at a type level...got an example? I'm not saying you're wrong, just that my beginner level understanding of C has never seen anything remotely close to that, and from my attempt at googling, its apparent I don't even have the right vocabulary to find it.

Admittedly, a lot of this complaint with C/C++ might not be technical but cultural. The pervasive use of macros and templates might have an origins in avoiding some technical painpoint of the languages or compilers, but they have a real effect in how they are used. For example, I didn't know that C had consts until I started reading K&R...real world usages in open source code almost always use define.

And the same goes for rust...for example, the extremely restrictive type system of Rust means that a lot of effort has gone into making type errors extremely helpful, so that you don't end up wrapping your whole program in an unsafe block. In C, you are told that you have a type error, but in Rust, you are told why, and given extra context, and in common cases you are pointed towards what you probably wanted.
I worked at a place that required vendoring dependencies and had to be code reviewed just like it was your own. In fact, we were responsible for fixing any bugs in them ourselves. Sometimes this was just a matter of opening an issue, sometimes it required backporting the fix to our version, and sometimes it meant we took over a fork because the dependency was no longer maintained.

There were too many cases where I looked at the PR preview to do my own code review and decided to just write it myself. There is a ton of shitty code out there. More than you'd expect.
Indeed. It's C# that makes me like Kotlin so much. I was trained in Java but used C# in a fully-professional setting for longer. C# as a language make a lot of very smart decisions that Kotlin took into itself when being created and out if it comes a non-Microsoft-owned (which matters for some people), comfortable, powerful language.

If I had to switch and use C# as my main work language for a company, I would be perfectly happy to.
This poem was set to music by Randall Thompson as part of Frostiana, a collection of Frost poems:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3bUzZmoIRA
Very honestly hope this stuff is all gated behind eu-only products/flags.

The thing that EU regulators don't seem to get is that I (and many others) have knowingly and intentionally opted in to this walled garden. It's simple, it generally works, it's relatively secure, and I don't give a half a shit about the cost. I do not want or need competition to drive down the price because I do not care about the price. It's a luxury product.

If the end result of this regulation was better software, better hardware, and better co-design, then I'd be all for it, but this just isn't going to be the case. We're just going to end up wading through sea of shitty, malware-ridden third-party bullshit that provides near-zero benefit to mainline apple consumers.

At least as likely as a positive outcome is that the experience for mainline apple consumers will get worse because Apple will need to dedicate engineering resources to interoperability instead of feature development.
I agree with you. I still believe the current status quo of Apple charging for signing certificates is reasonable. If that changes in the future, I will be upset about it then and will say so.
Every English speaking school in India has this poem for class 9 or 10th. So every English speaking indian of 14-50 range knows this poem
the mini models are the most exciting to me. they seem to hit the balance of general utility and cost.

people are fond of comparing large bleeding edge models, but when we compare the small ones to say gpt3.5, it is still astonishing.

to me the smaller models being the balance of intelligence and cost is the best indicator of what the general population can use and afford.

the larger models end up being used mostly by individuals teams and orgs who can afford to pay for it and learn how to use it.

keep in mind at this day and age there is still a lot of people who dont know these things exist. it's just outside of their reality. then there are who have the slightest idea about it, but won't commit the time and money needed to learn it and fully experience it.

this is like the new generational transfer of wealth and information. even if you're an individual or a small team, with enough levers you can use these technologies to your advantage, and with more levers (like yc) you can enter the battlefield and compete with existing companies.
There's no doubt been progress on the way to AGI, but ultimately it's still a search problem, and one that will rely on human ingenuity at least until we solve it. LLMs are such a vast improvement in showing intelligent-like behavior that we've become tantalized by it. So now we're possibly focusing our search in the wrong place for the next innovation on the path to AGI. Otherwise, it's just a lack of compute, and then we just have to wait for the capacity to catch up.
The same people who lied about how tough the Russians were, lied about WMDs, lied about how well the ANA was going to withstand the Taliban, lost the last 5 decades of wars while spending more than anyone else on Earth, have a report that demands we increase spending on their stuff.

Along the way we became a country where it was legal to torture people, have secret courts, and 2/3 of Americans outwardly state they don’t trust the judicial system (so, basically Russia/China/authoritarian shit hole levels of “trust”).

What if they’re just full of shit?
And when we get it there, it kills us.
I see a bunch of comments about whether gambling should be banned or not. But what about enforcement : can you ban it?

Nowadays, gambling is on 2 fronts : in-person and online. I am not sure about % distribution between them but I suspect online is not too small.
In-person gambling operations should be fairly easy to ban.

But online is a different problem because there will always be some country where gambling websites are legal.

And what's stopping gamblers from bypassing online restrictions (VPNs, cryptocurrencies, etc)?

I think an un-enforceable law holds no value and shows naive idealism. I agree that banning gambling would save the in-person gamblers but eventually, we risk them converting to online gamblers. (If vast majority of gambling is in-person, then maybe it's worth it).

It's an interesting coincidence that gambling laws are becoming more permissive in most places now that online gambling is becoming more prevalent. Another comment wonderfully put it as a possible prisoners dilemma. If place#1 bans gambling, gamblers from that place would go to place#2 that has gambling : now place#1 has both gamblers and less-tax-revenue while place#2 has same gamblers but more-tax-revenue.
Likely his most famous words. Beauty in it's simplicity.
You might just check out the Home Assistant Voice:

https://ameridroid.com/products/home-assistant-voice-preview...
My Mum's typewriters had a tab key too! You used to start a paragraph off with a tab. Personally I prefer not to.

30 odd years ago I used to teach IT skills - UK govt funded qualifications. For example the RSA Computing level 1 and 2 NVQs. RSA were the really old school based qualifications (the R is for Royal) and by old school, I mean that they were old school 30 years ago! So it was basically a typing exam.

Each folder of "evidence" - 12 units, two or three pieces of evidence each - was allowed something silly like three mistakes. A mistake includes a typo, spacing and other daft things. The units were spreadsheets, word processing, databases, email, fax and more. Each piece of evidence could be quite a lot of text. You might notice that I put two spaces after a full stop (period). That's an old habit and failure to do so is a mistake.

Obviously the world has moved on since. Did you know there are at least four types of tab stop these days? Left, right, centre and decimal. Few people know or even care about decimal tabs. You can avoid them in web dev style and use a table to emulate them, but I will notice!

Anyway the tab key is way older than IT.

(EDIT) It seems HN coalesces multiple spaces into one when displaying.
Myself I am schizotypal which means I have unusual experiences. For instance things like Ouija boards and dowsing rods work really well for me even though I don't believe in them at all (and actually have all the reason to be an arch-reductionist)

For a while though I practiced a kind of visualization I called "shapeshifting" which has recently turned into a project to be possessed by a fox spirit because I found out that everywhere there are foxes people have been getting possessed by fox spirits so why can't I do it? (No need to explain it in terms of science, reconcile it with western approaches to religion, none of that...)

I had it come in and take over my standing reflex (the first thing it does) we said a few words and then I was left with the message that I was not in good enough shape and I could get hurt doing this (not like a serious injury but sprains and strains, yes, to express itself it will ask more of my body than I do.

I'm going to have to talk about my goals with a trainer next week, I don't think I'm going to come completely clean that a fox sent me.
The Cuttlefish's Play: Review of Richard Powers's Playground
https://archive.ph/aqcg0
We are in the early stages of something like this in my org. QA has been writing tests in some form for a while, and it’s mostly been at a self-led level. We have a senior engineer per-application responsible for tooling and guidance, and the QA testers have been learning Java/script (depending on the application, teams we don’t interface with are writing theirs in C# iirc). With the new year, we are starting a phased initiative to ramp up all of QA to be Software Engineers in Testing - each phase will teach and guide and impart the skills needed to be fully sufficient to write automation tests in tandem with engineers writing features.

It’s an interesting and bold initiative imo, as I’ve often worked at places that let QA do whatever felt best which is good from the standpoint of letting them work within their comfort zone, and it also means that testing will largely plateau. I haven’t seen a real push for automation _not_ come out of the engineering department personally (because I’m the one pushing it every time), though I know this place has at least done some work with various automation systems in the past.
I gave it a fair skim, but I didn’t really feel like it refuted what I said.

Is there a specific section that comes to mind?
No, GPT-4 would have been classified as it is today: a (good) generator of natural language. While this is a hard classical NLP task, it's a far cry from intelligence.
> On one hand anyone well traveled in life can see 200-300+ page non-fiction books are padded heavily

One of my peeves is than an otherwise good story has to be contorted to fit the conventions of the medium. So many books would be an excellent 80 pages, but are many times longer.
I will leave the explanation to Jon Lojoie and his smash hit, Everyday Normal Guy 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmG4X9PGOXs
AI as it is now is essentially auto-completion based on what is seen in a given data set. This is not AGI, whether or not it beats all humans at every test that exists.
Have you ever heard of a local maxima? You don't get an attack helicopter by breeding stronger and stronger falcons.
The point of technology is to make our lives easier and cheaper. There's no point to have chatgpt to charge this way other than to make the capitalist owners more money.

Otherwise the self-serve machines at Mcdonalds should cost the company the same as an employee with a fair salary. Mass assembly lines building cars and machines should cost the same as 100+ workers including costs of health benefits and breaks.
>that result is not verifiable, not reproducable, unknown if it was leaked and how it was measured. Its kinda hype science.

It will be verifiable when the model is released. Open ai haven't released any benchmark scores that were shown falsified later so unless you have an actual reason to believe they're outright lying then it's not something to take seriously.

Frontier Math is a private benchmark with its highest tier of difficulty Terrence Tao says:

“These are extremely challenging. I think that in the near term basically the only way to solve them, short of having a real domain expert in the area, is by a combination of a semi-expert like a graduate student in a related field, maybe paired with some combination of a modern AI and lots of other algebra packages…”

Unless you have a reason to believe answers were leaked then again, not interested in baseless speculation.
Chiplet-Based NPUs to Accelerate Vehicular AI Perception Workloads
Just like the horrible government banning leaded fuel. I'm not joking, a stronger argument is needed about regulation than "any gubernatorial directive is bad". Apple isn't a person with natural rights. What are the actual drawbacks of this? Are we stifling innovation by forcing interop of the disruptive technology of "wireless filesharing"? It's infrared media transfer, but with 2.4GHz.
Where I work now basically does quarterly deployments. We service enterprises that generally outsource their development work. So we deploy pretty regularly to a staging environment and deliver documentation weeks/months before we actually deploy it. The exception to that rule is for hotfixes, which is also extremely rare. Like 2-5 times per year.
Search for "sozial treff <your city>". Call there and talk to someone. The churches are also good places to ask. German churches organize a lot of social events. If I interpret "at my age" correctly you mean that you are too old. Let me tell you, especially for older people there exists tons of stuff in your city.
> CUDA Moat Still Alive

Wrong conclusion. AMD is slower than NVidia, but not _that_ much slower. They are actually pretty cost-competitive.

The just need to do some improvements, and they'll be a very viable competitor.
Twitter is coming to matter less, so what they do or don't do, matters less.
I still pair with juniors, sometimes even the code review is a pairing session. When did I say I don’t need training or commentary? I’m talking about useless AI tools, not day to day work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprezzatura was all the rage in the 16th century
> If mathematics and programming were more like spoken language, it seems the task would be massively simpler

Mathematics and programming derives from spoken languages. The thing is that spoken languages lack precision: What you said is not what I understand. So they chose a subset, assign the items precise meanings and how to use them in sentences. Then convert the whole in a terser form for ease of notation. Starting with the terse notation is the wrong way to go about it, just like someone does not start learning music by reading sheet music. Learning programming is easier by learning what the components are and not how to write syntax.

> So maybe the problem for us too is the language and not the intelligence.

The issue is understanding. Behind every bad code, there's someone with either lack of understanding or making hasty decisions (time pressure, tiredness,...).
I'm sure e.g Jolla would be happy to develop a new feature that helps them become big enough that politicians feel like they need to regulate them
I'm part of a group that regularly meets at a pub and some only drink water. There's zero issue with that. The goal is not to get drunk: it's to have fun and discuss all together while enjoying two or three beer for those who like beer.
I wish there was a way to move my account to the US so I can get the best experience and tools instead of having to live through this digital iron curtain the EU regulators created. Who is using alternative app stores anyway? I surely don't.
this is the way.

its internal mechanism is still statistical prediction of text in units of tokens. that math seemed lucid enough to be able to use functions.
Peertube [0], Lemmy [1], and Pixelfed [2] all run on the same protocol as Mastodon. You can interact across all of them (e.g. Mastodon user replies to Peertube video post), but the presentation on each is very different.

There's more as well. Like Friendica [3] feels a little bit like Facebook, and Hubzilla [4] feels a bit like Google+ used to. Diaspora feels a bit more basic, but similar concept to Friendica.

All of them can cross interact.

[0] YouTube style - https://joinpeertube.org/

[1] Reddit-style - https://join-lemmy.org/

[2] Instagram-style - https://pixelfed.org/

[3] https://friendi.ca/

[4] https://hubzilla.org