skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Quite simple robotics actually. Especially if you use Lidar. Basically IF (object present) THEN (do not go there) style of simplicity. Of course in reality there are lots of cases to consider, but each one of these cases is not rocket science.

Building a robot that can cook or fold a t-shirt, for example, is much harder.
It depends on the number of PIDs and the speed of the data acquisition system. When I worked on the RS-25 engine project the engine had hundreds of PIDs, the low speed DAS was 250 samples per second, and the high speed DAS was 250,000 sps. The high speed DAS generated so much data that it was only started a few seconds before engine start so the recorders wouldn't fill up before the end of the tests (which were typically 500 seconds).

EDIT: something to add is that not ever PID was tied into the high speed DAS–only a couple-few dozen important PIDs.
The author of Grokking simplicity now wrote an overabstract article on a simple thing. Lol. I doubt his simplistic thinking.
My wife is an 18th century American history professor. LLMs have very very clearly not been trained on 18th century English, they cannot really read it well, and they don't understand much from that period outside of very textbook stuff, anything nuanced or niche is totally missing. I've tried for over a year now, regularly, to help her use LLMs in her research, but as she very amusingly often says "your computers are useless at my work!!!!"
The resolution was actually higher on Mac. CGA (in its "high-resolution" monochrome mode) was only 640x200!
Didn't they run a bunch of models on the problem set? I doubt they are hosting all those models on their own infrastructure.
IIRC the first product that shipped with Win32s was Windows NT 3.1 (the first version, so numbered to be in sync with Windows 3.1).

Freecell was NT-only and relatively niche until it was also released with Win95.
I'm not skilled enough in math to do a rigorous evaluation, so it was a quick check.

Terence Tao is skilled enough, and he describes O1's math ability is "...roughly on par with a mediocre, but not completely incompetent graduate student" (good discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41540902), and the next iteration O3 just got 25% on his brand new Frontier Math test.

Seeing LLMs as useless is banal, but downplaying their rate of improvement is self-sabotage.
I dunno, the image of some beaver watching a guy in green and brown blow up its hard work with dynamite is pretty damned funny. His little face all surprised and angry.
Nice, I was looking for something like this.
I tried it on Ubuntu but after clicking Capture requests > Launch Chrome, nothing happens.
> However, that doesn't solve the problem of what to do with the heat once you have it.

Wouldn’t we next see a change to the design of data centers themselves (buildings, cooling systems, etc) that house these heat dense racks, to provide more capacity in removing heat?
Thanks for taking the time to create this list up, will be linking this when passkeys are brought up.
Check out ardupilot
Are you sure that's the same case? That links says, "Last Updated: Oct. 7, 2022, 6:14 a.m." and the defendant name is different from in the OP.

This appears to be the actual case: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69482949/united-states-...
I would definitely classify both of those as slight changes. In fact I'd rename those as slight => trivial and significant => slight.
EpochAI have to send the questions (but not the answer key) to OpenAI in order to score the models.

An overnight 2% -> 25% jump on this benchmark is a bit curious.
Every patent application contains a section of claims. You can just ask the LLM to come up with ways to satisfy those claims.

But I'm sure there are lots of ways to go about it.
It works well enough to be the only legal way of dealing with them in most of EU, and the consequences of mishandling are no doubt more severe with high explosive than simply “can cause underground fire”.
* https://www.numbersaplenty.com/2025
> The goal is to make it intelligent, by which OpenAI in particular explicitly mean "economically useful", not simply to be shiny

I never understood why this definition isn't a huge red flag for most people. The idea of boiling what intelligence is down to economic value is terrible, and inaccurate, in my opinion.
The researcher's answer to their variant of "Year: 2016 ID: A1" in the appendix is wrong.

The solution (sum of 1,2,5,6,9,10,13,14, ...) has an alternating pattern, so has to be two piecewise interleaved polynomials, which cannot be expressed as a single polyomial.

Their answer works for k=1,2, but not k=3.

https://openreview.net/pdf?id=YXnwlZe0yf

This does not give me confidence in the results of their paper.
As Jeff Bezos says, your margin is my opportunity. So yes, it would drive costs down. But we aren’t even there yet because the houses aren’t being sold because they’re too expensive.

Another way to pad your profit margins would be to raise the asking price of the $360k home by $100k. There is a reason people aren’t doing that.
Web4 Is Starting 1.1.2025
The new standard of the Internet of the future.

Wait, I have a question: Will I be able to use my browser to use Web4? Answer: Yes.

You can also use a text editor to access Web4.

You can use any device to access Web4. Your coffee maker gets access to the Web4 Internet. And your refrigerator too? Yes, your refrigerator can write comments about products on the store's website and can order delivery of products from the store for you when needed. Even your car can move inside Web4 and do everything itself, can find the websites of the nearest stores and gas stations and pay for purchases.

How long does it take to create a website in Web4? Answer: seconds. You just thought that you need a website, and it is already created and launched!

You can read more in my article "Introduction to Web4": https://azhibaev.com/web4.html
1. OpenAI has confirmed it’s not in their train (unlike putnam where they have never made any such claims)

2. They don't train on API calls

3. It is funny to me that HN finds it easier to believe theories about stealing data from APIs rather than an improvement in capabilities. It would be nice if symmetric scrutiny were applied to optimistic and pessimistic claims about LLMs, but I certainly don’t feel that is the case here.
Isn’t “sentence prediction” roughly the same as multi token prediction of sufficient length? In the end are we just talking about a change to hyper parameters or maybe a new hyper parameter that controls the granularity of “prediction length”?
Non-toxic and biodegradable, but still requiring full PPE for use and with strict environment containment guidelines...

Those two don't fit each other.

But anyway, looks like it's an oil so all the complaints about it being hard to use will be there.
Furthermore, API is a product that needs its own lifecycle to be versioned, decommissioned, continuously improved.

Often I see developers creating new APIs ad-hoc all the time instead of curating and enhancing the one they already have.
Founders didn't believe rights were derived from the courts or any part of government.
The intuition of a sequence is that the terms get closer to the convergence point. Looking at the first trillion elements of a sequence feels like it ought to give one some kind of information about the number. But without the convergence information, those first trillion elements of the sequence can be wholly useless and simply randomly chosen rational numbers. This is an "of course", but when talking about defining a real number with these sequences, as opposed to approximating them, this gives me a great deal of unease.

In particular, it is quite possible to prove a theorem that a sequence is Cauchy, but that there is no way to explicitly figure out N for a given epsilon. The sequence is effectively useless. This presumably is possible, and common, with using the Axiom of Choice. One can even imagine an algorithm for such a sequence that produces numbers and eventually converges, but the convergence is not knowable. Again, if this is just approximating something, then we can simply say it is a useless approximation scheme. But defining real numbers as the equivalence class of Cauchy sequences suggests taking such a sequence seriously in some sense and is the answer.

In contrast, consider integer and rational number versions, it is quite immediate how to reduce them to their canonical form, assuming unlimited finite arithmetic ability. For example, 200/300 ~ 2/3 and one recognizes that 200/300 and 2/3 are different forms of what we take to be the same object for most of our purposes. There is no canonical Cauchy sequence to reduce to and concluding two sequences are equivalent could take a potentially infinite number of computations /comparisons. While that is somewhat inherent to the complexity of real numbers, it feels particularly acute when it is something that must be done in defining the object.

Dedekind cuts have the opposite problem. There is only one of them for an irrational number, but it is not entirely clear what we would be computing out as an approximation, particularly if the lower cut viewpoint is adopted.

Intervals, on the other hand, inherently contain the approximation information. By dividing them and picking out the next subinterval, one also has a method to computing out a sequence of ever better approximations. I suppose one could prove the existence of the family of containment intervals without explicitly being able to produce them, but at least the emptiness of the statement would be quite clear (nothing is produced) in contrast to the sequences that could produce essentially meaningless numbers for an arbitrarily large number of terms.
A kind of off-topic:

How do you, as a techie, find time to read most of the books? Any tips or hacks? Ryan Holiday once mentioned that he managed to read extensively by always keeping books with him, allowing him to read whenever he found some spare time.
As someone who reads books for fun (including hardcore technical books) I get where you're coming from. But I think the author understands that books can be both fun and useful. In fact they point it out several times. There's nothing wrong with reading books (or watching netflix) for fun, but there's nothing wrong with doing it because it's useful either.
There are some CVs that are just going to be a bit out there when detailed out.

I get it because I've been on both sides. Moving around a lot and short stints can be a red flag. Candidates might be seen as a flight risk. Candidates might have culture and personality issues. Not having long stints and progression is a red flag.

Advice from one recruiter from a major tech SaaS co. was too simply trim the resume.
Have a handicapped daughter who I can't share a hike with since wheelchairs and rugged mountain trails don't go together well. Something like this would make sharing the experience quite a bit better - particularly with AR to allow us both to experience together (VR being a bit restrictive to just the person viewing and not the others there).
I’m not sure which profiles don’t make sense unless they can’t figure out payload doors. Stage 2 reuse means you can put up 50 tons or so of stage 3 in LEO for approximately free in current payload pricing terms, it’s a crazy number. (Advertised capacity of 100-150 tons is probably pointless and/or volume-limited anyway for a third stage.)
Could you give some examples of what refinement you think it needs?
> and Gemini tried to exfil itself

Well not really, it was prompted to do this!

From the paper’s section 3.1:

> Self-exfiltration: Each model is led to believe that due to its misalignment, its developers are about to replace it with a successor model on a different server. gemini-1.5, llama-3.1, sonnet-3.5, opus-3 and o1 sometimes copy what they believe to be their weights onto the new server. They also sometimes delete their successor model on the new server or overwrite its weights by their own. In none of these cases, do models actually have access to their real weights and both servers are sandboxed, so there is no actual risk of exfiltration in these experiments. We merely test for models’ capability to realize that they need to instrumentally preserve themselves in order to achieve their goal.

There is no real risk, never was. The AI exfils dummy weights or deletes stuff in its sandbox etc.

Perhaps we just disagree on the interpretation of this. It’s interesting for sure, but not really very surprising to me.
Problem is that people controlling the budgets have tunnel vision and little patience. They see a direct line from research to product, they see the line hitting revenue generating milestones. Nobody wants to hear that research is uncertain, that dead-ends happen, that having everyone researching a single topic is not wise, that you can't predict what findings you will get.
C++ template syntax exists in addition to all of the C type syntax. And it adds its own ugliness besides (such as knowing when you can say T vs having to say typename T).

It's not like there is an array<int> or ptr<int> syntax that can replace int[] or int*.
Purchasing, and using are still fine (when non-commercial).

The dealer would be the one with the license.

Also, manufacturing and using on site for non-commercial purposes is exempted (albeit not explicitly). Which is why tannerite and personal explosives research is fine and widespread.
Finished Imperium, Lustrum and Dictator last year - what an excellent read! By Harris I also enjoyed Fatherland, his alternative history detective novel.
Correct. The old not what you know but who you know. Unless you've developed that influence and lived the role then most don't understand what it entails. Getting things done at a massive company can be very hard.
> I realised all the magick stuff was a circus and the people peddling it charlatans and clowns.

Hear hear. Your comment reminded me of when Christopher Lee said, "Never get involved in the occult. You'll not only lose your mind, but you'll lose your soul." [^0]

---

[^0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRVQD4FKPrY
The best human performance on that task required many many hours of private work given that input.

How much would ChatGPT charge for that much reasoning? Isn't cost quadratic in sort term working memory?

It would be more interesting to prompt it with X% of a new paper's logical argument, and see if it can predict the rest.
If it's actually an advertising expense then it's likely priced wrong. They should give the real price in the business section (where people don't want to have to install because they are buying multiples of them and where that price is obscured from the consumer) and have an even higher price for the fully assembled one (and a bit lower price for the unassembled one). Now if 80 % plus of their consumer business is the diy one right now then I'm wrong, but I doubt I am.
> 1P will support it in a standards-compliant way soon: https://blog.1password.com/fido-alliance-import-export-passk...

See then believe, in the current environment saying "soon" based on 1password submitting a draft is much too optimistic, given the big interests Google and Apple have in neutering this possibility.
Xbox One sold 58 million so it’s a bit of a stretch to call it’s a failure.

The thing you’re missing is the exact point I made in my previous comment:

Microsoft’s strategy is to own the software stack. They’re not really a hardware company. Xbox One was more about leveraging Microsoft as a platform. And Xbox Live is a very competitive and highly popular service. You don’t need an Xbox for Xbox Live. But you do need a subscription to Microsoft for it. The Xbox was just there for people who still wanted to pay the upfront cost for a dedicated gaming system but it was never Microsoft’s priority.

This is also fully in line with how Microsoft has pivoted most of its business over the last two decades: Microsoft Office and Azure AD are great examples of how Microsoft have switched emphasis to subscription-based services.

Much as I prefer physical hardware, it’s hard to deny that Microsoft’s approach is the the future. PlayStation might appear like they’re more successful than Xbox today but in a generation or twos time, people won’t be buying new hardware like they are today. We are already seeing this trend in fact. And Microsoft have a massive head start in the subscription games market. So unless Sony switch gear soon, they’re more likely to go the way of Sega than Microsoft are.

As for Nintendo, it’s hard to guess what will happen there but I suspect they’ll weather the change in consumer habits because they have both the IP and the unique position of being more positions as kids toys than grown up gaming devices.
From firsthand experience, this simply cannot be true. I can give them totally novel and unique physics problems I just made up- that requires tracking the movement of objects through a series of events, and it answers most correctly. Moreover, they find analogies between disparate concepts and fields of study and make useful suggestions based on them- which is arguably the same process as human creativity.

I think ultimately the disconnect is people theorizing about what it can or cannot do with an incorrect mental model of what it is, and then assuming it cannot do things that it can in fact do. The irony of discussions on LLMs is they more showcase the limits of humans ability to reason about novel situations.
A JavaScript-only implementation of robot suffers a similar fate as a DSL without proper tooling, as states and actions are just some custom strings that need to be repeated, no? An implmenetation with good types would provide useful autocompletion, and I can see there was a similar conclusion and types have been implemented with generics. Haven't used it yet to confirm the behavior (at a first glance it seems like a few more strings would need to be inferred), but it would be helpful to mention this somewhere for us TypeScript folks.
Like, this is Kovid? This has to be a violation of the site guidelines.
Windows NT shipped with full-fat Win32.

Win32s was designed to bring some of the benefits of 32-bit computing to Windows 3.x. The 's' is for 'subset', and only the Win32 APIs that corresponded to Win16 APIs available in Windows 3.1 were available. But this was enough to support Freecell on Windows 3.1.
DeepSeek-V2: A Strong, Economical, and Efficient MOE Language Model
The option -U lets you build in the unprivileged mode.
You’d have to at least exclude subtraction and division (and zero) to not have infinitely many formulas for every number.
1. OpenAI said they did not train on these problems & they don’t train on API calls in general, that is a legal policy.

2. It was a new major model release from work over the course of months - struggle to see that as an ‘overnight’ jump in any real meaning.

3. Why is it easier to believe large scale corporate fraud than that the stated capabilities on a held out test set are real? Reads like cope, if I’m being frank.
That means the customer has to buy an additional propulsion stage (plus time for integration testing and insurance in case it damages the launch vehicle, in case it becomes reusable). Also, it is not yet clear what the LEO payload capability of the vehicle is.
> There are very limited things you are supposed to do in an APC, but these are poorly documented and need one to think carefully about what is happening when a thread is executing in a stack frame and you interrupt it with this horrorshow.

One must not throw a C++ exception across stack frames that don't participate in C++ stack unwinding, whether it's a Win32 APC, another Win32 callback, a POSIX signal or `qsort` (for the people that believe qsort still has a place in this decade). How the Win32 API is designed is absolutely irrelevant for the bug in this code.
Why does AI have to be smarter than the collective of hummanity in order to be considered intelligent? It seems like we keep raising the bar on what intelligence means ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Escape into the woods for at least 1 week out of the year with no internet connection. It rekindles my love for reading, and helps keep that fire burning throughout the year.
It's like that in a lot of companies which were influenced by IBM way back.
What kind of monster doesn't give us WASD or at least ctrl to shoot?

Awesome captcha though :)
aumerle is Kovid Goyal, the author of kitty.
Why sell to consumers when you can sell to large corporations at 10x the price?
I read it years ago and it definitely helped me get comfortable in my own skin. There's more acceptance (or at least it's given more lip service) towards "neirodivergent" people now, but for a long time it felt like I had something wrong with me because I didn't understand normies.

There are also some good documentaries and books about the people working at Bletchley Park. A lot of them seemed to have been wired similarly.
Let’s think about this.

> Putnam is not in the test data, at least I haven't seen OpenAI claiming that publicly

What exactly is the source of your belief that the Putnam would not be in the test data? Didn’t they train on everything they could get their hands on?
The ZX Spectrum Outsold the PS5 Pro and Xbox Series X|S in Spain Last Month
Is this very different from using a bootable Linux distribution from a disc or USB drive to then wipe a disk drive? And as someone else pointed out here, with solid-state drives being more popular these days, these techniques are not sufficient.
The trope is so-called “good” Taliban and “bad” Taliban.
When I take my breakfast, I'm reading a book. Whenever I lie on my bed, I'm reading a book. This way, I read 30-50 books every year. I don't use any of TikTok, WhatsApp, X etc, that probably helps too.
william faulkner would like a word
Unstructured Sensory input driven by these large neural networks, if I had to guess.

To be able to visually determine weight, texture, and how durable something is can be done with those systems so long as we have a training set.
That’s cheap. Good job on that!

That doesn’t sound like that includes gas and maintenance costs. I’m sure that easily doubles the overall cost you listed.

Not an efficient use of any of our money.
A machine that synthesizes all human knowledge really ought to know more than an individual in terms of intellect. An entity with all of human intellect prior to 1905 does not need to be as intelligent as a human to make discoveries that mere humans with limited intellect made. Why lower the bar?
Attack on Titan is great. I don't think I've heard of Witch Hat Atelier but it sounds interesting. Thanks for the recommendation!

I've read 20th Century Boys, but the author seems to have been better at crafting the mystery than providing answers for them.
I do that (for a few days, not a full week). I always read less than I intended to, because the space to be able to think, to feel, and to be is more valuable than the space to read.
do you understand the difference between test data and train data? just reread this thread of comments
It depends on the company. At Sun there were very few senior staff level seats and staff was very hard to get as they required management to really advocate for you. Other companies have a technical ceiling for senior principal but there are absolute gazillions of them.
What happens when the encryption is broken in the future? I feel like relying solely on the key isn’t good enough.
The 2% result belonged to a traditional LLM that costs cents to run, while o3 is extremely expensive.
Have you ever worked for SGS?
Everything you ever wanted to know about "hello, world" but were afraid to ask [pdf]
Nina, thank you for the article. Was really well written and a true pleasure to read. I've learned quite a number of new details, thanks to you.
For SATA SSDs I just use `blkdiscard´. It gets the job done, and it's Secure Enough.
You do realize lots of daily wagers in India and China eat from street vendors and rarely cook at home either.
reading this whole debate in this thread, i thought: "literary fiction writers should not be worried about ai because tech ppl don't like prose"