skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I used to think like this, but no longer. Honestly, in an average album, there may only be 2-4 tracks that are excellent and the rest are just OK. This is a pretty common pattern and you can see reflected in the number of streams for each song. As for the album being the artists collective vision, I don't know that that is true. Maybe it is for something like Pink Floyd, but I get the impression most songs are written in isolation, rather than being a part of a collective vision.

In the end, why waste time listening to something you only half enjoy?
> You'll know AGI is here when the exercise of creating tasks that are easy for regular humans but hard for AI becomes simply impossible.

No, we won't. All that will tell us is that the abilities of the humans who have attempted to discern the patterns of similarity among problems difficult for auto-regressive models has once again failed us.
Stupid is as stupid does. We Americans love Forrest Gump. Success comes more from hard work plus luck than from intelligence.
The tough part about radiation itself isn't painful so causality can be hard to ascertain.
Indeed, it is "Source First" license, dev(s) reasoning here: https://futo.org/about/futo-statement-on-opensource/
My grandfather was a radar operator in WW2, on a ship that was hit and damaged by opposing forces.

He told me stories of how they would make barges that would float off the side of the ship, where sailors would go to drink torpedo juice.

He claimed at the time it was only the “expired” kind that they would have to change out anyways.
I think it's still an interesting way to measure general intellience, it's just that o3 has demonstrated that you can actually achieve human performance on it by training it on the public training set and giving it ridiculous amounts of compute, which I imagine equates to ludicrously long chains-of-thought, and if I understand correctly more than one chain-of-thought per task (they mention sample sizes in the blog post, with o3-low using 6 and o3-high using 1024. Not sure if these are chains-of-thought per task or what).

Once you look at it that way it the approach really doesn't look like intelligence that's able to generalize to novel domains. It doesn't pass the sniff test. It looks a lot more like brute-forcing.

Which is probably why, in order to actually qualify for the leaderboard, they stipulate that you can't use more than $10k more of compute. Otherwise, it just sounds like brute-forcing.
Thanks for the explanation, it helped, but I still have no clue where does the "ajar" thing come from, letter for letter.
Couldn’t agree more with this - too many people rush to build autonomous agents when their problem could easily be defined as a DAG workflow. Agents increase the degrees of freedom in your system exponentially making it so much more challenging to evaluate systematically.
One thing I have not seen commented on is that ARC-AGI is a visual benchmark but LLMs are primarily text. For instance when I see one of the ARC-AGI puzzles, I have a visual representation in my brain and apply some sort of visual reasoning solve it. I can "see" in my mind's eye the solution to the puzzle. If I didn't have that capability, I don't think I could reason through words how to go about solving it - it would certainly be much more difficult.

I hypothesize that something similar is going on here. OpenAI has not published (or I have not seen) the number of reasoning tokens it took to solve these - we do know that each tasks was thoussands of dollars. If "a picture is worth a thousand words", could we make AI systems that can reason visually with much better performance?
This is not a matter of who is doing it, but (a) why and (b) second-order effects.

> If Google were funding a leg of passenger rail I suspect you’d be similarly incensed.

It depends on (a) why and (b) second-order effects.

Are they doing it, e.g, because they want to build a new campus in a lower-cost-of-living area, and they want to make the idea of living in Tuscaloosa, AL more palatable by having it connected to Atlanta, GA with train service that does not take 6(!!!!) hours as Amtrak currently does? Amazing, go Google!

Oh, they want to make it so that everyone can use it at reasonable prices, but Google employees can do it for free and get priority boarding? Fine, if that's what it takes to get private enterprises investing in infrastructure, I'm okay with it.

Oh, they want to do it because they are going to use it as a test-bed for some revolutionary transportation technology that they pinky-promise will eventually work as some Futurama-style tube network where anyone can go door-to-door as fast as possible? And they are offering the whole thing for free (or heavily subsidized) for everyone that enrolls in their beta program? Then please Google go fuck itself, because we all know how this is just bait.
Do you have any dependents, like parents or kids, by any chance? Imagine not being able to provide for them. Think how’d you feel in such circumstances.

Like in general I totally agree with you, but I also understand why a person would care about their loved ones and themselves first.
I hope governments will finally take action.
Yes and no.

They do not pay out per stream. They pay out a set % of their total revenue to rights holders. Spotify has to pay the exact same amount of money before and after that change.

The savings for Spotify is in not having the (not so insignificant) administrative overhead of trying to make hundreds of thousands of basically worthless payouts to different individuals that are worth <$5 or even <$1.

I think it's fairly reasonable to draw some sort of lower bound on the minimum you need to reach to get a payout, especially in a world where basically anyone can put music on their service.
"Conservative doctrine" stopped being a thing a long, long time ago.
Self hosted isn't always local only. I have a vpn server on my home router and control my home assistant worldwide. No corporation controls my access or data.
Overdose of anti-ADHD stimulants have possibly lethal side effects.
Sounds like Brain Dances (BDs) from Cyberpunk 2077.
I've lived in the northeast my whole life, and I don't remember ever being surprised at the idea of someone saying it. That's at least partially because I'm just used to the idea of people I interact with potentially not being from the northeast though. Even at a young age in the suburb I grew up in (with around 25k population, so not a particularly huge one), it was pretty common to encounter people who came from other states or countries. I guess if you're from a town small enough you might not be as used to interacting with people from other places, but is that really a regional thing or just a small town thing?
good, as long as chrome has such an overwhelming marketshare, reducing its funding sounds like a good idea. the companies that build on chrome can contribute to the funding to keep chrome alive.
Actually I believe that he did mean 10 random people tested individually, not a committee of 10 people. The key being that the question is considered to be answered correctly if any one of the 10 people got it right. This is similar to how LLMs are evaluated with pass@5 or pass@10 criteria (because the LLM has no memory so running it 10 times is more like asking 10 random people than asking the same person 10 times in a row).

I would expect 10 random people to do better than a committee of 10 people because 10 people have 10 chances to get it right while a committee only has one. Even if the committee gets 10 guesses (which must be made simultaneously, not iteratively) it might not do better because people might go along with a wrong consensus rather than push for the answer they would have chosen independently.
If I recall correctly the authors of the benchmark did mention on Twitter that for certain issues models will submit an answer that technically passes the test but is kind of questionable, so yeah, good point.
Are most people having problems with python packages using Windows? It's been mentioned a couple of times in this thread, but not that often.
The PDP-11 was minicomputer, but PDP-10s were "minis" only formally, with VAX due to reasonable size and comparable performance coining the title "supermini" IIRC.
Ask HN: Stanford CS 153 help
hi hn - i'm volunteering at Stanford next quarter to co-teach cs 153 (infrastructure at scale) - a course i wish had existed during my undergrad years. rather than pure theory, it's focused on how large-scale systems actually work in production

the format combines hands-on projects with a speaker series. we've confirmed some solid speakers (Jensen Huang from NVIDIA, Matthew Prince from Cloudflare etc), but i'm also keen to bring in perspectives from folks who don't fit the standard mold. tbh, many of the best systems eng/devs/infra ppl i've worked with are pretty weird - they think differently, take unconventional paths, and often learn by obsessively building and breaking things rather than following traditional routes. i think it would be cool for the students to realize its a feature, not a bug, to be weirdly obsessive

if you're interested in this kind of stuff, i'd value your thoughts on:

1/ who are the fascinating/unsung heroes in infra/systems eng that students should learn from? especially interested in people who've solved hard scaling problems through unconventional thinking or unique approaches

2/ what kind of projects do you think would fun and meaningfully demonstrate real-world infrastructure challenges while still being achievable in an academic quarter?

prerequisites are CS106/CS111 level programming. draft syllabus here: https://explorecourses.stanford.edu/search?view=catalog&filt...

email: anjney at alumni dot stanford edu if you prefer to share thoughts privately. thank you in advance for any and all help
Telling on myself but almost everyone I know plays games/works in IT. Yes, I am a man child surrounded by man children/women children I suppose.

All up at least 10 current active VR users. Usage scale ranges from “an experience 3-4 times a year” to “years of daily active usage.”

Another mate joined just recently who is not really into gaming, but got a quest because he actually wanted a big tv/projector but it’s not feasible living in shared housing. I actually told him not to, I just didn’t think he would enjoy it, and despite enjoying jt myself, I actually don’t promote it much to people I consider “normies”because I know it’s niche and I don’t think it really is for most people, but interestingly he has been really happy with it entirely for movies.
> the CH32V003 is ridiculously cheap – like you can buy 50 of them for $1.45

I'm not sure how they saw that price. Has to be some kind of new new user one-time special. Following their link I saw $2.65 logged out, and once I was logged in $4.78 -- all for "50Pcs CH32V003A4M6" (the 8 pin package)

Of course 9.56c each is still cheap for something that is about the same speed as an i486SX, just with a lot less RAM (2k).
That's rather bad faith.
> The size of twitter.json has changed between the versions, I wonder why that is?

For parsing benchmarks, it read the pretty formatted file that is committed in the repository.

But for generation benchmarks it doesn't dump it pretty formatted, so there's much less whitespaces and newlines making the file a bit smaller.
If it wasn’t made of steps then Turing machines wouldn’t be able to execute them.

Further, this is probably running an algorithm on top of an NN. Some kind of tree search.

I get what you’re saying though. You’re trying to draw a distinction between statistical methods and symbolic methods. Someday we will have an algorithm which uses statistical methods that can match human performance on most cognitive tasks, and it won’t look or act like a brain. In some sense that’s disappointing. We can build supersonic jets without fully understanding how birds fly.
No, we built helicopters.
Well said. This summarizes my experience quite succinctly. Many an engineer fails to understand the importance of distinguishing between the different tempo and the immediate vs long-term goals.
The shape doesn't matter! Non-humanoid shapes give minir advantages on specific tasks but for a general robot you'll have a hard time finding a shape much more optimal than humanoid. And if you go with humanoid you have so much data available! Videos contain the information of which movements a robot should execude. Teleoperation is easy.
This is the bitter lesson! The shape doesn't matter, any shape will work with the right architecture, data and training!
Do you just mean because any physically realizable computer is a finite state machine? Or...?

I wouldn't describe a computer's usual behavior as having constant depth.

It is fairly typical to talk about problems in P as being feasible (though when the constant factors are too big, this isn't strictly true of course).

Just because for unreasonably large inputs, my computer can't run a particular program and produce the correct answer for that input, due to my computer running out of memory, we don't generally say that my computer is fundamentally incapable of executing that algorithm.
o1 already fixed the red herrings...
I've been using DeArrow https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36273890 it calms down the thumbnail clickbait on YouTube, I feel like I enjoy YouTube more by watching less.
This is how it used to be in Finland, too. More houses than in many other countries are heated electrically. With the cold winters here the variation is extra big.

Still since a couple of years ago bills have to be paid according to monthly (sometimes bimonthly) real consumption. I had the feeling this was even a regulatory requirement to make people aware of the real costs and encourage saving. Cannot find a reference to that now. Either I remember it wrong or the search results are just too polluted by marketing pages.

All meters are read remotely with hourly precision. An increasing share of households has spot price contracts. So the price changes every hour. Sometimes negative, sometimes 60 cents/kWh or more to mention the extremes. Switching to 15 minute pricing is on the way already
Are you going to quibble on the definition of purposefully? Is your issue that you think "faking" is a term only usable for intelligent systems and the llms don't meet that level for you? I'm not sure I understand your issue and why my responses are so unacceptable.
My understanding was that the central issue was whether the Nuvia “modify” license “transferred” to Qualcomm. If so, wouldn’t that be a legal issue to be resolved by MSJ? Why was this tried to a jury?
ah, i remembered the principle wrong - incompetent people get promoted, because competent people are most valuable right where they are right now.
Seriously, programming as a profession will end soon. Let's not kid us anymore. Time to jump the ship.
Personally, I find the so-called hydraulic theory of management the most accurate. The crap flows from the top to the bottom.
As you obviously know, the Taj Mahal is a memorial to the empress consort to the Mughal emperor.
It's remarkable to me that many of the top-level comments on this story are all positing that something (i.e. the damn phones) must have replaced drug use and we're just not accounting for it. And if it isn't the damn phones, then it must be that the kids are just too scared of modern-day drugs and the dangers lurking within.

I'm not saying it's not phone addiction, or fentanyl in the weed, but is it really that hard to believe that the youths just don't want to do drugs as much as your generation did?
I am guessing he meant 15mm, right?

15cm is not a small knife. Infact a 15mm diamond knife is pretty massive. The longest diamond knife I'm finding with some lazy searching is about 4mm, and it's 2200$.
96 250, non-diesel. I’ll never get rid of it.
Great examples. They are simple, reliable, efficient and effective. Far better than blindly copying what a human being does. Maybe there are equally clever ways of doing things like folding clothes.
Nitpick, but as far as I remember, minicomputers are midrange computers. DEC PDP-11 would be in the same class as IBM AS/400, so while they were distinguished from mainframes, they were "medium sized computers".

Assuming, of course, that those "medium sized computers" are the midrange.
Immediately, yes. 10 thousand years later, probably not.
Legendary shitpost from a major medical journal
Automattic is basically Matt Mullenweg, Inc. — not much difference there.
The whole plaza should be grass and trees, agree it would change the entire look.
This recent interview covers some of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUSv2gdqX-Q (from ~40 mins in). Also these podcasts for more depth: https://www.investmentmagazine.com.au/2021/07/passive-flows-... & https://advisoranalyst.com/2021/11/24/26-michael-green-the-i... & https://omny.fm/shows/masters-in-business/mike-greene-on-why...
Haven't read deeply into this particular dispute but Arm suing their own customers doesn't seem good for business. Especially since they lost.
Yes, but the stupid robot laid out your Thursday-black-Turtleneck for you on Saturday morning. That just won't suffice.
If you don't feel like the world needed grand scale changes at a societal level with all the global problems we're unable to solve, you haven't been paying attention. Income inequality, corporate greed, political apathy, global warming.
>People's comments, including in this very thread, seem to suggest otherwise (c.f. comments about "goal post moving").

But you don't see this kind of discussion on the narrow models/techniques that made strides on this benchmark, do you ?

>People have a colloquial understanding of AGI whose consequence is a significant change to daily life, not the tortured technical definition that you are using

And ChatGPT has represented a significant change to the daily lives of many. It's the fastest adopted software product in history. In just 2 years, it's one of the top ten most visited sites on the planet worldwide. A lot of people have had the work they do significant change since its release. This is why I ask, what is world altering ?

>How about you? I get the impression that you think AGI was achieved some time ago.

Sure

>It's a bit difficult to simultaneously argue both that we achieved AGI in GPT-N and also that GPT-(N+X) is now the real breakthrough AGI

I have never claimed GPT-N+X is the "new breakthrough AGI". As far as I'm concerned, we hit AGI sometime ago and are making strides in competence and/or enabling even more capabilities.

You can recognize ENIAC as a general purpose computer and also recognize the breakthroughs in computing since then. They're not mutually exclusive.

And personally, I'm more impressed with o3's Frontier Math score than ARC.

>I think everyone's definition of AGI includes, as a component, significant changes to the world

Sure

>which probably would be something like rapid GDP growth or unemployment

What people imagine as "significant change" is definitely not in any broad agreement.

Even in science fiction, the existence of general intelligences more competent than today's LLMs does not necessarily precursor massive unemployment or GDP growth.

And for a lot of people, the clincher stopping them from calling a machine AGI is not even any of these things. For some, that it is "sentient" or "cannot lie" is far more important than any spike of unemployment.
Yeah, we REALLY need to see pictures please. I have never heard of a diamond knife before and would love to see what it looks like.
> Perhaps the notion that the subatomic world is as vast as the universe, as stated by Richard Feynman when he said "There’s plenty of room at the bottom.", holds more truth than we realize.

That's true and he knew this even at the time of this famous lecture. He was talking about that there is a plenty of room at the room for us to explore how can we use atoms in synthetic chemistry not into exploring the fundamental particles inside them . When we are talking about particle physics we are basically talking about the successor field of nuclear physics. It studies the interactions and particles inside the sub-atomic structure. Feynman's most interesting work - parton model- was one of the first innovative theoretical work in QCD and was one of milestone of development and validation of the quark model.

The idea that protons, neutrons, and other hadrons are composed of fundamental particles called quarks that come in six -flavors- (up, down, strange, charm, top, and bottom) and possess fractional electric charges. These quarks are bound together by the strong nuclear force, mediated by particles called gluons, and must combine in specific ways to form observable particles (mesons or baryons). One day this was a wild theory and needed a lot of work on validating this model experimentally.
It would be good if you did not spam your website in every single one of your comments.
I loved Elite on the BBC B as a kid. It was before my time, but we had inexpensive tastes in our personal computing growing up. I absolutely loved it, and I can definitely understand someone spending this much time on it.
> are we stuck waiting for the 20-25 years for GPU improvements

If this turns out to be hard to optimize / improve then there will be a huge economic incentive for efficient ASICs. No freaking way we’ll be running on GPUs for 20-25 years, or even 2.
C is exactly at the right level. More high level and human readable than bare assembly, yet without the complexity and abstractions of Rust or C++ or opaqueness of Python.
Wonder what WP Engine thinks about that.
Soon, a pattern we've seen before: "Look at what you made me do. I'm only aligned with horrible opinions and communities now because you wouldn't support and love me for my less-horrible ones."

Also worth noting Musk was raised in apartheid South Africa, so some of stuff swirling around AFD may not be quite so odd or shocking to him.
Another handy dos command, originating back to DOS is SUBST.

Came in pretty handy when I wanted to share a folder with Remote Desktop, but it would only let me select whole drives.

Made a SUBST drive letter for that folder, worked like a charm!
Insights from DevRel and Marketing Leaders [video]
> Why would they use a very strong label that they don't even have proofs for?

There's plenty of proof of intent which has been addressed by actual international law experts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_genocide). MSF is not making a legal argument though, they are making a practical one. The practical effects of Israel's action, regardless of intent, look like genocide. From the MSF perspective, intent is irrelevant, it is only the practical situation on the ground that matters. Intent only matters in that it informs how we should go about stopping Israel from engaging in these actions, not whether those actions need to be stopped.

> Well maybe saving hostage lives, that would also be a very strong argument for Israel to withdraw is something they should consider

I don't doubt that it is something that has been considered and if that was something that any Israel's allies could do, they would.

However, saving 65 lives doesn't justify genocide, nor does it make what Israel is doing not genocide.

To be clear, the leaders of Hamas are also genocidal, just much less effective at it. The destruction of Hamas is a reasonable goal but genocide is not an acceptable means to that end.
kyle kingsbury/aphyr of jepsen seems like an exemplar of #1
>I don't know why people always feel the need to gender these things

Because it's relevant to the point being made, i.e. that these tests reflect the biases and interests of the people who make them. This is true not just for AI tests, but intelligence test applied to humans. That Demis Hassabis, a chess player and video game designer, decided to test his machine on video games, Go and chess probably is not an accident.

The more interesting question is why people respond so apprehensively to pointing out a very obvious problem and bias in test design.