skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
React doesn't have any of that v-if/v-else crap, and it's one of the reasons I gravitated towards it. I don't like the fake attributes because it feels like an abuse of HTML, a risk if there's ever a collision because something was added to the living standard, and also, and this is mind-boggling bad to me, at least in the early days of Angular you could actually see the unparsed templating garbage on the page before the library kicked in and re-rendered.

The DX on React is quite nice. You had to do a bit of extra stuff to squeeze out a bit more performance by memoing stuff, but that's finally supposed to be fixed in React 19. And it's not like that perf was free if you did everything by hand anyway, that just required you to handroll clever batch DOM updates.
I wonder how well O3 can do just compiling C to rust in one shot
I’m guessing it’s linked to declining social interaction among teenagers, which also explains the decline in alcohol consumption too.
As I pointed out in my comment above, that's the same thing all authors say when someone shows massive problems in their data.
> if we can identify what memory the child will need to access before calling _exit or exec (say, "the current function and its local variables")

I mean, a good deal of the parameters you need for the relevant syscalls are strings, which means it's not sufficient to copy just the stack frame, but all the memory reachable from the stack frame. Which is a nontrivial problem if you're assuming C/C++-style code.
LLMs can't do random very well

needs something like a "tool use" or "python script" component to call out and get a proper random choice according to your instructions
Transcription and summary is a vastly different thing than providing medical advice to patients.
Perhaps a sacrificial solar mirror that detaches from the main ship.

While the unfolded mirror is pushed moving away from the Sun, it reflects enough light for the smaller main body to accelerate sunward.
100% - yes - if you follow simple rules
My first impulse after ruling out Google Authenticator was to simply switch to Microsoft's Authenticator app (which I already had to use for a work-related thing anyway), thinking "of course MS would not make the same stupid mistake". Turns out they would, and they did. So alternatives from smaller vendors were the only option. In evaluating them, I focused on popular open-source solutions that had the features I deemed important (notably, local backup), and looked into the history, provenance and reputation of their vendors. Nevertheless, some risk will always remain.
Bitcoin isn't infinitely divisible, you can't do smaller than one satoshi.
Yeah, seriously. The style of testing is public, so some engineers at OpenAI could easily have spent a few months generating millions of permutations of grid-based questions and including those in the original data for training the AI. Handshakes all around, publicity for everyone.
>I don't understand what you are getting at.

If such discussions only made when LLMs make strides in the benchmark then it's not just about beating the benchmark but also what kind of system is beating it.

>You can foolishly define AGI as beating ARC but the moment ARC is beaten you realize that you don't care about that definition at all.

If you change your definition of AGI the moment a test is beaten then yes, you are simply post moving.

If you care about other impacts like "Unemployment" and "GDP rising" but don't give any time or opportunity to see if the model is capable of such then you don't really care about that and are just mindlessly shifting posts.

How do such a person know o3 won't cause mass unemployment? The model hasn't even been released yet.
It could be. Rumor is Intel (or AMD in the same situation) would lose the cross licensed parts of their x86 license if they were acquired.
>responsible for feeding half of Europe.

How so? The UK has not been self sufficient for food since before WWII. Hence food rationing for many years after the war ended.
Really? I suspect this is a troll but, in the static case, roughly the ratio of volume of space to how much gravitational force said volume applies on other objects. Extrapolate correctly for qm/gr - thats an exercise left for the reader.

Depending on your scales etc you may wish to group different things into the category of “object”, eg a car would likely be be selected as a valid grouping of atoms as an object by most people in conversation wheres it is mostly empty space at the micro level, and has a bunch of very different densities (many oom) at diff volumes even at the macro scale (eg the air in the trunk vs the engine block).
Here's my take - even if the o3 as currently implemented is utterly useless on your HARC-HAGI, it is obvious that o3 coupled with its existing training pipeline trained briefly on the hexagons would excel on it, such that passing your benchmark doesn't require any new technology.

Taking this a level of abstraction higher, I expect that in the next couple of years we'll see systems like o3 given a runtime budget that they can use for training/fine-tuning smaller models in an ad-hoc manner.
I thought that the gen 1 oryon cores were using Nuvia source, but the gen 2 cores were from scratch implementation.
While the YouTube algorithm could be better (e.g. its recency bias is much too strong), 99% of what it recommends me is in line with stuff I watched or liked before. So, I don’t know what to tell you.

Maybe your interests are shared by a lot of people who also like crappy stuff? Just joking, but there must be some reason for the difference in experience.
Imagine that thing painted neon green and hurling down the highway.
that sounds tedious af and still prone to error, i'd rather literally pay someone to handle all of this for me, let's say, some kind of institution which specializes in storing and handling money
> Even if you did suspect something was wrong you were careful because science said otherwise.… And so the only one loudly saying this was bunk where the right wing crackpots (the reasonable people on the right side were much quieter about it because they don't like to argue with science even though it went against their bias) - the right wing crackpots were on this only because the left wing embraced it as a science that confirmed their bias.

If “crackpots” turn out to be right when “reasonable people” and “science” were wrong—and this is far from the only instance of this happening—maybe we should reevaluate some things.

Just because a peer reviewed paper published in a prestigious journal says something doesn’t mean it’s true. Even a survey of multiple peer reviewed papers published over time isn’t necessarily determinative if there are common methodological issues or publishing biases. Yes, a lot of times actual crackpots will make stupid criticisms, but not every criticism is stupid even if it comes from outside the ivory tower.

In particular, whether or not a big rock falls faster than a small rock [1] is a fairly basic question in physics, which has one of the most certain answers. Virtually nothing in psychology, let alone human social psychology, is at that level of certainty, and any psychologist worth their salt will agree with that. Basically any finding in psychology should have a level of certainty somewhere between “yeah, that’s probably mostly true” and “hmm, interesting hypothesis that’s not entirely crazy, I wonder if it holds up”.

[1] Also, the literal question of whether a big rock or a small rock falls faster is trickier than you might assume if you only know the middle school version of the question. If we’re doing this on the moon, so as to dispose with the tricky aerodynamic questions, and we are answering the question from the frame of reference of an astronaut standing on the surface of the moon, the bigger rock actually does fall faster. Both rocks accelerate towards the center of the moon at the same rate, yes, but gravity works both ways. Both rocks pull on the moon but the bigger rock pulls harder, resulting in an extremely small torque on the lunar surface, drawing the side of the moon closer to it very slightly upwards. Which, from the surface frame of reference, is equivalent to the bigger rock falling faster.
*deep mind research ?
There is strong incentive for youtube creators to create this kind of "clickbait" content (and especially clickbait titles and thumbnails) which perpetuates that situation regardless of whether the algorithm explicitly rewards it. As long as engagement is a factor and creators are rewarded for it then it seems like what you observed is kind of unavoidable.
I see these models create new ideas. At least at the standard humans are beholden to, so this just falls flat for me.
As I said on another forum yesterday, Qualcomm almost always wins its legal battles - when they lose its not because they are wrong but usually only because their lawyers screwed up (Broadcom lawsuit of ~2012). It's kind of a Boy Scout Company in a legal sense and they are very careful. They retrained some of their best engineers as lawyers to help them succeed in court battles ...
Verifying Safety of Rust's CStr
>ultimately seized control over the account by convincing him to click “yes” to a Google [2FA] prompt on his mobile device

Stopped reading there. What more can we do to protect people from their own stupidity (and I'm not talking about the crypto "investment" part)?
But then there is the software ecosystem issue.

Having a competitive CPU is 1% of the job. Then you need
To have a competitive SoC (oh and not infringe IP), so that you can build the software ecosystem, which is the hard bit.
Thanks for confirming that I'm glad not to be your neighbor.

Last time we flooded, they came over and helped us bail water. When power was out, we helped them power their fridge with a spare generator. We generally help each other when we can, and enjoy doing so.

Nobody enjoys relaxing while watching others stress out and panic.
15% for handling all the stuff necessary to do proper customer service isn't unreasonable. everyone wants their cake and to eat it too. they already got the ability to list their emulator, it feels like a lot of begging going on, which honestly a teen writes an app and it gets big and now years later wants to make an entire career on it even though it was never permitted by apple and feels like they have a right to complain? especially when their product is focused on piracy (let's be real here). feels pretty duplicitous.
c2rust.com, but it uses things like libc::c_int
It's like a joke I recall from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: You are indeed falling towards the ground... but the trick is to miss.

Your lateral velocity is what keeps you missing, whether you want to or not.
I just assume the real reason is that it's an island and there is relatively little competition. The government and power companies can work together to take whatever they want from you and you can't stop them.
Eh, let's nip this in the bud: we could end up in a "it feels like...", coupled to free association, cycle. :)

More substantively, we can check our vibe. OpenAI is just as active as it ever was w/notebooks. To an almost absurd degree. 5-10 commits a week. https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook/activity
Retrain engineers as lawyers is clever. Better than repurpose them as subpar managers.
It doesn't follow, faulty logic. The two are probably correlated though.
But humans being able to develop new tricks is core to their intelligence, saying its just a bag of tricks means you don't understand what AGI is. So either the poster misunderstood Dennett or Dennett weren't talking about AGI or Dennett didn't understand this well.

Of course there are many tricks you will need special training for, like many of the skills human share with animals, but the ability to construct useful shareable large knowledge bases based on observations is unique to humans and isn't just a "trick".
> LLMs aren't really capable of "learning" anything outside their training data.

ChatGPT has had for some time the feature of storing memories about its conversations with users. And you can use function calling to make this more generic.

I think drawing the boundary at “model + scaffolding” is more interesting.
Gitlab 17.7 Released
Thank you. The challenge here is how to trust it. I think leading with stating that this is a paradigm shift is key, and then it's important to show how it pivots from first principles. Right now, the description has what appear to be proprietary product terms (fabric, ineffable, etc) where ordinarily there would be some more familiar terms of art from cryptography.

How much of this is net new, and are we asking people to suspend their disbelief?
It does, which is why I don’t really subscribe to any test like this being great for actually determining “AGI”. A true AGI would be able to continuously train and create new LLMs that enable it to become a SME in entirely new areas.
I mean fkcu me when they have those things, however, maybe they are just lazy and their judgement is fine, for a lazy intelligence. Inner-self thinks "why are these bastards asking me to do this? ". I doubt that is actually happening, but now, .. prove it isn't.
>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.

To be precise for 555kg probe you'd need additional 600-800kg of propellant mass and thus run the thruster(s) at about 1.5N thrust using 40-60KW - 250m2 of solar panels - everything is available at the current state of tech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster

"A test of the NASA Solar Technology Application Readiness (NSTAR) electrostatic ion thruster resulted in 30,472 hours (roughly 3.5 years) of continuous thrust at maximum power. Post-test examination indicated the engine was not approaching failure.[75][3][4] NSTAR operated for years on Dawn."
AI Language to Command Interface
Rewrote with feedback, works on everything and uses golang.
No kidding. And unlike the current pharma remedies, I doubt sugar gel is likely to cause permanent impotence.
> can't understand why this would be non-obvious. Maybe there's a cultural difference

Yes. Many Americans take it for granted that we have quick access to a variety of cities and landscapes. (Particularly on the coasts.)

Keep in mind that America is about a third richer, on a GDP per capita basis, than Canada. Even with stark income inequality, that produces a large disposable-income gap. Add to that the population gap and you have about the population of Canada travelling intercity many times a year.
A lot of companies with great IPR have very terrible management, now ARM has joined that club! Pay their license fees religiously for almost 30 years and they turn around and sue you, GEEZ!
Deciphering patterns in natural language is more complex than these puzzles. If you train your AI to solve these puzzles, we end up in the same spot. The difficulty of solving would be with creating training data for a foreign medium. The "tokens" are the grids and squares instead of words (for words, we have the internet of words, solving that).

If we're inferring the answers of the block patterns from minimal or no additional training, it's very impressive, but how much time have they had to work on O3 after sharing puzzle data with O1? Seems there's some room for questionable antics!
Gas production from the North Sea is low because they imposed onerous windfall surtaxes on it so now it is unattractive to produce.
It is fairly well documented that groups of people can show cognitive abilities that exceed that of any individual member. The classic example of this is if you ask a group of people to estimate the number of jellybeans in a jar, you can get a more accurate result than if you test to find the person with the highest accuracy and use their guess.

This isn't to say groups always outperform their members on all tasks, just that it isn't unusual to see a result like that.
C2Rust is mentioned in the second paragraph of the related work section.
"New" reasoning models are plain LLMs with clever reinforcement learning. o1 is itself reinforcement learning on top GPT-4o.

They found a way to make test time compute a lot more effective and that is an advance but the idea is not new, the architecture is not new.

And the vast majority of people convinced LLMs plateaued did so regardless of test time compute.
> any legitimate traffic coming from non-US IPs.

If it's not actually reaching you to log in and what not, how do you know it's legit or not?

How do you know it's US traffic or not in the end?

I'm not saying it's not something anyone can reasonably do, but I've both been the gatekeeper required to implement/support such a policy and been someone burned by it. It shouldn't be assumed the block lists are actually that good.
Yep, as a user I didn't find it confusing at all. F-Droid is designed for and around adding custom repos. FUTO links to their own repo and it all works fine.

I'd definitely consider this as being "available on F-Droid".
Crypto Doesn't Care About Cash Flow. That Will Soon Change, Says Pantera Capital
Good article. I think it can emphasize a bit more on supporting human interactions in agentic workflows. While composing workflows isn't new, involving human-in-the-loop introduces huge complexity, especially for long-running, async processes. Waiting for human input (which could take days), managing retries, and avoiding errors like duplicate refunds or missed updates require careful orchestration.

I think this is where durable execution shines. By ensuring every step in an async processing workflow is fault-tolerant and durable, even interruptions won't lose progress. For example, in a refund workflow, a durable system can resume exactly where it left off—no duplicate refunds, no lost state.
Yes, which originally came from Cyberpunk, the first sourcebook for which was released in 1988, with Cyberpunk 2020 releasing in 1990 complete with the idea for pre-recorded replayable memories/full sensory experience, ie:Braindance.

Strange Days was released in 1995.

Maximum Mike was, and is, a prophet right alongside Gibson.

edit: Although almost certainly this wasn't the first place people imagined being able to record and playback memories.
Thanks for all the write-ups on LLMs, you're on top of the news and it makes it way easier to follow what's happening and the existing implementations by following your blog instead.
How can people check their data?

In the medium term the plan could be to achieve AGI, and then AGI would figure out how to actually write o3. (Probably after AGI figures out the business model though:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/s/OV4S2hGgW8)
Doesn't mean that it is compiled with Vector support or optimizations, which is going to artificially make the results worse.
it’s a necessarily a logical implication that this theory would be a good approximation at certain scales just by the sheer fact that it used to be a theory that fit observations at some point. That is also true of “completely incorrect” theories like heliocentricity.

In the case of NM we happened to have something that is often also computationally simple and efficient so we keep using it, but it is by no means a “correct theory”. just a useful model that is still useful.

i daresay it will continue to be useful for some things even if we eg discover that we are living in a simulation and manage to escape! As long as some part of us will continue to experience this reality it will be useful - the math is simple and gives good approximations in many cases.
> along with Sonja Wild of UC Davis, who also contributed to the study

I love me some nominative determinism.
> You are allowed to train on the train test. That's the entire point of the test.

Right, but by training on those test cases you are creating a narrow model. The whole point of training questions is to create narrow models, like all the models we did before.
This lawsuit will cast a cloud of darkness on any startup company that wants to build a new arm chip design! What a terribly stupid thing for ARM to do - they have basically pointed a gun at their own head and pulled the trigger!
All I want in life is a good union for software. Role finished this week, who needs me next week? Off I go.
o8 will probably be able to handle datacenter management
I had Google call me once :) It was when I was riding in a Waymo and one of the screens in the vehicle was lagging a little bit. They made the surprising choice of calling my phone, rather than ringing the car itself, and I didn't pick up because... who picks up when your phone says, "Call from Google" :) They called the car shortly afterward to reassure me that the lagging screen wasn't an indicator that the car would underperform.
Simstim from Neuromancer (released in 1984) is the first mention of such a thing that I know of.
I mean, how do you select the volume to sample over?
I'm very pleased to see this sentiment, as a father of a 14 year old boy. 4 years ago I decided to quit alcohol altogether (from a moderate by Australian standards consumption), and I hope to be a positive influence on him through his formative years through open and honest conversations about the topic.

(He has no desire to start drinking etc early or at all at this point.)

Long term health impacts are high, as someone in my 50s I'm certainly doing better for my choice. And yes, not making stupid decisions under influence also cannot be underestimated.
Models in practice haven't been deterministic at 0 temperature, although nobody knows exactly why. Either hardware or software bugs.
Sonnet isn't a "mini" sized model. Try it with Haiku.
> But it's a terrible medium to turn black money into white money.

Isn't that what NFTs are for?

Create a stupid image, sell it on Open Sea as an NFT, bam, you've cleaned the money. Just claim it on your taxes similar to selling art and you're in the clear.
Probably about 20 years ago, near Boston, I remember noticing a reddish-brown squirrel sitting in a tree gnawing on a fried chicken leg and found the sight mildly absurd.
Wholeheartedly agree. I understand where ARM is coming from, but my god the legal team from both parties were night and day apart. And from evidences ARM isn't even asking for a lot more money. They are likely fighting this from principle, but their explanation were weak, very weak. ( They were even worst then Apple during the Apple vs Qualcomm case )

I thought the whole thing Qualcomm was way more professional. ARM's case was that what they think was written in the contract, what they "should" have written in contract and what Qualcomm shows clearly contradict.

It is more of a lesson for ARM to learn. And now the damage has been done. This also makes me think who was pushing this lawsuit. Softbank ?

I also gained more respect to Qualcomm. After what they showed Apple vs Qualcomm's case and here.

Side Note: ARM's Design has caught on. The Cortex X5 is close to Apple's Design. We should have news about X6 soon.
But for many other customers, who might need something like an A0 core, it's a strong signal to consider RISC-V instead.
I'd always placed the city's nadir when I was a kid, in the 70s-80s, during white flight, and figured the upswing started with the central artery project changes in the late 90s. I guess I really have no idea how bad it was before the 70s when you're talking about. My parents and friends parents definitely seemed to think it was better then, though.
I use Lutron Caseta switches for my smart switches.
> Maybe in some way one could argue that social media gives some sort of connection were you get some feelings from what others are doing/showing. I mean, technologically it's quite a leap

That technology exists; it's called empathy, and the extremely powerful form of it innate to humans is arguably our singularly defining characteristic. It's our tech moat, so to speak.
Extreme Programming: A Gentle Introduction
Ghostty Is Native–So What?
What is the cost of "general intelligence"? What is the price?