skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I routinely walk considerably further than that for groceries, in less time. On a route including a steep hill.

Not everyone has or wants to spend that kind of time. Especially when it’s not necessary and the weather is bad.

I’m hosting a party this evening so I need to run up there and get snacks and beer. The hour of time the e-bike saves lets me do that between work and guests arriving. I don’t have time to walk that distance and still eat dinner.

> Short trips made any way but walking have considerable overhead. Bad urban planning makes it worse. How many times do you have to stop a car on that route?

I don’t own a car. I ride my e-bike. There’s two lights and a stop sign on that route. It has a bike lane which is nice. Takes 10 minutes including time to put on my helmet and gloves and lock/unlock the bike.

If we both left my couch at the same time I’d be home on my bike before you even arrived at the store on foot.
Certain the end state is "one model to rule them all" hence the "transitional."

Just that the pragmatic approach, today, given current LLM capabilities, is to minimize the surface area / state space that the LLM is actuating. And then gradually expand that until the whole system is just a passthrough. But starting with a passthrough kinda doesn't lead to great products in December 2024.
I always smell foul play from Sam. I'd bet they are doing something silly to inflate the benchmark score. Not saying they are, but Sam is the type of guy to put a literal dumb human in the API loop and score "just as high as a human would."
I’ll believe it when the AI can earn money on its own. I obviously don’t mean someone paying a subscription to use the AI I mean, letting the AI lose on the Internet with only the goal of making money and putting it into a bank account.
Those are amazing, but I haven't seen all varieties of tea available that way. But I do think that all good teas can be found either loose-leaf or whole-leaf.
That would be a ton of problems for a small team of PhD/Grad level experts to solve (for GPQA Diamond, etc) in a short time. Remember, on EpochAl Frontier Math, these problems require hours to days worth of reasoning by humans

The author also suggested this is a new architecture that uses existing methods, like a Monte Carlo tree search that deepmind is investigating (they use this method for AlphaZero)

I don't see the point of colluding for this sort of fraud, as these methods like tree search and pruning already exist. And other labs could genuinely produce these results
Ask HN: What are your top AI stock picks?
Honestly I'm concerned how hacked up o3 is to secure a high benchmark score.
Author here. I made a simple small app for my wife to track breastfeedings and bottles on her Garmin smartwatch.

I deliberately made it simple without fluff. You have a baby in your hand while feeding, so the app needs to get out of the way :)

Happy to answer questions!
this is an impressive tinfoil take. but what would be their plan in the medium term? like once they release this people can check their data
nix-ld[1] and envfs[2] provide a decent workaround for unpatched binaries, in case you haven't heard of these tools yet.

[1] https://github.com/nix-community/nix-ld
[2] https://github.com/Mic92/envfs

The blog post linked by [1] is quite good.
> The world’s largest rail system, period.

I despise this way of arguing. Laying down x length of rail track is not a difficult problem whatsoever. Such a crude metric is entirely insufficient to back up an argument about how great American railways supposedly are.

What's the ticket cost for the passengers compared to other countries? Average train delay? Cancellation rate? Speed? Death rate? The argument is not looking so hot anymore, right? Then stop it with the irrelevant statistics of rail track length.
I did misinterpreted indeed, probably with:

> but I draw the line at tolerating vegetarian ethics

Which reads for my as not accepting the existence of it, which sounds a bit absurd. Flat earth theory exist even if it’s silly. You may have used tolerate in the sense of approve or consent I guess.

> it's not merely a personal choice when it affects others' wellbeing.

I agree this is problematic for the victims which usually doesn’t get to participate in that choice. It’s not fair. But I believe it is a personal choice, constrained by societal statu quo (or you get trouble) even if irrational, silly or awful. Some countries prefer maximizing freedom or tradition over fairness or minimizing victims.
Everything is an opportunistic carnivore. I once came across a turtle chowing down on a dead frog.
How much are you willing to bet that the price of a Waymo ride will converge to be within 10% of the price of an Uber ride today?

(Also, followup question: how are the prices of Uber rides compared with regular taxi service, now that Uber has stopped subsidizing most of their trips?)
PHP hasn't failed me yet. Been using if for about 20 years. Not heavily but it gets the job done and it's still improving. It's really quite sane if you start comparing it to the alternatives. It continues to 'just work'
This went exactly as expected. ARM had no leg to stand on going in.
It's not like they put in a lot of work into it either (as per the article).
Isn’t this the standard in all fields? I trust the top scientists at the Large Hadron Collider to define the presence of a Higgs boson, I trust the doctors of the WHO to define if a pandemic is occurring. These strongly defined terms need experts.
So why is basically all ransomware paid in Bitcoin?
At this point in the US, it seems we are far better off asking ChatGPT or Claude than the average police station.
Show HN: The perfect time-waster – browse chat screenshots
I built ScreenToMe, a platform where you can share and discover those chat screenshots we all secretly enjoy reading.
- Super smooth UX: Tinder-style swiping interface on mobile, arrow keys on desktop (←/→)
- Multi-language support: filter content by language or discover across all
- Categories like Funny, Cringe, Dark Humor, Dating, Red Flags, etc.
- Strong moderation: all content is reviewed before publishing
- Privacy first: must blur/remove personal info

It's like a curated museum of internet conversations - you know, those screenshots you keep sending to your friends saying "you won't believe this one". Now there's a place for them.

The site is completely free, no account needed to browse and vote. Just pure entertainment in bite-sized chat form.

Try it out (and add your best screenshots!)
FujiNet is a multi-function network adapter. It was initially developed for the Atari 8-bit systems, but we started adapting its firmware, and building other hardware versions for other platforms.

To date, we have implementations for Atari 8-bit, Coleco Adam, Apple // and ///, TRS-80 Color Computer, Atari Lynx, Atari 2600, Commodore (64/128/Plus4/VIC20). There are also system bring-ups happening for many other computers, such as ZX Spectrum, IBM PC (ISA and RS232 versions), RC-2014, BBC Micro, and more.

It provides virtual disk, for loading software from the Internet, a virtual printer which rasterizes to PDF, a network adapter with tons of protocol offloading, and a whole host of other subdevices (e.g. CP/M emulation, speech synthesizer, and more)

It is a public project, that anyone can jump in and hack on, and we want people to come in and help hack on versions for their favorite systems.

The site is here: https://fujinet.online/
Well I certainly at least agree with that second part, the doubt if there is such a thing ;)

The problem with pattern matching of sequences and transformers as an architecture is that it's something they're explicitly designed to be good at with self attention. Translation is mainly matching patterns to equivalents in different languages, and continuing a piece of text is following a pattern that exists inside it. This is primarily why it's so hard to draw a line between what an LLM actually understands and what it just wings naturally through pattern memorization and why everything about them is so controversial.

Honestly I was really surprised that all models did so poorly on ARC in general thus far, since it really should be something they ought to be superhuman at from the get-go. Probably more of a problem that it's visual in concept than anything else.
Not the parent, but remembering my reading of Dennett, he was referring to the tricks that we got through evolution, rather than ones we invented ourselves. As particular examples, we have neural functional areas for capabilities like facial recognition and spatial reasoning which seems to rely on dedicated "wetware" somewhat distinct from other parts of the brain.
Fair, Windows was more subtle there. Maybe in other regards and overall as well, it's hard to do just from memory.
I'm not disagreeing, just clarifying. I myself have asked lots of dumb/easy questions but prior to ChatGPT it was hard to get simple straight-forward answers.
>> the fair wage they deserve.

That was the context. Your post before this changed it to "want". I was responding to that. Nothing to do with non-americans feeling they deserve more either. It was about why americans feel they deserve
Apparently cows are happy to eat nestlings if they happen to find a bird's nest while they're grazing.

If you're an animal, there's no food better than meat.
Yes, I don't disagree. The answer was in the context of the other poster changing "deserve" to "want"
I assumed that if I did out the math on this, it would be clear why we don't, but then I did and I now share your confusion.

The Parker Solar Probe mass is 555kg. An achievable amount of ion thrust is around 0.5N. Thus, running that thruster would accelerate the craft at 0.0009m/s2.

Getting such a craft to 30km/s of delta-v would therefore take about 33.3 million seconds of thruster time, or about 13 months.

I don't know what the duty cycle is on ion thrusters. Maybe they aren't robust enough to fire for over a year straight?
Some regulations are designed to satisfy ideological whims of the legislature, and they don't benefit society at all.
Nadella is a superb CEO, inarguably among the best of his generation. He believed in OpenAI when no one else did and deserves acclaim for this brilliant investment.

But his "below them, above them, around them" quote on OpenAI may haunt him in 2025/2026.

OAI or someone else will approach AGI-like capabilities (however nebulous the term), fostering the conditions to contest Microsoft's straitjacket.

Of course, OAI is hemorrhaging cash and may fail to create a sustainable business without GPU credits, but the possibility of OAI escaping Microsoft's grasp grows by the day.

Coupled with research and hardware trends, OAI's product strategy suggests the probability of a sustainable business within 1-3 years is far from certain but also higher than commonly believed.

If OAI becomes a $200b+ independent company, it would be against incredible odds given the intense competition and the Microsoft deal. PG's cannibal quote about Altman feels so apt.

It will be fascinating to see how this unfolds.

Congrats to OAI on yet another fantastic release.
Sure, things can always have gone better, but this is data loss/corruption territory. It's asking for trouble and hurt feelings. I think a strong response is ok.
i'm surprised there even is a training dataset. Wasn't the whole point to test whether models could show proof of original reasoning beyond patterns recognition ?
I couldn't agree more. Using the term addiction in contexts where it is not medically valid is very dangerous (like yelling "fire" in a theater) and leads to the use of violent force against those one falsely claims are "addicted".

Audio-visual stimuli from screens and speakers has never been shown to be able to have the same effects as a dopaminergic drug which is to say, completely turning up incentive salience regardless of reward or lack of it. That is why drugs are dangerous.

Technology can only be habit forming (in some contexts, maybe) if it continues to be rewarding in some way. Psychological dependence, maybe, but never addiction, and not even physiological dependence. Addictive drugs do not have to be rewarding or pleasurable. They just hijack wanting.

They are not the same and definitely should not be legislated the same. Enjoying something that is actually fun is not the same as wanting something because it chemically turned on wanting.
Seems like the same text/instructions are cached, so they give you the same result. Just a hack, but adding in a data box with current date+time fixes it as expected as the inputs are no longer the same. I wouldn't rely on this for true randomness though.
I found the demos just under My Projects under the Examples section
>> elevating the vision of "The Genius Architect" over the needs and wishes of the people who would actually use the space

Otherwise known as all architecture. In a past life I work in the entertainment industry: lots of late nights in venues like concert halls and occasional art galleries. All of them contain expensive architectural elements that serve no need other than to stoke the ego of their designers. Look behind the veil and you will see the rat's nest of engineering workarounds needed to keep these white elephants upright. Let the engineers draw a building's outline and it may be ugly, but at least it will have sufficient electrical connections, parking, and floor space.
Well just that it’s none of these things, as expressed by countless people, online and offline. It was voted as world’s ugliest building more than once etc. etc…
>This model was trained to pass this test, it was trained heavily on the example questions, so it was a narrow technique.

You are allowed to train on the train set. That's the entire point of the test.

>We even have proof that it isn't AGI, since it scores horribly on ARC-AGI 2. It overfitted for this test.

Arc 2 does not even exist yet. All we have are "early signs", not that that would be proof of anything. Whether I believe the models are generally intelligent or not doesn't depend on ARC
> You can not simply switch on a flag make existing code safe ... except you can do this too ... it just then comes with a high run-time cost for checking.

I don't think you can reasonably implement this even at a high runtime cost without breaking programs. Either way, you've managed to re-state the crux of my argument.

> I do not believe you can solve a lot more issues with strong typing than you can already solve in C simply by building good abstractions.

Then I don't think you have much familiarity with strong typing or are underestimating the performance impact of equivalently "safe" (in a broader sense than what rust uses the term for) abstractions in C.

The only way to get equivalent performance while maintaining the same level of guarantees in C is to generate C code, at which point you're definitely better off using another programming language.
I find there's a time and a place for RTFM, and it's usually not at the start of the project when you know the least. When you're just starting, you just want to get something working. Being spoon-fed some answers to get past a few hurdles is rather nice. But then there comes a point where you have to stop and be like "Okay, what the heck is this actually doing? How does it work?".

I just hit that point with some TensorFlow stuff because I started hitting the limits of what ChatGPT could answer successfully, and I think that's fine. But maybe good that I couldn't get everything out of it or it may have delayed my learning further yet. Which I guess reinforces your point.
I'm very confident that queries were not routed to human workers behind the API.

Possibly some other form of "make it seem more impressive than it is," but not that one.
From Chapter VII of Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (https://www.lri.fr/~mbl/Stanford/CS477/papers/Kuhn-SSR-2ndEd...):

"If awareness of anomaly plays a role in the emergence of new sorts of phenomena, it should surprise no one that a similar but more profound awareness is prerequisite to all acceptable changes of theory. On this point historical evidence is, I think, entirely unequivocal. The state of Ptolemaic astronomy was a scandal before Copernicus’ announcement. Galileo’s contributions to the study of motion depended closely upon difficulties discovered in Aristotle’s theory by scholastic critics. Newton’s new theory of light and color originated in the discovery that none of the existing pre-paradigm theories would account for the length of the spectrum, and the wave theory that replaced Newton’s was announced in the midst of growing concern about anomalies in the relation of diffraction and polarization effects to Newton’s theory. Thermodynamics was born from the collision of two existing nineteenth-century physical theories, and quantum mechanics from a variety of difficulties surrounding black-body radiation, specific heats, and the photoelectric effect.4 Furthermore, in all these cases except that of Newton the awareness of anomaly had lasted so long and penetrated so deep that one can appropriately describe the fields affected by it as in a state of growing crisis."

Later in the same chapter, he gives three examples of crises that led to paradigmatic revolutions: "a particularly famous case of paradigm change, the emergence of Copernican astronomy."; "the crisis that preceded the emergence of Lavoisier’s oxygen theory of combustion"; and "the late nineteenth century crisis in physics that prepared the way for the emergence of relativity theory."

Kuhn absolutely considered relativity and quantum mechanics to be examples of paradigmatic revolutions, just like Newtonian mechanics in the 17th Century and the earlier Copernican revolution.

If you want to argue that Kuhn was wrong about history, then you can do that (and I would at least partly agree); but if you want to claim Kuhn didn't say what he actually said, that's a different matter.
Models are predictable at 0 temperatures. They might have tested the output beforehand.
The EU was built on red tape. Now it wants to slash it
> monogamous system of the 1950s West

It's not exclusively a "West" thing, and it never was. Monogamy has been a stable and thriving system in many parts of the world for centuries, well before the 1950s or the Western framing of it. Societies in South Asia, East Asia, and the Middle East, for example, have long upheld monogamous traditions through cultural and religious practices, sometimes even more rigidly than the West.
That's fair, but it's kind of on the same level as the "cultural continuity" represented by the Japanese using the Greek week. It's a real transmission, but it goes through multiple intermediaries, the source is generally not recognized, no contact ever occurred between source and destination, and, being adopted only indirectly, it's part of a cultural suite related to the intermediate culture that had contact with the destination, not one related to the source culture.
> ARM is literally blowing up their ecosystem for no reason

With explosives?
Your comment really is a prime example of what is wrong with this discourse.

> which has the frickking Black Forest ecosystem

Bavaria has forests, but not the Black Forest. The Black Forest is in Baden Württemberg.

> and a mountainous terrain

Bavaria is more mountainous than northern Germany for sure, but not all of Bavaria is the alps.

> Not to mention the winds are much slower there than in North Germany. For the cost calculus that wind energy provides, it's best suited for underutilized offshore areas or desert climates.

I often see this argued, often with people citing ground wins speeds to support their statement. However, at 100m public records to show sufficient wind speeds to justify the investment in many cases. Of course offshore wind is always going to have a lower LCoE than onshore wind, but in southern states like Bavaria transmission bottlenecks and redispatch are also a concern (by the way, both of witch are exasperated by the lack of investment in transmission networks).

> but of course solar doesn't make sense in Germany,

This is just a factually wrong statement. Solar does make sense ans the business case is just getting stronger with the falling panel and storage costs. I have a residential installation (the least cost and energy effective solution) and I cover most of my electricity needs from my roof in 10 out of 12 months. People love to reference the two months to demonstrate that it is useless, but that’s a bit like saying your house is useless because you’re not at home for 10 hours a day.
Have we really watered down the definition of AGI that much?

LLMs aren't really capable of "learning" anything outside their training data. Which I feel is a very basic and fundamental capability of humans.

Every new request thread is a blank slate utilizing whatever context you provide for the specific task and after the tread is done (or context limit runs out) it's like it never happened. Sure you can use databases, do web queries, etc. but these are inflexible bandaid solutions, far from what's needed for AGI.
The Need to Punish (1999)
ARC wasn't designed as a benchmark for LLMs, and it doesn't make much sense to compare them on it since it's the wrong modality. Even a MLM with image inputs can't be expected to do well, since they're nothing like 99.999% of the training data. The fact that even a text-only LLM can solve ARC problems with the proper framework is important, however.
The last few doctors appointments I’ve had, the clinician used a service to record and summarize the visit. It was using some sort of TTS and LLM to do so. It’s already in medical settings.
Depends on the task, no?

Do you have a sense of what kind of task this benchmark includes? Are they more “general” such that random people would fare well or more specialized (ie something a STEM grad studied and isn’t common knowledge)?
> I'm not aware of any KSP mod that helps you plan slingshots.

As someone who played before they added patched conics, I'd consider patched conics such a thing.
The USDA Say It's Time to Replace Meat with Beans
The screenshot in the “Add and configure sources” section has the YouTube plugin with the caption: “One of the biggest video platforms owned by Google”.

The stupid thing is that it’s entirely believable that Google would have multiple competing video platforms. Certainly they tend to have half a dozen competing chat things alive at any give point in time, two or three with the same name for bonus confusion.

(The sentence could do with a comma: “One of the biggest video platforms, owned by Google”.)
Ian I am willing to continue if you are getting something out of it, but you don't seem to want to answer the question I have and the questions you have seem (to me) like they are trivially answerable from what I've written in the response tree to my original comment. So, I'm not sure that you are.
Sure but... this is the technology at the most expensive it will ever be. I'm impressed that o3 was able to achieve such high performance at all, and am not too pessimistic about costs decreasing over time.
It's not really a matter of intelligence, and nobody's smart 100% of the time.

Let's take the average person on this forum, who's probably pretty tech savvy. Their odds of falling for a scam on a given day might be 1 in a billion. But when they're exhausted after work, they might be 10X likelier to fall for a scam. Another 10X when they're stressed out about family life, or going through a breakup. Another 10X when they're out drinking with their friends. And so on.

Eventually, whether it's due to age or other factors, everyone gets to be in situations where they're susceptible to scams. And scammers are experts at emotional manipulation, exploiting fear and embarrassment.
friends with a new number can leave a voicemail saying they are who they are (or text or hit you up on social or…)

taking a call from unknown number, never under any circumstance. people calling you do this for a living, you pick up and your odds are stacked against you. maybe not yours or mine but my Father’s for sure :)
Given the delivery mechanism for OpenAI, how do they actually keep it private?