skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm sure the debate over the definition of AGI is important and will continue for a while, but... I can't care about it anymore.

Between Perplexity searching and summarizing, Claude explaining, and qwen (and other tools) coding, I'm already as happy as can be with whatever you want to call this level of intelligence.

Just today I used a completely local AI research tool, based on Ollama. It worked great.

Maybe it won't get much better? Or maybe it'll take decades instead of years? Ok. I remember not having these tools. I never want to go back.
New Mercedes Could Be Dangerous to Drive Due to Technology – From a Real Owner [video]
Advent of Computing: Episode 148 - Is BLISS Ignorance?
OKRs for Evil and Good
Marketing probably
Depends on which country's GDPR authorities you ask. At one point the French authorities said you don't have to delete data from backups, the Danish authorities said you have to delete when technically feasible, and the UK authorities said you had to put the data "beyond use" which has been interpreted to mean that if you ever restore from the backup you have omit the "deleted" data.

My guess is that most places go with not taking any active steps to delete things from the backups themselves, counting on media rotation to eventually overwrite the data. When restoring they omit anything that is on the "should be deleted" list.
Well - it’s Spanish now no? Telefonica bought them.
Yes and no. Conceptually it's just three nested loops. The fiddly part is unrolling the inner loop and swizzling the data layouts in such a way that the cores can be kept "fed" efficiently. This usually means breaking things up into cache-sized chunks along some axis.

It's easy enough that there's blog articles showing single developers getting within spitting distance of NVIDIA's highly optimised code. As in, 80-something-percent of the best available algorithms!

All NVIDIA did was "put the effort in", where the effort isn't some super clever algorithm implemented by a unique genius, but they simply made hundreds of variants of the matmul algorithm optimised for various scenarios. It's a kind of algorithmic brute force for eking out every last percentage point for every shape and size of input matrices on every GPU model and even for various SLI configurations.

From what I've seen, AMD has done... none of this.
Yes, we can imagine that there's an upper limit to how smart a single system can be. Even suppose that this limit is pretty close to what humans can achieve.

But: you can still run more of these systems in parallel, and you can still try to increase processing speeds.

Signals in the human brain travel, at best, roughly at the speed of sound. Electronic signals in computers play in the same league as the speed of light.

Human IO is optimised for surviving in the wild. We are really bad at taking in symbolic information (compared to a computer) and our memory is also really bad for that. A computer system that's only as smart as a human but has instant access to all the information of the Internet and to a calculator and to writing and running code, can already be effectively act much smarter than a human.
>If the benchmark is not representative of normal usage* then the benchmark and the plot being shown are not useful at all from a user/business perspective and the focus on the breakthrough scores of o3-low and o3-high in ARC-AGI would be highly misleading.

ARC is a very hyped benchmark in the industry so letting us know the results is something any company would do whether it had a direct representation on normal usage or not.

>Even if it is pure marketing they expect people to draw conclusions using the perf/cost plot from Arc.

Again, people care about ARC, they don't care doing the things ARC questions ask. That it is un-economical to pay the price to use o3 for ARC does not mean it would be un-economical to do so for the tasks people actually want to use LLMs for. What does 3x the performance in say coding mean? You really think companies/users wouldn't put up with the increased price for that? You think they have Mturkers to turn to like they do with ARC?

ARC is literally the quintessential 'easy for humans, hard for ai' benchmark. Even if you discard the 'difficulty to price won't scale the same' argument, it makes no sense to use it for an economics comparison.
> If KYC is so easy and un-burdensome that it's being applied everywhere else in our lives

If by everywhere else you mean finance. Which means you want to burden every single website in America that accepts user-generated content with a banking-style compliance department.
They Helped Create DEI–and Even They Say It Needs a Makeover
Gift link: https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/workplace/dei-corporate-creato...
I do something similar, and in fact have some useful bash scripts to help me remember to log stuff.

Basically it's a script that pops up a reminder window at regular intervals, with options for daemonising, and enabling/disabling while daemonised, and auto-enabled at startup if it's a new day.

Plus, it integrates with a pomodoro timer/logger I've written, such that all the "tomatoes" (i.e. pomodoro sessions) I've done the day before automatically get added to the log at the start of a new day.

They're fairly simple scripts, but happy to share if anyone's interested.
Like: the whole system of Medicare reimbursement for anesthesia is based on a catalog of procedure-by-procedure base units. Medicare sets reference prices for procedures. You can just go look it up. I've got the XLS open right now. I don't understand what you're trying to argue here.

You get that, at the end of the day, this is about how much money anethesiologists take home, right? People on Twitter were talking about anesthesiology being withdrawn in the middle of procedures. Obviously, that's not a thing.

Of all the players in this system, the insurers are the only ones who have their profits capped by statute, across the board. If anesthesiologists make more money from a procedure, that comes out of your hide: it's reflected in your premiums and co-pays. Please, help me understand, why are you making a moral crusade out of paying your doctors more money? They don't need the money! America pays doctors 3-5x more --- THREE TO FIVE TIMES --- than Europe does.
ok. what evidence is there that LLMs have already solved cooking? how does an LLM today know when something is burning or how to adjust seasoning to taste or whatever. this is total nonsense
I just went to read that article.

Why would an author complain that the average 12 books read by an average American a year is likely a combination of those who read nothing after high school and those that read vicariously yet not seek out a source, simply let an unverified, unsourced, unreferenced thing sit there.

It seems that reading 100 pages a day does not guarantee development of critical skills.

The answers to the author's lede are here: https://wordsrated.com/how-many-books-does-the-average-perso...
Antitrust is good but it's treating the symptom, not the disease.

The disease is the fact it's illegal to crack open their locks. We need their permission to interoperate. If we don't have it, we're criminals if we try.

All we need to do is legalize reverse engineering and circumvention for the purposes of interoperability. In less than a year the iMessage nonsense will be solved because all competing platforms will add support for its protocols whether they want it or not. They'll try to make it hard to do it but it won't matter.

Adversarial interoperability should be the norm. They shouldn't have a choice in whether they are interoperated with. It should just happen organically.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...
I remember (apocryphal?) Microsoft's chatbot developing pidgin to communicate to other chatbots. Every layer of the NN except the first and last already "think" in latent space, is this surprising?
Only two market related predictions:

- Musk will leave the Trump team before the end of the year, this will cause Tesla to crash, and that will cause the whole market to crash. It should time well with the delayed crash after interest rate stabilization that has repeated multiple times in the past.

- Gamestop MOASS will not happen in 2025.
Spock is an exercise in syntax cleverness with regular confusion opportunity and little gain IMO. Way too much implicit syntax that IDEs struggle with.

Refactoring Spock tests sucks due to how the context is different based on the clause you’re in.
This is actually relieving. People are very pessimistic itt (lol see the top comment for the past year https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38777115 ).
If the first AGI is a very uneconomical system with human intelligence but knowledge of literally everything and the capability to work 24/7, then it is not human equivalent.

It will have human intelligence, superhuman knowledge, superhuman stamina, and complete devotion to the task at hand.

We really need to start building those nuclear power plants. Many of them.
The energy constraints for chips are more about heat dissipation. But we can pump a lot more energy through them per unit volume than through the human brain.

Especially if you are willing to pay a lot for active cooling with eg liquid helium.
Consistent, algorithmic performance on basic tasks.

A great example is the simple 'count how many letters' problem. If I prompt it with a word or phrase, and it gets it wrong, me pointing out the error should translate into a consistent course correction for the entire session.

If I ask it to tell me how long President Lincoln will be in power after the 2024 election, it should have a consistent ground truth to correct me (or at least ask for clarification of which country I'm referring to). If facts change, and I can cite credible sources, it should be able to assimilate that knowledge on the fly.
How do you mention geopolitics and a potential WW3 without mentioning the Middle East and Israel?
Complex SQL and regex are pretty much my only current use cases for it. Saves tons of time doing things you don't do every day so rusty, but still can tell whether it's doing what you were asking for.
To buttress your point, reason and human language are not the same thing. This fact is not fully and widely appreciated as it deserves to be.
Alas, Cyc is pretty much a useless pipe dream.
The DMCA is a law that restricts the ability of people to make speech. The government is the one doing the restricting, even if the place the speech is being done isn't controlled by the government.

The argument you're making is applicable when a website decides not to publish your speech (they're not the government, so the 1st amendment is irrelevant), but the DMCA is different.
> We still do not know, for instance, what makes a good tokeniser (Gowda and May, 2020; Cognetta et al., 2024): which characteristics should its produced subwords `s` have to be a good starting point for language modelling? If we knew this, then we could define an objective function which we could evaluate tokenisers with.

I don't see how the authors get past this true general statement from the first paragraph of the introduction. Finding a good tokenizer is not just NP-hard; we have no idea how hard it might be because we don't have theoretical agreement on what "good" means.

In order to have something to prove, the authors decide (somewhat arbitrarily):

> Specifically, we focus on finding tokenisers that maximise the compression of a text. Given this objective, we then define the tokenisation problem as the task of finding a tokeniser which compresses a dataset to at most δ symbols.

Is a tokenizer that maximizes the compression of text (e.g. by identifying longer tokens that tend to be used whole) necessarily a better tokenizer, in terms of overall model performance? Compression might be a useful property for an objective function to consider... but then again maybe not, if it makes the problem NP-hard.

I'm also not sure how realistic the limitation to "at most δ symbols" is. I mean, that limit is undeniably useful to make the proof of NP-completeness go through, because it's a similar mechanism to the minimum number of satisfied clauses in the MAX-2-SAT definition. But why not just keep adding tokens as needed, rather than imposing any preordained limit? IIRC OpenAI's tokenizer has a vocabulary of around 52k subword strings. When that tokenizer was being designed, I don't imagine they worried much if the final number had been 60k or even 100k. How could you possibly choose a meaningful δ from first principles?

To put that point a different way, imagine the authors had proven NP-completeness by reduction from the Knapsack Problem, where the knapsack you're packing has some maximum capacity. If you can easily swap your knapsack out for a larger knapsack whenever it gets (close to) full, then the problem becomes trivial.

If the authors managed to prove that any arbitrary objective function would lead to NP-hard tokenizer optimization problem, then their result would be more general. If the paper proves that somehow, I missed it.

I suppose this paper suggests "here be dragons" in an interesting if incomplete way, but I would also say there's no need to hurt yourself with an expensive optimization problem when you're not even sure it delivers the results you want.
> LLMs have no real sense of truth or hard evidence of logical thinking.

Most humans don't have that either, most of the time.
What someone from the past would have said.
> Copyright has always been a cover story for legitimizing censorship, ever since it was about preventing people from printing the wrong kind of bible

Source?
Yeah, but also... if RSS readers behaved correctly, it would be 512 kb. (170 kb with gzip, if she didn't enable it like you imply – I'm too lazy to check, but I assumed it was on.)

I think making clients behave correctly is much more sustainable solution, although we could do better than doing so at the cost of the end users.
Perhaps you should pitch that to a VC?
Because Brave is just trying to build their own ad-network under the guise of being "privacy" oriented. It is a conflict of interest trying to get profitable selling user data while also claiming to block it. When first installed the their own ad and crypto stuff is enabled-by-default. Then throw in a few nefarious incidents, such as the affiliate link-hijacks a few years ago, and it is hard to trust them.

No browser is safe from capitalistic rot at this point.
AI-generated tools can make programming more fun
How Many Books Does the Average Person Read?
Food (supply chain) and supplement safety will tank too.
It's the other way around. The 1st amendment protects public speech from the government, not the government from the public. Since DMCA is a law made and enforced by the government it is used illegally against the public in violation of the 1st amendment.
It’s about their (partial) sovereignty, which was given back to the nations as recompense. It has nothing to do with race.
Are they concerned that after their CEO was gunned down in broad daylight over his supposed unethical behavior, and the killer is being celebrated as a folk hero. That by doubling down and doing unethical things they may be putting targets on their own back?

I know if I were at UHC I’d be looking to leave before I ended up on a hit list.
A lot of people held that passing the Turing Test would indicate human-level intelligence. GPT-4 passes.
Nuclear nowadays produces ~70% of France's electricity and renewables are booming: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...

Two close calls (level 4) in 1969 and 1980 (at Saint-Laurent-des-Eaux): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint-Laurent_Nuclear_Power_Pl...
This 100%.

The monstrous debt storm just over the horizon that most people can't see (or refuse to acknowledge) will hit and will hit hard. The Fed won't be able to restrain or lessen it with policies and blunt instruments at their disposal.

Over the last 4 months I've moved most of my investments to gold, trading cards, BTC, wine, land and rare earth.
I sung an arranged version of this poem as part of my high school's chorus group some time in 2001-2003. As far as I can remember, there wasn't any (or many if at all) changes to the Poem's text.
The process is extremely assymmetric, the counterclaim process has much higher requirements than a takedown notice. Like having to actually provide evidence you aren't infringing, provide your real identity, and often convince an AI that your content shouldn't be taken down or least get it seen by a real person. And if you succeed, you just get your content back up. No compensation for any damage caused by your content being down for a while.
> because nobody needs the features brought by the much bigger price tag

That sounds like a very bold claim, yet it reflects nothing from the real world. You may not need something, but that doesn’t mean others don’t or must not.

Technically, nobody needs anything beyond food, water, shelter and companionship (even the last one is arguable). Allow everybody to only buy the cheapest of foods and the most basic shelters. Then declare that anything else is a want. That just doesn’t make sense.

Nobody needs social media or HN or to be commenting on HN either, but here we are.
> ought to be the law that every in-network claim must be automatically approved

This almost certainly requires vertical integration between providers and insurers. That or shifting approval/denial to the provider level, i.e. your doctor can fall off the approval list from month to month for submitting too many claims.

If not, providers will become the most profitable business on the planet right until every health insurer goes bankrupt. (We’ll probably get to blame it on PE-run hospitals, even if everyone is doing it.)
Apparently, there are even scholarly studies on this !

Friendship and Fraternity: The Cultural Nostalgia of Adda in Modern Bengal by Nabamita Das - https://internationalconference.net/program/detail/215
> c) Continued investment hinges on their being a large enough cohort of startups that can leverage LLMs to generate outsized returns. There is no evidence yet this is the case.

Why does it have to be startups? And why does it have to be LLMs?

Btw, we might be running out of text data. But there's lots and lots more data you can have (and generate), if you are willing to consider other modalities.

You can also get a bit further with text data by using it for multiple epochs, like we used to do in the past. (But that only really gives you at best an order of magnitude. I read some paper that the returns diminish drastically after four epochs.)
the more ai evolves, the cheaper and more powerful it becomes which drives cost of intelligence to zero which drives consumerism to zero driving everything to the edge and making world less centralized more slim and efficient and in sync with reality and nature which is the future i would like…more green and creative, intelligent, efficient, interesting, and beautiful
I Use Obsidian Templater
Can you please elaborate on your position? In what context?
Ask HN: Why has Apple effectively abandoned GymKit?
The Apple Watch is a wildly successful product, and yet there is absolutely no integration in gym equipment save for Peloton (which is evidently dropping support) and some extremely high end commercial equipment. Why hasn’t there been any effort to connect to equipment to gather more accurate data and lead to better health information (seemingly one of the biggest thrusts of the entire product)? Instead they rely on their own sensors to estimate cadence, speed, etc, and the results are abysmal on equipment (I’ve tried on probably a dozen treadmill brands in my travels, and personally bought a manual treadmill thinking that it would more closely resemble running outdoors with no motor moving the belt - I was wrong, as the speed/distances are still off by >10%).
Do you know just recently there was no internet or computers and there were still high paying jobs for smart people?
And we aren't even at a local maximum. There's still plenty of incremental upwards progress to be made.
Snow Signs
yes, but it seems to be going exponential in the last year coinciding with their ipo
Seems like a great way to get Ruby + UI/graphics
Reddit mods could learn a thing or two from these people.
I had something like this. I was making a script that would parse a standardized file describing a molecule and create the atoms and bonds and whatnots. I found out that they time an object is added it iterates through all the objects to update them of the addition. This was very noticable even around 1k objects. I later grouped all the duplicated objects (such as all the oxygens) into 1 discontinuous object, leading to O(1 [the bonds] + #elements) instead of O(#bonds * #atoms).

In the end I still lost out to another package that did the same function a lot faster. May be interesting to look back to see how they did it.
Yeah but my LLM won’t generate that code.
What does culture and names and people have to do with the Global Position System?

You are right that we can have lots more data, if you are willing to consider other modalities. But that's not 'GPS'. Unless you are using an idiosyncratic definition of GPS?
Well, that, and they pay their doctors 3-5x less.
I interact daily with people who did not have the chance to go past primary school or to go to school at all. And they did have to learn skills through alternate means. I myself had to learn computing and programming with little to no electricity at home, and only a few people that owned computers (which I had to borrow).

I do agree that you can learn with trial and observations, but it's way faster to have someone transmit the knowledge either in person or in books. And once learned, it is learned, unless you don't use that piece of knowledge for a long time and you forget about it. And it's exponential, learning things enable you to learn more things. You don't have to restart from scratch for similar situation. Like you don't have to learn letters again to learn a new Latin languages.

> Not everybody is capable of actual engineering though, as engineers follow processes and measure things

They are capable of it. It's just that most people don't care about that if there is another way to get what they need (including getting other people to do it)
> Go through the CMS regs and show me where Medicare puts a hard cap on payment like BCBS was trying to do

Where does it say CMS blanket approves? Because I’ll tell you this: if it does, I’m buying up some anaesthesiology practices. (They’re subcontracted within most hospital systems.)
Those are VC investments, nothing new to see here. They have all the incentives to ride the AI hype cycle, grow those investments and extract as much value from them as they can. Just as they've done before with other cycles as Big Data, Metaverse, Crypto/DeFi, etc.

Think about it, how many practically identical AI IDEs/editors are sponsored by YC alone? They're just hoping one of all those projects stick along enough to cash at least something in.

The big question is about trends in AI investment and usage from "old" corporations, SMBs and common people. Those will indicate if the world is really trusting the tech.
I would presume that as well. For myself, cognitive behavioral therapy greatly reduced my need for medication because I could recognize symptoms and preemptively deal with them before they spiral out of control.

I’ll still be taking antipsychotics for the rest of my life, but at least the side effects are manageable enough I can live with it.
should've said "6 orders of magnitude if we use 120 m/s vs 300_000 km/s" - I was also off by 3 orders of magnitude!